ebay heads-up, KLH FOUR's

[dynaco_dan]

There is a pair of KLH Four's on ebay #9743438932 for about 5 more days.

[Andy]

The Model Four is a sleeper in the KLH line up.....it was their first full range loudspeeker and it's an exellent speaker. CBS adopted it as their monitor speaker. The tweeter was made by GE. They sold for over $200 back in 1959-60 and was a direct competitor with the AR-3.

This pair being offered on ebay might be a good buy, $50. for shipping is fair for this hefty set. It's also a pretty scarce speaker......they should go for about $75. ? -it's a great speaker for that money!

[tysontom]

>The Model Four is a sleeper in the KLH line up.....it was

>their first full range loudspeeker and it's an exellent

>speaker. CBS adopted it as their monitor speaker. The tweeter

>was made by GE. They sold for over $200 back in 1959-60 and

>was a direct competitor with the AR-3.

>This pair being offered on ebay might be a good buy, $50. for

>shipping is fair for this hefty set. It's also a pretty scarce

>speaker......they should go for about $75. ? -it's a great

>speaker for that money!

Good report by Andy.

A couple of additional observations: the KLH Model Four (which used the Model Three's woofer system, more or less) was a full-range $231 (in Oiled-Walnut) speaker that was specifically intended to compete with the $225 AR-3, and was designed with almost the same low resonance as the AR-3 to approximate the latter's legendary bass response. *Consumer Reports* found that it did not quite match the AR-3, but was nevertheless a speaker with excellent overall response. It was a top-tier speaker (the AR-3, AR-2 and KLH Six being the others) in *CU's* test reports. The KLH Four never quite met with the same success as the AR-3 -- and did not have the favorable reviews and critical acclaim as the AR-3 -- but it was nevertheless among the finest loudspeakers available at any cost during the 1957 (its Press introduction) period through the mid-1960s. The Four was more "forward-sounding" than the equivalent AR speakers. Also in contrast to the AR-3, the same-sized KLH Four was about fifteen to twenty pounds lighter! Shipping weight of a Four was 42 lbs compared to 63 lbs for an AR-3.

The Four did originally use a single GE tweeter, but later it morphed into the same KLH-made tweeter as the Six. Somewhat later KLH added a second tweeter to the Model Four, and the LC crossover (more elaborate than the Model Six) had adjustment "slopes" for 1500 Hz and 6000 Hz (it was still a two-way speaker, however).

http://www.classicspeakerpages.net/dc/user_files/1360.jpg

Fig. 1 KLH Model Four Epoxied-in Tweeters

http://www.classicspeakerpages.net/dc/user_files/1361.jpg

Fig. 2 KLH Model Four Epoxied-in Woofer

http://www.classicspeakerpages.net/dc/user_files/1362.jpg

Fig. 3 KLH Model Six Epoxied-in Tweeter

The 16-ohm speaker was the first to use the epoxied-in 12-inch woofer with a cone made from the same pulp material KLH used on their later speakers. I believe that the Model One, Two and Three used bolt-in woofers.

The KLH Fours are fairly rare, but quite a few were manufactured. They were frequently sold at exclusive hi-fi shops with high-end electronics (such as McIntosh and Marantz), and the 16-ohm impedance worked well with high-powered tube electronics. The biggest problem with the Model Fours: crossover capacitors! I've owned three pairs throughout the years, and in every instance there was a problem with the output of the tweeters. And like the Model Six, the speaker has to be cut open to repair the crossover (unless one choses to rip out the cone and attach a new one the way KLH used to do). The grill cloth and black linen beneath were glued and pressed into the side slots, and cannot be removed without damage, so unless one has replacement grill material, repair is very difficult.

--Tom Tyson

[dynaco_dan]

Thank you Andy and Tom for your great added input into the history of this fine classic speaker.

I only inserted the heads-up for those who may find these of interest.

With this added historical write-up, there may be more member interest in bidding now.

I am happy to have done this now, I was totaly unaware of that model and it's significance in the classic KLH family.

Classic KLH was not a well represented, actually an almost invisible brand, here in Vancouver, in my experience.

Good luck to any member who may now be interested in obtaining this classic speaker, also, I am not bidding.

[dynaco_dan]

Hi there;

Just to bring this to your attention again.

With just 32 hours left in this auction they are at $2.75 at

02:30 PDT Friday morning.

[Andy]

Tom....thanks for the Great information and photos, I didn't know that the Model Four cost more then the AR-3. I also didn't kow that the Model One had bolt-in drivers, not epoxy sealed. Both Kloss and Villchur were at the apex of their creative genious period, putting 1000% into their loudspeaker products. When AUDIO MAGAZINE toured the KLH factory in 1958, they were impressed with every aspect of the operation noting "We have seen much evidence of experimentation with the (junk box) having hunderds of discarded woofers and tweeters". I wonder in if the two men corrosponded with each other in the 1958-60 time period, or were they competitors who kept clear of the other. AR seemed to take the high road as far as advertising with their 1960's ad's being among the best I've ever seen....very sophisticated. Looks like KLH took the high quality, yet subdued marketing path, very few ads in High Fidelity Magazine, etc.

[tysontom]

>Tom....thanks for the Great information and photos, I didn't

>know that the Model Four cost more then the AR-3. I also

>didn't kow that the Model One had bolt-in drivers, not epoxy

>sealed. Both Kloss and Villchur were at the apex of their

>creative genious period, putting 1000% into their loudspeaker

>products. When AUDIO MAGAZINE toured the KLH factory in 1958,

>they were impressed with every aspect of the operation noting

>"We have seen much evidence of experimentation with the

>(junk box) having hunderds of discarded woofers and

>tweeters". I wonder in if the two men corrosponded with

>each other in the 1958-60 time period, or were they

>competitors who kept clear of the other. AR seemed to take the

>high road as far as advertising with their 1960's ad's being

>among the best I've ever seen....very sophisticated. Looks

>like KLH took the high quality, yet subdued marketing path,

>very few ads in High Fidelity Magazine, etc.

I also didn't initially realize that the first KLH speakers used bolt-in woofers until I saw a pair of Model Threes on eBay last year (see image) in the old utility-black finish. I should have bid on them, but didn't realize until after the fact exactly what was going on). Also, the patent for the jig for the epoxy versions didn't come until quite a bit later, not that Kloss might have used the epoxy in the earliest stages with or without the patent. The Model Threes also used a flat-side woofer frame much like the AR-1/AR-3 and so forth.

http://www.classicspeakerpages.net/dc/user_files/1375.jpg

Fig 1. KLH Model Three Woofer-Only System

I believe that Kloss and Villchur parted ways in 1957 in an amicable fashion; but they were competitors, not friends, after Kloss left. It was only in the late 1990s that they were together again in an AES meeting in Boston. It was during a talk that Villchur was giving at that meeting that Kloss stood up and said that seeing the acoustic-suspension system for the first time at Villchur's house back in 1954 was one of the highlights of his life, or something to that effect.

--Tom Tyson

[dynaco_dan]

>Tom....thanks for the Great information and photos, I didn't

>know that the Model Four cost more then the AR-3. I also

>didn't kow that the Model One had bolt-in drivers, not epoxy

>sealed. Both Kloss and Villchur were at the apex of their

>creative genious period, putting 1000% into their loudspeaker

>products. When AUDIO MAGAZINE toured the KLH factory in 1958,

>they were impressed with every aspect of the operation noting

>"We have seen much evidence of experimentation with the

>(junk box) having hunderds of discarded woofers and

>tweeters". I wonder in if the two men corrosponded with

>each other in the 1958-60 time period, or were they

>competitors who kept clear of the other. AR seemed to take the

>high road as far as advertising with their 1960's ad's being

>among the best I've ever seen....very sophisticated.

Looks

>like KLH took the high quality, yet subdued marketing path,

>very few ads in High Fidelity Magazine, etc.

Unfortunately Andy, KLH was maybe subdued, but here in Vancouver, I only ever saw one KLH dealer, and I don't know that it was an authorized or pirate dealer.

Vancouver is a large city and to not see KLH here, would quite likely be the only retail outlet in British Columbia.

Business wise, you can't take that to the bank.

AR had a real struggle here also, with all the switching with loudness controls, bass boost, wiring them out of phase, dead tweeters and turning down the pots.

Demonstating a pair of trade-in AR-3A's with no tweeter, but they still kicked butt, and this was at our highest highend hifi store.

Consumer Reports quite likely did more for AR and KLH than anything else, other than word of mouth and test reviews.

Allison, AR, KLH, EPI, Cizek (sadly I never heard of this brand until coming to this site a few years ago) and other brands had a real uphill battle for store exposure with other prettier and more profitable brands.

In my prime I knew where to buy AR and we could get a discount making it more affordable.

I was like a Ralph Nader here.

I will guess that if 100 buyers had walked into our highend store just for AR speakers, 90 - 95% would walk out with another brand.

Sales pressure was very strong towards getting a better commission.

I don't think the shabby treatment I saw and received, was unique to AR, Vancouver or Canada.

I do also believe that there were some honest and considerate dealers and salespersons, but, they went broke long ago.

Consumer's Guide used to recommend for the ultimate speaker either AR-3A's or KHL Twelves, depending on your choice.

I never even saw a picture of the Twelves, until I came across a pair about 10 years ago.

[JKent]

>Hi there;

>

>Just to bring this to your attention again.

>

>With just 32 hours left in this auction they are at $2.75 at

>02:30 PDT Friday morning.

I was watching these Vern, but with 4 hrs left they've jumped to $27 and I'm sure they'll go higher!

[Andy]

Yikes ! Maybe the days of low priced KLH are over....$477.

[dynaco_dan]

Well at least they didn't go for the $2.50, that would have been real sad.

Pretty hefty bidding.

I sure hope they go to a good home.

Thank you for the update.

[JKent]

>Yikes ! Maybe the days of low priced KLH are over....$477.

HOLY COW!! what was your original prediction? $75? Yikes is right!

[tysontom]

The KLH Model Four certainly has a collectible status, but the reason the price shot up so high on this bidding was most likely due to this very forum: a whole topic was dedicated to the speaker "ebay heads-up, KLH FOUR's." I seriously doubt that the winner of the bid actually knew the real value, but he might have seen all the excitement building here, as though this were some sort of valuable, original art piece. The value of any vintage speaker is largely determined by what people perceive the value to be and are willing to pay, not by any appraisal value or other quantitative means. Fours in the past have not brought that much money, mainly because few -- if any -- function completely correctly. As Andy said, "they should go for about $75." I would have said $150, but you can never judge prices on eBay.

Most, if not nearly all, KLH Fours have capacitor problems; and as we all know, this requires cutting a hole in the back of the cabinet or ripping out the woofer cone to repair the crossover. The speaker might be pretty to look at, but the sound is missing. Therefore, many of these early KLH Fours (and some early Sixes) are sold on eBay with a faint description by the seller that the speaker "sounds great, but I'm no expert," or has a "warm, mellow tone," which, loosely translated, means that the output from the tweeter(s) is heavily muted -- or missing altogether -- due to the crossover. Many Fours and Sixes with epoxied-in drivers *also* have leaky cloth surrounds, and this also requires a fix in order for the speakers to sound exactly as they did when new. Harmonic distortion rises exponentially when the surrounds leak badly.

So, whether or not this particular pair was worth the price may be highly questionable, but the buyer was convinced it was. Whether the pair works properly is the question, and that will have to be decided by the new owner.

--Tom Tyson

[dynaco_dan]

Thank you, Tom, an excellent commentary as usual, Tom.

A little more insight into a rare classic speaker.

Also into the ebay sales techniques.

Perhaps this is how a pair of Dynaco A-25's went for over $400.00 a few months ago.

I might post a heads-up for, nipple tweeter's, next. lol

Sorry if I ruined a members opportunity to buy them cheap.

I only wanted to make sure that every member had an opportunity to see them at least.

[Horswispr]

I remember that $480 pair of Dynacos. They had original boxes with them, but other than that were no different from the two best pair I have in my possession. I actually wrote the winner (can't remember what I asked) but never heard from him. I found myself wondering...

[Guest russwollman]

OMG, today's values...absolutely nutty.

But hey, that's materialism, in the extreme-capitalist style.