A few comments for Rbf1138: I agree with all the recent posts here. I would add emphasis on the break in period. When I got my new 2000s, the timbre of intruments was amazing right out of the box, but many other aspects of the sound developed over time. They had broken in enough by the end of the trial period for me to decide to keep them, but they continued to smooth out and become more dynamic for a number of months afterwards. Also, make sure the Ohms are level, and level with each other. And toe-in is counterintuitive on Ohms: Toeing them in reduces the treble output of the tweeter at the listening seat, while toeing out increases it. I have settled on a slight toe-in, but I am sure some would say the treble rolls off too much. I like it that way - I still get excellent detail reteival, but no fatigue from over-bright recordings.
I own the Neko Case CD "Fox Confessor Brings the Flood" and it is a marvelous, well recorded disc that really shows off my Ohms. I brought it to a local Hi-Fi club one time to use as a demo and lots of my audiophile buddies were asking to see the case so they could buy it.
My Ohms made sense of many recordings that had sounded horrible on my Vandersteen 1Cs. One example is the Gladiator soundtrack. This can sound like garbage on systems that are too forward in the upper-mids, dry, that lack resolution, or that compress at high SPLs. On my system, with the Ohms, the recording is indeed as good as Harry Pearson says it can be - very dynamic, detailed, and full of diverse orchestral textures. I can't count the number of pinched, congested, over-bright rock recordings that finally became listenable with the Ohms. My hunch is that the lack of a crossover in the midrange or upper-midrange at least contributes to this wonderfull quality. It's great to choose recordings based on one's preference, without being limited to audiophile-approved recordings (which sound incredibly good on the Ohms).