Meaning NO disrespect to Greyhound (really), comparing any speaks to the original generation Spatials offers no relevant information so different are the Sapphires (in example). Having had all iterations of the M speaks (including compression horn upgrades, x-over upgrade), I can say, that in the same room with virtually the same acoustic treatments, there simply is no way to conclude anything other than that the new Sapphire series is a vastly improved musical tool. Upper frequency detail, bass texture, pitch, and mid-range presence, are all hugely improved. Having owned many "fine" speaks over the last 45 years (unfortunately not the Maggies being compared) I find the Spatials completely satisfying. It's been a long, long time since I purchased audio kit and just abandoned thoughts of needing to remedy some shortfall or defect. But that's the case with the Sapphire M3's. Clayton suggested that I might never need a "better" speak than the M3's. It wasn't hyperbole. At least for the music I listen to on the M3 system, mostly, well almost entirely, jazz, they just sing. I'm using tubes (Psvane 845 mono's) direct from an Okto Research DAC and I can't remember deriving so much enjoyment from the system. In all, you simply can't compare the current Spatial products to any that came before, at least in the M series.
