OHm micro walsh series...

Anybody heard or own these smaller versions of OHms' highly touted walsh series?
No. But I hope more people start to realize that omnidirectional radiators have great potential. I have moved from boxes to planars to omnis and will never go back. I think of box sound as 1 dimensional. Planar sound as 2D and Omnis as 3D. Doesn't the highly rated Quad 988 approach an Omni with time delayed concentric circles to emmulate a point source?
Those don't use real Walsh drivers. Walsh drivers look like "pylons" or "road cones" for lack of a better term.

As t Holzhauer's comments, once you hear a "true" Omni ( NOT a driver that is manipulated to reflect signals ), you'll never forget the spaciousness and depth that they are capable of. Sean
Drivers aside...how do these sound? anyone?
Sean I use to own Ohm walsh 3, my recollection is
I can go from one corner of my listening room,and
they still sound the same,My brother in law still
has them, I sold them.I did enjoy them for 3 years,
and bought Kef 104.That time I only know how to listen
to sound, not music.Maybe I will borrow them
to see . How good they are with good gear.
check out the review of the new micro's at 6moons.com

Listen to a morrison model 1, magic! A further refined Ohm speaker.
I think these speakers will amaze you. I to went from box speakers to planars to Ohms walsh. Four days ago the walsh 5 MK-2 arrived that i ordered. They are on 24 hours a to speed up the break-in and already sound great. These are replacing my 16 year old walsh 4XO's and i will say they sound better then ever. The micro walsh and all the walsh series are said to sound the some, the differences are in how deep they go (cabinet size),(driver size). John at Ohm is helpfull and will not try sell you anything you don't need.
Ecclectique- is the Morrison Model 1 an evolved Hegeman? If so, Shahinian has since made a look alike.
Ecclectique- I just went to the Morrison website and saw the most recent apeaker. Clearly it does not look like a Shahinian Arc. Maybe the older Hegemans were the shape of the current Arc.
I too am interested in the 3D sound these speakers potentially have. My big question is how do they sound at low volume listening? I live in a condo and am looking for the best value for low level detail.
Holzhauer.If memory serves: I think you are correct on the Morrison 1 evolving from the Hegemans.I have not seen, nor heard them in a number of years. I do remember their holographic sound and how incredibly musical they were even at very low listening levels.I think the drivers fired straight up if I am not mistaken.I have been a big fan of Shahinian's sound for many years.He is an incredibly knowledgeable man with a giant passion for all things music as well as the recorded arts.Merry Christmas all!
MicroWalsh speakers will play fine at low levels, but I'm sure it will be hard to resist playing them moderately loud once you've tried it. I was quite surprised myself, how loud they can play clearly once we'd built the first prototypes and brought them to our home testing theater/listening room. Though they are small speakers, and designed more for moderate volume level listening in apartments/condos etc, or as surround/rear speakers to go with larger Ohm Walsh mains.

In response to Sean: No, they are walsh type speakers, omni directional over much of the frequency range.
I was superise to see this thread get bumped up from one year ago. I posted on this thread almost a year ago but now also have the Micro Walsh. Omni directional is what what I prefer and to my ears the Micro Walsh sound bigger than they are. They are here for keeps.
Ohm's own literature / info on their current line of speakers clearly states that these speakers are NOT omni-directional. They may sound more "diffuse" than other designs though due to the lack of direct radiation from the inverted mid-woofer. Other than that, the only "Walsh" driver that i know of that would fit inside of one of those "mesh cans" would be a Walsh tweeter as used by Infinity back in the 1970's.

As to the Morrison's, they are based on Stuart Hegeman's designs. The manner that the woofer is loaded within the cabinet is different from any other design that i've seen. The easiest way to describe it would be to think of a combo transmission line design mixed with internal Helmholts resonators. This approach has a LOT of potential from what i can tell based on the limited reading i've done about it. Sean
Last spring, I ended up getting a pair of micro talls, the matching center channel, and Ohm satellites for my home theater system. The wide soundstage and 3D sound of the talls are great for movies and the center channel is superb.
I listen to music through them often and it always surprises me how loud those little micro talls can play.

A couple of other manufactures that make nice omnis....

This is out of Ohm Walsh loudspeakers Technical White Paper dated 1981.
((The engineering of single wide-range drivers, such as the original Walsh loudspeaker driver, entails trading off efficiency for bandwidth. Perhaps the single most important compromise is the voice-coil mass decison. A coil, large and heavy enough to provide efficient bass responce, will not provide adequate high-frequency range. Conversely, a low-mass coil with excellent high-frequency performance will not be able to generate large low-frequency excursions. So, while the OHM F is the ultimate embodiment of Walsh technology, it requires substantial power to achieve loud sound pressure levels. Also, while the 360-degree dispersion of the Ohm F produces remarkable stereo imaging., it requires rather careful placement in the listening-room. The Ohm Walsh Loudspeakers utilize unconventional technology to provide a less expensive speaker which is substantially more efficient and less critical of room placement, but still coherent over a wide listening area.))
They are NOT omni, so it must be the coherent sound over a wide listening area is why I like them.
We took our drapes down and replaced then with verticals and also took down 64 sq' of old SONEX that was falling-apart and now the room is too lively for my taste; I have to do something about that.
The use of the word "coherent" in this specific sentence may not be the most appropriate word for what they are trying to describe: "The Ohm Walsh Loudspeakers utilize unconventional technology to provide a less expensive speaker which is substantially more efficient and less critical of room placement, but still coherent over a wide listening area. By that, what i'm trying to say is the sound produced by such a design is NOT coherent so much as it is "equally diffuse".

While some may wonder how the sound radiating out of the rear of a mid-woofer combined with a forward firing tweeter could be "equally diffuse", that is simple. All of the sound that one hears is "leaked" through all of the holes in the metal canister and the material that lines the inside of that "cage". As such, the "beaminess" of the tweeter at higher frequencies is nullified due to all of the diffraction / internal reflections taking place. The end result is that one hears the sound eminating through the holes in the canister, not from any single driver. There is no direct radiation, hence everything is "equally diffuse", which is the opposite of providing a point source of radiation that exhibits a "coherent" wave-front. Sean
Some years back, i took the cans off a pair of 4XO's and i could not hear a differance when i slipped then off and on again; i did this several times. There must have been a differance, but my ears could not hear it. You know...they used to think the bumblebee could not fly.
You have to search their site to see the current ones are not omnis, as this thread indicates. They physically damp the rear radiation from the Walsh driver in all the main models, and use a conventional tweeter starting around 8 or 10k. These tweeters are seriously toed in by default.

If you talk to them they specifically disavow omni-directional radiation.
Ok well, the Micros were originally omni up to a little past 1 Khz, I was working at Ohm for a while and I began designing the Micros while John (the president and main resident speaker designer) was away on vacation. After returning from his vacation he was surprised and pleased with the results from the initial prototypes so we set about completing the design in earnest, working together. I guess they've made some changes to reduce the omni ratiation pattern to lower frequencies. Once you get to a low enough frequency, they are of course, still omnidirectional.
Critofur (Christopher)
After reading through these messages I feel compelled to dispel much of the misinformation contained herein, excepting Chris who actually worked on the design prototypes and as such is authoritative.

1. The Walsh micros, and the full range Walsh 5 and it's smaller breathren, utilize the Walsh bending wave principle wherein cone breakup is controlled through wave termination at the surround. Thus, the apex of the cone produces the highest frequencies - the sound heard is in fact coming from the front of the cone (the "back" of the woofer as it were). The high frequency extension is naturally limited by the mass and inductance of the voice coil.
2. The great advantage of the Walsh mechanism is that the full range from the lowest bass to the upper midrange frequencies and treble (to circa 8 khz) are produced by a single driver without a phase-shifting crossover. The omni-dispersion of the Walsh driver provides for perfect overlap of frequency response and power response (total radiated acoustic energy on and off axis) and seamless crossover to the tweeter, which is substantially omnidirectional (at the crossover frequency) due to it's small radiating area.
3. As bending waves travel down the cone faster than the speed of sound in air (supersonic wave transmission line), and as the cone is angled so that the total distance of wave propogation traversal is a multiple of the driver horizontal radius, it is possible to produce a perfect wave from from low bass to the upper cutoff frequency (i.e. 8 khz): there is no phase shift or time delay. The Walsh driver can pass a square wave. Conventional loudspeakers cannot produce a square wave except perhaps at one specific point in space.
4. The Walsh driver as implemented by Ohm has been modified to attenuate the rear radiation field and result in a high dispersion frontal radiator - the modern Ohms are not "omnis" as the Ohm F was. This design choice makes for easier room placement, minimizes room interactions, results in a warmer tonal balance, and improves the stereo image specificity, without sacrificing the spaciousness of the sound field produced.
4. The Ohm Walsh design provides for controlled directivity, vis-a-via the upper operating range of of the main full-range Walsh driver, and the tweeter. The tweeter is baffled in such a way as to provide for smoothly increasing directivity. The tweeter is directional above 10khz by design because in the highest octane reside the directional cues which provide for localization (imaging). There is no great advantage to an omdirectional radiation above 10 khz - in fact, it generally results in an over-bright fatiguing sound with compromised imaging and requiring acoustic damping of the room walls to counteract it by eliminating early reflections.
5. The perforated can is acoustically transparent - it's only function is to physically cover and protect the driver construct. It is not a diffuser.

The advantage of producing a coherent wave from low bass all the way up to far above the region of maximal human auditory acuity (circa 2-5 khz) is the resulting sound quality: natural, clear, detailed without the phase-shift, lobing and power-frequency response mismatching that plagues all conventional multidriver loudspeakers and rob the music of natural detail resolution, add coloration, and render a contrived quality to the sound. Also, the Walsh driver affords a very large radiating area for the production of the critical midrange, and it's geometry provides for perfect dispersion in the horizontal plane. The former characteristic results in extremely low distortion as excession cone motion is eliminated - the latter eliminates the beaming and cone-breakup that palgue all front-firing woofer cones, even exotic materials. The Walsh driver can hence be run full-range up to it's bandwidth limit, this eliminating the need for a signal mangling crossover with its energy-storing capacitors and inductors.

To really grasp the design advantages of the Walsh driver listed above, one need only listen to an Ohm Walsh loudspeaker in a proper setup to appreciate it's superior depiction of acoustic space and musical performance vis-a-vis conventional loudspeakers.
Want true omni? The German made Deuval's are it - however, one needs very deep pockets. You can view them at www.highendaudio.com. I have tried 9 different speakers since 1975 searching for that "liquid midrange". I will be auditioning a pair of Micro Walsh Talls for the next few weeks. Have been told they are great for classical orchestral and chamber works, I shall hear.
Would like to see this thread revived.
In the "old" days, there was only one Ohm speaker which used one 15 inch walsh driver. It was VERY hard to drive..at the time Phase Linear was the only amp that had enough power for them...and they were constantly clipping when you turned it louder...but...I remember it sounded very good. They then made an easier driving 12 inch full range..didn't sound as good. I had an Infinity speaker in those days which used the Walsh driver for a tweeter.
I just posted this about the Walsh 5...


The micros have a smaller sound, and not as refined, but they do sound very lively and in-room.
I'm REALLY thinking about a pair of S53's or 300's. I use the MBL sound as the top (for me) and a lot of people say that they resemble them a lot. True? thoughts?
"I use the MBL sound as the top (for me) and a lot of people say that they resemble them a lot."

Resemble is probably a fair statement. Never heard MBL or the two back to back, but have done a lot of research. I suspect there are many similarities in sound and also significant, if not earth shattering, differences.

Ohm 300 or 5 is certainly a logical alternative to investigate for those who covet the MBL sound but can't or won't take the MBL plunge, for whatever reason, I would say.