@kdude66,
I have only heard them at shows and they have certainly been at every show I’ve ever attended. Strangely, I have heard them sound so incredibly good, amongst the best sound I’ve heard and then I’ve also heard them sound really just so so at different times. Once in the same setup I heard them sound very sweet with a good vinyl setup and they switched to digital with lesser material. It then sounded like crap.
|
I would imagine they are more room sensitive than most other loudspeakers. |
I would think are less room sensitive than most speakers? Also less listening spot fussy....Interesting. |
^Interesting indeed. I would agree with you for the low frequencies. |
They have a huge sweet spot and sound best out tword the middle of the room or at least away from walls. I own the much less expensive Decware ERRx radial speakers and they sound best this way also.
|
They were best sound contenders for me at Capital AudioFest last year. That was the first I got to hear them. I am an omni guy with OHM Walsh speakers in my main hifi. Omni presentation is different more like a live performance. May take getting used to at first but maybe no going back for some. Placement not too close to walls or other reflective surfaces matters with true omnis. |
I have heard two models, the Unlimited (now discontinued, IIRC) and the Borderland Mk IV, on separate occasions at Distinctive Stereo in River Vale, NJ (the U.S. distributor for GP). Disclaimer: I am a happy Ohm Walsh 2000 owner (since 2009), and I adore the omni style of loudspeakers for what they do in general. The GPs are my dream speaker, in that they take the Ohm Walsh concept, and basically remove a lot of the cost constraints that Ohm's John Strohbeen works with to create more affordable omni designs. The GPs are simply wonderful. Smooth, yet detailed, great imaging, yet they disappear as a sound source into a massive 3-D soundstage. Good bass (although I am a bass freak who would never be without subs). Amazing dynamic range, both macro and micro, and the transient detail is Goldilocks - enough to sound real, but without shoving them down your throat. But I will say that hearing them gave me new appreciation for my Ohms, in that they do a lot of the things the GPs do, albeit not quite as well in any area, for a fraction of the price. But I will keep buying lottery tickets. You never know! |
Bondman,
Hope all is well.
I liked the GPs at CAp Audiofest very much, as much as anything I heard there, but gotta say, sitting here listening to my big OHM F5s that I scored for a fraction of retail even after wheeling and dealing, some serious A/B compares would be needed for me to be sure which way I would go, especially given the cost differential. The omni top end of the GPS compared to the OHMs definitely mean tougher placement away from walls. Maybe with the right room...... |
I would like to Thank all that have responded to my inquiry about these speakers from actual listening experience.
It’s been many yrs that I’ve heard a Omni of any kind and that would be the classic Ohm Walsh F’s.If my memory of these is correct,I do recall that they were very coherent speaking with one voice with a very large almost anywhere in the room stage but what was different was the imaging is different,not so pinpoint as most speakers.
The GP’s do pop up used from time to time,might be out of the USA,and Larry does have demo pairs for sale occasionally.
If you guys have any more solid info about the latest Ohm’s,I would like to hear about it.
If I get serious about the GP’s,due to their cost which is a serious commitment for me,I will have to take a trip and listen to them.
Enjoy,
Kenny.
|
kdude the newer OHM Walshes and GPs are very similar in that regard. However both are two way designs not one driver with only physical crossovers like the original Fs. It turned out to be almost impossible to deliver a long lasting durable and reliable product that way. GP uses Walsh principles on the higher frequencies, OHM Walsh on the lower. GP and OHM F both are/were true omnidirectional designs. OHM Walsh only somewhat in that side and rear sound is physically attenuated with sound absorbing materials inside the can to enable placement somewhat close to walls which works better for most in most rooms. This is the one guy who I think still tries and claims to have solved the issues with original OHM A and F. Have never heard but would like to. http://www.hhr-exoticspeakers.com/All good stuff! Different solutions that solve different problems. Lots of info on various thread here about OHM speakers. Not much else to say. If any specific questions ask away. |
Kenny - All the information on current and recent Ohm speakers you could possibly want is on this huge Audiogon thread - https://forum.audiogon.com/discussions/ohm-walsh-micro-talls-who-s-actually-heard-em It’s a long slog, but if you want a feel for what the Ohm’s are like, the only thing that would be more helpful would be an in-home demo (Ohm offers a 120-day in home trial, but you lose the round-trip shipping). Mapman may disagree, but I have long called my 2000s the "poor man’s German Physiks or MBL Radialstrahler". But the gap in sound, IMHO, is not nearly as large as the gap in price. |
You are either an Omni guy or not. We have heard pretty much every major omni, the MBL really are the best Omni on the market. WIth that being said most Omni's all suffer from the same problem they really don;'t work in real world envionrments.
An Omni is going to produce a gigantic swath of sound which bounces off all surfaces, this does create a giant yet unfocused sound.
Unless you can really tame all the room boundary effects or you love an oversized image which has no basis of reality then Omni's all the way.
It is interesting to note almost every single audio reviewer owns a direct radiating loudspeaker, why because they work in real world rooms and they produce life like well sized images. The only genre an Omni might be better would be orchestral music.
So Kdude you have to ask yourself what you value.
Dave and Troy
Audio Doctor NJ |
@audiotroy - Exactly. The reason I suggested the OP read through that huge Ohm Walsh thread was to get a feel for the kind of audiophile that likes the omni presentation, the pros and cons of it. It was that thread that lead me to try an in-home demo of the Ohms. For my taste, there was enough image specificity. There might not be enough for everyone.
I do beg to differ on the room treatment issue with omnis, though. Too much absorption defeats the whole point of an omni. The sound is supposed to bounce off the room surfaces; that is what creates the large soundstage. In my room, singers are properly sized on good recordings, with the singer’s apparent hieght at about 5.5’. They may produce images a little larger than life, but I prefer that to the miniaturized images many speakers produce. I actually have removed some of the absorption panels I had up from when I had more conventional dynamic speakers. I have a 60" plasma TV behind and in the middle of the Ohms. Covering this with a thick blanket actually sounds worse than just leaving it alone. I do plan on adding more diffusion, since my room is smaller than I would like, but the point is, I think, that as long as they are not too close to the adjacent walls, omnis should be allowed to bounce their sound off of them.
I would never expect an audio reviewer to use omnis as a review tool. Dispassionate neutrality is not really what omnis and their fans are all about. As JV of TAS would say, these are speakers by and for the "as you like it" crowd. I make no apologies for being a part of that crowd. I hear a lot of loudspeakers in the course of a year, and with rare exceptions, none of them that I can afford appeal to me as much as my Ohms. After all, if there were only one "correct" speaker, eveyone would own the same thing. But everyone hears differently and, as you said, values different aspects of reproduced sound differently. |
Omnis project sound and deliver sound stage and imaging MORE like what occurs in live un-amplified music. That’s the unique appeal. If the actual performers were in your room, they would be affected by acoustics more similarly. The nature of the soundstage and imaging totally depends on the room acoustics and seating location as well as the nature of the gear upstream, as is the case with any truly revealing speaker design. Early reflections are always a problem to avoid and omnis must be placed further from walls to avoid that than more directional speakers. OHm Walsh are not full omni’s however and are designed to be placed closer to walls to work better in most people's homes. OHM will customize most anything though if requested.
Bondman I would agree OHMs are poor mans GP or MBL based solely on the cost differential. Each does things quite differently though so not a strict apples/apples comparison. Should not be hard to hear the differences among the three.
|
Gentlemen,
Keep your opinion’s coming and I’m still reading all I can find on the subject.
I know at some point I’m just going to have to go and hear some,unfortunately no one has any kind of Omni near me.
Kenny.
|
@kdude66 - Where are you located? You never know when aother audiogoner near you has a speaker you'd like to hear. I have opened my doors to people who want to hear Ohms in my area. |
I've never really gone in for the common idea that omnis are by nature "not accurate" particularly in terms of soundstaging and imaging. As if on a direct radiator you "hear the REAL image contained in the recording" but on the omni you don't.
I've mad many speakers of all types, and even right now I have Thiel 3.7s, 2.7s, Waveform monitors, and others....as well as a pair of MBL 121 omnis.
The MBLs show me all the same relative information as any of the more direct radiating speakers do. If a voice is panned hard to one speaker...there it is. If it's just slightly behind and to the right...there it is.
I can simply hear the spatial relationships more distinctly, with more dimensionality, and with the sense of the speaker "disappearing" vs most direct radiators.
In fact, generally speaking, the more a direct radiating speaker has controlled dispersion, cabinet distortions etc, the "better" they soundstage in terms of disappearing as sound sources, and rendering depth and dimensionality. In other words....the more like the MBLs.
My Thiel 3.7s are just about the most "invisible" and best imaging box speakers I've owned, and they are the ones that sound most like the MBLs in terms of soundstaging and imaging.
|
I’m near Tulsa,Oklahoma.
We have a small audio club here,with many kinds of gear but no Omni’s that I’m aware of.
Kenny. |
I just got done restoring a pair of Borderland Mark 1's (new DDD's from factory), these are my first Omni's, and I love them. However, they are very current hungry and work better with SS, so I rolled the dice and tried powering them with a McCormack DNA-1. Wallah! Great match!. Controlled with Mark Levinson 26 pre and sources PS Audio PWD/PWT. This overall combination sounds very nice for a secondary system playing CD's. |
@kdude66 - Tulsa, eh? Well, all I can suggest is that you contact John Strohbeen at Ohm and/or Larry Borden at Distinctive Stereo. Maybe they can reach out to someone in your area who owns these speakers and see if they'd be willing to invite you in for a demo. You never know. |
prof, agreed.
I currently own Dynaudio and Triangle monitor speakers as well as two pair of OHM Walsh and a few others. |
I heard one of the German Physiks speakers some years ago, I believe it was the HRS-120, at a dealer. He'd received a used pair as part of a trade deal (they weren't on his usual brand repertoire), and we compared them to a pair of hORNS Mummy's - Polish speakers with a 12" OSWG waveguide (fitted with a 1" exit compression driver) and 12" bass/midrange, all placed in a fiberglass enclosure. I remember this listening session in particular because I've rarely, if ever heard speakers sounding this different compared to one another. My initial and distinct impression was that the German Physiks speakers were... an odd encounter. I then spent some time trying to get my head around their sonic imprinting, but after a while had to give in to the feeling of them simply being a major disappointment - not least considering their high price (some $30,000/pair). The one deficit to come to my mind repeatedly was that they lacked midrange presence and overall immediacy (in effect also: balance and coherency), as if a big suck-out and lack of energy through the entire central mids section marred the presentation here. The bass felt deep and fairly articulated, but seemed to struggle at more elevated levels (hardly over 90dB's), and the upper mids and highs were well-resolved and quite smooth - certainly the best part of their sound. If anything they sounded "sophisticated," and spatial abilities were in some regards noteworthy, but I sorely missed natural presence, coherency, and a more rhythmically astute aspect to their sound. Indeed to my ears they sounded strangely "fluffy" and somewhat diffuse, and I never really got to appreciate the qualities they did have. To each their own, I guess, but this is close to the antithesis of what I'm looking for sound-wise.
|
No depth no pinpoint imaging and no great bass other than that there just ok. |
The only GP I’ve heard was last November at CAF. The sound was spot on. Very neutral tonal balance and somewhat laid back perhaps but not overtly so. I believe they were using good qualiy (Veritas?) Class D amps (as I do with my OHMs) which surely imparted much of the tonality. Fans of warm sounding tube amps with lush midrange (not me I tend to prefer accuracy) would not be impressed in that regard. Soundstage and imaging indicated the muscians playing in the front part of the room with good soundstage depth. Like good omnis always tend to do. I heard nothing to fault. There was a large crowd listening intently. The sound was not like anything else I heard there. Of course every room sounded different and each will have unique leanings. That’s what makes the world go round. Omni’s cannot be beat for their large sweet spot and ability to image coherently regardless of listening positioning. If a live like presentation even on studio and/or mono recordings and coherent imaging most anywhere in the room does not appeal, probably no good reason to consider omnis.
|
[...] Omni’s cannot be beat for their large sweet spot and ability to image coherently regardless of listening positioning. If a live like presentation even on studio and/or mono recordings and coherent imaging most anywhere in the room does not appeal, probably no good reason to consider omnis.
A "live like presentation" and "... coherent imaging most anywhere in the room" would definitely appeal to me, but I find fault in equating omnis like the GP into being "live like" in presentation simply from those traits mentioned. They may be aspects of live-like sound, but very little of what I heard from the GP HRS-120 made me think of a sound character in that ballgame. For that to happen there’d have to be a very different magnitude of dynamics, scale and ease (not to mention overall coherency and presence/immediacy, certainly through the central midrange), and to accommodate this I’d wager the GP’s would have benefitted from a smaller size listening room compared to where I heard them, though I’m certain it would only have helped them so much. It’s not that I can’t appreciate an omni-presentation that relies heavily on the contribution of a given room’s acoustics/boundaries as "opposed" to a directivity-laden "through the window" type of sound that involves reflections to a lesser degree from the likes of horns, but if GP is largely representative of omni sound it’s too malnourished a sonic meal to my taste. (The only GP I’ve heard was last November at CAF. The sound was spot on. Very neutral tonal balance and somewhat laid back perhaps but not overtly so.) I believe they were using good qualiy (Veritas?) Class D amps (as I do with my OHMs) which surely imparted much of the tonality. Fans of warm sounding tube amps with lush midrange (not me I tend to prefer accuracy) would not be impressed in that regard.
I can’t buy into the "[quality] tube amp not equaling neutrality/accuracy" dichotomy; on the contrary, I’d say. The harmonic structure and texture, liquidity, tonality, sheer dynamic explosiveness/uninhibited-ness and natural fullness of good, lower wattage SET’s (preferably through higher efficiency speakers) to my ears takes the price towards a natural (I favor this term over "neutrality"), live-like presentation compared to many if not most solid state offerings with typically less efficient speakers. Good SET’s seem to lower my "reproduction"-guard and more into something that is simply there, with an element of simplicity or wholeness that downplays any dissecting tendencies of what’s heard. To me at least this is very much akin to witnessing an acoustic live event. |
@phusis - I don’t dispute that you heard what you heard when you listened to the HRS-120. I would only mention that, I think, GP has made significant revisions to its DDD driver, and I think the HRS-120 included an older version. When I heard the speakers, also in a very large space, both the Limiteds and the Borderlands (both with the current version of the DDD drivers) were very dynamic, engaging and life-like. Of course, there were many other variables, and YMMV. I also think that omnis vary in their sonic character just as much as dynamic or panel speakers do. There are dozens of variables, so I would not judge all omnis by the HRS-120 anymore than I would judge all dynamic speakers from hearing just one of them. There may be general family resemblances, but they can sound quite different from one another. |
Phusis there are some tube amps I like and others I find too limited. The ones I like tend to be able to do well with electronic as well as acoustic music. Of course I could say the same about SS amps. I do use a tube pre-amp (Audio Research sp16) in my system.
The tube amps I hear that I do like also tend to be playing with speakers that mate up to them well, often not the same ones I would choose with a SS amp.
So two different worlds really. I would never use a tube amp with the GP. The ones up to the task would likely be way too big and expensive, run hot, and consume loads of power.
Those who lean towards tube amps are not likely to go the German Physics or mbl way. But they will also end up with very good sound just in a different manner. Some like OHMs with tube amp and sub I know but not sure I would do that myself either. |
|
Not a bad idea, and they look pretty clean. Just look around at the big auction site, where many pairs are offered at much lower prices (although not this model, and not in as good a shape as these). |
I am not certain if you already acquired a pair of speakers but I can give you my experience on GP. I own several GP speakers (since 2009), including Borderland and 120. Obviously Borderland is more extended and IMHO, one of the best speakers ever made. My favorite is the Unicorn even though does not have the lows of the Borderland. All three models are recommended with no hesitation. They have natural voicing, excellent presentation, able to play large symphonies and keep rhythm well. Also, they handle high volume and peaks without stress or distortion. Amplification used is FM acoustics, Vitus Audio and Concert Fidelity. I hope it helps in your decision making.
|
I own a pair of Ohm 1000s and really enjoy them. I find that they produce a realistic sized, stable image. One of my favorite attributes of the Ohms is that I do not have to stay put in a small sweet spot in order to hear them at their best. It's great to have many people in the room and that all of them can enjoy the music at its best.
|
