Is no one else interested in these speakers?
Their sensitivity is rated at 99dB @ 2.83V/1m. They also ship with speakers measurements for EACH pair of speakers. The bass drivers are made of aluminum/Rohacell/Kevlar ply. I believe they are priced at $15,000 and hope they live up to their price. That puts them (price wise) up against a lot of really good speakers. I am hoping they are VERY dynamic and still tonally balance.
Here is a link to the spec pagehttp://www.klipsch.com/palladium/P39FTechSpecs.html
Very interesting speaker, not sure thant nobody is interested, however the issue is that klipsch is way out of their element with these, fit, finish, etc.. This is new ground of price bracket and hi end status to crack in their case. A 15 k pair of speakers unfortunatley needs to come with more than just great specs and overall sound.. I can tell you these are probably pretty amazing up to about 10,000 class, but 15 is pushing it..
Now if they had way better finish on the cabinets, and a Far more realistic components used in the crossovers vs. the bennic OEM type pieces they seem to be using they would have something that would maybe make more of the big horn guys jump on them..
But in this price range you are talking competition from Avantgarde with mundorf crossovers, and several other nose bleed horns that are 99 to 110 db efficient. At 8,000 a pair I could see these being a real deal, but that would put them in direct price line competition with their former flagship for 50 years the K-Horns...
I will say I bet these models would fair much better for a larger variety of music tastes, and be far easier to get dialed in for most rooms over K-horns however due to the more conventional design, and bass output from these I am sure will walk all over anything klipsch has produced for the most part.
I would however if seriously considering these, minus the good design on the "boat shaped" low standing wave and resonance enclousure on these pretty much say I could take a pair of the RF 83's put some killer outboard crossovers and for about 2500 to 3000 street price have 95% of the performance of the palladiums. I am not sure how much of the performance accounted for of the palladium is in fact the cabinet however.
One thing I would be cautious about although they seem to claim 8 ohm nominal impedance on like every speaker they ever produced, these have 3 woofers which seems that would definately make this a little tougher load on some amps dipping pretty low, like 3 ohm or even 2 ohm at some frequencys, unless by some miracle they produced a 12 ohm or 16 ohm driver(very doubtful).
These are not meant to compete with other horns, they have a model in each bracket to compete with B&W's 800 series.
I agree that they are not geared toward the horn crowd and more in line with what B&W and some of the other heavy hitters have out. I think Klipsch is a good mid/low end brand and you get a lot for your money (compared to other stuff at Best Buy, Crutchield, etc). But I think they are in over their heads. In their price range they have to compete with Wilson Audio Sophia, B&W 802, Thiel 3.7, Focal Alto, and the list goes on and on.
But who knows maybe they will be very good. I like the looks and I like American companies to do well in general. I am looking forward to a full review.
From what I have read when they designed the cabinets/drivers they used computer modeling (rather than building lots and lots of test speakers) which I think is a good place to start (I should note I am an engineer by trade.... so I am bias). I think the cabinets look well designed but again there are many good designs on the market.
I have no idea why somebody thinks klipsch is not gunning to be "Horns".. Okay I will play along, bottom line is that most speakers in that price range of "Horns" or conventional speakers make no difference accept yes, klipsch has entered a world of criticism and new level of speakers- being foreign, custom, fancy, or just BIG names in super hi cost audio, the klipsch do seem slightly out of place regardless what their marketing approach is.
By the way mostly these Palladiums will probably sell 10 pairs in the U.S. and like 90 pairs overseas, I am sure the Asian and maybe european market is much stronger and thats why they did it, and those are teh markets and speakers they are actually competing with... Not Joe blow walking down the street thru the 100 Audio video stores that carry B&W speakers.
"I have no idea why somebody thinks klipsch is not gunning to be "Horns".. Okay I will play along,"
Go to the Klipsch forum and read about the blind test they did against the B&W 802D. This is the market that they are going for.
"But I think they are in over their heads. In their price range they have to compete with Wilson Audio Sophia, B&W 802, Thiel 3.7, Focal Alto, and the list goes on and on."
Why does everybody doubt that Klipsch can compete in this price range but a company like Eggleston or some other startup is accepted? I'll take a Lexus over a Mercedes any day and prople use to look down on Toyotas. Remember that Wilson owners dismiss B&W's as mass produced "midgrade" speakers.
For the record, my user name was from my previous ownership of Khorns in tigerwood and I now own B&W Signature 800's, so I am not just a loyal Klipsch follower.
Klipsch is doing this to sell a few pairs of the Palladiums and get a "halo effect" on the rest of their products. They are also only selling them in higher end shops (not Best Buy).
I wish them well and they certainly have the financing and R&D to build a speaker in this range. If they can build a speaker that equals the B&W 802's and requires a 100 to 200 wpc amp instead of 500wpc I'd say that they pulled off a major success.
I can tell you they will definitely not take a 100 or 200 watter even :-)
I have used several of the reference towers in the 98 & 99db range with 20 watt amps and excelled beyond the 110 db output mark including more bass power than even their own monster subwoofer models.. So I don't see that as an issue at all..
Hmm, B&W well I guess for the upper midline and going into the costly brands I can see that B&W and Klipsch probably have no equal in name recognition across the board, meaning normal people, and the freaks on audio sites! So I can see where they might base the comparison, other than that, neither product is remotley close in my opinion.
Well all pissing contests aside I have high hopes for the line. I value dynamics above all things. IMO dynamics comes with high sensitivity.... or lots and lots of power. If everything else is in line I may look into a pair for the second system in the bedroom (now B&W 703s). The wife does not like it real loud so I am looking for dynamics at low volume (65-70dB).
I helped a friend shop (and buy) a "cheap" surround system. After listening he bought klipsch book shelves all around. I set it up for him. It was much better than I thought it would be (the sub was lacking but I have gotten use to the JL fathom). He only spent 3,500 on speakers and it made we question by 15,000+ in my surround sound speakers. Now I just spend my money on two channel. My point is Klipsch may bring more bang for the buck you people think.
I always recommend Klipsch to people who are new to audio and want a good deal. Their reference and heritage are great bargains if the source is up to the task. Harshness is an issue with the wrong source, but will be with any revealing speaker.
The Palladiums should be interesting. My Khorns were very dynamic. Great detail but the soundstage was like a vertical wall. No depth and a gap in the middle. If the Palladiums have the same dynamics and better imaging they should be a winner. The real problem is that many will snub them a junk because of the manufacturer. Funny hobby this is.
Undertow, Im sure that my system is junk but I will just have to live with it.
Where did I give the impression I was against your comments, your system, or klipsch? As a matter of fact I think klipsch is very good, and from all my comments above say the palladiums I bet are pretty great, but a little out of their element price wise I am sure? Sorry you feel your system is junk.
...I heard them twice at Minchen 2008 high end show, 3 month ago. The P-39F seem to emphasided certain tones over their neighbors in the bass. Midrange was very good, treble was a little glassiness. Stage was more forward then the other 4 speakers on the test.
From the 5 speakers on the "Stereoplay" magazine contest, they were the less successful. Here is a link to my coverage, sorry about the language (-:
Thanks for the post Tomer_tsin. I new I was in trouble when I could not even tell what language it was though lol.
It is disappointing to here you did not like them. I was thinking they would have sound stage issues but would make up for it with detail and dynamics. Your statement "treble was a little glassiness" was not what I was hoping to hear.
Anyway how was the punch/slam of the bass/lower mids. I don't think the forwardness of the midrange would bother me. I used to listen to a pair of Grado RS-1s in college for many many hours. I got uses to very forward mids to say the least and I grew to like it (knowing it was not natural... but fun).
The tweeter comment is a disappointment. Did they use an bright amp like a Krell? I would guess tubes or a laid back amp like Mac or Classe is needed.
Undertow - it looked like you were classifying B&W's 800's as "midgrade" Anyway, no problem.
Sorry, I was misunderstood.. I was illustrating no doubt B&W and Klipsch both start out at lower and mid levels, and the name of both is in all stores(almost as bose is)and yes compared to each other all the time sitting on the floor next to each other in many retail environments.. I do realize the nautilus series etc.. Go up to a much higher cost which is where the palladiums kick in...
Obviously both companies do make some stuff considered mid-fi, however they both go up substantially from there as well. .
I use to sell both in a store about 10 years ago, honestly the B&W 600 series I think were the ones, they sounded really nice in a few models, the bookshelfs were better than the klipsch offerings at the time as well, I have no problem with B&W at all. For the right price they can do well...
But are not really what I consider a product coming from a sound perspective related to Klipsch at all, 2 totally different things was my only point, so having a price scheme to compete with B&W is one thing, but I have no idea where anybody would relate the actual products as they both present a sound and product on 2 different ends of the spectrum.
I mean B&W sound would much more be comprable to what Wilson or the more conventional hifi designs are doing in my opinion, thats the actual competition.
Has anybody seen the picture of the P-17B bookshelf in the P Series? The finish on it looks just like the plain finish that they have been putting on their synergy series for a decade... 4k/pr for that? When you look at the other monitors that are at this price range I can't see how they could sell a single pair... I'd grab something from Salk Sound - have a great sounding speaker and a work of art for that price.
Just my $.02
Their spec sheet claims power handling of 400W continuous/1600W peak. Recommended amplification is 50-1000W. Does this seem strange for a 99db efficient speaker?
The Palladium P-17b bookshelf speaker is available in the same 3 finishes as the rest of the Palladium line and currently these are the only available finishes for all models.
"Has anybody seen the picture of the P-17B bookshelf in the P Series? The finish on it looks just like the plain finish that they have been putting on their synergy series for a decade... 4k/pr for that? When you look at the other monitors that are at this price range I can't see how they could sell a single pair... I'd grab something from Salk Sound - have a great sounding speaker and a work of art for that price."
Check out this thread on the Klipsch website. The finish looks very nice:
Undertow, did you ever sell the DM3000's by B&W (vintage 85 to 87 or so)? I have a pair of these. I replaced the caps in the crossovers and cleaned them up. I can't believe the perfromance that I get from these.
No sorry I worked in high school so I was not even 10 years old in 85 or 87'! I am sure any speakers with some good crossovers will be pretty close to the performance of most today however.
I may have been a little harsh about the finish on those, but I still don't think it's quite up to snuff for their price point.
I recently saw/heard the Monitor Audio Platinum Series, which has a bookshelf in the same price range, and the finish on those puts the klipsch to shame.
Well Klipsch has prices on there site now..... The P-39F is $20,000!!! They are out of my price range now (15,000 max). I do not think they will sell well at that price.http://www.klipsch.com/products/lists/floorstanding.aspx
The palladium is most definitely now a product designed simply to see how far they can push the hifi money spenders with their brand, its not a ground breaking speaker or design, as a matter of fact the only real advancment for klipsch personally(but already done by many others) is the cabinet design taking into account the shape and pushing it as far as possible to eliminate the basic acoustic issues with your run of the mill rectangle design.
They are now well over double what they should cost, at 15 k you figure street could get you a pair for 11,500 to 12,500. Used I would be shocked to see much more than 7500 bucks made back on them.. However in the U.S. you will likely see very few pairs used if any because nobody is going to pay that retail price or near it for these. Whatever, I mean they have the money to experiment and toy around with the industry to see what they can pull off and thats exactly why they decided to try this. And don't worry as with all klipsch product you will see these in 18 to 24 months getting blown out on dealers floors for very low street prices probably when they don't sell..
This past weekend I had a chance to listen to the P-38F in comparison to thiel 3.7, focal altos, wilson sophia among other lesser speakers. Bottom line is that the P-38f blew away all of these speakers, utterly and completely. I can still not believe the realism that came from these speakers-- sax, trumpet, trombone, bass were absolutely real and I've played in real bands and orchestras all my life. The sound stage was huge but what was more impressive was the size of the sweetspot, IMMENSE. At one point, I stepped to the left of the left most speaker's forward plane and I could still see the image albeit smeared, but it was still there. Further, the image is very stable at extremely low volume or really cranked up. There is a ton of impressive engineering in these speakers. If you want realism and great staging, you really do owe it to yourself to listen to these speakers.
I have to say, I've not been a huge fan of Klipsch speakers but the palladium line has really changed my opinion of what this company can do, so much so that I'll be buying these things though probably the smaller p37 or perhaps even the p17. I was extremely impressed by these speakers!
I am not suprised that they sounded better than the Wilsons or the Thiel. I think it is funny that people think a company the size of Klipsch does not have the resources to compete with niche brands like Wilson or Thiel. Wilson purchases their drivers from Focal, do you not think Klipsch could purchase quality drivers? (I know Klipsch makes there own) Could they not hire quality engineers? Stupid. Bose could make speakers that compete with the Watt Puppy if they so desired, it is simply not their business plan. I also think it is funny how many people claim that horns are colored when referring to Klipsch but not Avantgarde or Magico. I would bet that the fact that Klipsch makes so much money on their low end products would afford them the luxury of making a truly high end product with much less profit margin than a Wilson or Thiel.
I am not surprised that they sounded better than the Wilsons or the Thiel. I think it is funny that people think a company the size of Klipsch does not have the resources to compete with niche brands like Wilson or Thiel. Wilson purchases their drivers from Focal, do you not think Klipsch could purchase quality drivers? (I know Klipsch makes there own) Could they not hire quality engineers? Stupid. Bose could make speakers that compete with the Watt Puppy if they so desired, it is simply not their business plan. I also think it is funny how many people claim that horns are colored when referring to Klipsch but not Avantgarde or Magico. I would bet that the fact that Klipsch makes so much money on their low end products would afford them the luxury of making a truly high end product with much less profit margin than a Wilson or Thiel.
Ha, I can take any Klipsch speaker and essentially make it sound better than "Thiel or Wilson"
However Stock form some klipsch are just horribly imbalanced. Focal drivers are OK, but never found them much better than most decent paper drivers for far less money, maybe some of the exotic tweeters and or really huge subwoofers they make. Anyway Klipsch does make some killer drivers far better than many of the "Exotic" companies, most of their reference series woofers are far better, far more efficient, and reasonably priced over many of the big brand names. They are just that much more efficient, and their woofers play some true wide frequencies down low with ease, you would find it incredibly difficult to overdrive a klipsch speaker without some really crappy or really ridiculous power. I have scrapped and bottomed out just about all exotic drivers from Focal, and dynaudio, several others, but mostly based on not the greatest crossovers and points used.
Its simple, for the most part klipsch especially in some of the lines over the years produced subpar cabinets, cheap wire, and really CHEAP crossover components. You can take a pair of klipsch, Raspy horns and all, put a 300 to 1000 dollar worth of real crossover parts on it and easily make some 15,000 to 50,000 dollar pairs of standard dynamic drive speakers sound mediocre in comparison, Trust me I have heard it many times in many different iterations of the idea! Anyway Klipsch has improved a LOT in the Palladium cabinets, thats most of the difference, as they always made great drivers, however they also went up from 5 dollar computer crossovers to at least 50 dollar Bennic crossovers, Yes they are bennic crossovers and still WAY cheap and semi-crappy OEM parts even in the 20,000 dollar Palladiums.
They should have at least stepped up to the Mundorf and or Clarity cap levels of parts for these speakers, because the palladiums although far better than many still barely broke above the "Skimp" level on crossovers, and crossovers in this case and most speakers are 90% of the design and final sound you get.. Cabinets about 7% and drivers about 3%. Thats my argument, the palladiums are nice no doubt, but for about 8000 to 10,000 per pair MAYBE on the big ones... Not 20,000. The drivers in the pair are worth about 600 to 1000 bucks, the cabinets are probably about 2500.00 and the crossovers if lucky have about 100 bucks in them. Again this is true in many or most speakers, so thats just the industry as a whole and the greed especially with the highest markups in electronics are on cables and speakers, cables being the worst when they cost 15 bucks to make and sell to you for 600 to 1000 a pair. But again who can blame them when their 20 k speaker that cost them 3000 to make can beat out a 30 k pair that cost a designer 5000 to make, they are simply creating in that market. Good for them if they actually sell any! It might be tuff however as the name in this game is a stigma much like Bose.
"palladiums although far better than many still barely broke above the "Skimp" level on crossovers, and crossovers in this case and most speakers are 90% of the design and final sound you get.. Cabinets about 7% and drivers about 3%"
How factual are these percentages? Why would Klipsch fail to use quality crossovers in their most premium product? The idea that the engineers at a company with the resources of Klipsch would design a flagship product using inferior parts that you claim account for 90% of the overall sound is rediculous. Why do people feel that Klipsch is somehow out of the loop with regards to speaker design? They have over 60 years of history but apparently no one knows about the critical crossover which accounts for 90% of the sound. Someone should send them a link to this forum.
No offense I think you missed the point.. Actually NOT 90% of the cost so to speak should be put into a crossover at all.. But 90% of your FINAL sound is gonna rely heavily on how good the crossover is was the point. By the way you would be shocked at how many speakers in the big money range have crossovers that are worth as much as your 80 dollar DVD player from Target :-) Interestingly don't get me wrong with some crossover parts you can easily be 90% of the cost, most good capacitors these days cost more or double the cost of a good woofer! But not the bennic's used in these klipsch worth about 3 bucks each, and at their discount probably 80 cents.
Crossovers don't sell a speaker, well in this case, not a lot of sex appeal in that, especially for those that don't understand specs. etc... Looks for the most part do sell these days.. No doubt Klipsch is using some high grade parts, again not my point. Yes any speaker manufacture or Book will tell you 90% importance of the design is how well the crossover is designed, Klipsch DID in fact design I am sure a perfect crossover by SPECS and theory, but did still use rather cheap parts which equates to not as good of sound or tolerance as higher grade parts.
So your correct Klipsch did a perfect job on the crossover with basic parts doing the duty, However you take the exact crossover, same value parts etc... And up them to better parts which would cost nearly 50 times what some of the parts they used do, now you are putting it into a class of this kinda money. But problem is that they would have to build them in outboard Boxes, NO WAY would higher grade crossover parts fit in their original design, it would be nearly 10 times the size with the crossover parts I am talking about, and basically be a box the size of a good sized amplifier on the floor next to floorstander itself, so SEX appeal, and simplicity to the standard owner are now lost having to contend with another large box to run their speakers, and only true hardcore guys would buy this, not the Doctor with his wife allowing him to buy some new pretty home theater speakers sitting in the middle of the living room :-)
Again the palladium is a great speaker, and yes paper spec. and Parts used are definitely within the upper crust of design, however not enough money in quality parts to justify such a cheap crossover in my opinion. They are in the market where most people have never heard of wilson or Avantgarde, so they gear this product again for the hollywood guy with some money that just wants a cool speaker, but it could be much more. Its a big company and all about business, funny thing is they were at one point marketing Monster cable inside the speakers, it sounded worse than the old versions without it!! But then again when you took it apart it was literally the .25 cent a foot 18 and 16 gauge cheap crap that monster gave some chinese company the right to stamp their name on the roll.
I understood you to mean that the crossover has an impact on 90% of the sound not the cost, i just question the validity of this claim. Furhermore what brand of high-end speakers use crossovers the size of amplifiers? Theil 3.7 is the same dimensions as the lowly Klipsch RF-7 and the the Wilson Sophia is not a huge speaker either. I don't doubt that Klipsch takes WAF into account with the Palladium line but so does every other high end manufacturer. The Klipschorn certainly does not attempt to be a cute speaker, does it employ the massive crossovers you speak of? What company does?
NOT MANY!!! But most speakers use simpler crossovers, however there are several using outboard large ones, some only take about 1 inductor and 1 capacitor for example, but still is the size of a shoe box. Its not about the part QUANTITY, the Quality parts are far larger. For example you take 1 cap, like a 10 uF cap in a standard Klipsch speaker, its about the size of a half roll of pennies for example.
That same CAP from Clarity or Mundorf, or someone similar and its literally almost the Size of a soda can. So it is definitely not easy or cost effective for most mass produced speakers to implement this for sure. That was not my argument either. Hey I would definitely take a pair of palladiums don't get me wrong, but knowing for 1000 bucks more with such a huge investment already Yes I would build outboard far better crossovers and they would be about the size of a 12" X 16" X 7" amplifier each. And the Palladiums issue with crossover is they are Very complex from what I saw, they are a 3 way meaning a section for tweeter, woofers, and mids, and have about 10 to 15 parts per board. If you use some good ribbon inductors and some Mudorf or clarity caps in that crossover not only will they be that large, but also about 10 to 15 lbs each in weight.
Here is a quick link I came up with on the klipsch website actually
The woofer and tweeter boards alone next to each other although not easily seen in perspective because nothing is next to them as a reference would barely fit next to each other like that on the table in a basic preamp chassis you have on your rack. see link its a cool project to which you can read and check out. Oh and looking back at the link now I do see its the crossover shown next to large Mono block tube amps! Almost the same size. Don't get me wrong the crossovers pictured here are probably 5 times the cost of the palladiums, and they can get much more expensive than even this.
I don't doubt that better crossovers exist, i just doubt that 90% of the sound is controlled by this. If that is the case then I would be quite confident that many high end companies would have huge external crossovers. I am sure the crossover is very important, i just think that the ones Palladium or Wilson or Theil use are sufficient.
Again Palladiums which is what this is about are a very cool speaker, the main change and very refined part of this speaker is the "Boat tail" cabinet eliminating the box noise issues and damping of your standard rectangle boxes. They simply put a little more money into crossovers not what I consider a 20,000 dollar speaker to have
. But again its un-realistic to think that Klipsch of all companies would even entertain an outboard crossover with 1000 dollar worth of parts in it for several reasons, they are not really targeting audiophiles that can live with this, they are not really trying to make the best of the best, but simply show that even their more efficient design can compete at that price level. In the end you would have to TRI wire the speaker which is a BIG hassle to run a better crossover outside the cabinet, and have another box on the floor, but if I owned them and wanted the ultimate performance from them thats what I would do! Great attempt on a speaker, at 8,000 bucks used I can see it being a nice buy!
These are the best sounding (modern) speakers that I have ever heard! McIntosh gear is a great match with these speakers.
All you people bashing the palladium speakers probably have not even heard them, funny, i have listen to these for hours and love them, best klipsch speaker in my opinion, very smooth, large sound stage, excellent mids, thinking of getting the P-37's local dealer is going to make me a deal for 5,500 on 8,000 speaker..
Wow I can't believe it has been two years already sense I started this thread. I looked for a place to demo the Palladiums for a while and gave up. But one day about a year ago I made a trip to demo Magnepan 20.1, 3.6. I brought a lot of rock music because I knew that would be where the Magnepans would come up short (brought audiophile stuff too). After I was done with the Magnepan 3.6 the dealer looked at my music and instantly said I have Klipsch Palladiums in the other room. In the other room they had the Magnepan 20.1 and Klipsch P-38F ($12,000, three 8" woofers, etc) connected to an all Mcintosh front end.
Note, I used Metallica's "Black album" and Jack Johnsons' "On and on" for the following demo.
I started out listening to the P-38F right after the Magnepan 3.6 (also on Mcintosh stuff). My first thought was, wow that is a lot of bass. It seemed a little untextured though... but I blame the room, they were too close to the back wall IMO. The second thing that stood out to me is how small the soundstage seemed after the Magnepans. The speakers just sounded so small in space (left to right, front to back). I tried moving them around the room and playing with toe-in. Now keep in mind the soundstage on Magnepans is a little over-stated (as is the scale of voices) but the Klipsch are on the small side of the soundstage scale.
The mids of the P-38F were every bit as detailed as the Magnepan and maybe more so. They also seemed very natural even though logic told me there should be some horn coloration I did not hear it. The highs were also very detailed and not splashy at all.
After the Klipsch demo I immediately listened to the Magnepan 20.1 on Mcintosh's 1000 watt mono blocks. Compared to the Klipsch they seemed slow in the bass, lack midrange clarity but had great highs (I mean really great). All in all I feel the 20.1 is tonally a little bass heavy.
At the end of the day I did not buy any of these speakers. The 3.6 needs more bass in both extension and power for my tastes. I could not get over the soundstage of the Klipsch and I really wanted to like them. I really loved the corner horns back in the day. The 20.1 sounded ok, I don't think the Mcintosh is the right brand to pair with them. But at $13000 I want a speakers that is better build, I would need to demo them on different amps.
What else have you demoed? Thiel and Wilson will give you a lot of the good qualities of the Klipsch without as many short comings. If you are open to used speakers there are a lot of nice options out there for $5000-$6000.