I couldnt compare the SuperHemp to the A8 because I have NEVER heard the B200 in a box, but I would imagine it would bring the presence band forward, and make for a "tighter" driver. I have only heard the B200 on open baffle, where physics make it abit more relaxed with static air masses on each side of the cone. The closest compari would have to be an A8 in the larger cabinet which would be VERY interesting. I can say this: the critical midband in both drivers is so similar it is interesting, and this is what was observed by Louis from the start. With that in mind, and in my experience, I know for a fact that either way, you simply cannot lose here. Both are astonishingly great and musical drivers, and I love them both equally, for different reasons. If you are a detail freak, go the A8 route. If you are spinning jazz vinyl, SuperHemp. If you have sweet tubes, Hemp. If you have some power, A8. If you already plan on using a sub, maybe go with the A8. With the SUperHemp it is pretty optional, believe me, these things have some grunt. Both drivers can sink power beyond what seems reasonable. Especially the B200, which can EAT 60 watts easily. I have done this. The B200 can play louder likely, in the box, be more controlled at volume due to braking effect of an aperiodic load.
I would be interested as hell in what the B200 in the larger cabinet, aperiodic load, with subs would be like. THAT is what I possibly would be examining. A Super-B. Hope this stream of consciousness was of at least ~some help.