Ohm Walsh Micro Talls: who's actually heard 'em?

Sndsrtaud,

IT can vary, but I use DNM Reson ICs throughout my system. I like these for their flexibility, cost effectiveness, coherence and overall clarity. The bass tends towards the leaner side compared to some ICs but is very articulate and full and a nice match to the OHMs.

For a fuller low end, I also like MIT networked ICs. I use the older and less expensive Terminator series ICs. I tend to prefer these more with my monitors.

FOr speaker cables, I have no clear preference. I use industrial grade in wall speaker wire to my f5s which reside in the room adjacent to my gear. The results are very good having tuned everything accordingly.

In my main room where my gear resides, I use more expensive AUdioquest cv6 speaker cables. I have had my 100s and Triangle monitors in there. My Dynaudio monitors are in there currently. The CV6 sounds very open and dynamic in there with all, but the OHMs tend to respond to tweaks the most.

Kbuzz - I started with a new pair of Ohm Walsh 2000s in my combo 2-channel/HT system, leaving my Vandersteen center and surrounds in place. The back surrounds were and remain a pair of Paradigm Atoms. I sold my Vandersteens (2 pairs of 1Cs and the center). Then I found a pair of MicroWalsh Talls here on A'gon from a nice, local seller. They were a little banged up, but nothing horrible, and the price was right! These are now my L/R surrounds. I doubt you'll see a used Ohm center for sale. I bought the smaller center channel from Ohm (talk to John Strohbeen, and he'll let you know what is appropriate for your set up). It was $700 plus shipping. It is not very large. It is shaped like an upside-down "T". The cabinet is about 16" wide, 3" high, and 5" deep (all approximate). Sitting atop the cabinet is a can roughly the size of a MicroWalsh Tall can, with its cap. I have it on a low, angled stand beneath my Plasma display. While I am much less passionate about film than music, I feel my surround presentation is more than adequate. The uniformity of sonics from one Ohm to the next is outstanding, and a hallmark of John Strohbeen's, IMO.

Phealon: Congrats on the wonderful find! I agree with you about the need for a base. I have cement floors (carpeted). While John was confident that bases were not needed, my floor is uneven, so the speakers rocked a bit (not rocked as in rock 'n' roll, but as in wobbling). I ordered a custom set of cradle bases from Sound Anchors for about $325, with three-point adjustable spikes. Sure enough, the sound improved, with cleaner transients, better definition and increased detail.

Stph: That Kedo speaker uses a Manger midrange driver!! I have heard this driver in a local DIYer's speaker, and it is a remarkable thing. It is a very expensive driver, and the carbon fiber cabinet ain't cheap, either. These have to be $30,000 speakers. Although not a walsh design type, this speaker is clearly designed for 360 degree radiation.

Dear Mapman...what sort of image height do you perceive when the vocalist is at realistic listening levels i.e. singing between speakers or slightly behind the speaker plane? If 5-6ft, does this effect extend to multi-tracked lead vocalist in either channel?

Reading back through this Thread I'm staggered at some of the amplifier power reserves being rumoured. In the case of 500W or 1000W > 4 ohms, how does the Ohm 5000 react to Telarc 1812 type peaks? I've seen this type of program material blow many a fine bass driver :(
What is your experience?

Many thanks....

".what sort of image height do you perceive when the vocalist is at realistic listening levels i.e. singing between speakers or slightly behind the speaker plane? If 5-6ft, does this effect extend to multi-tracked lead vocalist in either channel?

That's a hard one to answer.

Specific recording parameters are a big factor. You get what's there. Often, that is a lot. There is always good natural ambience to vocals that make them sound natural in the space and easy to locate, usually somewhere between the driver height and the ceiling, from a typical listening position, but are seldom pinpoint in location, more like a live performance than what you would hear typically between two smaller stereo speakers.

THis tends to carry over even into mono recordings and make those seem very lifelike with a natural 3-d ambience, though not stereo, sometimes it can be hard to tell it is pure mono.

The omni-like wide dispersion helps keep the presentation sounding coherent from most anywhere you would listen from, so the sweet spot is essentially quite broad.

"Reading back through this Thread I'm staggered at some of the amplifier power reserves being rumoured. In the case of 500W or 1000W > 4 ohms, how does the Ohm 5000 react to Telarc 1812 type peaks? I've seen this type of program material blow many a fine bass driver :(
What is your experience?"

I have 5s, series 3, not 5000s, which I expect are similar, but I can speak for the 5s.

I have some old telarc CDs and records and I have witnessed exactly what you are talking about back in their heyday. They are known for overall dynamic range and peaks.

Lots of music I play has very demanding peaks, like orchestral, big band, electronica, etc., both on CD and record.

My goal with the OHM 5s and use of monster amps as I call them with same was to be able to raise the roof and go as loud as I would like without stress, breakup, compressed dynamics, etc. Like the biggest baddest systems one might hear out there, but at a price point I might handle.

I would say I accomplished that goal and have been most pleased. WHen I listen, I realize how fortunate I am to have been able to get to where I am audio/sound wise.

Some recordings make me nervous when I know what is coming next, not wanting to have to deal with any expensive repairs due to accidents, but I have yet to hear any of those bad things in my main rig with the BC ref1000m amps and the OHM 5s. I am not as brave with the rest of the gear I have at home, though most of it does quite well still in these regards by most any audiophile standards I would say.

Moon,

I'd agree with Mapman, the height thing is really recording specific.

One of my favorite "studio-stunt" recordings to demo the imaging capabilities of the Ohms (100s w/ a pair of Rythmik subs in my case) is found on Lindsey Buckingham's "Under The Skin". The track "It was You" bounces grouped/multi-tracked vocals around the stage - left/right, up/down, forward/back. This is not exactly a natural, audiophile approved recording technique, but a dramatic demo of how well the speakers place sources in space.

Similarly, "Q sound" recordings are shown in full glory.

IME, with more traditional recordings, results will vary too much to generalize.

Marty