[schw06]

According to Steve Guttenberg from Tone Publications:
http://news.cnet.com/8301-13645_3-20007800-47.html
   I would love to believe this because $6000 is a "reasonable" price point in this hobby. I hear nobody else speaking about this speaker on the forum and curious if any seasoned audiophiles concur with his praise of the 3.5?

[eclein]

I heard them awhile back at a Rave and they were nice but not outstanding IMHO, I thought they looked pretty cool and were much smaller than I imagined they would be. I think for the money one could do much better quite frankly, they lacked low end definition and sounded thin to me. I remember at the time commenting to another AC member there that my vintage JBL's sounded nicer and he agreed with me...FWIW

[jermmd]

The Gallos are nice but expensive for what they are IMHO. I can think of 10 speakers that I'd rather have than the Gallos.

joe M.

[carusoracer]

I have not been able to hear the the 3.5's yet. I have the 3.1's and they are a nice pair of speakers. Are they the best :scratch:I have heard better and a lot worse. Mine really respond with the separate 2nd voicecoil poweramp.
They really respond with Tube Amps Bi Amped with the SubAmp.
The biggest draw is their flexibilty with room placement and seemless crossover in the CDT Tweeter's dispersion. It is quite special to hear.

[davidrs]

I hear nobody else speaking about this speaker on the forum and curious if any seasoned audiophiles concur with his praise of the 3.5?

The Absolute Sound January 2011, Issue 209 has a full length review.

- David.

[jtsnead]

I owned the 3.1's for a few years, I liked them for soundstaging and the ribbon tweeter sounded very open and detailed, however as I upgraded components I felt I was missing a degree of midrange body, very noticable with male vocals, I figured that mainly it was because the midrange drivers are only 4", listened to alot of speakers and settled on a mtm design that image as well and have the body I was missing.

The best thing to do is go listen and decide for your self

I do not like that they are double the price of the 3.1's though

[OzarkTom]

Try out the Gallo Stradas, much better soundstage at a much better price than the 3.5's. As quick as ESL's like the 6moons review said, but better focus and imaging than ESL's. If you talk to a honest Gallo dealer, they will tell you the same thing, even though they would rather you buy the 3.5's. I have talked to three honest Gallo dealers across the country and they all admit, the Stradas are much better.

And they are compatible even in small rooms. Mine is 16x26 feet  wide and I have wall to wall sound with 3D imaging depending on the source.

[Photon46]

The Gallo speakers in this design since the 3.1s have generated mixed opinions and you're not likely to get a critical mass of opinions by soliciting thoughts on this one. For every person that thinks they're the bomb, another thinks they are overrated. I've heard the 3.1's in several systems and have always found them underwhelming and lacking in mid-range body. However, that's just my brain and ears opinion. Obviously, many people do like them. The 3.5s would have to have made major changes and improvements to make their value worth $6K IMO.

[OzarkTom]

Here is just one of the quotes from Mapleshade.

"When Anthony Gallo invited Pierre to his home to listen to prototypes of his Strada, Pierre knew he was in for a treat. More than impressed, Pierre left the session dumfounded—and itching to design the perfect vibration control stand to unleash this gem’s full potential. Six months and hundreds of listening tests later, we achieved this goal. The Strada, mounted on Mapleshade's custom-tailored upgrade stand, was simply the best monitor-size speaker we’d ever heard, bar none. That included the $15,000 Sonus Faber and the $30,000 Magico. In our studio, it quickly replaced Pierre's much-loved and tweaked Ref. 3s."

For more, here is the link.
http://shop.mapleshadestore.com/Upgraded-Gallo-Strada-Reference/products/72/

I personally use the Gallo stands and I get the same quality.

Another quote:

• The cylindrical omni tweeter and carbon fi ber midrange are the new, much-improved versions developed for the just-launched $6000 Gallo Reference 3.5.

• The Strada is exactly the upper half of the Ref 3.5 without the built-in subwoofer, yielding two big advantages: no sound-muddying midrange-to-woofer crossover needed; and no woofer directly shaking and smearing the midrange and treble drivers.

This amazing speaker is not just great value for the money. Pierre considers the Strada paired with our Upgrade Stand sets the absolute reference standard for small speakers at any price—and makes the purchase of any floorstander questionable.

[TONEPUB]

Steve really likes the Gallo's, but we certainly didn't see eye to eye on this one.

The most I can hope for with any of our reviews, including the ones I write is that our enthusiasm for a product will get you out to investigate and see how much you like it.  I'm sure there are a few things that I am wildly enthusiastic about that others will disagree with as well.

That's the tough part of something as subjective as sound!

[wywires]

I did hear them on several occasions at a dealer in SoCal. I thought they were very good but a little thin sounding. For $6K, one can do lots better. Interesting that the the 2.5 was priced much, much lower than the 3.5. I was told by an informed source that the bulk of the price difference was due to a tooling screw-up on the aluminum tower. They made the decision to increase the price rather than eat the cost and redesign the tower and its tooling for better manufacturability.

[Rusty Jefferson]

I have owned the 3.0 and auditioned the 3.1 (in my system). Haven't heard the the 3.5 yet, but I have auditioned the Strada (in my system).

Apparently, by design they soundstage as good or better than anything in their price range. You put the Gallo speakers in a largish (20'x24') room, maybe 5' from the front wall and 6-8' from the side walls, I think they sound quite remarkable. However, I feel their weakness is clearly their lack of bass response, especially when set-up to optimize their soundstaging. I always used, and think the use of subwoofers is absolutely necessary with all the models, and unless you already own quality subs, this obviously increases the cost of ownership.

When I relocated to a smaller home recently, and downsized my listening room to 12'x16' (and only an 8' ceiling), the 3.0s didn't soundstage as well. and were less satisfying as midfield speakers. Sold them to a buddy with a larger listening space, everybody happy.

All the Gallo models I've heard will reward you for upgrades to the rest of your system, and I would have to assume the 3.5 will do the same. If you already have a pretty good rig, and then add a really nice preamp, say, they will let your new upgrade shine through.

3 years from now, used ones will be selling for $22-2500. If you have a good room for them, and good subs, they should be the base of a good low/mid cost system.

[bacobits1]

I heard the 3.0's, nice but they were not $6k.
At $6k I would look at a lot of other places.

D

[Rusty Jefferson]

I heard the 3.0's, nice but they were not $6k.
At $6k I would a lot of other places.

D

If that Wilson Audio speaker is 'worth' $68,000, then the Gallo is probably 'worth' $6000. All things are relative, I suppose.

[schw06]

I am curious to see if anyone truly believes there is a speaker less than $10,000 that belongs in the 10 best "cost no object" list?? If so, what do you think it is.
David

[Rusty Jefferson]

I am curious to see if anyone truly believes there is a speaker less than $10,000 that belongs in the 10 best "cost no object" list?? If so, what do you think it is.
David

Top 10 list of 'cost no object' speakers, no.

Just looked at the top 10 list 'under $3500'. Gallo 3.1 seems appropriate on that list.

[Barry_NJ]

Well I'm a fan, and have owned Gallo Reference series speakers since '94. First Polyethylene sphered Solos (1994) then Polyethylene sphered References (1995), then Aluminum sphered References (1997), then Reference 3.1 (2009) and currently Reference 3.5 (2010) I'll admit I wasn't ecstatic about my transition from my Aluminum Sphered Reference I to the Reference 3.1, but going from the 3.1 to the 3.5 really changed that. As a member of the NYAR I get to hear a lot of different systems in their tweaked home environments, but I usually leave a rave pretty happy to go home to what I've got. Now we all have our own personal preferences in what we listen to/for when listening to a stereo system. Some folks love dynamics, some folks love pinpoint imaging. Me, I want  a broad and deep sound-stage and an inability to localize the speakers. If I sit down, close my eyes, and can hear where the speakers are sitting in the room, the illusion is gone and I'm done. I don't think I've ever heard a speaker that does that better than the CDT equipped Gallo Reference speakers. There are some things I'd like to improve in my system, but my Anthony Gallo Nucleus Reference 3.5 speakers are not one of them.

[satfrat]

I heard them awhile back at a Rave and they were nice but not outstanding IMHO, I thought they looked pretty cool and were much smaller than I imagined they would be. I think for the money one could do much better quite frankly, they lacked low end definition and sounded thin to me. I remember at the time commenting to another AC member there that my vintage JBL's sounded nicer and he agreed with me...FWIW

I'm afraid I have to agree with Ed. So much so that I had to laugh at that title as it's just unthinkable.    Not that I didn't like the Gallo's, they're actually a very enjoyable loudspeaker to listen to but they're nothing I'd own personally let alone even thinking of putting them on a top 10 list of any sort, let alone a "cost no object" list. That's just to ridiculous to even comprehend to my mind.    Someone musta had too much scotch in their morning coffee before dreaming up that list. 
 
Cheers,
Robin

[Barry_NJ]

I'm afraid I have to agree with Ed. So much so that I had to laugh at that title as it's just unthinkable.    Not that I didn't like the Gallo's, they're actually a very enjoyable loudspeaker to listen to but they're nothing I'd own personally let alone even thinking of putting them on a top 10 list of any sort, let alone a "cost no object" list. That's just to ridiculous to even comprehend to my mind.    Someone musta had too much scotch in their morning coffee before dreaming up that list. 
 
Cheers,
Robin

Robin, were you even there? Where did you hear the Gallo Reference 3.5 Speakers? Most of the posts I read were pretty complementary. That's pretty good considering that the speakers were set-up in the open Lobby Area of the store for that rave, with a bunch of flat-panel TV's as acoustic treatments in the room. Far from optimal conditions if you ask me.

Regards, Barry

[davidrs]

I am curious to see if anyone truly believes there is a speaker less than $10,000 that belongs in the 10 best "cost no object" list?? If so, what do you think it is.
David

David,

Is your $10K limit for new or used speakers?

And driven by how many dollars (in the upstream chain)? Since that does have a bearing on performance.

- David.