Ohm Walsh F Hope of Resurrection

I'm going to put the Model F back in and jack em up. They're no good to me treating them like paper mache.  If they break, they break. I've already gotten a valuable, yes worth the money and time, comparison between speakers. Consider this exploration for the sake of humanity,  like Space-X, only on slightly smaller scale.   ;)

For those appalled at this decision, I remind that this was a set with major damage and on the way to the dump. I would never ever treat review or more valuable gear in such fashion. Feel free to check with any manufacturer whom I have reviewed, or my sales of my gear. 

I'm pushing the issue, building systems at advanced pace to get to the end of the matter. In a day or two I will know whether the F is worthy of more time. It could perk up. I'll build yet another rig for more perspective.  

Once again, as consistent in this stream of consciousness discussion, not a review, I make no claims or promote no expectations of either HHR or current Ohm products.  

Doug, as a check point to your repairs you might speak with Harry Weisfeld.  He has a pair of restored stacked Ohm F at the VPI house.  I haven't heard them, but perhaps he has some ideas to help bring out the best in the F. 

My recollection from back in the day is that OHM-Fs did not have shimmering highs, nor could really loud sound levels be played without some loss of control. What they offered was room filling sound and a good soundstage at moderate volumes. IIRC my memory from this long ago is suspect. 

@douglas_schroeder ,
I'd be interested in listening to the Kings Audio King Tower. They look super cool.
I'm also glad that the majority of posts have been spot on and helpful.
Bob

Thank you gentlemen, for your thoughts! All input is appreciated! 

Today I tried to blow them up! Not really, but I did as mentioned and laid a lot more amp output on them. I stared with an alternative class A/B integrated (Kinki Studio EX-M1+ with sundry discrete opamps inserted), and pushed the speakers to pretty high levels, perhaps 85dB. NO problem! They seemed not to stress, which is ideal.

But, the resolution, as russ69, recalls well in his comments, is nothing to write home about. I returned to the aforementioned "magic" amp, and yessir, this is certainly a magic amp! Wow, what a class D! Combo with the Exogal Comet DAC is pushing the speakers even better and with more resolution. Now the resolution is listenable, but nowhere near exemplary. 

Yes, the single driver firing into a box is not exemplary resolution. The mid and upper treble is more pleasing when they are driven harder and the convergence of the omni fields is in more effect. At low levels, not nearly as inspiring, as might be expected. The "sublime" comment initially was at quite a lower level, but now I will not hesitate to play them harder. 

For comparison, both the King Tower and Ohm Model F restore were placed in identical position, and here are some results; there is a sizable resolution gap between the capabilities of the King Tower, and the Model F, across the frequency spectrum, with the King Tower dominant in that respect. The soundstage is not as coherently "mushroom cloud" with the King Tower and is taller, as also would be expected. The fullness of the soundstage and encroachment (or perhaps "intimacy" and "immediacy") upon the listener is superior with the Ohm Model F. It seems to shift the soundstage forward toward me about four feet, such that the umbra is about three feet ahead of me, versus the umbra of the King Tower being about 7 feet ahead of me.

That is the calling card for the Model F and this rebuild. One has to excuse a fair bit of flabbiness and indistinctness, but the mushroom cloud is distinct with full range omni, and that helps to offset some of the disappointment in indistinctness and resolution. There is a curious tie in with other full range speakers, and the Tannoy Glenair comes to mind (reviewed). I can mentally image the Glenair's driver pointed downward similar to the Ohm, and capture the affect of it driving into a pile of foam. I really do wonder whether I should remove some of the foam. I suspect the speaker would wake up quite a bit. After all, it didn't strain when I put it to higher levels, so what's the harm? I am very curious how the driver's nature would change, as well as the cabinet coloration. The cabinet is really dead now, and I suspect the speaker would benefit greatly from a bit of "Harbeth treatment", i.e. hollowing out the box somewhat. Maybe I'll try that next. 

None of this should be surprising, but overall I am very happy that they are tolerating higher levels of massive power, the best outcome that I believe possible for a vintage set. What will be particularly helpful to me ongoing is having another soundstage to work with. I now will have full range omni, quasi-omni, quasi-line array, and big ESL, as well as open baffle horn hybrid. There is another speaker making a splash, with its own unique soundstage, but that is a different story for another time, a review actually. 

Overall it's been worth it, and I pleased that the are not falling apart with some pushing. That makes them worth keeping and using occasionally. 

What do you guys think about the idea of removing perhaps 1/3 of the dense foam pieces in the cabinet? I think it may be a winning idea. I don't know that the removal would adversely affect the driver much, as it's a pretty sizable cavity and with some open space between the driver and foam. What say ye? This is basically an ongoing experiment, play time, so I may as well do it. I was willing to take a risk that they speakers would fail, so why not do foam remediation? I am wondering whether this would aid the resolution, and at this point I think it likely would. Only one way to know!  :)