Welcome to New Member Andrew

[John Mayberry]

Interested in the fantastic GS401…

Welcome aboard,

 

John

 

John Mayberry                                                                                                                       

 

VP, Engineering

Emmaco, Inc.

www.emmaco.com

626 799 9993

 

 

 

[Jack Ward]

Hello Andrew, and welcome to our eclectic little group.

Jack

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Gale Audio" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to gale-audio+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to gale-...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/gale-audio.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

[andrew....@gmail.com]

Thanks, John, for the warm welcome. Yes, a new owner of a pair of Gale 401 Chrome that are bringing much enjoyment after a long search. I'll post picture when time permits. One question, meanwhile, has anyone found a centre speaker that matches well with the Gales? (A third Gale isn't an option)

[John Mayberry]

I've spent a number of years in the audio business.

The problem with center channel speakers in the theater business is they handle 70% (some claim 85%) or more of all the content. Thus shoving some tiny box under a TV is not going to make for happy listeners.

The speaker should have equal or greater capabilities than the Left or Right speakers. Another Gale would be well suited for the Center speaker.

John

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Gale Audio" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to gale-audio+...@googlegroups.com.

[Jack Ward]

John is correct, timbre matching is important for a center channel.

Jack

On Sep 13, 2017 7:16 PM, "John Mayberry" <emm...@emmaco.com> wrote:

I've spent a number of years in the audio business.

The problem with center channel speakers in the theater business is they handle 70% (some claim 85%) or more of all the content.  Thus shoving some tiny box under a TV is not going to make for happy listeners.

The speaker should have equal or greater capabilities than the Left or Right speakers.   Another Gale would be well suited for the Center speaker.

John

-----Original Message-----
From: gale-...@googlegroups.com [mailto:gale-audio@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of andrew....@gmail.com
Sent: Wednesday, September 13, 2017 3:29 PM
To: Gale Audio <gale-...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Welcome to New Member Andrew

Thanks, John, for the warm welcome. Yes, a new owner of a pair of Gale 401 Chrome that are bringing much enjoyment after a long search. I'll post picture when time permits. One question, meanwhile, has anyone found a centre speaker that matches well with the Gales? (A third Gale isn't an option)

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Gale Audio" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to gale-audio+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to gale-...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/gale-audio.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Gale Audio" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to gale-audio+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

[andrew....@gmail.com]

Thanks. Sounds like I might be better off with a phantom centre given that a third 401 isn't going to fly and a matching centre channel from another brand looks difficult.

On Thursday, September 14, 2017 at 9:28:06 AM UTC+8, Jack wrote:

John is correct, timbre matching is important for a center channel.

Jack

On Sep 13, 2017 7:16 PM, "John Mayberry" <emm...@emmaco.com> wrote:

I've spent a number of years in the audio business.

The problem with center channel speakers in the theater business is they handle 70% (some claim 85%) or more of all the content.  Thus shoving some tiny box under a TV is not going to make for happy listeners.

The speaker should have equal or greater capabilities than the Left or Right speakers.   Another Gale would be well suited for the Center speaker.

John

-----Original Message-----
From: gale-...@googlegroups.com [mailto:gale-...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of andrew....@gmail.com
Sent: Wednesday, September 13, 2017 3:29 PM
To: Gale Audio <gale-...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Welcome to New Member Andrew

Thanks, John, for the warm welcome. Yes, a new owner of a pair of Gale 401 Chrome that are bringing much enjoyment after a long search. I'll post picture when time permits. One question, meanwhile, has anyone found a centre speaker that matches well with the Gales? (A third Gale isn't an option)

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Gale Audio" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to gale-audio+...@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to gale-...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/gale-audio.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Gale Audio" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to gale-audio+...@googlegroups.com.

[John Mayberry]

A two channel Gale system is a damn site better than the 7.1 junk you'll find in a big box store.

---

From: andrew....@gmail.com
Sent: ‎9/‎13/‎2017 6:59 PM
To: Gale Audio

[Toby]

I suppose it depends on what you are looking for. 7.1 for films/TV or for high quality music?

I have two amp systems, a vintage stereo amp for my music that just runs the two huge fronts then a 2004 7.1 that runs the same fronts plus the rest in the 7.1. My centre is a relatively small Tannoy but solid box (two small mid bass and a tweeter), The 7.1 channel Sony can be setup accordingly to balance the sound but to have it the size of the two huge Technics SB-8000's would be prohibative. However the sound for TV/film is incredibly good with the sound stage very impressive.

Is it an option to run your system separately like this?

[Mike Nightingale]

Re: A "Phantomm centre. Given the cost of trying a "Phantom" speaker, go for it, but I doubt that you will find it satisfying.
I run a THX system of 4 Celestion Ditton 25 units L&R Front, L&R Rear, with Ditton 15 units  for Far R, Far L and centre Rear. and a pair of NAD 801 at ceiling level for height.
I went through many centre speakers trying to find the right ones, many! Finally settled on a B&W B Dm600 IFS centre.
But only after replacing it's inadequate tweeter with a matching Celestion one!

My advice would boil down to, get the beefiest unit you can fit under your screen. Preferably requiring a gang of labourers to fit (Just kidding) and if the tweet doesn't fit with with the rest of your system, just change the tweeter for one that is in your main units.



Mike

[John Mayberry]

I have to admit I’m struggling with a center channel as well on our 2.0 system…

[Berris Conolly]

Nearest thing to 401/402 I’ve heard are the (smaller) ATC SCM19

Only ever set up stereo, but presumably impedance matching & efficiency is important ?

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to gale-audio+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to gale-...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/gale-audio.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Gale Audio" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to gale-audio+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to gale-...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/gale-audio.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Gale Audio" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to gale-audio+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

[Jack Ward]

Showoff. 😋

Jack Ward
Now in Knoxville, TN, USA

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to gale-audio+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to gale-...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/gale-audio.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Gale Audio" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to gale-audio+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to gale-...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/gale-audio.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Gale Audio" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to gale-audio+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

[Toby]

Nice John, how do you upload a photo to the site to add it to a post?

I also think running a 7.1 system for audio is a completely different beast, I only ever use mine for TV/films etc and not music, music always plays out through the older 70's gear as otherwise it just doesn't sound right. I've always had it split that way and it seems to work, however I've recently bought an old Sony SCD-XA9000ES SACD player having never owned or experienced one I'm keen to see what it sounds like through the 7.1 set up.

[Mike Nightingale]

Toby, to add a picture simply copy it, then paste it into the text of your email.
Re stereo music - Back in the seventies I wanted  a quadraphonic system so much! But being a teenager couldn't possibly afford one and had to make do with whatever system I could cobble together.
However ever since Dolby surround was invented I've had a surround system of whatever latest type was available and have ascended the speaker number ladder to get to my current count of 11 for this thx system. (The ones I mentioned before plus two subs and an "Ass kicker" in the sofa)

I love to hear all my music this way, and stereo sounds flat and boring to me, having become used to various elements of music coming at me from all around, It is interesting to me how tracks from pre quad days have "Accidental" surround elements - I've always assumed from poor phase control of the old desks (When it presumably didn't matter much!) Obviously mono tracks do not have any surprising surround sound qualities!
Re SACD I've only ever had one SACD and only played via a Sony Playstation 3 (Early model - SACD play was discontinued in the slim versions) Compared to the CD version it was like going from listening in the mastering room then opening the door and stepping into the "Live" studio, VERY impressive indeed. Had SACD caught on, MP3 might not have, as it was clearly a dumbed down experience. In a way, I'm glad it didn't though, as the cost of rebuying all my music (Again!) would have been ridiculous!

Mike

On 20/09/2017 08:53:02, Toby <tob...@btopenworld.com> wrote:

Nice John, how do you upload a photo to the site to add it to a post?

I also think running a 7.1 system for audio is a completely different beast, I only ever use mine for TV/films etc and not music, music always plays out through the older 70's gear as otherwise it just doesn't sound right. I've always had it split that way and it seems to work, however I've recently bought an old Sony SCD-XA9000ES SACD player having never owned or experienced one I'm keen to see what it sounds like through the 7.1 set up.

[Toby]

Thanks Mike, I'll give it a go, it won't let me copy and paste a picture in from this post on my phone, oddly.

I have thought of adding a speaker under the sofa but with the huge fronts producing so much bass and the 7 x 200 watt RMS from the Sony TA-DA9000ES I don't think I need it. I need to get a new laser for my SCD-XA9000ES SACD player, try an get into finding more discs to listen to.

[Mike Nightingale]

NB, Just for clarification, the "Ass kicker" (AKA Butt Kicker) is not a "Speaker" as such but a transducer with no cone, transferring deep jolts of very low frequency directly into the framework of the furniture it is attached to.
This is a similar device...
https://www.soundimports.eu/en/tt25-8-copy.html?channable=e29137.NzQ4MzM2NDk&gclid=Cj0KCQjw9uHOBRDtARIsALtCa95iluSfoOXT68yn_suyofyRZ487I9cXzvVi-3nMJyzuA6CW3Hy6DpwaAipoEALw_wcB

Mike

On 07/10/2017 08:05:13, Toby <tob...@btopenworld.com> wrote:

Thanks Mike, I'll give it a go, it won't let me copy and paste a picture in from this post on my phone, oddly.

I have thought of adding a speaker under the sofa but with the huge fronts producing so much bass and the 7 x 200 watt RMS from the Sony TA-DA9000ES I don't think I need it. I need to get a new laser for my SCD-XA9000ES SACD player, try an get into finding more discs to listen to.

[andrew....@gmail.com]

More or less decided to put aside the idea of a centre channel as the two channel is just great and, mostly, I’m on axis for TV / movies. One thing that I don’t get with these speakers is that the measured frequency response (in the brochure) is a bit up-and-down compared to a lot of modern speakers but the sound is spectacular. Now back to music.

[John Mayberry]

Having run frequency response tests for years, a linear phase response (without large anomalies) is by far the best indicator of whether you’ll like a speaker for many years.  In order to do it, you’ll need superb impulse (ETC).

The best I’ve measured?   The Hill Plasmatronics.    Here’s a frequency and phase response measured by my friend Jay from 1 kHz to 20 kHz.

A ridiculously complicated speaker (each contains its own helium tank) not practical for home use.   I suppose that’s why I bought a pair.




Second best- Quad Electrostatics (ELS-63). 

Here’s a quote from Stereophile, “Of the speakers I have measured for Stereophile, only about 10—models from Quad, Thiel, Dunlavy, Spica, and Vandersteen—have step responses (an impulse or ETC) this good.”

Read more at https://www.stereophile.com/content/measuring-loudspeakers-part-two-page-3#7FAzYtVHf526pZDb.99

John Mayberry
Emmaco, Inc.
VP, Engineering and Chief Technologist
p (626) 799-9993 m (626) 394-3954

This message contains confidential information and is intended solely for the individual(s) named and does not permit other individuals to disseminate, distribute, or copy this email.

--

[Pete Wilson]

And then there’s this:

https://www.stereophile.com/content/kii-audio-three-loudspeaker-measurements

I bought a pair a few months back (traded in the B&W 800D's.) 

Sound rather nice. Go to 20Hz or below in my room…

— P

On Oct 20, 2017, at 11:32 AM, John Mayberry <emm...@emmaco.com> wrote:

Having run frequency response tests for years, a linear phase response (without large anomalies) is by far the best indicator of whether you’ll like a speaker for many years.  In order to do it, you’ll need superb impulse (ETC).

The best I’ve measured?   The Hill Plasmatronics.    Here’s a frequency and phase response measured by my friend Jay from 1 kHz to 20 kHz.

A ridiculously complicated speaker (each contains its own helium tank) not practical for home use.   I suppose that’s why I bought a pair.

<3FBCA08B651E4FCBB892DE18E41ED378.png>

<3FBCA08B651E4FCBB892DE18E41ED378.png>

Pete Wilson

pe...@kivadesigngroupe.com

CTO, Kiva Design Groupe LLC

www.kivadesigngroupe.com

[John Mayberry]

Fascinating device.   There’s some inherent DSP delay, but it’s set correctly to provide a quality response.  All else being relative- who’s going to notice?

Sort of a cake and eat it too with a moving coil.   Sweet indeed.

Generally the delay can be dealt with by mechanically moving the components backwards and forwards (think Wilson and Spica), but the crossover anomalies in coiled speakers require processing to sort out.   Any speaker that does not have a crossover point in the passband of greatest human listening acuity (i.e. that marvelous Peerless midrange in the Gale) has obvious benefits.  And it’s why they sound so good.

You do not want a crossover in the 500- 4 kHz range (that’s why the old telephones sounded so “natural”).   The GS401’s crossover center points were 475 Hz and 5 kHz.

John Mayberry
Emmaco, Inc.
VP, Engineering and Chief Technologist
p (626) 799-9993 m (626) 394-3954

This message contains confidential information and is intended solely for the individual(s) named and does not permit other individuals to disseminate, distribute, or copy this email.

 

[John Mayberry]

If you really want low frequencies, there’s only one solution.

https://www.soundandvision.com/content/eminent-technology-trw-17-rotary-subwoofer

 

 

John Mayberry
Emmaco, Inc.
VP, Engineering and Chief Technologist
p (626) 799-9993 m (626) 394-3954

This message contains confidential information and is intended solely for the individual(s) named and does not permit other individuals to disseminate, distribute, or copy this email.

 

From: Toby
Sent: Saturday, October 7, 2017 12:06 AM
To: Gale Audio

--

[Pete Wilson]

Damn right!

Sent from my iPhone

[Jack Ward]

Wow.......just wow.

On Oct 20, 2017 8:15 PM, "Pete Wilson" <pe...@kivadesigngroupe.com> wrote:

Damn right!

Sent from my iPhone

On Oct 20, 2017, at 5:48 PM, John Mayberry <emm...@emmaco.com> wrote:

If you really want low frequencies, there’s only one solution.

https://www.soundandvision.com/content/eminent-technology-trw-17-rotary-subwoofer

 

 

John Mayberry
Emmaco, Inc.
VP, Engineering and Chief Technologist
p (626) 799-9993 m (626) 394-3954

This message contains confidential information and is intended solely for the individual(s) named and does not permit other individuals to disseminate, distribute, or copy this email.

 

From: Toby
Sent: Saturday, October 7, 2017 12:06 AM
To: Gale Audio
Subject: RE: Welcome to New Member Andrew

 

Thanks Mike, I'll give it a go, it won't let me copy and paste a picture in from this post on my phone, oddly.

 

I have thought of adding a speaker under the sofa but with the huge fronts producing so much bass and the 7 x 200 watt RMS from the Sony TA-DA9000ES I don't think I need it. I need to get a new laser for my SCD-XA9000ES SACD player, try an get into finding more discs to listen to.

 

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Gale Audio" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to gale-audio+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to gale-...@googlegroups.com.

Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/gale-audio.

For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

 

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Gale Audio" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to gale-audio+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

To post to this group, send email to gale-...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/gale-audio.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Gale Audio" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to gale-audio+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.

[John Mayberry]

Once you're exposed to this,  all other subwoofers are just not subwoofers.

---

From: Jack Ward
Sent: ‎10/‎25/‎2017 3:13 PM
To: gale-...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: Welcome to New Member Andrew

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to gale-audio+...@googlegroups.com.

[andrew....@gmail.com]

That subwoofer is amazing! A quick question. How do the Gale 401a do when close to side walls? At present the speakers are well away from the front wall and side walls, and sound fantastic but some house renovations mean that in all likelyhood they will have to be moved into a smaller room (16’x12’) which will have it’s benefits but does necessitate the speakers being closer to the side walls.

[Carl Smith]

The manual I got with mine says ...

"It is recommended for best results that the speaker be placed horizontally on a bookshelf at least one metre (3 feet) above the floor with books on either side of the speaker. Alternatively it may be placed either horizontally or vertically in or near a corner at least one metre above the floor. "

and ...

"Adjust the balance controls for best musical balance between bass, midband and treble. This will vary according to the room in which the speaker is used."

The balance control they are talking about is the midband and treble pots on the back of the speakers.

So clearly they were designed for hard up against the wall with 'mass' on either side. But ... I've always found the bass to be way too much for my ears when setup that way. That is, until I re-read the bit about adjusting the mid and high pots on the back of the speaker. You increase those while listening to one of your reference tracks and keep repeating that listening test until you get a more balanced experience between the bass, mids and highs. Having said that, I still found the bass was not taut enough for my liking when right up against the front wall ... didn't hear the pluck of bass strings! But, by keeping them against the side walls and moving them out away from the front wall a little at a time, I found a point where the bass became more controlled - could hear the pluck - worked well. 

And while that's what I found for a small room, for completeness sake :-  when listening in a large room I always found a 1:1.6 golden ratio of the distance front wall offset : side walls offset worked a treat (provided the distance off the side walls still allowed a wide enough speaker placement of 2 to 3 metres). But the amp had to provide plenty of grunt to force the bass driver to do its stuff, in my case a pair of 200W per channel Musical Fidelity XA200's ;)

On 2 November 2017 at 09:18, <andrew....@gmail.com> wrote:

That subwoofer is amazing! A quick question. How do the Gale 401a do when close to side walls? At present the speakers are well away from the front wall and side walls, and sound fantastic but some house renovations mean that in all likelyhood they will have to be moved into a smaller room (16’x12’) which will have it’s benefits but does necessitate the speakers being closer to the side walls.

[Berris Conolly]

Because they’re infinite baffle sealed boxes the Gales are quite flexible in room positioning, particularly regarding bass interaction with the rear wall (unlike rear-ported speakers).

Too close to a side wall and you may get unwanted reflections which can muddy the sound stage.  

The treble and mid pots were originally designed to balance the response at the manufacturing stage, and weren’t meant to be fiddled with by the listener, which of course people soon ignored.

 

The only way to get a good room balance is by repeated listening to few reference tracks (which obviously must have a full range of frequencies) and moving the speakers around, sometimes only a small distance at a time – a lengthy procedure, unless you’re lucky first time.

Along with listening from the desired seat (which hopefully also becomes the sweet spot) walking around the room may give extra information about frequency interactions such as undesirable bass reinforcement, or cancellation.

If you can hook up a computer, a tone generator may also be useful – you should be able to hear at least down to 35Hz

http://onlinetonegenerator.com/

[Berris Conolly]

ps. once a well balanced tonal-range position is found based on room interactions, the toe-in or speaker angle can be fine tuned to control the depth, height and width of the sound stage. On some tracks you should hear distinct sounds beyond the speakers. 

[Berris Conolly]

ps. once a well balanced tonal-range position is found based on room interactions, the toe-in or speaker angle can be fine tuned to control the focus and width of the sound stage. On some tracks you should hear distinct sounds outside the speakers.

On 2 November 2017 at 10:38, Berris Conolly <tbco...@gmail.com> wrote:

[Berris Conolly]

ps. once a well balanced tonal-range position is found based on room interactions, the toe-in or speaker angle can be fine tuned to control the depth, height and width of the sound stage. On some tracks you should hear distinct sounds beyond the speakers, often referred to as 'air'.

On 2 November 2017 at 10:38, Berris Conolly <tbco...@gmail.com> wrote:

[Berris Conolly]

ps. once a well balanced tonal-range position is found based on room interactions, the toe-in or speaker angle can be fine tuned to control the depth, height and width of the sound stage. On some tracks you should hear distinct sounds beyond the speakers, often referred to as 'air'.

If your ceilings are are high, raising the speakers may produce good results.

On 2 November 2017 at 10:38, Berris Conolly <tbco...@gmail.com> wrote:

[Mike Nightingale]

Agree with all the above. Also have your tweeters at ear height, for your normal listening position. :)

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to gale-audio+...@googlegroups.com.

[Toby]

I’ve always thought remote controlled, motorised speaker bases/stands to rotate the speakers from your listening position would be great for setting up, you could hear a more consistent change to the music you are listening to with immediate affect, opposed to traversing back and forth moving the speakers then relistening etc.

[Berris Conolly]

Indeed Toby, and a willing assistant can do this for you, while repeatedly playing the last 30 seconds of a track . .  (no drugs allowed in the interim) 

Of course it all relies on your source and amps working well with the Gales - there's no point in carefully tuning the room response if you're not already happy, a chicken & egg. 

On 4 November 2017 at 07:34, Toby <tob...@btopenworld.com> wrote:

I’ve always thought remote controlled, motorised speaker bases/stands to rotate the speakers from your listening position would be great for setting up, you could hear a more consistent change to the music you are listening to with immediate affect, opposed to traversing back and forth moving the speakers then relistening etc.

[Toby]

I’ll try that with my wife Berris and let you know how I get on! ;-)
It would be interesting to try the gales on some of these very new amps with test tones and a microphone at the listening position to set up the sound delivery. I suspect they would sound incredibly good!

[Berris Conolly]

I would add that once a good position is found for most speakers, other elements in the chain can be fairly safely changed.

Returning to a raised tweeter height when seated - many expensive speakers are deliberately tall, giving a sound stage similar to the front row below a low raised platform. 

With regular studio recordings and low speaker height, sitting in the gods doesn't seem so happy. Capturing the natural acoustics of a hall or cathedral is another matter ..   

On 5 November 2017 at 08:29, Toby <tob...@btopenworld.com> wrote:

I’ll try that with my wife Berris and let you know how I get on! ;-)
It would be interesting to try the gales on some of these very new amps with test tones and a microphone at the listening position to set up the sound delivery. I suspect they would sound incredibly good!

[andrew....@gmail.com]

A quick update. Overt the past months I’ve been tinkering with the room / speaker set-up with current incarnation being a near-field set-up in our 12’x16’ room. The sound is great and, with some floor to ceiling bass traps in the front corners, I’m getting +/- 2.5dB response fro 60Hz to 300Hz. I’ve found, though, that irrespective of the speaker location that the in-room response rolls off starting around 60Hz. My thinking is to augment the speakers with a subwoofer for the final octave but I’m interested in the experience of others. Has anyone else seen this <60Hz roll-off? And what about subwoofer integration?

[Pete Wilson]

Alas, I don’t have Gales (if I had a spare room that might change, but …)

I do, however, have a pair of Celestion SL600Si’s, which are supposed to be flat sorta 50Hz-20KHz; see graphs:

https://www.stereophile.com/content/celestion-sl600si-loudspeaker-dlp600-digital-equalizer-1989-measurements

Can’t find equivalent info for Gales, but may be similar.

Point of this email is to say that you might want to try room/speaker equalisation rather than subwoofing; and room/speaker eq if you use a subwoof.

I used the MiniDSP ddrc-22d in my 13x12x10ft high room. Subtle but worthwhile improvements, including extended bass.

https://www.minidsp.com/dirac-series/ddrc-22d

Some folk hate this sort of DSP. I’ve found it useful and convenient and effective

— P

> On Feb 16, 2018, at 4:52 PM, andrew....@gmail.com wrote:
>
> A quick update. Overt the past months I’ve been tinkering with the room / speaker set-up with current incarnation being a near-field set-up in our 12’x16’ room. The sound is great and, with some floor to ceiling bass traps in the front corners, I’m getting +/- 2.5dB response fro 60Hz to 300Hz. I’ve found, though, that irrespective of the speaker location that the in-room response rolls off starting around 60Hz. My thinking is to augment the speakers with a subwoofer for the final octave but I’m interested in the experience of others. Has anyone else seen this <60Hz roll-off? And what about subwoofer integration?
>

> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Gale Audio" group.

> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to gale-audio+...@googlegroups.com.

[andrew....@gmail.com]

Thanks, Pete. I’m a big supporter of DSP having used various mini-DSP and computer based solutions over the years. This system though includes a turntable and I’m hoping to not subject the main signal to A to D. The fact that the issue is in the last octave has me thinking that I could solve it with gales running full range augmented with a subwoofer that is low passed at say 40Hz with some DSP on this if needed. Part of the thinking is that the room is small enough, and frequencies low enough, that I don’t have to worry about delaying the main speakers to align with the subwoofer.

[Pete Wilson]

:-)

My Linn is hooked up to a PS Audio PhonoConverter. Very nice phono preamp. Includes an excellent 24/192K A/D. I listen to LPs through the digital chain .. plus I’ve already digitised many of ‘em (at 96/24 - a limitation of the MiniDSP). Now only about $1000…. Our local radio station is KMFA, which is classical music locally grown. I run the tuner’s output through a 48/16 $20 A/D. Sounds good. (But it’s still only FM, and in fact they broadcast in that horrid ‘hybrid digital’..)

That is, I (at least) cannot reliably distinguish betwixt ‘naked Linn’ and ‘digitised Linn’. Ortofon 2M flying in an early Rega RB300 arm…

Full disclosure - the Celestions were pressed back into service when my Kii Three’s had to go away to get their bits replaced… The Celestions are not as good as the Kii’s…

— P

[andrew....@gmail.com]

Well, I’ve spent a week tweaking the speaker location and listening position vs-a-vie the front wall (I.e., keeping the equilateral triangle unchanged) and have found a set-up which which bass is extended to below 40Hz. My guess is that a well thought out and implemented subwoofer strategy would deliver great extension and, ultimately, perhaps better bass. That said, I’m inclined to not go down this path on the basis that the cost / space / complexities in making this approach work - but never say never.

P.S. Interesting to hear about the Kii 3 speakers which, after a bit of reading, look to be quite an innovative design.

[Pete Wilson]

Stereovile liked ‘em, as do I...

[Andrew]

I'm still enjoying these amazing speakers with a set-up involving a nice valve pre-amp and 200W solid-state power amplifier all set-up in a 12'x 16'x 10' room with corner bass traps and sidewall bookcases. The set-up is dedicated to two-channel music . I'm getting in-room bass that starts to roll-off at about 80Hz but, subjectively, the bass / mid-bass seems to work. The reason for the post is that I'm re-visiting the idea of adding one or two sub-woofers and keen to hear from anyone who has gone down this path. Any and all advice would be much appreciated. 

[emm...@emmaco.com]

Adding subwoofers is always a hit and miss affair.  Some get lucky, some don’t.  Most fail.

Having spent years doing it (mainly for professional applications) the key is placement, trying to match the Q of the speakers, levels, crossover points, polarity, and lots of lots of patience.  A well matched systems is golden.  Unfortunately, 95% of the are the exact opposite.

Tough call.

John

 

From: gale-...@googlegroups.com <gale-...@googlegroups.com> On Behalf Of Andrew
Sent: Monday, January 28, 2019 1:46 AM
To: Gale Audio <gale-...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Welcome to New Member Andrew

 

I'm still enjoying these amazing speakers with a set-up involving a nice valve pre-amp and 200W solid-state power amplifier all set-up in a 12'x 16'x 10' room with corner bass traps and sidewall bookcases. The set-up is dedicated to two-channel music . I'm getting in-room bass that starts to roll-off at about 80Hz but, subjectively, the bass / mid-bass seems to work. The reason for the post is that I'm re-visiting the idea of adding one or two sub-woofers and keen to hear from anyone who has gone down this path. Any and all advice would be much appreciated. 

--

[SmithMcDougall Gmail]

I concur John;  The very few times I’ve tried to set up a subwoofer – with smaller speakers inherently lacking LF eg the LS3/5a and JR149 – the combination just never sounded right.

But the issue wasn’t the LF – to my ears; somehow the addition of the sub seemed to suck out the ‘magic’ of the midrange – in effect to kill the essence that makes these small speakers so enjoyable. No idea why or how this effect occurred, but after later attempts with other smaller stand-mounts, I finally gave up. (The extra box and wires didn’t help aesthetically either.)

The far better solution (for me anyway) was to flick on the in-built (Leben amp) 3db bass boost.  Not hi-fi purism of course, but the 149 were stunningly good with that bit of extra support.

Robin

Virus-free. www.avast.com

[Pete Wilson]

In general, subwoofers are iffy.

But if you can get a pair on loan, then you can experiment. I think Music Direct (if you’re in the USA) stocks them and offers an extended try out period

https://www.musicdirect.com/brands/rel-acoustics/?manufacturer=Rel%2520Acoustics&sort=popularity%7CDESC&page=1&pagesize=24&c1=tab-products&c2=grid

REL’s products are intended to hook up to your main speaker terminals (though they can be driven with a classic filtered subwoofer-out signal) and have been in my experience worth a try (had an old out of date one assisting a pair of Celestion SL 600’s)(yeah, I know, they’re not Gales)

— P

[Pete Wilson]

Oh, and you might want to dabble with some DSP. That way, no subwoofers, just correctly boosted bass (and reduced room effects)

If all your music is digital, you just stuff a miniDSP Dirac Live box into the chain, just before the DAC. If some music is digital and some analog, or it’s all analog, things get more nusiancy. My solution (because that’s my position) was to buy a NAD M12 preamp, which happily turns analog into digital (and includes DACs, so you can get analog back out). The machine isn’t at all ideal for everyone, but works for me.

MiniDSP:

  all in one: https://www.minidsp.com/products/streaming-hd-series/shd

Other Dirac products reachable from this page.

NAD M12

https://nadelectronics.com/product/m12-digital-preamp-dac/

[Toby]

It’s an interesting subject, I never found subwoofers to work that well, I had a separate amp and subs but eventually got rid. Instead I switched my Sony STR-DA9000ES to sub woofer output signals off so it effectively allows those signals to go through the 7 speaker front, centre, side and rear setup with my big Technics SB-8000’s (16 inch bass driver) providing afar nicer natural sound with some great lows when required.

I now have a dedicated Musical Fidelity KW750 power amp handling 2 channel Hi-Fi duties with a switch over between the two amps for the SB-8000’s, again the bass lows are tremendously good and natural. I’ve been a bit of a convert to Musical Fidelity, no tone control just straight through from input to output the sound is stunning.

[Andrew]

I’ve always has speakers on stands that are the right height to ensure the tweeter is at ear height. The Gale 401 are different however as thethat the original stands were, from memory, about 20” meaning the tweeter is a lot lower than is usually the case - some 15-20cm below war height. What is the reason for this design? And has anyone tried stands that bring tweeter to ear height?

[david wilson]

With reference to Andrew's query about tweeter height/stand height, when I completely renovated my 401s a couple of years ago, I re-veneered the speakers with well matched walnut veneers and, having a good amount left over, decided to create matching stands. The attached photo shows the final result (I have posted it here before) and my decision to set the over-all height at tweeter-to-ear level has worked out well - I get very good imaging and stereo placement. Hope this helps.

David Wilson

On Tuesday, 12 February 2019, 12:11:50 GMT, Andrew <andrew....@gmail.com> wrote:

I’ve always has speakers on stands that are the right height to ensure the tweeter is at ear height. The Gale 401 are different however as thethat the original stands were, from memory, about 20” meaning the tweeter is a lot lower than is usually the case - some 15-20cm below war height. What is the reason for this design? And has anyone tried stands that bring tweeter to ear height?

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Gale Audio" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to gale-audio+unsub...@googlegroups.com.

[Andrew]

Great looking speakers and stands!

Any ideas as to the reasoning behind the lower positioning of the tweeter? I'd be surprised if it wasn't thought through but don't get the reason. Is it, perhaps, to address floor cancellation or a result of lower lounges etc. at the time?

[david wilson]

My thoughts on the tweeter placement are that although many users have the speakers in "portrait" vertical format, I believe the original concept was to use them, as I have in the photo, in horizontal position, in which case the tweeter is at the "top" and the considerable weight of the bass units and cabinet is equally spread either side - just my thoughts though- others may have more insider knowledge.  David Wilson


Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPad

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to gale-audio+...@googlegroups.com.

[Andrew]

Yes, I'm using the Gale 401c in horizontal configuration - in part as this seems to be the original intention and in part as I guess that in this orientation the off-axis response is better. My 20" stands see, then, the tweeter at about 800mm whereas ear height in standard chair is about 1000mm. A 24" speaker stand with some 1" feet / spikes would start to get the tweeter at ear height but I'm not sure if there is a downside in such a move.

[Carl Smith]

It would indeed be interesting to see if anyone really knows why that original chrome stand design was designed to be "that way".

In my GS401A's original manual :

"... the design philosophy behind the GS401A and GS401B is ...... with the requirement that it must fit into a normal bookshelf system."

and

" .... It is recommended for best results that the speaker is placed horizontally on a bookshelf of at least one metre (3 feet) above the floor with books on either side of the speaker. Alternatively it may be placed either horizontally or vertically in or near a corner at least one metre above the floor."

;)  Given that I'd say to Andrew ... I think they are / were originally designed to go "at least one metre (3 feet)" off the floor. IE about ear height when seated  ;)

On Tue, 12 Feb 2019 at 22:11, Andrew <andrew....@gmail.com> wrote:

I’ve always has speakers on stands that are the right height to ensure the tweeter is at ear height. The Gale 401 are different however as thethat the original stands were, from memory, about 20” meaning the tweeter is a lot lower than is usually the case - some 15-20cm below war height. What is the reason for this design? And has anyone tried stands that bring tweeter to ear height?

[David from www.vintagegale.com]

I have x3 slightly different stand versions from the early 70's all are around 500 high give or take a few mil. I had my copies scanned in  from these originals. The differences are mainly how the shelf is bolted to the tubes and all are basically the same height. It seems at some stage a different company did manufacture them as they are obviously made in a different manner but the height remains the same. It may be prudent to remember (if you can!) that things like 'sound stage' 'pin point imaging' etc did not come into the equation in the 70's. Tannoys were also a very popular speaker at the same time and typically their rectangular cabinet like a Cheviot is only around 600 to the driver centre/tweeter from the floor, so it was not an obvious issue back in the 70's. 

On Saturday, August 26, 2017 at 12:29:08 AM UTC+1, John Mayberry wrote:

Interested in the fantastic GS401…

Welcome aboard,

 

John

 

John Mayberry                                                                                                                       

 

VP, Engineering

Emmaco, Inc.

www.emmaco.com

626 799 9993

 

 

 

[Andrew]

That explains it. Thanks. And, on that basis, I'll progress down the path of trying a 600mm / 24" stand. 

[emm...@emmaco.com]

They do sound a little better, not a huge improvement.

Look a little goofy…

John

 

From: gale-...@googlegroups.com <gale-...@googlegroups.com> On Behalf Of David from www.vintagegale.com
Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2019 10:33 AM
To: Gale Audio <gale-...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Welcome to New Member Andrew

 

I have x3 slightly different stand versions from the early 70's all are around 500 high give or take a few mil. I had my copies scanned in  from these originals. The differences are mainly how the shelf is bolted to the tubes and all are basically the same height. It seems at some stage a different company did manufacture them as they are obviously made in a different manner but the height remains the same. It may be prudent to remember (if you can!) that things like 'sound stage' 'pin point imaging' etc did not come into the equation in the 70's. Tannoys were also a very popular speaker at the same time and typically their rectangular cabinet like a Cheviot is only around 600 to the driver centre/tweeter from the floor, so it was not an obvious issue back in the 70's. 

--

[emm...@emmaco.com]

If you really want to know, slouch down in your chair…   the tweeter doesn’t spit.

 

I’m sorry, the polar directivity is relatively low.

Deep thought for the day.

 

John

 

From: gale-...@googlegroups.com <gale-...@googlegroups.com> On Behalf Of emm...@emmaco.com
Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2019 11:42 AM
To: gale-...@googlegroups.com

[SmithMcDougall Gmail]

I always loved the appearance of the chrome 401s mounted horizontally on the chrome stands - still a classic artistic statement even today.

But I can't help feeling it was a triumph of form over function.

My particular issue was always with the practical safety of that support in a regular domestic situation. They tended to be quite unstable - even a tad bouncy (these days stands are supposed to be firm & solid to tighten bass?) - and a bit of a knock could be disastrous.  Dedicated listening space?- fine.  Grandkids? - fuggedaboudit!

Also, the extra width meant placement and getting around them - very gingerly - could offer difficulties in most domestic rooms.

Coupla years back I had some refurbed Quad 57's - probably the cleanest, clearest, most natural speakers I've ever tried.  But that squat, wide shape just didn't fit our room.

All long gone.

Just out of interest:- has anyone compared 401s or 402s with Audio Note Type J?  About the same size (~ standard Brit 2 cub foot) & the ANs are stunningly open and involving - & designed to be pushed right back into the corners of the room.

Just wondering...

Virus-free. www.avast.com

Virus-free. www.avast.com

[emm...@emmaco.com]

When we downsized the pair of Quads went on the auction block and the 63s ended up in their boxes in the garage.

Only had room for one set of Gales (one in the closet), one set of Plasmatronics, and one set of Sonus Fabers.  Down to three.  And a patient wife.

The Snells are a great choice for a smaller speaker.

 

From: gale-...@googlegroups.com <gale-...@googlegroups.com> On Behalf Of SmithMcDougall Gmail
Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2019 4:21 PM
To: gale-...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: Welcome to New Member Andrew

 

I always loved the appearance of the chrome 401s mounted horizontally on the chrome stands - still a classic artistic statement even today.

But I can't help feeling it was a triumph of form over function.

My particular issue was always with the practical safety of that support in a regular domestic situation. They tended to be quite unstable - even a tad bouncy (these days stands are supposed to be firm & solid to tighten bass?) - and a bit of a knock could be disastrous.  Dedicated listening space?- fine.  Grandkids? - fuggedaboudit!

Also, the extra width meant placement and getting around them - very gingerly - could offer difficulties in most domestic rooms.

Coupla years back I had some refurbed Quad 57's - probably the cleanest, clearest, most natural speakers I've ever tried.  But that squat, wide shape just didn't fit our room.

All long gone.

Just out of interest:- has anyone compared 401s or 402s with Audio Note Type J?  About the same size (~ standard Brit 2 cub foot) & the ANs are stunningly open and involving - & designed to be pushed right back into the corners of the room.

Just wondering...

 

Virus-free. www.avast.com

 

Virus-free. www.avast.com

[SmithMcDougall Gmail]

Ha! - I acknowledge that oblique mention of Snells – the progenitor of AN.  A dark story indeed.....

I agree & honour Peter Snell – poor bloke died before he was 40 - for his innovative / value-for-money design approach; they are excellent for the price.

But I’ve actually had both – Snell Type J III and AN Type J -  and can assure anyone that the ANs are noticeably better.  And so they should be for the huge $$$ they charge.

To look inside them doesn’t seem all that reassuring – seemingly very basic in fact - but there is something about a simple, well executed 2-way box that can be exceedingly ‘right’.

I found the same with Harbeth awhile back – the much-vaunted SHL5 did nothing for me and lasted less than 3 weeks.  Whereas the diminutive P3esr were stunningly enjoyable for their tiny size.

Sorry to digress off-thread....

Robin

[emm...@emmaco.com]

Sorry, didn’t mean to bring up their progenitor.  Slip of the fingers or brain, I suppose.

I’ve never heard the Harbeths.  Have heard great things, though.

 

John

[Andrew]

Any idea of the vertical listening window of the tweeter? Ear height is about 40" from floor which would entail, roughly, a 30" stand and I'm guessing the description of "goofy" would be right. A 24" stand with 1" feet gets a lot closer that base 20" stand whilst most likely still looking acceptable as well as allowing off the shelf stand solutions. 

[Jack Ward]

I remember listening to Gales while comfortably seated in a large bean bag chair....back in the day. At the time, those stands seemed like the perfect height. Perhaps sitting on or near the floor was the original reason they were designed that way. It was the 70s, after all. ;-)

Jack Ward
Knoxville, TN, USA

On Thu, Feb 21, 2019 at 3:49 PM Andrew <andrew....@gmail.com> wrote:

Any idea of the vertical listening window of the tweeter? Ear height is about 40" from floor which would entail, roughly, a 30" stand and I'm guessing the description of "goofy" would be right. A 24" stand with 1" feet gets a lot closer that base 20" stand whilst most likely still looking acceptable as well as allowing off the shelf stand solutions. 

--

[David from www.vintagegale.com]

There are plenty of alternative stands around just hunt them down

[Berris Conolly]

Dispersion from the Gales is quite good, and you would have to move a long way off-axis before the treble falls off noticeably. However, on the original stands the sound stage is too low for me, unless you’re sitting on the floor. Taking advantage of the sealed box design, here they’re mounted on wall brackets at shoulder height, which just wouldn’t work with rear-ported speakers. 

--

[Berris Conolly]

Dispersion from the Gales is quite good, and you would have to move a long way off-axis before the treble falls off noticeably. However, on the original stands the sound stage is too low for me, unless you’re sitting on the floor. Taking advantage of the sealed box design, here they’re mounted on wall brackets at shoulder height, which just wouldn’t work with rear-ported speakers.

I suspect the original stand design was purely aesthetic rather than functional, possibly influenced by Jon Bannenberg?

On Fri, 22 Feb 2019 at 08:21, David from www.vintagegale.com <davidms...@gmail.com> wrote:

--

[Mike Nightingale]

Argh! Someone mentioned rear ported speakers! Ban him!  ;)

Mike
(Interim Fake President of the Sealed Speaker Alliance)

[Berris Conolly]

Yes indeed, they're horrible things - I'll join your Alliance :)

[SmithMcDougall Gmail]

I reckon Peter Quertyuiop of Audio Note would strongly disagree......😀

Virus-free. www.avast.com

Virus-free. www.avast.com

[Berris Conolly]

Yes I read about those remarkable plywood?? speakers (25Hz!) but never heard a pair. I have a piece of Bach organ music (played on a contemporary instrument) and seemingly recorded with no bass roll-off. Most ported speakers make a terrible job of the low notes, when all you can hear is the ports chuffing away. At least the 402s make quite a decent attempt, down to about 35Hz ... 

[emm...@emmaco.com]

I don’t know Audio Note, but their website brings up some serious questions.

Why do they have a reputation for such quality with an 8” paper cone two-way?  Looks like mid-range Scanspeak kit, and not even their Revelator line at that.

And this build quality?   Don’t get me started…  looks like the transformers were purloined from a 1970’s Hitachi flip number clock radio.  Why would you put that on a website?

What am I missing?

 

From: gale-...@googlegroups.com <gale-...@googlegroups.com> On Behalf Of SmithMcDougall Gmail
Sent: Friday, February 22, 2019 1:51 PM
To: gale-...@googlegroups.com
Subject: Re: Welcome to New Member Andrew

 

I reckon Peter Quertyuiop of Audio Note would strongly disagree......😀

 

 

Virus-free. www.avast.com

 

Virus-free. www.avast.com

[Berris Conolly]

perhaps it's about tuning a resonant box to a room. Any suggestions how to make the short Bach organ track (ZYX; 16bit CD rip) avaialable? This will test all components because it's both recorded at a low volume, with authentic low notes and good ambience

[David from www.vintagegale.com]

I remember building an Audio Note DAC 1 kit many years ago. Not sure what drivers he is using in his speakers today but the early Snell clones used I believe a Peerless 8'' that looked the same as some of the 402 bass drivers. Peter Q's philosophy was always to keep it very simple and if it's not needed then don't put it in. The Dacs have always been 'no oversampling' and he has a big following which is reflected in good used prices for his equipment. 

[emm...@emmaco.com]

I think many young audiophiles have built a first-pass crossover on a rear ported 8 inch woofer.  What make these command such high prices?

 

John

 

From: gale-...@googlegroups.com <gale-...@googlegroups.com> On Behalf Of David from www.vintagegale.com
Sent: Saturday, February 23, 2019 8:56 AM
To: Gale Audio <gale-...@googlegroups.com>
Subject: Re: Welcome to New Member Andrew

 

I remember building an Audio Note DAC 1 kit many years ago. Not sure what drivers he is using in his speakers today but the early Snell clones used I believe a Peerless 8'' that looked the same as some of the 402 bass drivers. Peter Q's philosophy was always to keep it very simple and if it's not needed then don't put it in. The Dacs have always been 'no oversampling' and he has a big following which is reflected in good used prices for his equipment. 

--