Shameless Poll: Pearl vs Ohm vs Zu

@audionoobie I read your post with great interest. Your experience mirrored mine...that is until I contacted Evan about what I was hearing, or more correctly, what I was not hearing. Your characterization of it sounding like it was being played thru a blanket fits, but what I said to Evan was this: it sounded to me like dialog was way rolled off, like maybe a big dip in the crossover region between the walsh driver and the tweeter. What I noticed in particular was the total lack of natural sibilance but the upper frequency response seemed ok. So it was like a dip in the 2k -5k response. His response was that he would see what he could do to tweak that in such a way to open up that midrange a bit. So he sent me a couple of replacement drivers that I installed myself. This was the entire canned driver assembly so it was an, unscrew old one, connect new one, and screw back into the cabinets and voila, they went from rejects to keepers. Since then I have had a lot of time to live with them and they continue to impress. I'm sorry your experience was ultimately not satisfactory. I'm glad I stuck it out as I ended up with what I would easily call an end game speaker for the room they have to play in.

@livinon2wheels That's so cool that Evan was able provide a solution for you. I didn't even know that was an option. It's good to see so many here that are happy with their Ohms. It's a great company and with Evan at the helm will continue to be well into the future.

I'm happy where I landed with my new Elacs. Sometimes you just know when you plug something in whether it's going to work for you and that's what I got at a quarter of the cost no less. 

@audionoobie Yeah I am really pleased with them overall. Certainly not cheap or cheaply made, and not for everyone obviously, but for those they do work for, well worth the money IMHO. Evan went the extra mile for me and I am very thankful for his efforts. He turned what would have been a mistake into a win for me and that kind of support is worth a lot. You certainly don't find that everywhere today, actually hardly anywhere do you find that. Vendors like that deserve support and repeat business. There is a high likelihood I will be buying more from him, probably this year. I am dying for a set of F5's or maybe two pair. :) The 2000s are good speakers but a tad bass shy. I think they really need subs to do their best work. I also think that the 2000s would be brilliant as rear surrounds in a HT setup. Ohm's acoustic signature is unique and the sweet spot is broad enough you can move around a bit without losing the image. I don't think I have ever heard a standard front facing pistonic speaker system provide a broad sweet spot. Not saying there aren't any but I just haven't heard them.

@livinon2wheels ...and that walsh>typ. tweeter format is what keeps this one from being an all out supporter of current Ohm offerings....
For grins and to just being able to play them without building a pair o' boxes, I 'Ohm Walshed' a pair of vintage' Utah 12" with it's matching exponential horns....

Sound stage suffers a tad. but Loud? Yes.

If an omni is what one seeks. be consistent because it actually does matter.

I've been toying with an update on the Infinity 'ice cream cone' Walsh for awhile now but it can feel like brain surgery with a Dremel.

@audionoobie... the loudness issue was a fault on the early Ohms ( "....great at 200, blows at 201.." ) that surrendering of the large drivers' size helped....

Personal approach:  A good sub, mind the xover...

You want Loud?
Add mid to high drivers to taste.

I've done a 'surround Walsh' array that accomplished just that.

It's all tied into dispersion, a cone at 90ish on-axis vs. 360.  Less radians at your ears with lower 'information' available as well....

It's a quest with an answerable question....;)

Happy Friday, y'all....👍

Glad to hear the Ohm tradition of going the extra mile for customers has survived.  👍