Gallo 3.5 vs Merlin VSM-MXe


Hello,
I'm looking to upgrade to different speakers. At the moment I'm running Gallo Strada's with a T3 Sub. While I enjoy this system, I would like a little more coherence and weight. Some more musicality would be nice too. I've been given the opportunity to get a pair of used Merlin VSM-Mxe with super bam for a nice price, or a new pair of Gallo 3.5's for the same $.
Any ideas?
g_goodwin

Showing 17 responses by mapman

For what you are looking for, with the right amplification and setup, I think the Gallos will carry more weight and might be able to challenge the MErlins, but I would expect the two to always sound a good bit different in overall presentation, which might matter more depending on your tastes.
For coherence, which is a big factor in "musicality" for many, including me, I'd look to the MErlins or any other good monitor even over Gallo's.

There are other floorstanding designs in the same price range however that also exhibit top notch coherence along with low end extension, weight, control and authority, among other things that are worth consideration.
I'm wondering what the difference is between the Gallos and Merlins VSM with RC and BAMM tweaks is in regards to low end extension?

Also cost?

There are no small monitors I have ever heard that can plunge the depths with enough authority to be mistaken for a larger well designed full range with music that demands this. Even the heralded Magico minis which do a good job of pushing the limits in regards to what a smaller monitor can do when price is no object. That is what the larger MErlins and larger designs with larger drivers in general are for.

I will say that with the BAMM in particular, that I would expect the MErlins to do extremely well in all regards for their specific class of speaker, however.

The Gallo's are harder to classify perhaps but I think of them as competing with other larger floorstanding designs in their price range in general, a different class than Merlin VSM, which are best classified as monitors I believe.
BP,

If they do 30hz up, then agree that should most likely suffice in a small room.

However, most very good small monitors I am familiar with do not go that low. For example, I use a pair of Dynaudio COntour 1.3mkii monitors in a 12X 12 room. I think these do things down below 50hz to some extent. VEry nice in that room! Until you compare to larger floorstanders that also fit well into that room and go a bit lower. Then you notice you are missing something with music that benefits from response in the lower octaves.

It is very dependant on room acoustics, agreed. Those same floorstanders that shine in the 12X12 room I mentioned tend to be a bit bass heavy as you describe in the 12X12 sunroom with cathedral ceilings above it. But that can be tamed. It is sometimes easier to subtract what is there to start with than to add it later.
"m, i asked if you have heard them?"

No, but I have heard a lot of top notch similar monitors and have a good feel for what is possible out of a speaker that size. I've also read a lot about the MErlins.

As I said, I have no doubt they can perform extremely well as do the others, especially in smaller rooms.

But the fact is there is only so much you can wean out of a small box with small drivers.

For some rooms, that may be enough though, granted.
"one day you need to hear it and experience its "total" potential. "

I'll be happy to eat my words if I hear these someday and they redefine the limits of what a smaller monitor can do in terms of weight and impact with music that demands you be able to feel it as much as hear it for teh full experience.

Monitors may do well at plumbing the depths of the low end to a decent extent, but all good ones I am aware of tend to start to roll off at at higher frequencies than good true full ranges so the energy delivered in the lower octaves may still be quite good, but not the best, even in a small room and with a circuit like the BAMM providing a boost.

Typically, the only way to really know what is missing is to experience it first.

Also, I will say that for a lot of genres, like smaller ensemble jazz and classical, it is not a big issue. For most else, it can be and often is, I believe, at least with better recordings.

That's really the only limitations I hear with very good monitors compared to larger designs typically, even in a smaller room where I have experimented with both.
I would add also that for smaller rooms, monitors and other designs that more closely approximate a point source tend to perform best overall in general.

Also, I believe monitors + sub(s) is a very practical and modular solution when needed/desired.
"it is designed for more intimate settings where the lowest octave would overpower the room or bigger speakers/room treatments would dominate the appearance. in these intimate settings large wave launch systems would have too much stratification of the output and sound too complicated losing the appeal to most."

BP,

I hear you and understand completely.

Good monitors or other similar floorstanders that also tend to feature a high degree of driver coherency in close quarters by design, like the OHM Walsh speakers with CLS drivers I am fond of, are the best choice generally for close quarters. Some might be a bit too much in the bass for small rooms perhaps, but there are often ways usually to tame that via placement, treatments, etc. as needed, I suspect. You definitely do not want too big a speaker in a small room just because, that is for certain.
Goatwuss,

How big was the room you used these in?

BP's argument as I understand it is that the VSMs are optimal for a smaller 12X12 room like the OPs.

My experience based on other highly regarded smaller monitors I have heard including my own in similar size rooms tells me that may not be the case if the goal is meat on the bones in addition to all the other good stuff I know good smaller monitors can deliver. Small monitors are an excellent fit for smaller rooms in most regards but not necessarily optimal from a "meat on the bones" perspective.
"you have not heard them so why comment."

BP, as the vendor, you are undeniably biased on this subject, so why comment?

I won't stop commenting.

Will you?

If the OP is still out there and cares, after reading through things further, and getting past all the noise, I realize that you are comparing used versus new at a particular price point. That's important.

Used MErlin VSM-MXes at a good used price will probably not depreciate as much as new anythings.

Given that, I personally would be even more hard pressed to go for new Gallos over floor standing MErlins with Bamm.

This is just my opinion of course. I have never heard MErlins but would feel confident trying them in your situation if it were me.

A sub can always be added later if needed, but the benefits would likely be marginal as indicated and only with some recordings/music types in a smaller 12X12 room.

Of course, some people feel more comfortable buying new, all other things aside. Only you as the buyer can make that judgement.
I've heard the Magico mini in a smaller dealer showroom off good tube amplification. They are lovely sounding speakers, but again not as full and muscular, weighty, meat on the bones, whatever as other good larger designs I have heard. That is the only criticism I would have with them and I suspect that is why Magico makes larger models also.

Personal taste is always a big factor.

I've not heard the most recent Gallos, but have heard the prior version. I liked them at first but preferred Quad ESLs overall in that setup when I then heard them based on overall clarity and detail top to bottom, though the Quads are generally not considered the nth degree in dynamics either. The better monitors I have heard (magico, Totem, Dynaudio) compare favorably with the Quads in my assessment.

All things considered, I would lean towards any good monitor most likely over the Gallos based on my limited exposure, but I'll stick to my comments noting that smaller monitors are not likely to be the nth degree in macrodynamics, weight, meat on the bones etc., though likely still very fulfilling in that regard.

MErlin vsm may well be the cream of the crop and not even the most expensive. Most people who own them seem to hang on to them, always a good sign. BP is obviously quite passionate about his products and has seemingly spent years refining the design rather than changing directions, a very good omen. Don't know for sure. Haven't heard the buggers. Would like to someday.

I FOund this chart I thought useful while looking for information on exactly what kinds of sounds we might want to hear that fall into the lowest audible octave.

Audible Frequency Spectrum

It helps to understand what one might be missing if a speaker is challenged below 40hz and whether or not it matters.

I'm sure there is other similar info out there as well that might help add additional insight.

In addition to the sounds listed that fall into the lowest audible octave, I would add that many electronically generated sounds from synthesizers and other modern electronic music sources commonly used in much modern pop music deliver output that can fall in this range. I find a lot of better quality modern pop recordings and remixes from teh last 10 years or so in particular sound best FWIW when the lowest octave is fully present.
"why does it seem like you prefer to spout your opinions more in merlin threads"

Because that is the topic you happen to be monitoring maybe?

I offer opinions and observations on many topics of interest to me based on what I learn over time from various sources, including others whose opinions I respect.

IS that a problem too?

In general, I try to keep discussions positive and sometimes humorous. I seldom get into threads about topics or products I do not like and would not consider buying myself or recommending to others. The exception is when I suspect people may be making a flat out mistake or throwing their money away for no good reason.

If I start talking about MErlin less, you can take that as a bad indicator and a negative trend, FWIW.
"a square can be turned into something other by firing the speakers down a diagonal."

yes, good suggestion.

I ended up doing this to some extent to optimize in my 12X12 room with both monitors and more full range floor standers and the results in both cases are top notch. I would expect similar results with other designs as well, including either Merlin.
Here are the general rules I followed to find a good location for my monitors in the 12 X 12 room.

1) Determine primary listening position
2) locate speakers to distribute sound evenly from left to right across the room. Dispersion pattern of the design is a big factor in determining what works best. Locations closer to side walls may work best.
3) Avoid exact symetrical placement of any kind relative to teh room walls
4) Best results for soundstage and imaging together may require tweeters firing to left and right of listening position and not beaming at listener. This will depend on room acoustics and tonal balance of speakers as well.
5) For best soundstage and bass results together, rear or bottom ported designs may need to come out several feet from rear wall. Front ported or sealed designs may go closer to rear wall.
6) Small changes in placement and/or orientation relative to the listening position can have big effects. Liten carefully with a variety of music over time and fine tune as needed.
"ome of the very best sound i have every heard came from these types of set-ups"

In my home, I run setups in 5 different rooms. The small 12X12 room set up this way is by far the best overall and hard to fault IMHO even with no special room treatments used.

The only problem I have in there is the room is still relatively small. Smaller scale ensemble recordings appropriate for a room that size and pop/rock type music leaves little to want. Larger scale ensemble recordings (classical symphony, big band, etc.) where there is more going on on a larger scale tend to benefit in a larger room where there is more room for everything to breathe. But the bigger room is more a matter of quantity, not quality. I use much larger speakers there and its L shaped configuration requires a much different setup there in order to be able to make good use of the size of the room.