B&W 804D vs 803S


I currently have a pair of stand mounted B&W N805 speakers. While they sound great, I'm looking to upgrade to something with a bit more depth. I've tried pairing my N805's with a sub; however, I've never managed to get it quite right. That said, I have an opportunity to purchase a pair of brand new 803S's. However, I'm also looking at the new 804D's. I would say about 90% of listening is TV or movies and the other 10% on music. Right now, my setup is in the den of my house. 10 foot ceilings, open floorplan that opens to the kitchen and formal dining. Any advice would be greatly appreciated.
tjbranch
Mr_m, my comments were not directed to you; I was asking the original poster if he was working with a local dealer.
Thanks, guys. Yes, it is a local dealer; however, they have different locations. One location has the 803S and the other has the 804D. Thus, makes it a little hard to compare. I'm just wondering if the extra money gets you that much better of a sound with the 804D ($2.5k difference can be spent in a lot of other areas). If you can follow, I tend to think of speakers on an exponential line. The X axix being Quality of Sound and the Y axis being Dollars. At the start, all speakers give sound and the costs remain low. But as you move down the quality axis, dollars tend to really jump. Eventually, you get marginal improvement but at a cost that doesnt really justify that improvement (because of the exponential factor). To see a visual look up Exponential Growth in Wikipedia.

So, at the end of the day, does the Diamond tweeter really have that big of an edge given my ratio of movies/TV to music?
Spinaker...My comment wasn't useless. I simply reminded him to listen to other speakers and not be stuck on B&W. When my wife passes away, I needed a present and bought an 802D - the first speaker that I came across reading their glossy ads. The speaker disappointed and I dumped it and took a loss. I'm simply telling the original poster to be sure of his purchase.
Stringreen's advice is wise and very useful despite the aesthetic and matching constraints mentioned by the OP.