New Gallo 3.5's

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

BTW, and totally unrelated to anything we have been talking about, I finally got an NAD receiver working with the 3.1s. The audyssey EQ program is really pretty impressive and the changes that it makes to the speaker's output suggests that the presence regions 1-2.5K are perhaps a bit depressed on the 3.1s? Although I tend to hate equalization of any kind, I couldn't really find myself preferring the stock speaker response anymore after listening to the various compensated EQs - one a ruler flat one, one the stock or standard Audyssey curve and another that is an NAD proprietary curve that is slightly warmer and fuller sounding than the flat EQ. All of them however, boosted the speakers output in the presence regions. Interesting . . . . Curious to try this with some other speakers that have markedly different coloration from the Gallos to see if they end up sounding like them when equalized. Anyone else with experience with this program?

best, Doug

HI Doug,

I'd have to agree that the midrange is a bit depressed with the 3.1s. I replaced a pair of KEF 104/2s which have incredible midrange projection with the Gallo 3.1s. While the Bass is deeper and tighter, the treble comparable but with much broader dispersion, the midrange is shelved down a notch. I had to work a bit to get it to an acceptable level. You can read about it here if you care to:

http://forum.audiogon.com/cgi-bin/fr.pl?cspkr&1204694214&read&keyw&zzgallo+toying

Still not the equal of the KEFs in the midrange, yet very revealing with a more laid back presentation. The KEFs where very forward with "in your face" midrange detail. It's all there with the Gallos, but more blended-in and back a bit. As with everything audio YMMV and there is no doubt that setup and positioning have a great impact here.

Let me say I LOVE the Gallo 3.1 speakers. You can scan through this tread and read many many posts where I'll go an extended weekend listening spree and am just floored by what these speakers can do. So keep that in mind with relation to what I'm articulating. Yes the midrange is a bit depressed, but it's a danm fine loudspeaker overall.

Room correction is next on my list. That said, not sure when I'll get to it. Just picked up the new Oppo BD-983 so my A/V spending budget is capped for a while. (Yeah, I'm a cheap bstard :) Like you, I'm not afraid of EQ either. If we all had perfect hearing and perfect rooms, there would be no need for it. Of course, almost no one has a listening room designed for audio and our hearing varies and deteriorates as we age. So I say, bring it on! It will let us enjoy the music more and longer!