Ohm Walsh F Hope of Resurrection

avsjerry, all is forgiven. I wouldn't presume to debate you in terms of technical knowledge. Anyone who is building their own speakers I consider to be worthy of respect. 

I do believe that the factors involved in the restoration are such that the weekend warrior would have slaughtered them. The repair shop commented on how tricky it is to align the cone properly, even with the supplied shims for alignment. I did not give serious, ongoing consideration to doing the repair myself, and that was a wise decision. 

Thanks for forgiveness, Doug.  And for giving me a kudo for my diy activities, as that nod helps push me forward. 

Having 3 working pairs that have similar characteristics, even given their different sizes, is a huge push to carry on, despite any discouraging words, anyway.  

Being a partner with spouse owning a growing business has tended to absorb much of the free time to spend on it is depressing in its' way, but it does allow for buying 2 mil titanium and aluminum for 'rolling a cone'....

That, in itself, is a Good Trick.  I finally came up with a means to do that in a predictable fashion...

I've avoided on purpose to 'do' a 3 segment F-style cone, and have taken a different tack at it.  As I 'write', I'm listening to Spotify with a 'bookshelf' version that, as F. Zappa once noted, makes 'noises agreeable to the ear'.

My larger 'mains' in the next room 'do better'. ;)

Perhaps, one fine day in the near future, I'll loan you a pair for critique'.

I'd like to have a serious listener do a 'serious listen' to them.
I can only go so far with a calibrated mic and various programs.
Who better than a reviewer? *Ingratiating Smile* ;)

Meanwhile, I'm wondering How I can convince spouse that the 1.2K$ that appeared in our checking account (Thanks, Feds!) could be applied towards a 3D printer that can 'print' 2 mil carbon fiber cones instead of an automated catbox....

"It's too big, and looks like a weird front-load washing machine with slumped shoulders..." don't fly with her.
That...and the cats prefer my lap to hers.
The 'mother duck, being followed by the ducklings' doesn't fly either...*L*

Enjoy your revived F's (I'm jealous)......and Thanks again, J

@asvjerry maybe I would take you up on that someday. Would love to hear what you’ve come up with. The system pic looks way cool!  

Ever thought about selling a pair?   I bet it would generate some interest.

*S*  Thanks, @mapman .... At this time, I'd love to Loan you a pair just to have an omni fan have a critical listening session.  'Ell, I'd like to have a 'next version' pair for my own ears.  I've got most of the items amassed to do so, it's the assembly routine that's pending....

First thing I do is to break them in as the 'manufacturer', since everything about them is basically experimental. The next step is to try to blow them up, since the 'warranty-er' is Me.

That in itself is a response to the old comment on the original Fs'; "Sound Great @ 200 watts, blow @ 201...."  I'm OK with doing that myself...it'd be embarrassing to have it happen in your hands.

One personal goal is to enter a pair with a matching sub into the unlimited category @  the MWAF, hopefully this year (Covid conditions allowing such).  Apparently, no diy omni has even been entered according to them.  Good, bad, or indifferent, it'd be a "Now for something entirely different" experience for the judges and the crowd.

I've considered a raincoat as apparel for the tomato and egg response, since I'd be there and a target....*L*

".....selling a pair?"  At this stage, I'd sign and date them.  'Functional Art', as any production goal is a pipe dream....and we can debate what's in that pipe.... ;)  One consideration is to fuse the crossover to keep enthusiasm from frying the works, as that's where I've blown any up.

....but Thank You for the comments.  What you'd get would be light years from whatever you saw....;)

Stay warm, dry, & healthy...
J

Douglas, the putty on the inner surface of the titanium section of the Ohm F cone will dry out over time. It is a known issue for older F's. The speakers will play but the treble sound from that part of the cone can be different. As an engineer, this makes perfect sense to me, as follows.

The putty acts like a dampening material for the wave travelling through the upper segment of the cone. To dampen the wave, it has to have just the right 'flexibility'. When the putty turns hard, it is less flexible, and becomes more rigid-like, and the cone can't flex the same way as when the putty was new. 

You are already aware of the foam degradation on the inside of the aluminum section of the cone. 

An important parameter for a wave transmission cone is that the impedance of each interface between sections are designed for passing the wave across the boundary, with minimal reflections back up the cone, interfering with the subsequent waves coming down. The same needs to occur at the surround at the bottom of the paper part of the cone. That is why the surround is not replaceable by just any foam surround that physically fits the dimensions.

Hope that clarifies why the sound may be different, if the putty can't be replaced correctly.