• The move to the new server is done. There are some software and database maintenance updates in process. This has us passing the hat around to help out. We appreciate any donations. Seriously, even a dollar helps. The payment page may be found here - https://www.audiokarma.org/support.html

KLH model 12 somewhat rare and sound decent?

rpampt

rpampt

Analogeous Vinylitis
I have a shot at some KLH model 12's with the control boxes. How do these guys sound? I have a pair of Model 23's recapped which are not too bad, but seem a bit deficient in the highs. Also not extremely efficient. Also have some BA a150's.

How would the KLH model 12's sound compared to either of these or even to the JBL 4312's or L100's. I don't want to just move laterally. Are these also somewhat rare, as it seems I see the 6, 17, 23 etc pretty regularly. Any advice on these?
 
Register to hide this ad
If the 12s are the very large 60s system with the seperate tweeter section, I think you are probably going to feel its a lateral or downward move. That's based on your standard of reference, which are powerful and dynamic JBLs, not the ultimate in smoothness, but still fairly balanced with some oomph. The KLHs will probably be somewhat lifeless and bland in comparison, though you may get used to that sound and feel that in many ways its more accurate. I've never heard the KLHs (did see a used pair in a Tech HiFi in 1974 or so). They are a rather rare speaker since KLH, which typically sold speakers by the boatload (good and inexpensive, and well advertised) didn't make too many of them.
I think there is a rather lengthy thread on them here at Ak, but several years ago.
 
You should not be hesitating at all. The KLH 12 is one of the rarest KLH models, and is second only to the KLH 9 in quality. Run and get it.
 
If your JBL 4312s have a titanium tweeter my guess is you'll find the KLHs to be dull and muffled sounding. They probably look fantastic and are I am sure quite collectable.
 
Last edited:
KLH Twelve speaker system

Nat said:
If the 12s are the very large 60s system with the seperate tweeter section, I think you are probably going to feel its a lateral or downward move. That's based on your standard of reference, which are powerful and dynamic JBLs, not the ultimate in smoothness, but still fairly balanced with some oomph. The KLHs will probably be somewhat lifeless and bland in comparison, though you may get used to that sound and feel that in many ways its more accurate.
Click to expand...

This very well sums up what I experienced with my KLH Twelve speaker system. Lifeless and bland, for sure. I was extremely disappointed, especially since I'm a big fan of my KLH 6s, 17s, & 23s. My Twelves are now in storage in the basement.
 
nitrous said:
This very well sums up what I experienced with my KLH Twelve speaker system. Lifeless and bland, for sure. I was extremely disappointed, especially since I'm a big fan of my KLH 6s, 17s, & 23s. My Twelves are now in storage in the basement.
Click to expand...

Sounds like you didn't recap. =/
 
Collectability:

on this merit alone I'd snag 'em :yes: especially if the cabinets are in nice shape.

Performance:

I consider them a KLH 5 on steroids; with the larger box, low end extension will be a little better, and with a recap of the crossover they will lose alot of the 'muddy' highs. The midranges are some of the best fullrange drivers ever IMO. And yes . . . comparing them to a JBL studio monitor is kinda apples to oranges. The KLH tweets don't have the high frequency extension of those sweet JBL tweets, BUT try the 12's with vocals, jazz, classical, or live recorded acoustic music and you just might love them :thmbsp:

I don't think I'll ever sell mine . . . . now if I could just find a pair of 9's :scratch2:
 
markus said:
The KLH tweets don't have the high frequency extension of those sweet JBL tweets, BUT try the 12's with vocals, jazz, classical, or live recorded acoustic music and you just might love them :thmbsp:
Click to expand...

Most people don't realize that this is what the speakers were designed to play - not all the artificial (read: needs to be amplified in order to be heard) music that JBLs were designed to play. Put on some good jazz LPs and the 12's will serenade you wonderfully.
 
TMAD sorry dude but you are just wrong here, the acoustic suspension "east coast" sound is very inaccurate say compared to late 70s JBL studio monitors. My 4313bs for example are +- 3db 42 to 18,000 where as late 60s KLH if you are lucky are 35 to 15,000 with nothing above 15,000 and more like 8 db of variation across the frequncy spectrum making the JBLs more accurate to the original recording on all types of music.

Now this is not to diss KLH or Henry Kloss who I think did excellent groundbreaking work in bringing hi-fi to the masses, if you enjoy them for what they high quality speakers that look nice, that are smooth sounding, but rather lacking in dynamics and high frequency extension then you are gold and more power to you, but to claim that they somehow sound better on certain recordings than the more accurate JBL monitors is simply false though. I for one would rather hear what the people mixing say Brilliant Corners by Thelonious Monk actually heard in the studio as opposed to some rounded off inaccurate "east coast" version, YMMV of course. Ex "east coast" guy speaking BTW the Advents and ARs hit the road once I heard JBLs, Nelson Reed, DCM Timeframes, and Klipsch... They do make good restoration projects and look damn nice in a vintage system though.
 
Last edited:
barredowl said:
I for one would rather hear what the people mixing say Brilliant Corners by Thelonious Monk actually heard in the studio
Click to expand...

that would be nice :D what would they have used for monitors back then ? I have heard of the big AR LST's being used, and I'm sure there were Altec's and JBL's in use . . .
 
I was trying to thread the needle here -- later JBLs are much more balanced than earlier ones, and the 43xx models might well be much more accurate than the 12. I'm less convinced that the L 100 would be, but I wouldn't argue that it couldn't be.
But I don't think that comparing the +/- proves too much -- speakers aren't flat in rooms and two speakers with the same +/- spec may sound dramatically different if one has more or less random variations and the other has a distinct tilt up or down, or a big sag in the middle.
There is a dynamic lively quality to speakers like the JBLs that is missing in the usual acoustic suspension speaker, but whether than makes them more accurate seems still to be something of a matter of taste or perception.
 
I previously had the JBL's of a couple different varieties. I now have a pair of the KLH 23 and Boston Acoustic BA A150's. I was hoping to have more comparisons to them, I just threw the JBL's in to the question as an afterthought.

KLH 5's on steroids? That sounds promising, I haven't heard the 5's though, only the 23's.

I had the 4312's but they weren't my cup of tea.

I like the BA A150's out of this bunch, but if the 5's are similar to the 23's, but with a more powerful, fuller sound, it may be something worth trying out.
 
Eh, alright. No two people have the same set of ears. I guess the AR/KLH sound somehow just sounds more "authentic" to me somehow than the JBL/Klipsch sound.
 
Most KLH and AR's I've seen are older than the JBLs and Altecs I've seen.

So the caps have likely passed beyond the 30 year life expectancy on the former.

Maybe the reason so few of these get recaps is that the cabs are harder to get inside.

The worst I have in that vein is a set of KLH-7's. The unreproducible fabric grills are glued in, the drivers are mounted directly onto the fiberglass-blend front baffle, and the back is furniture glued/dovetailed with no access at all.

So opening them up means wrecking them unless you're prepared to completely restore them. Kudos to KLH fans who take on that level of project.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom