Ohm Walsh speakers in the 21st century

Thanks uncleang for the comparison.  What ever I get has to fill a 18’X22’ totally carpeted room with two solid walls a two mostly open walls.

All the best.

JD

JD, given the size and nature of your listening room You'll need to go with the Walsh 3000 (or larger) and a good robust amp, which they love.

uncleang,
I was thinking the 3000 or the 4000 and running them with a Dynaco Stereo 400.  I’m thinking about recapping it, but we’ll see how it sounds first.


JD

JD,
The only difference between the 3000 and the 4000 is a 12" driver vs. 10" one. Naturally it can go a little deeper in the bass and louder too.

The Dynaco 400 is exactly what these speakers prefer.

As you may have noticed the OHM website is not big on handing out specs on their products (they weren’t 35 years ago either).
But to their credit they emphasize room size to pick the right speaker, which in all probability is the right way to pick your speakers.

You mentioned you had Walsh 7's in the 70's.  You are most likely referring to the Walsh F which was a true Walsh design (one driver and a true omnidirectional) unlike the modified Walsh designs that started in the early 80's (gen 2) which were considerably more efficient (but still fairly inefficient) that had the main driver + super tweeter arrangement. These, and all subsequent Walsh models, also featured damping material (which OHM calls 'Tufflex') applied to the rear of the main cone driver which attenuates rear sound propagation by -20 db.

Wow! 
You are correct, they were the F’s.  I wonder where I came up with 7?  I built a couple of Halfler DH 220’s bridged and their preamp in 1980 and in 82-2(?) I built the 400. The bridged Halfers listed more watts, but the Dynaco made the Ohms sing.  As I said earlier, I gonna have to pop the top and check most of the caps.  I wonder if there’s update videos on YouTube?

JD