New Gallo 3.5's

No problem, I appreciate the clarification (couldn't tell if you were teasing (which is always OK) or being dismissive - my fault for assuming the latter.

I take it you have a pair of 3's (3.0 or 3.1?). I am eagerly awaiting the appearance of the 3.5s. It does sound like Gallo did quite a bit of work smoothing things out even more. Just a bit pricey at barely this side of 6K. Some of the online sellers (which means you lose the warranty thru Gallo) might have them for mid to high 4's. Will be interesting. . . . really wish that Stereophile would review them. Atkinson's stuff is the current industry benchmark IMHO for technical and quantitative assessments of loudspeakers. Love to see it, and don't understand why they haven't - the usual stuff about only reviewing advertiser's products (which has some truth I suppose) doesn't explain it. Anyone know why Stereophile has ducked this?? - the speculation of course is that it would upset the apple cart to have such a small relatively cheap speaker blow away the high end products. The field is still recovering from the trauma of the first controlling listening tests on amps - did so much damage that no one wants to touch that subject.

best, Doug

Hi Doug, yes I own a pair of 3.05's actually. Other than the removal of the switch on the back of the speaker, there was some other modification made to the crossover??? I don't honestly remember, it was right before the 3.1 came out. Anyway, I love the speakers. I use them along with the Gallo sub amp, and they never cease to amaze me. IMO they are one of the best values in the speaker market. In reference to Stereophile; I can only imagine there are some politics at play as to why they haven't reviewed them. I am very curious to hear the new 3.5.

As you may or may not recall, Wes Philips heard the 3.1 at, I believe, the 2006 CES, loved them, and requested a review pair. Apparently, Gallo promised him a review pair. After their non-appearance, I raised some questions, and got into a, ahem, dialog with John Atkinson. After much back and forth, the story is apparently Gallo elected not to send them for review. After reading a response from Wes Philips, I intuit from that response that Gallo's reviews were so positive that he did not need another positive review since the speakers were selling so well, and did not want to risk any negative critism that may negatively effect sales.

In light of all the full-page advertising that Gallo did when these events transpired, I doubt advertising had anything to do with the non-review in Stereophile.

Very interesting, and it fits with Gallo's own statements. What did Wes Philips actually say about the speaker?

I've provided the link.
http://blog.stereophile.com/ces2006//index2.html