Zu Essence vs B&W

If you are used to Klipsch speakers, the Zu Essence will be right up your alley. The Zu will give you the same dynamics, better midrange clarity, more detail and tighter bass. The Essence is a great bargain.
You don't need as much horsepower for amplification as the B&Ws can be a more difficult load to drive.
The Magnepan 1.6s are tough to beat at their price point X 5 but need lots of power. Class D amps like Wyred would do the trick and keep you on budget.
Another sleeper is the Gershman Sonogram at $3500. With the exchange rate so bad, the American(N) speakers will definitely be a better value.

Well for what it is worth I listened to Metallica's Black album (among other rock) on both the 802D/803D and Spire. The spire had lots of bass and energy to well... Rock. They seemed to play what was there no more no less. While the B&W can "rock" too but they need to be played LOUD to come alive.

Logans can be pretty hard to place right. I find the bass integration changes with distance and integrate best at about 10 feet. If you sit to close there is too much bass and they can sound thin if you are too far back. They also need to be off the rear wall a good bit (most speakers should be anyway).

But really use your own ears and pick the one you like best. I would go listen to all of these speakers again and if you go with Zu have a money back guarantee. I believe any of these speakers will be a good up grade from Klipsch RF-7s

Thanks, the Spire and the Zu actually look like the best options at this point. Any thoughts on the Spire vs the original Summit?

I have never heard the Summit but the word over at the Martin Logan forums is that the bass integrates much better on the spire.

Anyone familiar with the RF-7 and the Essence?