2. speakers
  3. 1204694214

Gallo Reference 3.1 questions...

Howdy,

Just toying with the idea of owning some Gallo Ref 3.1s...

TOYING!

The sub amp is described by some as mandatory, while others describe the speakers as bass rich even without it. Shall I merely infer from this that those who think it mandatory are big ol' bass fiends? Certainly with a 10" driver, I can't imagine it sounding at all anemic.

If a sub amp really is neccessary, does it HAVE to be the Gallo? Couldn't I just use any old amp to run the woofs? Not for nothing, but they need to have their speaker designers take 10 minutes off and help the amp dudes come up with a nicer looking amp. It looks like a DIY kit.

What would be smokin IMO, looks wise, is a Jeff Rowland Concerto integrated running the speakers and a pair of 201s running the subs.

Next Q... I have a tiny joint. Actually I stopped smoking. I have a small apartment. If I placed the Gallos in the hallowed 1.5 foot squares of floorspace I have allocated for speakers, with woofers facing each other, the left one would be inches away from my TV/audio stand, woofer pointing at the rack. The stand is open sided, not solid sided, but I wonder if this could pose a problem.

If I set them up with woofers facing away from each other, the right one would point into my kitchen area, but the left one would face a window about 2-3 ft away, with a big fat AC in it. In the summer the AC runs quite a bit.

OTOH, reviews seem to indicate that the staging on these is very wide (but short, I know), so I wonder just how critical placement is anyway.

Any insights?

Thanks

Rob
rkny

Showing 2 responses by bondmanp

bondmanp
1,784 posts
 
I auditioned a pair of Gallo Ref 3s last night. System was a Musical Fidelity 5.5 CD player, Rogue Audio Metis pre, Arcam amplifier. In most respects, I was extremely impressed - huge soundstage, good imaging, excellent definition, detail and timbre. Some of the smoothest highs (without loss of detail) I've heard for less than $6K/pr. The bass was very extended and powerful, highs extended, with some (but not lots) of air. I did not find them to be "dry" at all, as some have described them. On the contrary, there were numerous occassions of the hair on the back of my neck standing up during vocal selections. Dynamics were impressive for a small speaker, too. So far, it is on a very short list of potential upgrades from my Vandy 1C/2Wq speakers. Note - the demo was without the bass amp, and I will retain the Vandy 2Wq subwoofers rather than get the Gallo amp.

My question to owners (past and present) and others familiar with the Ref 3s, is regarding the upper bass range. I noticed a pronounced plumbiness in the upper bass region. So much so that it gave the Ref 3s a box resonance-like sound (of course, there is no box, so it is just way it sounded, not a cabinet resonance). Is this a flaw in the speaker? Perhaps the room? They were fairly close to the back wall, aimed straight out, about 6' apart, and 15" from the side walls. Perhaps the proximity to the walls was emphasizing this region? Please let me know what your experience is with the Ref 3s in this range, visa-vis positioning, associated gear, etc.

Thanks!!
bondmanp
1,784 posts
 
I auditioned these recently. I am looking to upgrade from Vandy 1Cs (other Vandys are either too large or too expensive). What I liked was their very smooth presentation in the upper-mid/lower-treble range, hu-normous soundstage, and their freedom from box-like resonances (something I am sensitive to thanks to the 1Cs). My only complaint was that there seemed to be an upper-bass hump, with this range overshadowing lower mids and lower bass notes. This was without the sub amp. To those who are familiar with the 3.1s, does your impression match mine? TIA.
More to discover