Some people are going to slam the WP7s, I'll bet. Just let me put in my two cents ahead of them: they are NOT like the 5.2s, which I had, and from what I understand, better than the 6s. That said, room setup is critical and so is what you feed them with - so I am certain some have heard them in less than optimum situations. Bob Wood http://www.GreatHomeTheater.com |
Heard both speakers very often: WP 7: Fast, dynamic and focus presentation, music presented in a very precised, controlled and detail manner. Unforgiving and transparant to the source and room accoustics. Kharma. 3.2FE: Smooth and coherence musical pleasure combine with tonal purity, excellent image palpability and soundstage. Choose your poison carefully because both use focal titanium tweeters: but the treble sounds very different between Wilson and Kharma! Trust your own ear. Good luck. |
Extemely different speakers. Maybe even opposite ends of the spectrum. Here goes: Wilson WP 7: Very dynamic, detailed and good depth in bass. With proper setup and amplification, good imaging, soundstaging and sense of space. Can sound mechanical, bloated and slightly etched. Musicality is something you have to really work for. Kharma 3.2 FE: Excellent coherence, inner detail, imaging and soundstaging. You should expect as much from a two way speaker. Good musicality although sometime a bit dry and lean. Depth of bass and dynamism is definitely it's weakness. Adding a subwoofer hurts coherence and does not add dynamism, only adds to depth. I would say that depending on room size, musical tastes and accompanied equipment would make a suggestion on my part easier. |
