Ohm Walsh 2000 vs MMG vs Vandersteen 2ce Sig?


Ohm Walsh 2000 versus Magneplanar MMG versus Vandersteen 2ce Signature II? How does they compare with respect to speed, dynamics, tonality, texture, detail, tranparency, extension and sound stage?
pmboyd
Its true larger Maggies are more comparable pricewise, but in terms of size, mmg and Walsh 2000 is a fair comparison, if that matters.

Maggies must be placed further away from rear wall in general for best results and that can be a problem for many, especially those wanting to fit larger Maggies into a room.

That was the problem I had with my older Maggies that my larger and more expensive OHM 5s replaced. The Maggies were larger (taller mostly), less expensive yet impossible to place properly and practically in my current room.

I had them in my prior house for years without a problem, so the room and its usage is really a big factor.
Sthomas, I agree we should be comparing in the same price ranges, but the OP asked the question, and therefore some of us provided some input on the matter.

While the three speakers are not priced in the same ballpark(well, Ohm 2000/Vandersteens are close), it is a testament to just how good the MMG's as well as other "budget" speakers really are. I have lived with Ohm's and MMG's for some time now, and they are more similar than not. I can and do live with both of them quite easily.

Enjoy the music! Tim
I really like the Magnepans too. I remember I sold my Paradigm 100 v.3's because I tried out some MMG's. I thought they were better speakers all in all. I put $900 in my wallet after selling the Paradigms and keeping the MMG's for what I consider a more enjoyable speaker. Magnepans are truely awesome. If only we all had that dedicated theater room hidden away for large 1.7's, 3.7's.
I agree, and also the funds to have the dedicated room and the 1.7/3.7's to boot! Not to mention the amplification and the....Oh well. Some things never end do they? Tim
It has been awhile since I have trawled through some of the forums here, and was looking through this thread. Since the last time I posted on this matter, I have added a pair of Rel T-3 subs to my MMG's, which funny enough, brings the pricing right in line with a pair of Ohm MWT's. In this mode, the MMG's might have the edge in my listening room. This is the first time I have been able to get any sub to work well with the Maggies, and it is quite nice. With the exception of a still somewhat narrow sweet-spot compared to the Ohm's, the overall balance is maybe a bit better, and now with the bass thrown in.

I have also played around with the subs on the Ohm MWT as well, and have to say, this also is a very, very satisfying setup. Either one does it for me very nicely, and taking the subs into consideration on both pairs of speakers, really is a toss-up. They both have very similar qualities, and yet they each also have some things they do differently, some better, some worse.

I have always liked the way MMG's do acoustic guitar, they have that bit of leading edge bite, whereas the Ohm is maybe a bit more softer around the edges. The Ohm is bit more dynamic though on most other things in the way a typical cone-driver speaker tends to be. I know that almost sounds like a bit of a contradiction of sorts, but there you have it.

The MMG also seems to provide more of a wall of music-yet with depth and imaging, the Ohm more diffuse, but still in a very natural/realistic way. I guess it is all turnabouts and roundabouts.

I have always loved my MMG's, while certainly not perfect, with the addition of the subs, it has gone a long way to getting what I got out of my Ohm's. But I still love both for the positive things they do, and not many negatives really.

So much for my 2 cents. Enjoy the music! Tim