i tried a lot and my favorite look is still strongly hinted windows fonts. fine both with or without subpixels to me (depends on the specific font and it's shape/size/boldness which one I prefer)
Since the freetype autohinter on linux has a reputation of destroying all the goodness in these quality fonts i wasted a lot of time during the last 10 years or so, regularly recompiling freetype manually to get the bytecode hinter enabled, that used to be disabled by default. and of course it still never worked 100% correctly - i think the freetype people didn't understand how you have to adjust gamma for the subpixels. it depends on color perception.
Recently they stopped trying to badly copy windows and switched to imitating mac os, making everything anti-aliased, normally resulting in horrible quality on normal low-dpi displays even when using high quality hinted fonts. This helps a lot with...
...BAD quality fonts. Any added randomness actually makes them look less themselves, and thus better. Some people use only strongly antialiased fonts with such bad quality hinting that the autohinter and strong antialiasing is the only good way of dealing with them.
One common example: most webfonts, normally selected by aspiring web designers at 72 point, then scaled down by another guy to make it readable (losing all the "beauty"), and scaled up again by the font artist, very slightly, just beyond being still readable, so that you can see enough detail of the artwork.
At the same time with this change the freetype people limited your choice about the older rendering while claiming the opposite (they say they increased the choice). I don't know if they did it on purpose or just didn't know better, they claim at least that they found the final perfect solution and all that, and that everything would be configureable and legacy behavior still supported, but that's a lie. They even combined their misunderstandings of font technology with a corporate-style marketing effort, trying to convince all IT hipsters how they have perfected fonts once and for all.
A lot of people I know are happy with it regardless. Fun-fact: they all have very high dpi displays and spend most of their day web browsing (obviously with those shitty web fonts). It's too hard to install microsoft fonts anyway, so I can see how they never realized they now look really bad.
As much as people rant about microsoft, they did this one thing right: they really know how to display text on our (still) limited resolution.
One alternative if you want crisp fonts like me and can't figure out how to make freetype do it's job is to just download a BDF version of the good old VGA font.
http://sciops.net/downloads/vga/http://www.inp.nsk.su/~bolkhov/files/fonts/univga/index.htmlI agree about rxvt, it's my favourite terminal. i dislike xterm because of rewrapping being weird. sometimes the end of my lines are lost.
aterm: the horror