Klipsch $20,000 39F vs $8,000 37F-woofer and MDF? What?

[CiscoKid123]

[cornfedksboy]

Have you listened to them both?

There are also some differences in the cabinet's exterior construction that would add to the cost, and just so you have a frame of reference, the RF-7 II's are 3 times more expensive than the RF-82 II's...you know, for two inch bigger woofers, some MDF's, a better facade, and a dB or two.

It's not that uncommon, espescially since the Palladium's are geared towards the "money is no object" audiophile.

[CiscoKid123]

[Boxx]

Oh well... To each his own....

[Edgar]

Many years ago I worked as the counter man in a Schwinn bicycle shop. The shop was in a strip mall, and happened to be a couple of doors down from a laundromat, so we got a lot of walk-ins who were really just killing time while their undies dried.

On one particular day a woman wandered into the store, and noticed a Schwinn Continental (at the time ~$130) right next to a top-of-the-line Schwinn Paramount (at the time an astronomical ~$1000). They looked exactly the same to her and, frankly, had she ridden both she would not have been able to discern any difference between them. But she argued with me for a half-hour about the fact that the Paramount, which was obviously exactly the same as the Continental, was such a rip-off. She used phrases like, "The Paramount costing $870 more than the Continental while being not much
different has convinced me that they have a flawed business outlook", and, "You have to admit, it's taking advantage of the customer."

Afterward she wandered out of the store, never to return, feeling very self-righteous.

[DizRotus]

In audio, like in many areas of life, a diminishing return factor sets in. With audio it presents as physical size and economic cost. Many folks can't justify the added expense and increased footprint of a Klipschorn over a Heresey (or Bose cubes). They're happy with 80-90% of the performance at a small fraction of the cost. To a few more, it's worth paying a multiple of the cost to get that last bit of increased performance.

The most basic principle is you don't have to spend the money if it's not worth it to you.

If someone were to suggest that a Toyota and a Ferrari will each get you to the store in the same amount of time at the legal limit, so why would you you spend many times more to get a Ferrari, it would be pointless to try convince them otherwise. Likewise, it's pointless to try to convince the Ferrari owner that he/she has wasted his/her money.

To quote Boxxx, " To each his own."

[DizRotus]

Many years ago I worked as the counter man in a Schwinn bicycle shop. The shop was in a strip mall, and happened to be a couple of doors down from a laundromat, so we got a lot of walk-ins who were really just killing time while their undies dried.

On one particular day a woman wandered into the store, and noticed a Schwinn Continental (at the time ~$130) right next to a top-of-the-line Schwinn Paramount (at the time an astronomical ~$1000). They looked exactly the same to her and, frankly, had she ridden both she would not have been able to discern any difference between them. But she argued with me for a half-hour about the fact that the Paramount, which was obviously exactly the same as the Continental, was such a rip-off. She used phrases like, "The Paramount costing $870 more than the Continental while being not much different has convinced me that they have a flawed business outlook", and, "You have to admit, it's taking advantage of the customer."

Afterward she wandered out of the store, never to return, feeling very self-righteous.

EXACTLY!

In1974 I tried to buy a Schwinn Paramount, but Nixon's wage and price freeze made it impossible. Schwinn (understandably) refused to sell Paramounts at the frozen price. Instead, I bought an Italian made Legnano, with Campagnollo components and a Reynolds 531 frame. It was almost identical to a Paramount (which I would have preferred).

A friend bought a Schwinn World Voyager for less than half the cost of my bike. His Schwinn was Japanese made with Shimano componets. It was a very nice bike.

As we went on rides in the ccountry he would ask, "How can your Legnano be worth more than twice the cost of my Schwinn?" I exchanged bikes with him for a few miles. He never asked again, but he did constantly pester me to switch bikes.

I still ride the Legnano. His Schwinn is long gone.

[Edgar]

In1974 I tried to buy a Schwinn Paramount

I still remember the Schwinn "Cycling '74" catalog! (In fact, there is a pro audio company named "Cycling '74". The founder of that company told me that he got the name from the 1974 Schwinn catalog.)

I still ride the Legnano. The Schwinn is long gone.

I still have my Paramount, a 1989 OS model. It is my daily rider.

[RRFL]

Am I mistaking something or is Klipsch playing a practical joke by charging 2.5 times the price of the P-37F for the P-39F in order to get 3-9" woofers instead of 3-7" woofers and some extra MDF.

$12,000? What? Changing your frequency response from 43Hz-24kHz +/-3dB to

39Hz-24kHz +/-3dB and changing maximum output from 120dB to 126dB changes the cost 250%? 120dB is where hearing damage occurs and a loud rock concert plays at 115dB, so who cares about the output?

This is ridiculous.

If we look at only 1 aspect of the difference between the 37F vs 39F and that is the maximum output of 120dB to 126dB, then, we must consider that, it is necessary to double the number of speakers to increase sound pressure by 3db so 1 speaker producing 120dB must double to 2 speakers to achieve 123dB and then double that to 4 speakers to get the next 3dB to achieve 126dB, etc, etc, etc. It's 1,2 4,8,16,32,64 and so on. So that makes it necessary to spend 4 times $8,000 = $32,000 to get 4 sets of 37F's to match the sound pressure of 1 set of 39F. So therefore, 1 set of 39F is a saving of $12,000 over the 4 sets of 37F.

[jacksonbart]

You know my clock radio plays music and tells the time, it cost like 9 bucks!

[Fish]

Long story short........the 7's are 3 times better than 82's, I own both.No speaker pair Klipsch makes is worth $20k in my personal opinion.Of course my opinion is no speaker made is worth that price based on sound.

[Boxx]

You know my clock radio plays music and tells the time, it cost like 9 bucks!

Yes, but does it have an alarm...

[Ironsave]

Oh well... To each his own....

+1!!!!

If I can afford $12,000 for P37s, I can probably save my pennies for 3-6 months and get P39s.

Sorry dude; your complaint is falling on deaf ears.......

As mentioned; that speaker (P39) is for the "money is no object" audiophile.

There are those who say a set of Jubilees are as good or even better, and I believe a set can be had for thousands less than the P37s.

But the elegant styling and incredible performance is attractive on the P39s, just as a Jube is attractive in a completely different way.

Compared to other manufacturers, P39s are relatively inexpensive "flagship" speakers.......

[Boxx]

Oh well... To each his own....

But the elegant styling and incredible performance is attractive on the P39s, just as a Jube is attractive in a completely different way.

Compared to other manufacturers, P39s are relatively inexpensive "flagship" speakers.......

Very well said.... and you are so very right...

[CiscoKid123]

[cornfedksboy]

1) The RF-7 II does have better components and a real wood veneer vs. vinyl. Also it is made in the USA. That is why it costs 3 times more than the RF-82 II.

2) You've totally missed the point...For those of us in the real world, we wouldn't spend $20000.00 on speakers, espescially when there are speakers that are pretty darn close to them for $12000.00 less. However, there are some that feel that the "better sound" and better aesthetics would warant such an expense. It is not a proportional cost inflation based on materials/labor, but it might be proportional based on added R&D and lower sales figures. I don't know.

3) You don't listen to speakers at a distance of 1 meter (where the 126 db was measured from), and in fact, if you are going to drop $20000.00, you might want these speakers to fill your 5000 cubic foot room with sound.

4) Yes, fanboy does apply here. You posted on a Klipsch forum sponsored by the company...did you think we would all be out here in protest? You will probably find more like-minded folks on more general audio forums.

5) There is acutally an intermediate step between the P-37F and P-39F. It's the P-38F and it costs $12000.00 a pair.

6) Would you feel better if Klipsch was charging 12K for 37 and 15K for the 38, but kept the 39 at 20K? Would those business practices be more in-line with your ethics?

[RRFL]

Am I

mistaking something or is Klipsch playing a practical joke by charging

2.5 times the price of the P-37F for the P-39F in order to get 3-9"

woofers instead of 3-7" woofers and some extra MDF.

$12,000?

What? Changing your frequency response from 43Hz-24kHz +/-3dB to

39Hz-24kHz +/-3dB and changing

maximum output from 120dB to 126dB changes the cost 250%? 120dB is where

hearing damage occurs and a loud rock concert plays at 115dB, so who

cares about the output?

This is ridiculous.

If we look at only 1 aspect of the difference between the 37F vs 39F and

that is the maximum output of 120dB to 126dB, then, we must consider

that, it is necessary to double the number of speakers to increase sound

pressure by 3db so 1 speaker producing 120dB must double to 2 speakers

to achieve 123dB and then double that to 4 speakers to get the next 3dB

to achieve 126dB, etc, etc, etc. It's 1,2 4,8,16,32,64 and so on. So

that makes it necessary to spend 4 times $8,000 = $32,000 to get 4 sets

of 37F's to match the sound pressure of 1 set of 39F. So therefore, 1

set of 39F is a saving of $12,000 over the 4 sets of 37F.

Are you kidding? Do you know how loud 120dB is? No one listens to music that loud or else you'd be deaf after a few days. 126dB is like hearing a jet engine at a close distance. 85 dB is loud and prolonged exposure causes hearing damage. It's like saying "yea, but these go to eleven".

The fact is, the 39F and 37F are using the exact same tweeter, midrange and woofer. While I haven't heard it, anyone who says they sound different except for some extension is going to also probably say that their Oracle MIT speaker wire drops bombs on Belden. Placebo is so huge in audio that it's mind boggling. Also, the P-39fs have a 3dB higher sensitivity so if you're running 100 watts in to each speaker one will "sound better" because it's louder. If you have an SPL meter handy it will sound roughly the exact same.

If I had a choice between a pair of P-39Fs and a pair of P-37Fs paired with dual active crossovers and dual SVS PB13-Ultras covering 100hz and down for an extra $4,000, I'd take the 37Fs anyday of the week without even hearing these speakers.

Think about it rationally. If the tweeters are the exact same with the same crossovers that means the highs sound exactly the same, if the midrange is exactly the same with the same crossoves then the midrange is exactly the same, if the woofers are roughly exactly the same except for extension then they sound the same.

Maybe I'll audition these speakers if I have a chance. I'm in a bad mood lately maybe that's why I'm ranting.

No offense, but I think the term fanboy is best used here to describe a biased opinion regardless of logic. Even if it is a "better" speaker, $12,000 is preposterous you can't just have a base speaker of the same series costing $8,000 then the a step up version that is roughly the exact same (be unbiased here) costing $20,000 even if it is their "flagship".

Should I open a burger joint with 2 burgers with one being better beef while costing a $1 more a pound and have the cheaper one cost $3 a burger then the "flagship" cost $10 because it tastes better? It's called business ethics and Klipsch clearly has none.

Many designers will use the same drive components in a variety of encolsures mixed and matched with other components.

They are adjusted so maximise the performance match of other components in that particular enclosure.

For many years the Heritage range of speakers all share many driver and horns.

The Khorns and LaScala had identical components and only the cabinets were different. The quote performance did not look that much different on paper however when you compared the difference was remarkable.

The sound pressure is measured at 1 meter on axis so you can compare with a consistent standard. As you move further away this reduces significantly.

Last year I listened to a JBL home theatre system that cost (AU) $250,000.00. It was nice but I still prefer my (1976) LaScala. Lucky I did not buy the JBL without listening to them.

When you choose a system consider that when it's running flat chat it won't sound as good as a half power. The extra capacity provides greater accuracy in reproduction.

Everyone has individual hearing and what each person wants is often different. A friend of my cannot tell the difference between inexpensive speakers and very expensive speakers and has never been interested in quality audio. He always goes for the best video side of things.

The choice of how much you spend is for you to make from what is available in the market place according to your personal likes and dislikes. Each person will have a story on why they selected one item over another.

Yes I do know who loud 120dB is http://forums.klipsch.com/forums/t/119811.aspx?PageIndex=8

If you look below the front of the stage you will see the system woofers each of these KPT-684 cabinets contain 2 18' woofer and produce a max of 132dB. There are 4 cabinets cemented in end to end and that gives us a maximum of 138dB. We don't actually drive them flat out so we can maximise accuracy of reproduction. Each cabinet has a pair of 400watt drivers, 800watt per cabinet 3,200watt in total and the 4 amps driving the 4 cabinets are rated at 3,200watt each 12,800watt in total. It is really good:). When I'm adjusting the system for full power I only turn on one quarter of the system if I'm not wearing ear plugs. I am also a classical pianist and play a variety of orchestral instruments.

I still prefer the sound of my (1976) LaScala even after creating this very powerful system.

I had a pair of the Baa Baa Burgers $12.00 each and I also like the Moroccan Lamb burgers $12.00 each, so difficult to choose, I'm walking past there on my way to sound mix a live band tonight emmm tos a coin maybe.

[RRFL]

1) The RF-7 II does have better components and a real wood veneer vs. vinyl. Also it is made in the USA. That is why it costs 3 times more than the RF-82 II.

2) You've totally missed the point...For those of us in the real world, we wouldn't spend $20000.00 on speakers, espescially when there are speakers that are pretty darn close to them for $12000.00 less. However, there are some that feel that the "better sound" and better aesthetics would warant such an expense. It is not a proportional cost inflation based on materials/labor, but it might be proportional based on added R&D and lower sales figures. I don't know.

3) You don't listen to speakers at a distance of 1 meter (where the 126 db was measured from), and in fact, if you are going to drop $20000.00, you might want these speakers to fill your 5000 cubic foot room with sound.

4) Yes, fanboy does apply here. You posted on a Klipsch forum sponsored by the company...did you think we would all be out here in protest? You will probably find more like-minded folks on more general audio forums.

5) There is acutally an intermediate step between the P-37F and P-39F. It's the P-38F and it costs $12000.00 a pair.

6) Would you feel better if Klipsch was charging 12K for 37 and 15K for the 38, but kept the 39 at 20K? Would those business practices be more in-line with your ethics?

I have actually set up my LaScala in a nice cosy toe in where we were only about 1 meter away on a soft sheepskin covered waterbed mattress on the floor, but we won't go into how to impress the girls right now will we.

[tragusa3]

I'm with the OP here. Sure, the pricing structure makes sense for certain people (noone I've ever known, but....). The reason our whole economy is in the tank though is that everyone thinks they're those people.

I'm a project manager, and often find myself lobbying for a particular contractor because they make a job painless and do it right. These contractors, to me, are worth the 20% premium over the rest of the market. However, I've had a few that I've watched try to get their margin up much higher than that. Greed. So, I quit using them. The value was no longer there.

Regarding the above comparison of Klipsch and LaScala. I've got LaScala and a close buddy has Khorns. So I listen to both on a regular basis. We both cross them over to subs. I think a comparison supports the OP's point. I prefer the LaScala.

[Ironsave]

I'm with the OP here. Sure, the pricing structure makes sense for certain people (noone I've ever known, but....). The reason our whole economy is in the tank though is that everyone thinks they're those people.

I'm a project manager, and often find myself lobbying for a particular contractor because they make a job painless and do it right. These contractors, to me, are worth the 20% premium over the rest of the market. However, I've had a few that I've watched try to get their margin up much higher than that. Greed. So, I quit using them. The value was no longer there.

Regarding the above comparison of Klipsch and LaScala. I've got LaScala and a close buddy has Khorns. So I listen to both on a regular basis. We both cross them over to subs. I think a comparison supports the OP's point. I prefer the LaScala.

Do you guys realize this is the cost of diminishing returns?

Klipsch could easily price these for $24,000 and $40,000 respectively.

(This would be more in line with their competitor's rates).

If you can't justify $20,000 for speakers; DO NOT BUY THEM! Buy the P37s!

HK charged ~$2500 for an AVR 7300 back in '05-'06. The next step down was ~$1500. For only 20 wpc difference and a few surround modes?

How is that unfair? I would never pay $1500, less $2500; but I waited and got my AVR 7300 used for $225.

This thread needs to be shot and put to rest........