Spendor D9.2 Run In

Well prof, I think that it's apparent that Spendor was trying to stay current with that line, and appeal more to the modern younger audiophile who's looking for "accuracy". Reviewers rarely outright trash a speaker, and I'm sure that this one doesn't deserve to be, but you can usually find mild criticisms if you read between the lines, and that's what I gathered reading about these; namely that they were too bright.

I think that the OP should look at the classic series either new or used to find the Spendor sound that he's looking for. 

philip swift some years decided on the bifurcated strategy to cover market/buyer segments for speakers

classic series for classic looks/bbc design. a/d series for modern slimline floorstander looks, and increasingly, a modern sound - meaning he is targeting focals, revels, magico, proacs, wilsons and so on... but perhaps not so successfully as one would hope...zippy city...

for a modern-styled floorstander type speakers that hark back to the more beautiful, less attacking, natural sound of spendor classics, i think modern sonus fabers deserve a look, perhaps some revels, some devores (non orangutans)

I have a pair of D9.2s, paired with a Naim Uniti Star. They are great speakers but definitely need a bit of eq imo. This is easy to do if you're a Roon user. 

jjss49,

We're in agreement, but when I think about it, it is a little surprising that they would have gone so overboard on the treble.

A couple of years ago I auditioned at length the Spendor Classic 100's in a hi-end system.  For comparison, afterwards we subbed in a pair of D7's (no D9's in the store, and just before the .2 version came out).  There was no real comparison.  The Classic 100's sounded significantly better by every metric: fuller, better balanced, etc. etc..  It's my understanding that they also use the same tweeter, so obviously some else significant was going on.