Why pay more for less (Klipsch vs Klipsch) OR which speakers to keep?

[Yura]

Hey guys, I have two questions

I've been watching buying tendencies and prices on different klipsch speakers and there is something i do not understand: Why do people pay more for less and why they go for lesser seakers?

To explain what i mean, here is an example (prices for used gear):

RC-3 ~$130 vs RC-52 ~$220
97db, 150w vs 96db,

RS-3 ~$200 vs RS-42 ~$400 (both are price for a pair)
95db, 110w vs 93db, 75w

I understand that these are not apples to apples, but you see the point? Excellent older model speakers, which are excellent in all respects are being sold at half the price of the more recent models that aren't as good. Why so?

The only differences I see are speakers like RF-7 which are for some reason holding their value extrmely well and are often prefered over newer models of towers.

The reason why i'm asking is because i have more speakers than i need at the moment and I'm trying to figure out which to sell and which to keep. I have RF-62(pair), RC-3, RC-52, RB-3(2 pairs), RS-42(pair), RW-10d but only need 5 speakers for my home theater. So I have an extra center channel and a pair of surrounds.

I think 2xRF-62, RC-3 and 2xRB-3 make the most sense for 5 speaker home theater. RC-3 is closer to the RC-62 in specs, so it should match closer to RF-62s. The same goes for RB-3s over the RS-42s.

Ideas, opinions?

[Youthman]

I understand that these are not apples to apples, but you see the point?

Yes, you aren't comparing apples to apples and no I don't see your point. Not trying to be a jerk, I'm just not following your logic. Just because a speaker has a 95db sensitivity doesn't necessarily make it better than a 93db speaker.

I'm trying to figure out which to sell and which to keep.

In your example above, you are saying the RC-3 is better than the RC-52. If it's better (to you), why not keep it? The only problem this poses is that the RF-62's are not voice matched to the RC-3 (regardless of whether or not it is a better speaker or not).

I'm not saying which speaker is better than the other since I personally have only heard the RC-52 (and frankly wasn't impressed).

[Montigue231]

Yura, new models come into the market, Will always drive down the price of the previous models. Companies will mark down prices to move inventory just b4 new models are introduced. This drives down the prices of pre owned equipment. The RC 52's are still being produced from Klipsch while the RC 3's are part of the early 2000 reference. Of course there are highly desirable hard to find items that will always hold there value.. for instance Academy center speakers KSP C6 surrounds some heritage floor standing speakers....BTW what city are you located in? If you dont mind me asking

-Monty

[Yura]

Youthman - Well, I do think that RC-3 is a better center and in part because of its higher sensitivity, but primarily because of the larger drivers. And when you say it's not "voice matched" what does that exactly mean? I really think RC-3 matches RF-62s very well, while RC-52 sounds "small".

To reiterate the point - I think that older speakers are better for the money compared to newer speakers at similar or higher prices. RC-3 is closer match to RC-62 and is clearly above the RC-52 in the lineup. I would expect people to buy "higher end", bigger, more powerful speakers especially if they cost less over higher priced, smaller less powerful ones. The fact that they are 5 years older is not an issue, since speakers don't really age so to speak.

Monty - Im in San Diego, California.