No single best speaker here - they are built to different priorities, and the right one depends on your room, your amplifier and what you listen to.
| Area | Better | Why |
|---|
| Bass | B | KLH Kendall digs deeper - 25Hz against 48Hz. |
| Amplifier needs | B | KLH Kendall is more sensitive (96dB vs 89dB), so it goes louder on the same amplifier. |
| Headroom | B | KLH Kendall takes more power (250W vs 150W) - more in hand in a big room. |
| Size | depends | Similar cabinet size - neither is easier to fit. |
| Expandability | depends | Wharfedale EVO4.3: bi-amping; KLH Kendall: bi-amping. Wharfedale EVO4.3 sits in a wider range (7 models), so a matched surround system is easier later. |
| Price | B | KLH Kendall is cheaper - $1,500 against $1,698, about 12% less. |
A Wharfedale EVO4.3 B KLH Kendall
depends neither is better in the abstract - it turns on your room, your system or how you will use them. Only specs published for both speakers are judged; anything missing on either side is left out rather than guessed.
Which should you choose?
KLH Kendall is the easier recommendation: it leads on most of the measured areas and costs less. Take Wharfedale EVO4.3 if its size, looks or fit in your room suit you better. If a subwoofer is in your plans, the bass gap largely stops mattering - you would be crossing over above 48Hz anyway, so judge these on the other rows instead. If your amplifier is modest, vintage or valve-based, KLH Kendall is the safer partner - the other will want more current or more watts to sound its best.
And remember what a spec sheet cannot show: how each looks in your room and whether the finish suits it, what dealer support and warranty are like where you live, and how they actually sound to you. If you can hear them first - ideally with your own music - that will tell you more than any number above.