DeVore Fidelity Gibbon X loudspeaker Specifications

Sidebar 1: Specifications

Description: Three-way, ported, floorstanding loudspeaker. Drive units: 0.75" ultra-low-mass textile dome tweeter suspended in inert chamber, 7" midrange driver with phase plug and inverted natural-rubber surround, two long-throw 9" woofers. Frequency range: 23Hz–40kHz. Sensitivity: 91.5dB/W/m. Impedance: 8.5 ohms nominal, 16 ohms maximum, 7.3 ohms minimum at 26Hz.
Dimensions: 44" (1120mm) H by 9" (230mm) W by 17.5" (445mm) D (not including feet). Weight: 85 lb (38.5kg).
Finishes: Cherry Bamboo, Mahogany Bamboo, Mink Bamboo.
Serial numbers of units reviewed: X1510041 (both).
Price: $15,890/pair. Approximate number of dealers: 20. Warranty: 5 years limited, parts and labor.
Manufacturer: DeVore Fidelity, 63 Flushing Avenue, Unit 259, Building 280, Suite 510, Brooklyn, NY 11205. Tel: (718) 855-9999. Web:

DeVore Fidelity
63 Flushing Avenue, Unit 259, Building 280, Suite 510
Brooklyn, NY 11205
(718) 855-9999

Bogolu Haranath's picture

Wonder how the 'Spinorama' graphs would look like of this speaker? :-) .......

Axiom05's picture

My guess is that it would not look particularly good.

Kal Rubinson's picture

Some of the info can be gleaned from JA's graphs.

Bogolu Haranath's picture

I know ...... It looks somewhat similar to 'speaker C' :-) .........

... or may be, 'weird' frequency response is the proper description :-) .......

RH's picture

Ha! ^^^^ "Nice one centurion. Like it, like it"...;-)

david_I's picture

So the Gibbon Xs are at the same price point as the Monitor Audio Platinum 300 II. As well as some Focal speakers. I'd be curious to read about a comparison.'s picture

A question for Jim Austin: I see that you own a Leben CS-600 integrated amplifier in the Associated Equipment section of the review. Did you try that amp with the Gibbon X? (I know this is one of the amps that Devore has shown the Gibbon with at shows.) If so, what were your impressions and how did it compare with the Pass and the PS Audio?

doak's picture

Is it the “presence region suckout” that makes its sound so appealing?

Long-time listener's picture

God-awful ugly measurements!

(Although, having said that, if everything else measures well, a tasteful presence-region dip is ALWAYS welcome here, after all the over-aggressive sounding speakers I've heard that measure completely flat through that region.)

Jason P Jackson's picture

Lower midrange/Upper bass? You mean the "power range"? BAH! We don't do that these days. It ruins the imaging.

hb72's picture

@ John Atkinson: I am a keen reader of your measurement section, but of course I am well aware, that pleasure taken from listening via certain equipment and measurements of same equipment are not exactly the same thing nor fully correlating, but need to be put into relationship i.e. understood (the hard work!).
Thus I really wonder about the somewhat unusual disparity in the relationship of measurement vs percieved sound quality & joy of these speakers. Any findings/comments here?

tx for comment,


Indydan's picture

I'm obviously not JA, but maybe this article he wrote will answer your question.

Lorton's picture

There is a difference between comparing the sound of 2 well-engineered products, to a speaker like the DeVore, which does not seems to take any engineering into any account. It is hard to imagine why would anyone choose to build such a speaker on purpose.

hb72's picture

have you heard the speakers yourself?

Lorton's picture

Of course I did. All the Devore loudspeakers sound to me like they measure; quite badly. But, there is always going to be someone who would like what they hear, so what?

RH's picture

Lorton wrote: "But, there is always going to be someone who would like what they hear, so what?"

Well, for one thing, you just answered your own previous puzzlement when you wrote:

"It is hard to imagine why would anyone choose to build such a speaker on purpose."

Can you imagine a reason for building such a speaker now? :)

Lorton's picture

Nope, still can’t.
These are two different subjects (from two separate posts). One has to do with objective assessments (JA measurements), the other is subjective.

RH's picture


"Nope, still can’t."

Really? I find that odd, since the answer is pretty obvious.

You talked about comparing "well engineered" speakers to the Devores and concluded: "It is hard to imagine why would anyone choose to build such a speaker on purpose."

Ok, I guess you could use some help in the imagination department.

You admitted that some people will like the sound of the Devore speakers, right?

That's obviously a reason someone would choose to build such a speaker!

If you are selling speakers, and you come up with a design that some significant number of customers will like...however it measures...THAT'S OBVIOUSLY a rational reason to build such a speaker.

In fact, most speaker designers build the type of speaker THEY LIKE to begin with. John Devore has explained before that he plays a wide range of his favorite music on any of his designs, and they have to pass his own "I like it" test before he considers the job finished. So if a speaker designer likes a certain sound, is aiming for that sound, achieves that sound, and finds a paying audience for that sound...all those amount to good reasons someone would deliberately design such a loudspeaker.


Maybe *you* wouldn't design a speaker that way, because you have different goals and criteria. But you weren't asking about you; you were wondering why anyone ELSE would design such a speaker. If someone else has different taste, different criteria and goals, then it's entirely explicable and rational they would design to meet those goals.

Is that clear enough I hope?

(Some people seem to have trouble thinking beyond their own goals; if "I" wouldn't do doesn't make sense anyone else has reasons to do it...")

Lorton's picture

Designing a good speaker, one that will cost $15K, should require a basic understanding of the science involved (and it is not philosophy). For example; what can possibly be the point of using multiple drivers that cancel each other at the output (due to poor XO implementation)??
If you don’t want to hear the full output of your speakers, in the Devore case is anything between 100Hz-500Hz, and 2KHz-4KHz, then just don’t have any drivers playing at these ranges (I bet you some will like that as well). Will be cheaper, and will, at least, look like you meant to do that ;)

RH's picture

I dunno; must be that it achieved the sound he liked. Check the manufacturer's comment and you'll see he's aware of the way his speakers would measure, could have addressed it, but gave his reason why he didn't bother.

Another manufacturer may not have used drivers and crossovers the same way, and hence ended up with a more textbook response like the one that apparently you'd like to see. However, that would change the sound of the speaker, and it clearly wasn't what JD was going for. So it seems more deliberate design choices vs lack of knowledge.

michaelavorgna's picture

I'll agree with JA's findings:

A couple of years ago, DeVore Fidelity's John DeVore gave me a ride from Brooklyn, where we both live, to Michael Lavorgna's place, in New Jersey. John was delivering a preproduction pair of his Gibbon X loudspeakers for Michael to set up in his then-new listening room, and I'd tagged along to give them a listen (footnote 1). Michael's room and system sounded superb, and I made a mental note that when the Gibbon X went into production, we should review it.

Seems to me that "superb" sounding is a design goal for every manufacturer of hifi gear and John DeVore has clearly hit the mark with the X.

Happy Listening,

Michael Lavorgna

Bogolu Haranath's picture

May be you (ML) could review the new Elac Navis active, self-powered floor-standers, $4,000/pair, and compare them to Gibbon X? ......... Elac Navis don't need any power-amp(s) :-)...........

michaelavorgna's picture were to include a number of different amplifiers for the DeVore's since the speakers on their own don't sound like anything ;-)


Michael Lavorgna

Bogolu Haranath's picture

Ok ....... Don't compare Navis to DeVores ........ You (ML) could just review the Navis floor-standers and tell us what you think :-) .........

michaelavorgna's picture

...of reviewing 4 pair of active speakers and one all-in-one. This will keep me busy for a while.


Michael Lavorgna

Bogolu Haranath's picture

Great ...... Active speakers, with or without external EQ/DSP is the future ..... Some active, self-powered subwoofers are already doing it :-) .........

Bogolu Haranath's picture

We may have to wait for a while for A.I enabled loudspeakers :-) ........

michaelavorgna's picture

...most intelligence is artificial.


Bogolu Haranath's picture

Siri, Alexa and Cortana are not sure about Socrates saying that :-) ..........

Bogolu Haranath's picture

"A.I will be the best or worst thing for humanity" ......... Elon Musk :-) .........

hb72's picture

tx, Indydan!!!

Bogolu Haranath's picture

If we didn't have all these measurements, we would not know about all these deliberate design choices. Thank you again JA :-) .........

Bertie Bucket's picture

Yeah, yeah, measures crap and sound great? You want some oil with those fries?

Rothwea's picture

I spent 2 years hunting for a speaker that sounded great with tube amps. That search ended with the Gibbon X. The most engaging listen in my room, on my system and with my music. Audio magic when paired with an Audio Research REF 75SE. Measurements are useful but hearing is believing.

allhifi's picture

Wow. Moments after I read this review (and thinking whether to post a reply) I was thinking upon the self-employed businessmen, particularly in the Hi-Fi business and the time-consuming commitment, stress, and responsibility in running said business.

Then I thought, well, at least Devore has friends within Stereophile and Mikey Lazagna plugging away on behalf of Devore loudspeakers.

THEN I thought, wait-a-minute, this is a $15K loudspeaker -BIG money.
If invested it should be done cautiously and wisely. Unassuming consumers should be informed -honestly.

For all the words spilled on the 'X's' subjective SQ impressions (that danced around as opposed to being clear and precise), at least Stereophile demonstrates the responsibility to consider and share some basic test-bench measurements -particularly important with loudspeakers.

And there, the answers lay; this $15K loudspeaker lacks the sophistication that a $15K loudspeaker demands. At that price point, there are several loudspeakers to consider, the finest (to my mind) being the KEF 'Reference 3' ($14K). The Ref-3 is a wonderful-sounding loudspeaker that also happens to be a very, very accurate, low-distortion loudspeaker. Heck, its little brother the 'REF-1' (at $8K/pair) is a fantastic loudspeaker. Both, are thoroughly engineered products. And it shows. I suspect other makes/models in that price range exist as well.

The point being, at the $10K price point, consumers should expect (and get) quality engineering and performance. At $15K-20K, even further refinement, even greater construction quality and accuracy.

Consumers should also expect (and get), honest subjective opinions regarding SQ along with some investigation and insight concerning the loudspeakers construction and engineering sophistication. Neither was offered here.
To make matters worse was finding/reading fellow Stereophile contributor M Lazagna's reply in the comments section.
Waxing poetic about a loudspeaker that measures poorly; far from accurate -or even desirable- casts a huge shadow of suspicion concerning the buddy-buddy relationships that appears to develop between reviewer's/magazines and some manufacturers.

If a business wants to play in the high-end market, they best be bringing some high-end skills -ensuring a competitive product.

This loudspeaker's test-bench results revealed a shockingly uneven (i.e. highly coloured) frequency balance -particularly concerning since today's most basic drive-units (aided by DIY cabinet/x-over rec's) easily offers up accurate, even/linear frequency response -and the fact that linear frequency response is considered so important a design objective.
Today, one must go out-of-their-way to mess up this most basic of loudspeaker performance expectations.

Most bizarre. Most disappointing.

In the end, as always: Caveat emptor.