thanks jamesgarvin. i have tried everything, even different rooms. shooting them straight out is helping a bit. reading up in the maple shade catalogue, i have tilted them back much more, helped also a little.
the only action that make them really sound better is to switch the gallo sub amp to full range. i get a more satisfying fuller sound and the highs seem to be less pronounced. obviously, the woofer is taking on some of the job the midrange units should perform and this with satisfying clarity. it is obvious, that i am acting against gallo's advice by bi amplifying the ref 3's with the complete frequency spectrum into the bass unit. while this may send shudders down the spine of serious audiophiles, it seems the only way for me to get acceptable performance from these speakers. |
I would also make two suggestions. If you are pointing the speakers in, I would suggest placing them facing straight forward. The other issue may be your room. I felt mine sounded a little light, I did some measurements, and I learned that my room has a very big suckout from about 50 hz up to about 100 hz. I made adjustments on the sub-amp that significantly reduced, though did not eliminate, the suckout, which gave the speakers significantly more body. Perhaps there is a room issue. |
Hey Woifi,
We all hear differently, listening to "Stereo" is a personal thing. As no two speaker systems sound the same, no two people, look the same or hear the same. I have a number of musician friends who love the sound of my Gallo speakers because "it sounds like real instruments". Good luck in your quest. |
Well, I'll bet Gallo says there's nothing wrong with them. Do you have any knowledgeable audiophiles nearby who might take a listen and make suggestions? I mean I can't imagine BOTH speakers being infected with the kind of nasties you describe. Are you using a subwoofer amp into the lower pair of speaker inputs? I've heard about some people thinking the lower pair of inputs is for bi-wiring, which it isn't. |
thanks dopogue, i will send them to gallo and have the tweeters checked. |
Woifi73, after giving them your best shot for 4 years and not liking the result, you should definitely replace them IMHO. I've had mine for 4 1/2 years, listen to the same music you do (plus jazz) via an all-tube system and have no intention of replacing mine. Must be some serious lack of system synergy because mine have never sounded the least bit tinny and etched to me, and with the substitution of the Mapleshade bases sound truly amazing, albeit much better on everything BUT "rock and electronically modded music." That's a real head-scratcher. Good luck, Dave |
i have been playing to get the ref3's to sound good for 4 years now. (stands, tweeks..). i am throwing the towel.
i listen to classical music and chamber music. while imaging very well, the sound is tinny and etched. the reviewers praising the 3's tweeter may not listen to life music. violins do not sound right through this tweeter. i have tried tube amps (quicksilver v4 monos) in combination with a vtl5.5 preamp and the benchmark dac. alternatively i used the speakers with the musical fidelity kw500. i find that they sound much better with rock and electronically modded music than with classical recordings. i have my guarneri memento's next to the gallo. they portray the music in all its glory. any similar experience and possible remedy? |
These are extremely neutral and very revealing of any upstream equiptment.There just telling you when you are, or not,moving in the direction of audio nearvana. worry not, you will get there. |
Looks are in the eyes of the beholder. I like the looks, without the cover. The cover is ugly.
The Gallo's are very transparent and they will pretty much reflect what the upstream components feed them. They will not make components sound better than they are. I thought they sounded great on my Pioneer AVR but it was not until I went to a Spectron amp that I could really hear what they were capable of producing particularly in the bass. I do use the SA amp bi-wired off the Spectron amp. The result is tight/textured lower bass not muddled at all.
There are some Gallo Ref3 naysayers out there but once they are broken in they are some of the nicest sounding and imaging speakers out there. Of course, that is only my humble opinion. |
I tried the resistor across the 2nd voice coil tweak and found it made no difference I could hear. So I don't use it.
"Highs are good, but not spectacular, midrange smeared, bass very well extented but muddy" Don't know what to say because I believe the poster heard the Ref 3.1s in this way. In my system the highs are incredibly detailed with big air, the mids are a bit recessed but clear as a bell, and the bass is extended and tight. Imaging to die for.
For the record I think this is one ugly looking speaker. But I buy speakers for their sound, not their looks, and I've been very very happy with the Gallos for a couple of years now. |
I agree. And I sure don't want to saddle my SET monoblocks with the added chore of reproducing subterranean bass. |
Though it seems that the "mod" was successful for Jerry, I don't think we can draw the conclusion that it removes the need for the bass amp. |
I think this is what you're looking for.
http://www.10audio.com/gallo_ref3-1.htm |
Hey anybody remember what that crossover mod was that many said removed need for separate bass amp?was real simple but can't Google it up.I'd like to archive it.
Chazz |
Mapleshade offers upgrades to the speakers as well as the stands, has anybody heard those upgrades or mods? |
I am a 3.1 owner.
I have owned several different types of speakers, 2 pairs in the 10k+ range. These are my favorites! Very open and transparent sounding, with some of the best imaging capabilities out there regardless of cost.
Everyone has different tastes, but when setup properly, I would not describe them as "thin" whatsoever... actually the contrary, I get a very meaty sound out of them. But yes, if you have bright/thin sounding equipment, and/or a room that is reflective with not enough damping, I can see how they might sound harsh.
Very dynamic and BIG sound despite their small size. I personally recommend an amp with some current to drive them. I started with a 60WPC tube amp, but unfortunately the bass was a bit mushy and transients were lacking. A Wyred 4 Sound Class D amp fixed that right up. |
I bought mine despite thinking they looked wimpy as hell, especially next to my former Gallo Ultimates. Even ended up co-designing some special speaker bases (just listed them on Audiogon) to raise them 6 inches. The trick to these things is POSITIONING. Although Mechdude1 found them pretty much plop-n-play, it's taken me a long time to get them to world-beater status. The Mapleshade bases make an amazing difference, but that was after I had already moved them all over the place and ended up with them 8 feet from the back wall and 3-4 feet from the sides. Don't get me wrong; I liked them from the beginning -- well, after the break-in -- but I like 'em a lot better now. |
Actually, I bought them despite their looks, which I was not fond of. I first listened to the Gallo 3.1s at CES (actually THE Show) a few years back and I thought they were one of the best I heard there. I eventually bought the SA amp to go with them and thick granite stands to raise them a bit as I always thought the soundstage sounded 'short' (for lack of a better description). While I loved the sound (and still do), I eventually sold them and moved on. Currently I have the VS VR 4 Jr's and think they are absolutely fantastic with no weakenesses in any area. |
to me, the overarching question is whether anyone would buy the gallos if they didn't look so unique. not that there's anything wrong with buying on the basis of style--it's your money--but i can't help but think that with gear generally. many of us are influenced more by form than by actual sound quality. |
I must admit the two times I've auditioned these speakers I
wasn't impressed. They do have a great top end and good bass
extension.
Where they lack for me, is the all important midrange. The
speakers sound thin on both occasions in two separate
systems and rooms, I've heard them in. Even the owner of the
last pair I heard was a little disappointed. Not my cup of
tea by a long shot. I went with the intention of buying the
last pair. Thinking maybe the first pair weren't set up
properly...no dice though.
They do look cool though! I'm sure they make great
conversation pieces if nothing else. |
Set up and broken-in properly, they are anything but congested and veiled. I couldn't agree more. I don't own them, but have heard them. They were driven by a Musical Fidelity A5(?) integrated. Stunning detail, air and delicacy. I keep saying I'm going to buy a pair, but haven't gotten around to it yet. Maybe next year. |
Fin1bxn, sounds like they were either undergoing break-in (for the first hundred hours they sound pretty ghastly) or were miswired, intentionally or unintentionally. Set up and broken-in properly, they are anything but congested and veiled. |
I demoed them with Cary Tube amp (100 watts)and preamp in a medium room against Older merlins VSM and Revel F52. I was not impressed. Sounded congested and like a viel was over them. We played around with placement and to no avail. I was disapointed becuse I have herd so much about them and they are a perfect size. But in the same room with the same electronics they were very disapointing to me and all in the room |
Enjoy them, Mechdude 1. I certainly have, for the past 4 years. When you're feeling really flush, treat them to the Mapleshade bases specifically designed for these speakers. Pricy as hell ($775) but they literally transform the Gallos.
As to the Maggie comparison, I heard the 3.6s a while ago and couldn't return to the Gallos fast enough. As they say, YMMV :-) |
I've auditioned the Gallos and fall into the Not That Impressed camp. They certainly look cool--certainly a major factor in their huge popularity-- but weren't, to my ears, especially exciting to listen to--nice, but not overly detailed high end, somewhat lacking in dynamic slam and bass extension. Within their $3-5k price range, I much prefer the Magnepan 3.6 (which also need a sub) as well as the more conventional Totem, JM Lab, VMPS, PSB floorstanders, all of which sound "fuller". Just my opinion, of course--I hope their many fans continue to enjoy them. |
Hi All!
I have a 7.1 Gallo Ref3.1 system for home theater. I use a Lexicon RV-8 for movie duties, and a Pathos Classic MK2 integrated for dedicated music. Source is a Lexicon RT-20. I have custom subs, w Velodyne
SMS-1 controlling them.
I've heard quite a few speakers, and the Gallos with my Pathos driving them are Audiophile SEX! (I'd do 'em if I could...:-)
IMO-if you are not getting great sound with these speakers, something is seriously off with your system, room, or set up.
They are stupid easy to set up. Just get them 3-4 feet out from front, and side walls, and they are singing. The many stellar reviews are DEAD on. I love the sound of planars/ribbons, but they are huge, and usually require very careful setup(at least my Martin Logans do). Also the bigger stats, and ribbons visually "dominate" the room. The Gallo ref's have the speed and killer soundstage, without taking over the entire room. My 6 ref 3.1, with ref center channel
are AMAZING for home theater, and visually are barely noticed. With LOGIC 7(Lexicon) and the Gallos you ARE in the movie for sure.
These are keepers for a long time! Feel free to contact me with any comments, suggestions, or questions.
Mark |
My 3.1s sound great. The detail and clarity is sensational. They sound great all around the room. Imaging is great, following each instrument is concise as well as effortless.
A totally engaging listening experience with no fatigue.
I would like to know though if anyone has modded the mid enclosures, i feel that these speakers could progress even further with some dampening on these . I am reluctant to bastardise the external though and am timid about opening the speakers up. |
I have owned and listened to the Gallo ref 3.0 for a year. My experiences did vary quite a bit depending on all equipment and ic's and pc's. Initially the Gallos were so harsh in the mids but the highs were glorious.The bass was not nearly where I wanted it to be. Not enough definition or prominence.Just kind of mushy. Got a good ss amp (bat vk 500) and gained some bass and mids and liquid but still harsh on mids due to cd player(music hall). Then added tube pre amp(bat vk 5ix) which helped alot to control the etched sound of the mids. I believe that the Gallos really reflect the equipment. Finally got a 24 bit Bat vk d5se cd player and hit real paydirt. The sound improved immensley as well as the sound stage. The real gains were in the speaker cable and interconnects as well as power chords. After ALL tweaks were done I found myself glued to my system in an unusual way. I could listen for hours on end without the fatigue I had experienced before all the changes. The imaging is wonderful but the bass mids and highs are something to be sought after. VERY clean and warm with lots of textures that are simply astounding. I never tire or fatigue and I want to really spend the time listening. The only thing now is the bass is slightly heavier than I want in some recordings. I have a small wierd room but speaker placement is the key in any room. I think tubes and warm ic and speaker cable make a tremendous. (Speltz IC and speaker cable with ZU Mother pc)I did try some other cables and did not find the warmth or bass that seemed possible. So here is mt 2 cents worth. Work toward the goal of taming the Gallos is my suggestion. |
I hear the Gallo's for the first time today. The bass was heavy but everyhting else was stellar. (Seems to me most speakers have way too much bass for almost any room but I guess people like that). One issue - they are short.
Why are they and so many floor standing speakers so short? The average person inf the avaerage chair or couch is well above these and many other speakers
I also heard the soon to be announced Avalon Evolution. it was amazing - especially for the size and price. the highs we not quite as crisp as the Gallo but overall the speaker was just as impressive - and the bass wasn't heavy |
Tantra, that's wonderful advice. I was thinking of using a powered subwoofer to supplement the Gallos. Would that be overkill in your opinion? I have a Von Schweikert powered sub, which is incredibly quick and musical.
Many thanks for the input.
rr |
Rustler, the fact that the speakers can handle 350 wpc doesn't mean you need that much to drive them. The Ref3's are actually fairly easy to drive. The Stingray in UL mode should have plenty of power. Maybe even in triode mode. But I would strongly recommend purchasing a Gallo SA to drive the woofer second voice coils. With this combination you will have it all. The tight fast bass of a high-current SS amp, the lovely liquid midrange of the Stingray, and the awesome high end of those Gallo CDT tweeters. That system would be hard to beat at any price! |
How much power do they need? I'm thinking of getting either a Manley Stingray or a Krell 400xi integrated amp. Would the Manley tube piece be enough? The lit says they can handle up to 350!
rustler |
It's funny, I think that people cannot really get over how good these sound. These are so good they are almost a *freak* and because some people don't/can't deal with it they come up with "they sound congested" or "lean Bass".
Give me a break.
I actually went to the Digital Ear a store in Tustin (SoCal), they are a Gallo dealer and did not even have them hooked up or near others for a demo. They tried to sell us EVERY other speaker in the house from Martin Logan to Audio Physics to even Tannoy!
I could not believe it, They were not even going to play them for us, until we demanded that they do. They were clerly superior to everything they TRIED to sell us, the $4500 Audio Physics, the $3795 (Vistas) Martin Logan's and they said with a straight face that the Galllos are over-rated...?
You know what I think? I think that if dealers actually demo these speakers against everything under $10K they will never sell another speaker other than the Ref 3.1's! And I think that is way too painful for many of these dealers, their profits will dip because they will be moving the Gallo's in lieu of more expensive Logan's, A. Physics and every other speakers out there.
This is a business after all, and if Lexus comes out with a car that is 3 times less than the more expensive Mercedes but clearly out performs it, Mercedes is in serious trouble.
And that's what I think has happened here, these speakers are so good, everyone else is in trouble, including the dealers. A $3K Reference Speaker is a major paradigm shift for not only many manufacturers, but many dealers as well.
And I believe, THAT is the issue...
Cheers-
Mike |
Read about Zu Druids on 6moons. Srajan compares them directly to the Gallo Ref 3's. He had them both on hand at the time.
Further, I know he traded up to bigger Zu's and still has the Gallos. In short, he praised the hell out of both of them.
And I believe he gave them each an award. |
I have found a system configuration that sounds really wonderful. In fact, it's the best stereo system I've ever heard anywhere. Modwright 9.0SE tube preamp, pair of Conrad Johnson Premier 12 amps driving Gallo Ref3 speakers. The combination of a warm, liquid tube amp and the Gallo Ref3's is magical, EXCEPT for the bass. Then I added a Gallo SA to drive the second voice coils, and a REL Storm III subwoofer. Now the bass is fast, tight and punchy, but beautifully integrated. I run both the Gallo SA and the REL at 50% gain with both low-pass filters turned all the way down. It's a very versatile system that sounds good with all types of music from chamber music to rock. See "Tantra's Tube Rig" on the A'gon website. Highly recommended! |
Wow not much in middle ground here.Guess I'll need to hear them which means leaving the sticks for Da Big City!.I think that some speakers elicit this type of no middle ground.The Zu line comes to mind.Maybe I reading to much of www.6moons.com but would like to hear them as much as gallo's and the Hyperion speaker which looks like a Wilson Wat/Puppy.But the double box configuration is geting more and more poular and given it's potantial to reduceresonace makes sense.Used to work at a dealer who sells the little cheap Gallo's as a alternmative to Bose (since most wioves say "doesen't it come any smaller" more often than any other.So my ex-boss is skeptical given he has B&W,Kef,Linn,and a few other options.damn thing about beiong a dealer is oftenm a company makes one or two great products and the rest of their line isn't worth it.Some,especially small companies.allow you to cherry pick but the bigger they are the more they want you to have the whole or a large percentage of the line.but am hinking on looks alone sonmeone would by a sample pair.It's just another dealer I know said his Thiel and B&W would just knock these out of the box and thought the Absolute Sound review was in his words "whack".
Cheers
Chazz |
Rolloff, just go to www.partsexpress.com and key in 249-720 under "Quick Search" at the upper left. The speaker spikes attach at the bottom (not the sides) of the stands . Both the brass points and the rubber feet come along with the set. |
Dave,
What did you use for the sides of the stands to mount the speaker spikes into? Do you have a part number for the feet too? I didn't see the rounded point models at Parts Express, though I was blown away by their real world prices. How refreshing to have someone sell hardware at hardware store prices, and not jewelry store prices.
Rolloff |
Rolloff, they are not attached, I do have some threaded screw from the bottom of the speakers to the holes on top of the stands to prevent shaking or knocking off since I'm in earthquake territory. |
First, I got the price of the Parts Express spikes wrong. They're just $14.80
for four, not $22.99. And the stands themselves can be seen at
www.steinaudio.com
Regarding the interface between speakers and stands, In the case of mine,
the speakers are simply sitting on the 4 dead ball halves (as I said, I'm still
experimenting, although these sound VERY good). The speakers are quite
stable, strange as this may seem. I can't seem to get a good photo but will
keep trying.
I prepped the stands with Rust-Oleum "Painter's Touch" sandable
primer, sanding after each coat, and finished with the Painter's Touch semi-
gloss black. If I had it to do over, I might go with flat black for a better
match, although the semi-gloss looks fine. Both primer and black paint were
via spray cans.
Yes, the feet are adjustable and I'm using a slight tilt, but not as much as the
stock feet provide. Dave |
Thanks to Kkm and Scott Stein I have a pair of these stands (they look identical to the ones pictured in Kkm's link) and can confirm the sonic improvements. Besides, I think they look rally neat! The slightly "outboard" spiked feet are from Parts Express, their part # 249-720 (cost is $22.99 for 4 feet, twice that for 8).
Between the bottom of the speakers and the tops of the bases, I'm using "dead balls" cut in half, but am still experimenting. With the dead balls, you can touch the sides of the bases and feel absolutely no resonance from the speakers even playing Flight of the Cosmic Hippo at full blast!
I really recommend this tweak. Dave |
Kkm,
Nice stands, and well designed with the outboard feet that I'll presume you can adjust. (see my systems page for another variation) I don't see the method for attachment of your speakers to the stands though. How is that accomplished?
You should post your pictures on a systems page here on the 'gon.
As you said in your post re painting, preparation is always the key to a good finish. That and some 400-800 wet dry sand paper.
Enjoy-
Rolloff |
Finally had the DIY stands completed and running for a couple of weeks now and it's been quite an improvement. For photo's follow the link:
http://www.audiocircle.com/circles/viewtopic.php?t=28857&highlight= |
Hmm, interesting comments on the negative sound from the Gallos. My own experience was that my pair needed over 200 hours of break in before they stopped changing their sound and just sounded wonderful. Admittedly, I bought the Gallos based partly on the reviews, as in general, speakers will vary their sound depending upon the room they're in. That being said, the pair that I heard was broken in for over a month at the dealers, and was in a room devoid of room acoustic treatment. When I was shopping, I was prepared to spend up to about 5 times the cost of the Gallos, but after hearing them, I couldn't begin to justify it. They're that good. Yes, they need a long break-in. Yes, for me, they improved their imaging with the Brightstar stands. I think that was wholly dependent upon my room, and would probably be for you too. The sub amp is a bonus, but I don't always turn it on, and I remember thinking before it finally arrived from Gallo, that the bass, as is from my 120 watt tube monoblocks, was superb. You can just tweak it that last little bit with the solid state driving the second voice coil.
Unless someone's listening to a lemon pair, or a pair that's not broken in, I can't imagine a bad review of these speakers. Certainly not given their price, though as I said, for me they're value far exceeds their cost. Then again, brain imaging studies have shown that people will associate quality with cost or a product name, as they are evaluating products and given a relative value of the sample. Maybe, some people just can't get past that part of their brain to enjoy the sound from these speakers? That's not a negative comment towards anyone who doesn't like these speakers, it's just a comment on human physiology. In the end it doesn't matter. No one should feel talked into liking the sound of a product. Buy what sounds good to your own ears. For me though, this is one product I won't be replacing any time soon. |
Dopogue ; I made a point of asking the salesman if the Gallo's were "fully" broken in . I really wanted to like them and went to this shop to specifically hear them . On a subsequent visit , I again heard them on some Cary monoblocks (six packs maybe ?)and they sounded the same to me and the auditioner. In defense of the Gallo's , I have read where most people state that the Gallo's really need 200 - 300 SS watts to sound their best. That amp requirement does not fit my desires . As I said above , synergy maybe ? |
"Well extended and airy highs, decent midrange, lack of any bloat in lower/mid bass with a slightly lean sound...the soundstage was enveloping" I don't understand, how is Photon46's reaction a "ditto" of Ojgalli's?: "Highs are good, but not spectacular, midrange smeared, bass very well extented but muddy. Soundstage is like you're sitting in the second balcony" Hmm, talk about "scratching my head" -- to me, the first quote sounds positively positve!...But I haven't heard the speakers... |
Can't argue with Photon46, whose most serious complaint is their sounding like the small speakers they appear to be. I was using humongous Gallo Nucleus Ultimates when I got the Ref 3s, and playing them side by side, people THOUGHT I was playing the Ultimates. The Ref 3s actually had a bigger sound but looked tiny by comparison. This is in an 18x40' space, BTW.
Saki70 describes Ref 3s that aren't broken in (takes well over 100 hours) and/or are miswired (the bottom pair of binding posts are not for biwiring but for hooking up a subwoofer amp). In any event, the last thing they should sound like is congested. Not disputing what you heard, just a tad puzzled. |
I must echo Photon46's impressions . I too listened to them through the same CDP , CJ PV14 pre and a Cary hybrid amp . Both my wife and I felt that they were nothing to write home about ! They sounded congested and also like small speakers . When we compared them to VS VR4jr's and Usher 6311's (?) it wasn't even a contest . Synergy maybe ?
There are a great many who love them . |
FWIW, I had a rather extended listening session to the 3.1's a couple weeks ago. They were powered by a Cary V12 amp, Cary SL98P preamp, Soundstring cables, and a Arcam CD192 player. I would have to say I was, like Ojgalli, underwhelmed. After all of the glowing reviews and enthusiatic endorsements on the online forums, I was figuratively scratching my head at my reaction. After 30 minutes, I ask my wife her impressions. Ditto, same impression: well extended and airy highs, decent midrange, lack of any bloat in lower/mid bass with a slightly lean sound. While the soundstage was enveloping, it sounded like a small speaker. Now that was our impressions, I don't doubt for a minute that those that sing it's praises really enjoy them. But that audition really drove home the fact that we all must hear things differently and have to make up our own minds. |
Good grief, Ojgalli, what are you listening to through the Gallos. Mine sure don't sound a bit like that. My last two pairs of speakers cost twice as much, or more, by the way. |
