proac sound vs coincident sound

Is ProAc cold and analytical? Does it require tubes to be listenable? I was interested in Proac but then I read this in the Stereophile Aug. 2008 review of the D28s:

I drove the D28s with Musical Fidelity's kW monoblocks, as well as with the 100Wpc Music Reference RM-200 tube amp (reviewed in April 2002)—which ultimately proved a better match for these speakers. The kWs and D28s produced a somewhat cold, bright, overly analytical sound on top, complemented by exceptionally taut bass. Switching to the Reference tube amp produced the creamy, warm, inviting sound I'd heard from the D28s in Tempe, giving up only a bit of the kWs' bass clarity, control, and definition.

Is ProAc cold and analytical? Does it require tubes to be listenable?

Kind of. Definitely tilted that way, of course, it is all a matter of taste. Jack Sprat could eat no fat while his wife could eat no lean. Are Proac speakers "unlistenable" ? - if you are like his wife then yes.

Very interesting. I've had the impression from the forums that Proacs in general
were in the British Harbeth school--"forgiving," which
I thought meant not too icy or piercing.
I guess this British sound is confined to, say,
Wilson Benesch, Spendor, maybe Tyler from what I've
read on the 'gon. At least that's my impression from
my reading here. Thanks.

I've heard the 2.5's on Plinius gear.
Not bright, not cold.
Nice warm midrange
A bit rolled-off on top.
A bit thick and slow down low.
I liked them but not enough to buy them - I got Reynaud's instead.
That's what I heard.

Read the Stereophile review carefully, and you'll see that the D28s are significantly different from the Response 2.5s--not only the new advanced porting system, but different drivers from different manufacturers. Haven't heard the D28s, but the older speakers are much closer to the, for sake of a better word, "English" school.