2. speakers
  3. 123125-1644

Are Ohm-Walsh micros and 1000 series disrespected because of omni-directional design??

I never was a big fan of Omni-directional speakers because they are often disappointing.  I don't need the sound in back of me or 2 foot to my right or left.  However, I have seen many testimonials for Ohm -Walsh speaker on Audiogon, yet they are infrequently reviewed. 

Therefore, are Ohm-Walsh speakers disrespected because of  their Omni directional design??. I  noticed two issues on their website: 1) how do your determine which micro or tall column will be compatible for the dimensions of your listening area, especially if your listening area is only part of a larger room. 2)  A  buyer can easily mistake  the way they are priced. For example, the OW Talls (w-1000)  are $ 1000 each, NOT $1000 FOR THE PAIR.  So, that model is $2000 a pair, and there is lot of competition from conventional designed speaker, in that price category For example. the Golden Ear Technology. model 7, and the Magneplanar .07 both in the $1400-1500 price range and, some of the PSB towers, like the T-2 or T-3. or Monitor Audio recent series.. 

Would like some feedback about whether this Ohm-Wash design is disrespected  by the major audio press. Are  hardcore audiophile not convinced by the Omni-directional design and results, and so it never gets a f"air shake or serious audition,

sunnyjim
sunnyjim OP
927 posts
 

finsup....Yes,, I am still in the building or should I say audio asylum (LOL)   You make a very important about the issue of  listening to the system or just enjoying the music. However, if what a listener  hears is edgy in the highs, jumbled in the midrange on crescendo's, and raucous rock finales, or an a noticeable. incoherentcy  of musical presentation across the board, then the listener may feel intuitively that it does not  satisfy his general expectation. Without having to employ cornball  cliques: you may not get that "peaceful easy feeling" from the music you worked to achieve.

This is NOT necessarily abdicating the music for some ideal of musical perfection by technological whizzerty . The "two" are tied and intertwined  too closely together. This does not mean every listening  session is a flop by not delivering that so called "peaceful easy feeling" because there are too many parameters that go into the a natural, or musical  presentation of the medium; that is, from electrical hash in the AC outlet, or a disgruntled partner who just does not like the look,  color,and shape of the speaker in the living room.

I think audiophiles or aspiring audiophiles who put in the hours of research, and trial and error auditioning realize listening to music requires a high degree of concentration so as to enter the flow of the music played, and the potential genius inherent in its structure. This focus is not some elitist pretension that many non audiophiles contend and accuse us;  but, for the record, casual listeners, or listening while you work, or listeners passing through the room on the way to the  kitchen or bathroom are at a deficit. I don't hear a thing when I listen casually or distracted, so I listen alone. No playing slap and tickle with the girlfriend,  or watching the last segment of Dr. Phil while Beethoven,or the Allman brothers are wailing away  at the peak of their musical creation. 

I think you point deserves a separate thread, and I am sure the divergence of opinion will be great and  at times caustic. Thanks for the comment!! 

finsup
289 posts
 
To construe what I wrote as a suggestion that these speakers don't allow you to hear into the music, I think you may have misunderstood, but then it seems as if you prefer the traditional presentation of monopole speakers and are partial to very analytical speakers.  I'll offer that these are not the type of speakers that will allow you to hear the second violinist pass gas.  Sorry for the crudity. So, yes, they do lack the resolution you'll find in other speakers. What they do well is render a smooth, coherent presentation.

As to your specific misgiving that these speakers might play some kind of "parlor trick" and that the sound was "around the listener, was not distinct or detailed, and kind of amorphous or nonspecific in imaging or sound staging", then I think your misgivings are misplaced.  

Still, what you want to do -  concentrate so as to enter the flow of the music played - is not what I look for in a speaker which is to enjoy music and appreciate the perspective the Ohm Walsh lays out. Neither approach is wrong, but I read of incessant audiophile- nervosa on these forums and am grateful I am not so afflicted. 

As to your subject title, it may be that Ohm Walsh speakers are not so much disrespected as to being misunderstood.

Best wishes on your journey!
mapman's avatar
mapman
21,838 posts
 
What the ohms are not is bright in any way which sometimes can be perceived as more detailed.  

How owe detailed they are depends largely on what they are fed and how set up in the room.  

I do do not find them wanting in detail compared to say my Dynaudios which are more renowned for that.   Or using good headphones as a reference for listening most directly to the recording.  THey are definitely less bright.  Which is truly more detailed depends.  For all practical purposes I find it to be a moot point in the end.   Which is better in regards to detail is mostly a question of what one is listening for.   Assuming both are being fed a clean detailed signal to start with. 
wtf's avatar
wtf
307 posts
 
I agree with Mapman. My Maggies and Mark & Daniel Rubys are definitely brighter than my MicroWalsh Talls (circa 2004) but there is plenty of detail without any of the hardness. I'm always surprised audiophiles dismiss Ohm speakers so easily and often without hearing for themselves. One day I hope to move up to the 2000's.
finsup
289 posts
 

I think both of you may be reading too much into my statement above about the Ohms lacking resolution. I perhaps should have used a qualifier such as they lack “some” of the resolution that can be found in other speakers. Not much, but they are not the last word in detail. That said, the Ohms do offer great detail, again depending on room, placement and quality of upstream components.

For me, however, it is not the [very decent] level of detail that compels me to write, as I did above, that these are keepers for me. Please see my Feb 19 post above. Rather, it is their rich, smooth, coherent sound – their ability to connect me with the music. It is an almost-there live experience for me. Almost. Very close. For me. 

Put another way, I really like Maggies. What they bring to the table, they bring incredibly well. Yet, for what I want in speakers, and need given how I listen to music, they don’t bring it well enough. I can go to a concert with my family – all five of us. I can switch places with any one of them and while I hear a small tonal shift, I am still engaged. Sitting on living room sofa, in the sweet spot, with the Ohms, I get that almost-there live experience, sitting back mid-hallish. If I get up, move around, switch places on the sofa, I get a small shift in how the music sounds but it doesn’t collapse on me they way it would with Maggies.

What I am trying to say – to SJ’s concern - is that this isn’t some fake, artificial trick the designer has used. In much the same way I can change seats during a concert and still maintain that live connection to the music, so too can I with the Ohms. 

Map, I think it was you who wrote in Rebbi’s epic Ohm Walsh Micro Talls thread (still going strong!) that the Ohm’s had plenty of “meat on the bones” If it wasn’t you, then a tip of the hat to the forgotten author. What that description conveys to me is the rich, harmonic, musical space these speakers render.

Anyway, SJ, sorry to take this thread in a slightly different direction, but I hope by now that your initial query has been answered by all the posters above.

More to discover