I that you for your opinions. The store that had the Klipsch sounded very well. The salesman I talked to was a good friend I've have been dealing with him for a couple years so I kinda have a rapport with him. Before I sat down and did a comparsion with the Klipsch against the boston, he let me know that he was partial to the Boston. I brought a movie Episode I and some music Marvin Gaye(DTS CD) and Al Green(Dvd Audio). I listened to them both I liked the movie with the Klipsch the best. The music they were identical. He put in a jazz cd. That's when the Boston showed more detail. The Klipsch was good, but the midrange and highs were blurred together. He explained to me that it was because the Klipsch used an 8" woofer for the midrange and the Boston uses an 6.5"(less air to move). But the Klipsch they had to demo was the RF-3. The weekend before that, I demoed the Klipsch I'm considering buying the RF-5 at a local Tweeter. There the salesman told me that if I was looking for movies that the Klipsch was the best mate for my receiver. I love the Klipsch speaker it sounded soooo good. I just don't want to invest all that money into the reference 7.1 package when there is a better option. Like you said Klipsch isn't for everyone, as a matter of fact I run into more people who dislike the Klipsch sound. All the Klipsch owners could you please reassure me that this speaker is an awsome speaker that we all like. How exactly would you describe the "KLIPSCH SOUND". Sonically, what is the difference between the RF-3 and the RF5. What cause bright sound? Is it the tweet or the tone of a speaker. I'm always hearing that the horn makes it bright or makes it a more detailed speaker. I'm confused on that, too. I'm sorry for all the questions and being unorganized in thought.
P.S.
I do 95% movies and 5% music