TAD Reference loudspeakers-How good are they?

Thank you for the feedback; the RELs are great subs. I know others in the US who have the CR1s and drive pair them with JL subs (112, 113, 115, Gotham); I've not heard this as I'm an old REL fan/owner but they seem to love the combination particularly with the additional audiophile-grade crossover....

From my research, close to 100% consensus REL is superior for 2 channel and JL for HT. 

Thanks....back in my subwoofer days with 7.1 HT + 2-ch hybrid, REL was the king for 2-ch integration. Others came and went and tried to measure up but they fell short for 2-ch. Glad to hear it's still that way!  My last REL was a B1 Britannia which had the best of both worlds very well ironed out (IMHO), typical hi-pass integration off amp mains for 2-ch and equally great LFE input for HT.  I realize other subs in the line had this but the front-firing B1 was my favorite in terms of pleasing both sides of the house...

KNGhifi- you should call me sometime -. We can talk about TAD's and 911's, which we see to both have a penchant for.

@Zephyr, ah I don’t think the accompanying amps, front end or cables were at fault when i auditioned the TAD’s. I’ve auditioned them twice, the last time with D’ag Momentum mono’s & a full DCS Vivaldi stack, and the results were the same as the first audition...I left the room after a few tracks. By then my ears were bleeding. Maybe the TAD's can be made to sound good with tubes and enough room treatments, but at the end of the day they'll always be just souped up Pioneers.

Conversely I haven’t found that to be the case with the Magico S series, especially the S5 Mk2’s which are just amazing paired with Vitus. I find I can listen for hours without fatigue. Despite bcgator’s histrionics, I did say "every TAD speaker i’ve heard sounds bright and fatiguing". To imply my ears are lying to me, or perhaps that i’m lying to either myself or others is ludicrous. To each their own.