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 4 responses by jamesgarvin

jamesgarvin
41 posts
 
I agree. In my room, they are incredibly flat from about 120 hz on up. As I previously wrote, my room has a suckout beginning about 90 hz. I suggest that what you are hearing is either the upstream components, more likely the room, set up, or a combination of all three.
jamesgarvin
41 posts
 
I agree with the prior two opinions. When I first received the amp., I used it to generate relatively flat response to about 25hz. Which sounds great on paper, but actually had little effect on most music and films. Then, after some playing around, I discovered that my room has a big suckout from about 50hz to up 90 hz. I then used the bass amp in order to fill in, as best I could without really goosing up the low bass around 28hz too far that it sounded ponderous.

The differences are now significant. I would let your room be your guide.
jamesgarvin
41 posts
 
I think the response very much depends on the room. My room has a big suckout from about 50 hz to 90 or 100 hz. A hump would be a good thing in my room. I use the Gallo Reference amplifier to fill in, as best I can, that portion of the range.

Another possibility, which, although I've only heard the 1Cs briefly in less than optimal conditions, I doubt, is that the 1C is lean in that area, and your ears have been conditioned to that leaness, and the Gallo sounds like it has a hump. I doubt this because I did not hear any such leaness in the 1C in my brief listen.
jamesgarvin
41 posts
 
Danmyers, what amp are you using? I was using an early generation Adcom 555 for about a year with my 3.1s, and thought there a veiling to the mids, almost like someone placing a piece of paper over the cones. I upgraded to a Music Reference RM-200, and the mids came alive, and were much more transparent than with the Adcom. In addition, it became tonally more neutral - I think the Adcom added some glare as well. The lesson, I think, is that the 3.1 is very revealing of the upstream components.
More to discover