Official August 9th Palladium Listening Party Thread!

[damonrpayne]

Looks like it was an awesome time.. I would be curious what "DocWho" thought of the room, and measurements as well?

From a bigger than life HT experience, I wish I had that (22- 25 feet width?) distance you seem to have, Damon.

I personally loved the Palladiums at Ovation better than at Klipsch in Indy myself, too.

Are you getting the whole HT Palladium setup with surrounds and a sub too?

Roger

1. DrWho thought the room was a little on the dead side, but there are surprisingly few acoustic issues. I have a 6-month plan for room treatments
2. Some day I'd like the surrounds, bookshelves for rear surrounds, some bryston monoblocks, etc. Not this year.

[boomac]

Suffice to say I had a great time at Damon’s and I was very impressed with the P-39Fs. Hopefully I’ll be able to provide more on the visit by sometime this evening.

[DrWho]

work is killer - I'll have a nice long review after I've crashed for a bit.

[DrWho]

Well how about this....

The Pals sound nice. [8-|]

[Arky]

work is killer

The real world.[:|]

[SET12]

Was hoping for a bit more of a review from the attendees but I expect most folks are probably not in that mode yet. Damon it was cool of you to host this to give folks an opportunity they'll likely not get otherwise, at least for some time. I would genuinely love to hear these. So guys when you get the time give us a good written interpretation this was a rare oportunity.

If you have some specfic area that you'd like to know more about
I'd try and give you an answer as to my thoughts! Never the less its a
very interesting loudspeaker for sure!

SET12

[Mallette]

I hate to say it, but I am getting the impression these guys were distinctly underwhelmed...

Dave

[LarryC]

The P-37's at Indy were easy to under-appreciate! They were very accurate with ALL tone qualities, and had excellent, dramatic, loud-soft dynamics. They do need the sub IMO, on classical music anyway.

[SET12]

I hate to say it, but I am getting the impression these guys were distinctly underwhelmed...

Dave

Dave,

Not really!

Its hard to really put a finger on them and comment about this and that! with out having them in ones own environment and perhaps a variety of electronics.

But I do know enough to recognize a superior speaker when I hear it whether or not it may be using the electronics of my choice or the set up is up to par.

They truely do some amazing things!

I think the Heritage line can also!

Especially doing some of the things that I have done myself or as friends of mine have!

The Heritage line hasn't been around for 60 plus yrs for nothing!

While I wasn't over whelmed I was neither under whelmed.

SET12

[LarryC]

When I said they needed a sub, I meant the bass would have been more solid and had a more dramatic punch. That was apparent when I played one of my classical DVDs on the P-39 setup, which didn't have a sub, after having heard it several times on the P-37 w/sub the day before.

[Mallette]

>While I wasn't over whelmed I was neither under whelmed.

Anytime I hear a speaker that sounds as good as a K'horn, I am blown away. I am not hearing any sense of that here. Of course, maybe jaded Klipsch ears earing a new Klipsch product that is "just as good as" doesn't make for an adrenaline rush.

My original opinion of the Palladium was that it was Klipsch attempt at doing what the K'horn does by more "conventional" means and to produce a higher WAF and decorator appeal. Further, I felt the price suggested that to do so validated PWK's approach to building the best possible speaker at the lowest possible cost without taking size or form factor into account.

In reading the opinions so far, what I have gleaned is:

1. Tastes great

2. Less filling

and that PWK was right about most everything.

Not a dis at all...just seems that you gotta reinvent physics or go through a lot of expensive gyrations to match near perfection.

Dave

[Amy]

Don't worry, I've seen more than a few people blown away by these speakers within the past year!

Like all things that are of a personal taste, not everyone will agree. And this speaker was never intended to compete with any of our past products. Otherwise, we would have discontinued what they would have replaced. Instead they compliment each other. Everyone has a choice.

What we can agree on, I hope, is that we have put plenty of time, background knowledge, expertise, state of the art technology, and quality materials into this product, much as PWK did in the 40s and throughout his career. The accomplishment of the asthetics is no small feat either. It ain't easy curving large pieces of wood to perfection []

We are proud of our efforts, and we are honored that we have fans who will take the time and money to travel just to listen to our products, whether they are "blown away" or just "whelmed." It's a real testiment to the legacy of PWK.

So, as I continue to say, to each their own!

Thank you for opening your home to host a party so everyone has a chance to listen, Damon. You are a generous person.

[Mallette]

Well, maybe I didn't get it quite right. My faith in the Klipsch legacy and those who tend the flame says that the Palladiums are worth every penny of what they cost and that there is no other speaker on the market of that design and form factor at that price that sounds (or looks) any better.

My understanding of PWK was that sound was his only goal and that looks and form factor were not issues. I have little doubt that he would say that "Well, IF I were going to try to build a work of art that sounds great, that is the way I'd do it."

Dave

[ClaudeJ1]

>While I wasn't over whelmed I was neither under whelmed.

Anytime I hear a speaker that sounds as good as a K'horn, I am blown away. I am not hearing any sense of that here. Of course, maybe jaded Klipsch ears earing a new Klipsch product that is "just as good as" doesn't make for an adrenaline rush.

My original opinion of the Palladium was that it was Klipsch attempt at doing what the K'horn does by more "conventional" means and to produce a higher WAF and decorator appeal. Further, I felt the price suggested that to do so validated PWK's approach to building the best possible speaker at the lowest possible cost without taking size or form factor into account.

In reading the opinions so far, what I have gleaned is:

1. Tastes great

2. Less filling

and that PWK was right about most everything.

Not a dis at all...just seems that you gotta reinvent physics or go through a lot of expensive gyrations to match near perfection.

Dave

In Acoustic Principle, the Palladium is a Super-Refined Cornwall.

[damonrpayne]

This is the third time I've had people over to hear the P-39F. It seems like people are much more forthcoming with their praise in person. Since folks seem to be worried about some sort of "fallout" or that they're betraying the memory of PWK I won't mention anyone's feedback.

I have to admit, this is one of the many times in past years where the reaction of the Klipsch community has left me scratching my head in confusion.

[Mallette]

This is the third time I've had people over to hear the P-39F. It seems like people are much more forthcoming with their praise in person. Since folks seem to be worried about some sort of "fallout" or that they're betraying the memory of PWK I won't mention anyone's feedback.

I have to admit, this is one of the many times in past years where the reaction of the Klipsch community has left me scratching my head in confusion.

You make some sense there. I HOPE I made it clear that I believed the heirs of PWK would do nothing to betray his legacy and that, though I've not had the privilege to hear it, the Palladium would make him proud.

I was, perhaps a bit more boldly than others, mainly trying to pry some clear statements out of those who were there. I am also at a loss to explain why this generaly straight shooting and verbose gaggle of geeks seems suddenly speechless.

Dave

[damonrpayne]

Ok Mr Mallete, I'll just make some inflammatory statements then, and perhaps I can tease out some more meaty dialogue [6]

• I think the K-horn is not as good as the P-39F, and I'm talking about the 60th anniversery K-horn, which I think is quite a bit better than the "normal" Klipschhorn. The small changes made to the Khorn in the past 15 years add up to a more modern and better sounding product than someone's 20 year old Khorns with perhaps an upgraded crossover.
• I do not like the lisening rooms at Klipsch
• When I heard the Jub, it was in a mono setup in Hope and Roy had just gotten a passive crossover working, so with those caveats in mind I would certainly take the P-39F over the Jubs I've heard.
• I think people would argue that the Khorn is better than the P-39F and rationalize ANYTHING they could possibly think of to "prove" this. More than one person suggested to me that folks who are used to having the best would rather not have to run out and spend $20k in order to continue to have the best.
• I just framed my picture of PWK posing with the Jubilee. I was going to put it in my home theater but I thought it'd be a much better conversation starter in a more prominent section of my house. This said, I think the hero worship of PWK (a GREAT man, no doubt) goes a little too far sometimes.

SET12, who was a ton of fun to talk to when he came over, made a statement that's very much stuck in my head. He said that the audiophile hobby was really an "aging group". Think about why that might be, I've been mulling it over for a few days. Whether or not this has anything to do with why young people don't seem to be getting into audio, I've an observation I'd like to resurrect: some folks are simly luddites. The LP is better than the CD, Reel to Reel is better than LP. Tubes are better than solid state, which is better than digital. Film is better than megapixels. The K-horn has simply got to be better tha the P-39F because it came first. Any time a flaw is pointed out in something older, it is shrugged off as an excusable trade off that's necessary in order to get <<fill in the blank>>. Your tubes can't reproduce bass is answered with "bass isn't important"; your vinyl has noise is answered with "noise isn't important", Your speakers have serious measurable distortion is answerd with "that's part of the sound I go for", so on and so forth. All the engineers in their labs increasing power, or lowering distortion, or increasing sample rates, or reducing cabinet resonance, or matching runs of Left/Right drivers, or changing horn curves, or exploring exotic materials or inventing new topologies are wasting their time .

Does it disqualify me as an audiophile if I think engineers are probably making things better every few years? Am I deluded if I think I can hear the difference? Am I the only audiophile who'll admit that at age 31 I can't hear as good as I could at age 16?

On the Audioholics forum I shut down someone trying to invent reasons why the 802D vs. P-38F test done by Klipsch was not valid. I think some of the things said here (not in this thread per se) fall along the same lines.

Whew! I feel better getting that off my chest. Is there anyone I haven't offended?

[damonrpayne]

This is the third time I've had people over to hear the P-39F. It seems like people are much more forthcoming with their praise in person. Since folks seem to be worried about some sort of "fallout" or that they're betraying the memory of PWK I won't mention anyone's feedback.

I have to admit, this is one of the many times in past years where the reaction of the Klipsch community has left me scratching my head in confusion.

You make some sense there. I HOPE I made it clear that I believed the heirs of PWK would do nothing to betray his legacy and that, though I've not had the privilege to hear it, the Palladium would make him proud.

I was, perhaps a bit more boldly than others, mainly trying to pry some clear statements out of those who were there. I am also at a loss to explain why this generaly straight shooting and verbose gaggle of geeks seems suddenly speechless.

Dave

-Just to add to my previous remarks and comment more directly to what you said: Jim Hunter, who has heard them, and knew PWK for a lot of years did say Mr. Klipsch would be proud of them.

-I'm not the only person who's heard the P-39F in the same room with other various speakers to come out and declare they are worth the price premium. I'll leave it to these un named folks to step forward.

[Mallette]

Glad you got that off your chest...really. You needed that.

I plead guilty to being a old fart. However, while I love and cherish my LP's, it is because they are trully awesome. I have absolutely no doubt whatsoever that 24/88.2 and higher PCM and 1 bit, 2.8mhz digital are both equal and, when it comes to archival qualities, far superior to LP's.

I would say the K'horn is the most cost effective, accurate loudspeaker to date...but I am ready to hear better. And I KNOW there are more expensive speakers that are marginally to significantly better...but I can't afford them.

As to PWK, he deserves considerable homage and I've made him my paradigm for what reproduction should be...to the point I will not seriously question what his heirs and assigns do unless they discontinue heritage.

Then I am outta here...

Regards, and CHEERS!
Dave

[mikebse2a3]

Ok Mr Mallete, I'll just make some inflammatory statements then, and perhaps I can tease out some more meaty dialogue

I think the K-horn is not as good as the P-39F, and I'm talking about the 60th anniversery K-horn, which I think is quite a bit better than the "normal" Klipschhorn. The small changes made to the Khorn in the past 15 years add up to a more modern and better sounding product than someone's 20 year old Khorns with perhaps an upgraded crossover.
I do not like the lisening rooms at Klipsch
When I heard the Jub, it was in a mono setup in Hope and Roy had just gotten a passive crossover working, so with those caveats in mind I would certainly take the P-39F over the Jubs I've heard.
I think people would argue that the Khorn is better than the P-39F and rationalize ANYTHING they could possibly think of to "prove" this. More than one person suggested to me that folks who are used to having the best would rather not have to run out and spend $20k in order to continue to have the best.
I just framed my picture of PWK posing with the Jubilee. I was going to put it in my home theater but I thought it'd be a much better conversation starter in a more prominent section of my house. This said, I think the hero worship of PWK (a GREAT man, no doubt) goes a little too far sometimes.

-Just to add to my previous remarks and comment more directly to what you said: Jim Hunter, who has heard them, and knew PWK for a lot of years did say Mr. Klipsch would be proud of them.

-I'm not the only person who's heard the P-39F in the same room with other various speakers to come out and declare they are worth the price premium. I'll leave it to these un named folks to step forward.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

First Damon I would like to say I've not heard the Paladiums yet nor have you heard the Jubilee as we now use them so for me to compare the Jubs to Palladiums or for you to make a comparison of the Paladiums to the Jubs is really useless for anyone to understand how these systems sound.

I really hope this thread doesn't go like past Jub threads which would be a shame because I'm sure the Palladium has some very special qualities just as the Jubilee does and many Klipsch speakers exhibit in each model's unique ways.

One thing I hope you do understand is PWK lived his entire life advocating properly designed Horn Loaded Systems as what he felt to offer the best sound possible and thus he considered a fully horn loaded system again designed properly as the best. So people such as myself who also have come to that conclusion based on what I value as accurate/realistic sound still align myself with most of what it seems PWK thoughts were also. PWK wasn't perfect and even over time you will read in his writtings how he would disagree with himself as time and his knowledge advanced, so many of us still find ourselves favoring fully horn loaded systems (such as the KHorn and Jub) most likely as PWK would also and again is just a simple matter of what we value most in this less than perfect world. So describing some people as "luddites" simply because they find value in things different than you doesn't make them so and would use that word more carefully if I was you.

I copied two parts of the interview you were quoteing from to point out that yes PWK most likely would be very proud of the Palladium and also (just like many of us) very likely would still choose a different path to what we value in sound reproduction as many on this forum might do and also the part about the Room just can't be quoted enough because no one experiences a loudspeaker without the enviroment's influence good or bad and it must be taken into account at all times when we experience and express our opinions of loudspeakers especially.

People should experience for themselves and buy what makes them happy whether its Palladiums, Jubilee, KHorns ...etc.... and leave it at that IMHO!

Bottom Line, I hope you enjoy the speaker that has obviousely made you very happy as I do the Jub!

mike tn[]