Finsup -
Most of the criticism was that the high frequencies might be a tad rolled off. This might be changed by changing the toe-in, but, frankly, I like the frequency balance as is. Note that although the highs are a little rolled off, there is no lack of extension or transient information; it's all there, at a slightly reduced level, which makes these speakers easy on the ears during long listening sessions.
Some felt that the 2000s were not the last word in soundstage depth, although they did exhibit a reasonable amount. Note that there is a large, tube-based RPTV in between and behind the speakers, which has to have a negative affect on depth.
Most of the other criticisms involved my room acoustics and speaker cables (they are too long and not properly positioned).
90% or more of the comments were positive. Some checked items off a list - soundstage, imaging, timbre, frequency balance, extension, PRAT, etc., and found them all more than acceptable for the price, and in some cases acceptable at ANY price - a real strong endorsement IMO.
The last fellow stopped by earlier this week, and generally agreed with the others. That, and a few more hours of listening myself have convinced me that keeping the 2000s is the right move.
Since they are staying, I jumped on a pair of used MWTs offered locally here on Audiogon, to be used as surrounds. I wasn't going to address the surround channels before the center channel and spiked bases, but opportunity knocked, so I jumped. Now my wallet needs to catch its breath for a bit!
