@inna wrote: "I don't like in your face sound of horns but I understand that's not the case."
There are a LOT of things I don't like about many horns! In-your-face sound, tiny sweet spot, cupped-hands, and being the obvious source of the sounds you're hearing. Ime those problems arise from horn geometries optimized for things other than home hifi.
The geometries I use are benign as far as internal reflections go, which prevents cupped-hands effect and helps the horn to "disappear" as the sound source. Imaging is also improved... one time at an audio show a man who had been an employee of a horn loudspeaker company remarked, "Wow, I didn't know horns could image!" They can as long as their geometries don't work against that. They can also have an unusually wide sweet spot, and again it's the specifics of the horn geometry (and speaker set-up) that make it possible.
But the relative lack of reverberant energy (due to their narrow radiation patterns) does, as you noted, make horns tend to have a more "in your face" presentation. Personally I really like the feeling of being enveloped in the acoustic space of the recording, which is just the opposite kind of presentation. So on my more expensive systems I use additional drivers to add a bit of beneficial late-onset reverberant energy, which imo does a good job of conveying that feeling of envelopment.
So I am very picky about which horns I use. And even then if the budget allows, I put a fair amount of effort into minimizing and/or working around the things they don't naturally do well.
There are a lot of intensely passionate designers out there doing their best to deliver the things they think matter the most. It's not the road to riches for most of us, but it sure is fun.
Duke