My next upgrade

I share your concerns with the Maggie’s, and given what you’re looking for and your budget one of the first speakers that jumped to mind for scale and 3D imaging was the new SVS Ultra Evolution Pinnacles.  At $5k they’re well within your budget, and they offer a 45-day trial period including shipping both ways so no risk to try.  Read this review where they basically trounced a pair of $9500 speakers and see if you don’t agree that these might tick all your boxes…

https://www.soundstagehifi.com/index.php/equipment-reviews/1944-svs-ultra-evolution-pinnacle-loudspeaker

Speakers I’ve heard around your price range that excel at throwing off an expansive 3D soundstage and pull off an exceptional disappearing act are the Joseph Audio Profiles ($7k), ProAc DT8, and Usher Dancer Mini-Two.

https://soundapproach.com/usher-mini-two-2-x-7-2-way-diamond-tower-speakers-pair.html

https://www.audioconnect.com/products/proac-dt8

Incidentally you really should also strongly consider ditching the Mac Mini and get a decent dedicated streamer — the Mac is a performance bottleneck in your system. Hope this helps, and best of luck in your search. 

@soix +1 on ditching the mini. Used a mini for years running Audiarvana.

For sure there are better options  

The option I chose was to run Qobuz through a Linux based i5 NUC with 32gb ram using Euphony software. I’d put it up against some expensive streamer’s. 

I would suggest focusing on your front-end source first. If the source isn’t capable of delivering layering and spatial cues, enhancements on the back end won’t help much.

1. Get a decent external streamer. The built-in UPnP streamer in the X26 Pro is, at best, comparable to a $200–$300 streamer.

2. Are you currently using a DDC or external clock? If not, consider using the U18 DDC and an external clock to synchronize the streamer/DDC and DAC.

3. Based on my experience with the newer R26, achieving strong layering and spatial cues with the X26 Pro can be challenging. Upgrading to a more capable DAC may be necessary. I recently upgraded to the Harmony micro DAC and the Topping D90 III Discrete, and I finally achieved the spatial performance I had been craving.

4. Increase the distance between your speakers to about 9 feet to improve soundstage width, but maintain at least 3 feet of space from each side wall. Add a slight toe-in.

5. Pull the speakers further from the front wall to better reveal depth and layering information.

6. Treat critical areas in the room, including (but not limited to) the first reflection points, corners (with possible bass traps), and the front wall—consider using a diffuser there to further enhance imaging.

I have been a long time ribbon speaker enthusiast for over thirty five years. A while ago, I started asking, then why are the vast majority of speakers dynamic? There are lots of reason. But it set me to exploring and now I am a very strong supporter of them. While alternative speaker types excel at some attributes, they typically are not great overall. For the specific benefits come some significant compromises. And if you are not willing to adjust your electronics to suite ribbon, or horn speakers, you will not be getting the best. 

I think, in general, especially when on a budget, good floor standing dynamic speakers are your best all round solution. One attribute I did not understand with earlier speakers I owned was coherence. The "same sound" top to bottom. Once I moved to full sized floor standing speakers I understood coherence and really appreciate it. 

I would recommend auditioning Sonus Faber (natural / musical), B&W (a bit top and bottom heavy... really good for Rock), Wilson (great imagers... buy used), and DynAudio (outstanding detail). Totem might also be a good choice... not as "audiophile like", but really pleasing and music speakers. 

Find the "sound" you like. Then you can build up the rest of your system to get the most out of them. With $6K, I recommend used. You should be able to get a speaker from the $10K original cost range... and that is going to be a much better speaker. 

Scott,

A couple things. I have used Gustard dacs, the X26 PRO and the A26. Both of these produce an excellent sound overall but are slightly overly bright in the trebles. Since you have their master clock, the solution for me was to use the sine wave connections. You may lose a bit of the amplitude of the sound image but gain a lot in musicality without hurting your ears on long listening sessions. Anyway, that was my experience in the house of stereo. Since I switched to an Audio Mirror Tubadour V tube dac, my master clock is back on square wave. Also, if you keep the Gustard dac, copper wires are a much better match than anything silver imo. As a side note, with the Tubadour V, I now was able to incorporate some pure silver wires. Everything matters and finding the right combos is just a trial and error thing. Enjoy the journey.

@baylinor  

10Mhz clocks were never intended to improve jitter performance. They were intended to keep many devices in sync and prevent ‘clock drift’ over time in professional situations ...

https://goldensound.audio/2022/04/14/gustard-x26-pro-measurements-f20-firmware-10mhz-clock/

In OP's situation, the proper way to use an external clock, as suggested above that has been used by several users including @sls883, is to employ an external streamer up front, connect it to a DDC via USB, and then feed the signal to the DAC via I²S. A 10 MHz clock should be provided to both the DDC and the DAC. One could potentially eliminate the DDC if the external streamer or digital transport supports both I²S output and a 10 MHz clock input. Whether a sine wave or square wave works better is another subject.

@lanx0003 

Actually, your info is not accurate. If the master clock is connected to the DDC, the I2s connection transfers that clock signal automatically to the dac. Hence the master clock connection to the dac is unnecessary. My setup has the master clock connected to the ethernet switch and the DDC. Much smarter way of using your clock.

@baylinor  First of all, we're discussing the OP's situation, and it seems you're suggesting feeding an external clock to the DAC only. I just provided a technical source explaining that using a 10MHz clock alone may not improve performance. The OP doesn't have an external streamer, so a DDC cannot be utilized.

Second, a more contentious topic: if you have a network switch, by no means should you connect it to an external clock. The Gustard C16 or C18 provides only two sine wave and two square wave outputs, limiting its usefulness beyond two devices—though other clock generators might offer more outputs. Still, synchronizing multiple devices is the intended purpose of such a clock.

Now, the more debated issue is whether the DAC itself needs to be clocked. Many people seem to assume that the DAC automatically slaves to the DDC’s clock when connected via I²S, but that’s not necessarily true. What I can say is this: it depends—not all DACs behave the same way. It depends on the DAC’s internal design. Some DACs are designed to slave to the incoming clock signal via I²S, while others use a PLL (Phase-Locked Loop) mechanism to regenerate a cleaner clock from the incoming signal for ASRC (Asynchronous Sample Rate Conversion).

The Harmony (micro) DAC then has a unique design that allows the user to select between using the I²S clock or the DAC's internal clock. This is advantageous if the DAC features a higher-grade internal clock, such as the OCXO used in the Gustard X30 or Denafrips Terminator 15th. In such cases, feeding an external clock for synchronization is considered beneficial. Some user here has already tried this and reported positive results.

Look at the description of his equipment up top. He has a DDC.

Anyway, this blabbing is not for me. My attempt to help was strictly about square vs sine wave. And you decide to write a book about a completely  different subject. Have a good day.