These sit in different price classes - Perlisten A3t costs roughly 3.3x what KLH Kendall does. Expect it to lead on paper; the question is whether the gap is audible enough in your room to be worth it.
| Area | Better | Why |
|---|
| Bass |
B |
KLH Kendall digs deeper - 25Hz against 31Hz. A subwoofer would even that out. |
| Amplifier needs |
B |
KLH Kendall is more sensitive (96dB vs 88dB), so it goes louder on the same amplifier. |
| Amplifier match |
B |
KLH Kendall is the easier load at 8 ohms; the other is 4 ohms and wants an amplifier rated for it. |
| Size |
depends |
KLH Kendall is easier to place; Perlisten A3t is bigger, which usually goes with fuller bass. Your room decides. |
| Expandability |
B |
KLH Kendall: bi-amping. |
| Price |
B |
KLH Kendall is cheaper - $1,500 against $4,990, about 70% less; arguably a different class. |
A Perlisten A3t
B KLH Kendall
depends neither is better in the abstract - it turns on your room, placement or how you will use them.
Only specs published for both speakers are judged; anything missing on either side is left out rather than guessed.
Which should you choose?
KLH Kendall is the easier recommendation: it leads on most of the measured areas and costs less. Take Perlisten A3t if its size, looks or fit in your room suit you better. If a subwoofer is in your plans, the bass gap largely stops mattering - you would be crossing over above 31Hz anyway, so judge these on the other rows instead. In a large or open-plan room, Perlisten A3t has the cabinet volume to fill it more easily; in a small room, near a wall or at desk distance, KLH Kendall is the easier speaker to get right.
And remember what a spec sheet cannot show: how each looks in your room and whether the finish suits it, what dealer support and warranty are like where you live, and how they actually sound to you. If you can hear them first - ideally with your own music - that will tell you more than any number above.