What is a better value speaker -- Kharma 3.2FE at

To me,"house sound"is actually the sound of YOUR amp/speaker/room interface.All speakers mentioned are obviously fine choices.

Surprisingly I have to give Jtinn credit,as he really seems to be fairly open,and honest in his assessments,even though he is a dealer(nothing wrong with that,btw,and I'd have no problem dealing with him).Yet there IS an agenda!

My take on speaker/amp/room interface(that'e the ONLY way to assess this)is sort of like the following-------
When you are invited to a catered affair(hopefully good food),and you and your significant other are picking up the place cards,to see where you will be seated,are you happy to be seated on top of the band?Or at a reasonable distance?
This really correlates to the type of Amp/speaker/room interface we wind up with,if we can have our druthers(hope I spelled that right)!

I have a fairly complex, reasonably large and dynamic set-up,that I've spent years refining.I truly love it!!I have,also,heard just about everything,and I think my tastes are(need)changing.This is really,only,because I have #1-gotten to middle age,and have sewn my "audio oats",and #2-I have heard enough really good stuff to decide how I want to listen,to my music collection,in the future.NOT how I'm told I should listen,or what some other "reviewer dude" likes.
I no longer care about "bringing down the house",and have come to appreciate a simple set-up,like the Kharma 3.2 driven with the simply incredible Lamm 18 watt mono blocks(I don't own either of these gems,btw,and am only a hobbyist).WITHOUT the sub!!!Darn good dynamics in a little two way.And they are still overpriced at 21 grand.I'll bet they kept that price because they felt that was what the market would bare,what with all the good press.I'll also bet they outsell all the other models,in the Kharma line combined!!That seems to be why the price has remained stable.They want to sell them,and won't risk another price increase.Just my opinion,btw!!Yet they are still great.

Recently I was lucky enough to hear the Nola Exotica Grand,driven by the ASR EMMITER.All Nordost cabling with S.O.T.A.digital(big bucks) front end componentry.In a superb room(important,as you know already).Truthfully,though the sound was everything I felt the press described them to be,I got tired of them in a half hour.BIG BOLD DYNAMICS!Very seamless(except the very low bass,which has always been the achilles in this speaker).Open,extended,detail to spare,believeable!Excellent tone color!Yet I could not really enjoy them for a long session!Sorry!

Sounds like I must be nuts,but my listening preferences have been altered,due to my own experiences in the hobby.Ten years ago I would have cut off my right arm for this sound.Yet now that I've basically heard it all,I want a more personal,intimate and flowing organic connection.Yeah,the "Von big boys" are superb(even with all those drivers),but this is all only my opinion.Nothing more!

Personally,I'm tired of being seated near the band!!

I owned WP6s for a couple of years and switched to the Kharma 3.2s. I still have the Kharmas and I am happy with them. I had the Wilsons (with a Pass X350 amp and ML No. 32 preamp) and could never get the midrange & highs to sound right (they were too etched and tizzy). Maybe the WP7s are smoother up top, but I can't say. The scratchy highs did not appear on some recordings, making me think the Wilsons were just too ruthlessly revealing. Maybe different upstream equipment would have helped.

The bass of the WP6s was just about perfect: resolute and "just there," never calling attention to itself. The Kharma bass is actually more prominent, and almost as deep, and I would describe it as a very fast, warm-and-friendly bass, far superior than my old Aerial 10t bass, which was kind of one-note and pumped-up.

The Kharma bass, I think, comes from the rear port, which kind of serves as a phantom woofer, so the 3.2 acts more like a true 3-way speaker.

The Kharmas are great on all classical music, really making instruments come alive but still sounding natural.
Piano is rich and fast with just the right amount of "clang" with perfect decay but no weird overhang. Most popular music is fine too, but the Kharmas also tend to be revealing and can be a little etched on heavily equalized rock or close-miked vocals. (But this problem is nowhere near as severe as with the Wilsons, which sounded this way on almost every popular CD.)

On the other hand, the Kharmas make older music (50s or 60s rock and pop) sound gloriously real, like you've entered the time tunnel, and you're in the studio with Grace Slick or Janis Joplin a few feet away, ambience included. It's a real trip. I think some of the modern stuff (post 80's) is recorded pretty horribly, with a pumped up midrange and a harsh sound that is meant to sound good in a car or on an Ipod. (If your still reading this, thanks for reading my rant...)

So I would go with the Kharmas, unless you want to wait for Dave Wilson maybe to put a nice ribbon or Revelator tweeter on a WP8 in the future, and maybe take a hint from Albert Von Schweikert on getting the highs right like he has in the VR9SEs, but that's another story...

You just have to be crazy comparing the VR4jr to the Kharma. There is no comparison. While the VR4jr is a terrific speaker for the money it just doesn't have the musicality, clarity, dimensionality, and the purity of the Kharma. It's like comparing a Mazda RX-7 to a Ferrari. The Mazda may be fun to drive, but once you go to the Ferrari its hard to go back.

RGS92, well said. Thanks. I agree that the WP6s had a somewhat "hot" tweeter but was able to tame that down to a tolerable level with the addition of a good tubed preamp (I used to go direct from CD to amp). The WP7s seem to have a bit smoother top end than the WP6s. Glad you're happy with the 3.2s. Are you still driving them with the Pass 350?

Audioaril: Not crazy at all. You should do it as well. You would be surprised.