Which would be better, the Paradigm Persona 3Fs or the Dynaudio Focus 60 XD speakers?

Haha...that's a tough thing to answer actually.  I haven't heard the new Focus speakers, but Dynaudio doesn't use their best tweeter here, which is odd given the top model is pretty expensive.  I heard the Contour 20 and the Persona 3F, which are more comparable I think.  The new Contour series utilizes Dynaudio's best tweeter (Esotar 2)/ Usually Dynaudio tweeters have a smooth, silky sound, they are very good.  The 3F tweeter and midrange units are on a different level though and sound extremely high resolution.  It's like they cut through the air.
I think the XD 60 may have better bass response, the 3F is pretty small comparatively.  The XD60 will also allow you to correct for any room related issues with the DSP.  I would audition the Contour 30, XD60  and the 3F if I were you.  You would save money with the active speakers obviously, but they are also best for digital sources IMO, as any analog source would also be converted to digital, so there'd be no point.

Ah, but my question revolves around whether a digital crossover can provide a superior response to speakers with hard wired crossovers yet possessing superlative driver materials.  Surely the physical components in a typical crossover circuit will add their own sound to the output of the speaker.  Is this enough to overwhelm the output of the drivers, however transparent they might be? 

I've heard none of these speakers, but I cannot see how the Contour 20 compares to the Persona 3F.  Perhaps to the Persona B? 

I chose the Focus 60 XD speakers and the Persona 3F speaker as both are similarly sized, both have twin 7" bass drivers and both have mid-range and tweeter drivers.  The Focus 60 XD is roughly US$4000/pair more expensive than the Persona 3F, but that is due to the included amplification and crossover network.  I submit that in any given living room, the Focus 60 XD will have the same effective price as the Persona 3F, if not actually less. 

And again, the question is, in the short term, should OEMs sink more money into diaphragm materials or improved crossovers?

Improved crossovers through active designs are a big improvement especially in three ways. Diaphragm material is overrated and cannot make up for poor driver overall design, integration and motor quality 

It seems that year after year we hear of new speaker diaphragm materials with near magical properties.

We never hear of new crossover topologies with near magical properties.

Now I’m all for superlative diaphragm and motor technologies, but should not some thought also be given to crossovers?

If new digital signal processing capabilities allows us to generate in cyberspace superior crossovers and to improve upon the old school and expensive meat space components of yore, should we not embrace this development?

My question is, how close are we to achieving this breakthrough, or have we already achieved it?

PS: nitewulf and shadorne, thanks for your replies! 

The Paradigm mid-tweeter driver does use a more capable material, but implementation matters as much, if not more, than simply choice of the material.

In high frequency driver use, due to its very high self damping (not internal damping), ultrasonic breakup is pushed up fairly high for a 25mm dome. Down at the bottom of the band, it might reduce distortion if a designer chose to use first or second order crossovers and a low point, but that isn't the case here. Paradigm uses third order all around and the tweeter is crossed at 2.4khz. 

The mid driver on the other hand is on the larger side, which does begin to beam at just under 2khz. I'm assuming the lens placed on the driver assists on the integration, but well have to see measurements to know. In any respects, the material would push its resonance up a bit further, which aids in keeping its distortion in check since Be doesn't have very good internal damping properties. The larger radiation area would also allow greater dynamics in the range with less motion and thus distortion.

While you may read that it reflects poorly on the Dynaudio, it doesn't. The materials chosen by them have much better internal damping, which simply means some of the breakup energy is absorbed by the cone material.

Think of it like suspension in a car. In Paradigm's case, its a sports car with a very stiff suspension. It requires a smooth road to operate at its best (avoiding distortion). The Dynaudio has a more compliant suspension and can deal with a little imperfection without disturbing the ride too much. Consider the road condition as simply distortion and not musical signal. Paradigm, had to ensure its drivers worked specifically in their operting range, which is fairly broad due to material choices. Dynaudio could accept a small bit without it all falling apart.

But as long as the designers keep the drivers within their optimal range, a competent design can be made with either. Each material just comes with its own properties you need to contend with.