Klipsch Palladium P-39F?

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, I’m sure that my system is junk but I will just have to live with it.

Tigerwoodkhorns,
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 (-:
http://www.dtown.co.il/index.php?news=399

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).