Ohm Walsh Speakers

[binkyhouston]

For sure; 'SOTA then' vs. 'SOTA now', a half-century does make for changes in many ways. Yes, Lincoln was a Serious Sort, his background demands sort of attention. And that, properly done, would do what it does....but 'top tier' has kept getting harder to reach up to.
Victim of the era, and there's been a lot since. The better of the batch has it's adherents...and I have 'pets' I've known or would have liked to.

*L* Yeah, and we fall apart too....everything eventually, but The End is an outrageous amount of 'years' from now. We're just organic fluff in the Big Scheme of It All. Anything we make short of the pyramids requires new 'stuff' constantly. *yawn* Next... *G*

The original Walsh may seem to be a kludge, but I'd bet it was the best kludge possible under the circumstances... As one DIY's attempts to literally 'roll my own' (especially the cones), it's been a long term project that's presented and undergone attention to details that must have hounded those who did the first ones. The fact that it worked as well as it did is remarkable....

...and I thank them all for providing a model to follow on from.

 

[binkyhouston]

I never got to hear those Beos', but they did catch my attention...until I got to see one of the cut-away renderings of it's innards. Still somewhat directional (as per current Ohms' with the tweeters), going 4 way (!) with onboard amps and room-correction eq running the xover.

Ahead of it's time...but didn't deserve looking like a Dalek having gone through reconstructive surgery after a starvation diet.
Immediate potential shrink of the potential buying pool. Danes...*sigh* Biolabs' 'top tier' speakers always tended towards 'edgy sculpted'.

B&Os' electronics always had a minimalist style that is appearing again with others SS items. I'll applaud that... *s*

Personally, I'm striving for a simple cylinder about navel height. No real 'color' to speak of but uniform, unassuming in appearance.
One thought is to coat them with Black 3.0, which is about as weird as I'd subject anything to....

Current working versions a friend calls my 'steampunk speakers', which I kinda like. It's the 'right' bits 'n pieces that count anyway.

Cheers, J

 

[EJ3]

I never got to hear those Beos', but they did catch my attention...until I got to see one of the cut-away renderings of it's innards. Still somewhat directional (as per current Ohms' with the tweeters), going 4 way (!) with onboard amps and room-correction eq running the xover.

Ahead of it's time...but didn't deserve looking like a Dalek having gone through reconstructive surgery after a starvation diet.
Immediate potential shrink of the potential buying pool. Danes...*sigh* Biolabs' 'top tier' speakers always tended towards 'edgy sculpted'.

B&Os' electronics always had a minimalist style that is appearing again with others SS items. I'll applaud that... *s*

Personally, I'm striving for a simple cylinder about navel height. No real 'color' to speak of but uniform, unassuming in appearance.
One thought is to coat them with Black 3.0, which is about as weird as I'd subject anything to....

Current working versions a friend calls my 'steampunk speakers', which I kinda like. It's the 'right' bits 'n pieces that count anyway.

Cheers, J

At the time I could tolerate their look (and today also [and the idea that you could use different covers to change their color to something more acceptable]) & liked the resulting sound at the place I heard them.
The newer speakers from them visually fell off the edge of the deep end for me. I couldn't get past the visual enough to pay attention to the sound.
And, at no time did I ever have the money to buy the 5's & had I had the money, they aren't what I would have spent it on.

 

[anmpr1]

At the time I could tolerate their look (and today also [and the idea that you could use different covers to change their color to something more acceptable]) & liked the resulting sound at the place I heard them.
The newer speakers from them visually fell off the edge of the deep end for me. I couldn't get past the visual enough to pay attention to the sound.
And, at no time did I ever have the money to buy the 5's & had I had the money, they aren't what I would have spent it on.

The latest and greatest B$O might be the best in the world, but even if it was, I'd never put it in my listening room, even if I had all the other necessary parameters for owning the loudspeaker. Simply because of its looks. It looks like something from a B horror movie, that might come alive in the middle of the night and eat you. Unless your dog started barking to alert you of the fact.

And since you need two (for stereo), they would reproduce and you'd have a bunch of little monstrosities running around, causing havoc.

 

[mmi]

Was surprised to stumble across this LG omni Bluetooth speaker recently:

 

[youpassbutter]

For whatever reason, I am drawn to speakers designed by individuals who take an unusual approach to sound reproduction: Sean Casey/Zu, Eric Alexander/Tekton, Clayton Shaw/Spatial, and I just picked up a used NX-Studio from a GR Research kit. I am the same way with amps. Anyway, I have a pair of Ohm Walsh 3000s on order because I can't seem to help myself and they seem like they'd work well for a hybrid 2.1 stereo and family room HT system. We shall see - I am also curious how to see how Dirac + an omni speaker would work.

 

[mstanley117]

am also curious how to see how Dirac + an omni speaker would work.

I have the 2000's in my main listening room which is just around 2800 cu. ft. (right on the borderline of the 2000's & 3000's), and I have a MiniDSP SHD for Dirac Live. So far, my experience with Dirac Live on these has been a mixed bag. I think a lot of my issues stem from the difficulty in measuring the full frequency rage given how the speakers are designed (the tweeter points up at around 45 degrees towards the ceiling I believe).

To me, the Ohms are "voiced" well already from the factory, and Dirac tends to reduce the mid-range in my room. This changes the imaging, and distance of the soundstage out from the speaker in a manner that I don't really like that much. With regards to my room, it is not well treated by any means as it is a living room, so perhaps that would improve with a better environment. I will say, though, that the Ohms do well in this room and are easy to place compared to other speakers that I've tried.

Let us know how it goes, because I'm curious if you end up experiencing something similar. Also, I'm not sure what time frame John gave you for your order, but I ordered mine sometime in August of 2020 and they weren't delivered until March 2021 if my memory serves.

 

[youpassbutter]

I have the 2000's in my main listening room which is just around 2800 cu. ft. (right on the borderline of the 2000's & 3000's), and I have a MiniDSP SHD for Dirac Live. So far, my experience with Dirac Live on these has been a mixed bag. I think a lot of my issues stem from the difficulty in measuring the full frequency rage given how the speakers are designed (the tweeter points up at around 45 degrees towards the ceiling I believe).

To me, the Ohms are "voiced" well already from the factory, and Dirac tends to reduce the mid-range in my room. This changes the imaging, and distance of the soundstage out from the speaker in a manner that I don't really like that much. With regards to my room, it is not well treated by any means as it is a living room, so perhaps that would improve with a better environment. I will say, though, that the Ohms do well in this room and are easy to place compared to other speakers that I've tried.

Let us know how it goes, because I'm curious if you end up experiencing something similar. Also, I'm not sure what time frame John gave you for your order, but I ordered mine sometime in August of 2020 and they weren't delivered until March 2021 if my memory serves.

Thanks - I just bought the SHD for my Zu's so I'll definitely report back when my 3000's come in. I ordered them in August 2021, so am expecting delivery within a month or two.

 

[dep14]

I have the 2000's in my main listening room which is just around 2800 cu. ft. (right on the borderline of the 2000's & 3000's), and I have a MiniDSP SHD for Dirac Live. So far, my experience with Dirac Live on these has been a mixed bag. I think a lot of my issues stem from the difficulty in measuring the full frequency rage given how the speakers are designed (the tweeter points up at around 45 degrees towards the ceiling I believe).

To me, the Ohms are "voiced" well already from the factory, and Dirac tends to reduce the mid-range in my room. This changes the imaging, and distance of the soundstage out from the speaker in a manner that I don't really like that much. With regards to my room, it is not well treated by any means as it is a living room, so perhaps that would improve with a better environment. I will say, though, that the Ohms do well in this room and are easy to place compared to other speakers that I've tried.

Let us know how it goes, because I'm curious if you end up experiencing something similar. Also, I'm not sure what time frame John gave you for your order, but I ordered mine sometime in August of 2020 and they weren't delivered until March 2021 if my memory serves.

It doesn’t surprise me that Dirac is a struggle with the OHM’s. I’m back running some Walsh 5Le’s with the 5.5000 cans (the latest and greatest).

I’ve attempted audyseey with mine in the past, virtually worthless, but then again I‘ve come to find most room correction sucks outside of for subwoofers (which I find criticial) and a little bit on center channels (when I use them which isn’t as often anymore).

I do suspect the OHM’s measure pretty flat, but with a downward slope. Nothing makes a whole lot of sense about OHM’s. I suspect if most on this board saw the crossovers and what is inside of the cans they would be stunned. Then again, if they measured flat people would be thrilled.

Room correction is fine as is a relatively flat response. That said, I think most listeners when listening and not looking at graphs tend to like a bit more bass than a flat response would indicate. Plus, with the way our ears hear, particularly at lower volumes a bit more of a smile response is preferred (thus the loudness button we had on everything for years).

I‘m not anti-measurement at all. In fact, I like to know my DAC in particular is accurate as then I can tweak the sound using other components, or the EQ in ROON. I do tend to try to smooth peaks and valleys just a bit, but don’t go crazy with it. DAC wise I just purchased an SMSL 9 SU9N.

Maybe I even like a little distortion (I tend to like a tube in the pre-amp, OR I tend to like Nelson Pass designed stuff). I think there is a happy medium out there between measurements and listening… and of course the room…

But, back to the OHM’s. I’ve been selling off some gear (higher priced) lately and I’ve had a few people over. Every single one of them sincerely likes the OHM’s. They are certainly coherent and just do not compress even at high volumes. The biggest thing I can tell people - they need a fair amount of power.


As far as measurements, there are few older articles out there that tend to read as they measure pretty flat.

Ohm Walsh 2 Speaker System Review price specs - Hi-Fi Classic

www.hifi-classic.net

 

[Jakubowski]

Bought my first Ohm Fs in 76 and loved them. Best sound reproduction I ever experienced since being on the stage myself. Classically trained Trumpet and Flute player but also played in a Rock band (alot of Chicago type music, 2 Trumpets, a Trambone, Sax, Lead. Rhythm, and Base guitar Drummer of course and a Hammond B-3 to round it off we also doubled as a Jazz band, who ever paid the bills)
Back to the Fs, powered them with a SAE 2400 amp and a SAE MARK 1B PREAMP. Went thru 3 pair trying to impress the girls.
Older wiser? Now have a pair of Walsh 4XO speakers and a pare of Klipsch LaScala.
Same PREAMP with a SAE 502 amp and a pair of Carver TFM-25 (mono block the Klipsch) looking to add reconditioned Fs back to the line up with another SAE 2400. Living in the past maybe but can't get my Dad who taught Flute, Obeo, and Clairinet and played Flute and Obeo in the Saskatoon Synphony when was 18 out of my head saying that the Fs were the closest sound reproduction to the real thing.
Listening to music for me is wanting to be in the middle of it all. You put a table in front of the couch full of plants and the Ohms about 6 to 8ft apart and you can feel each plant play an instrument.
Power to the table of music (all kinds)
Peace

 

[anmpr1]

Back to the Fs, powered them with a SAE 2400 amp and a SAE MARK 1B PREAMP. Went thru 3 pair trying to impress the girls. ...and a pare of Klipsch LaScala.
... and a pair of Carver TFM-25 (mono block the Klipsch)

I know that whenever I want to impress 'the girls', the bottom line for me is 600 watts into a Klipsch LaScala! I mean, size matters...

Carver TFM-25

8-ohm FTC rated power/ch 225 W
4-ohm FTC rated power/ch 350 W
2-ohm dynamic power/ch 750 W
Bridged mono power 600 W

​

 

[egellings]

Are they supposed to be omnidirectional speakers with a transmission line for bass?

Bass is done by way of the Walsh driver acting like a sealed box woofer. The Walsh behavior happens at frequencies above the bass range.

 

[mstanley117]

Bass is done by way of the Walsh driver acting like a sealed box woofer. The Walsh behavior happens at frequencies above the bass range.

Additionally, as I understand sound reproduction, the frequency below around 120hz (or so) is fairly omnidirectional anyway due to how our brain interprets those frequencies. In other words, our brain can't "locate" where those frequencies originate with pinpoint accuracy, and they don't "beam" as higher frequencies do. Thus, the way the Walsh (current) design works is as those frequencies get higher in the range, the CLS design is omnidirectional, meaning that they are spread out throughout the horizontal and vertical planes to remove the "beaming" effect of traditional box speaker designs.

From my own, anecdotal experience I hear it in the aforementioned description. That is, it's very difficult to pinpoint the specific source of the sounds, and these speakers are relatively omnidirectional from a forward-facing perspective. If you have tracks that have hard left and right pans, then yes in those circumstances the omnidirectionality is removed, but outside of that it's pretty much there.

 

[egellings]

Additionally, as I understand sound reproduction, the frequency below around 120hz (or so) is fairly omnidirectional anyway due to how our brain interprets those frequencies. In other words, our brain can't "locate" where those frequencies originate with pinpoint accuracy, and they don't "beam" as higher frequencies do. Thus, the way the Walsh (current) design works is as those frequencies get higher in the range, the CLS design is omnidirectional, meaning that they are spread out throughout the horizontal and vertical planes to remove the "beaming" effect of traditional box speaker designs.

From my own, anecdotal experience I hear it in the aforementioned description. That is, it's very difficult to pinpoint the specific source of the sounds, and these speakers are relatively omnidirectional from a forward-facing perspective. If you have tracks that have hard left and right pans, then yes in those circumstances the omnidirectionality is removed, but outside of that it's pretty much there.

The LF frequencies are omnidirectional because the wavelengths are so long, often longer than the listening room's dimmensions. The shorter the wavelength, the easier it is to spot where it's coming from.

 

[Salida]

Thought I’d resurrect this thread with some of my experiences. I bought a pair of F’s in 76 and blew them up multiple times. Took the Ohm Walsh IV option and said goodbye to the F’s.

Fast forward to 2012 and I found a pristine pair of F’s and had them refurbished by Millersound in PA. Bill replaced the voice coils, former, spiders, surrounds, and internal cone damping.

Everything about them improved, though that is tempered by the passage of time.

Bill said the originals were shipped from the factory broken, with the thermal compound in the gap migrating down to the former/cone joint where it caused the adhesive to fail.

Anyway I drive them with a 75 wpc amp and they get plenty loud for me.

John Strohbeen, Ohm’s current owner passed away last year and the company is operating but looking for a new owner.

With MBL and German Physics out of my price range I am enjoying my restored F’s more than I did when I first owned them.

 

[mlsstl]

I also had a pair of Ohm Fs back in the 70s and loved them, but they were just way too big as time went on so they were sold after just a few years. Fast forward to 2018 and I bought a pair of Ohm 1000s and really enjoy them. One of the things I like best, besides their quite neutral sound, is the really big sweet spot. The problem with many speakers is that if you are not seated in exactly the right spot the imaging, and sometimes other aspects of the sound, goes south. The Ohms let me move around the room and I hear a realistic, though not as precise as some speakers, stereo image no matter where I am. To me that is much more like what I hear at a live acoustic music event. I moved to a different house and now have a larger room so thought about Ohm 2000s or 3000s for a bit, but I don't listen all that loud so tried adding a subwoofer. That turned out to be a perfect solution since I (and the wife) don't care much for large speakers.

 

[bargainguy]

I have a pair of Walsh 4's toward one end of a 10 x 15' living room.

At various points, I've tried replacing the Walsh 4's with other speakers, yet I keep coming back to them.

HF energy seems to be less fatiguing for me than direct radiating speaker designs. Long listening sessions don't grate on me the way some speakers can.

They're not for everyone, but I find their sound addictive. I once heard someone say they were the ultimate party speakers. As long as you were in the room, you were in the sweet spot.

 

[Flaesh]

So if you don't have access to Ohm Walsh speakers in your country, maybe this technique will be

IME this technique sounds completely different compared to omnis in terms of the ratio of direct and reflected sound))

 

[Duke]

IME this technique sounds completely different compared to omnis in terms of the ratio of direct and reflected sound))

Agreed.

The technique I described is about getting a wide sweet spot, not about replicating the direct to reflected sound ratio of an omni.

 

[Flaesh]

The technique I described is about getting a wide sweet spot,

Agreed. And I use it. Member

radio3
Last seen Sep 8, 2022

so we are unlikely to know what he needed. Now we can return to discussing the Walshes themselves))