They each have their strengths. If you search posts, you'll probably find an even split between the two. EK was loved for quick and to-the-point reviewing, great for people who know their stuff well. TBR was loved for the depth and thoroughness, great for perfectionists and people who needed more of a textbook approach to the material. Which is best for you requires that you know who you are and what you need.
The reputation you mention about TBR bio being too dense has been a comment for over twenty years. I am choosing not to comment one way or the other, because everyone's needs are different, but I cannot deny that there have been many posts with that comment about the TBR biology text and its passages. There have been many SDN comments about EK bio being a great foundation that can be honed by applying your bio knowledge to passages and questions. The truth is that content review is very overrated (and honestly not as helpful as people think) and thoroughly analyzing answers after doing practice questions is very underrated. Use what you have to maximize your practice.
Best of luck with whatever you choose to do, and if I was going to guess, you'll probably find one resource is better for chem and physics and the other is better for bio, CARS, and ps. But you won't know what's best for you until you work through each book for a while.
