Carver TFM 35 vs TFM 35x

I have a pair of Eminent Technology LFT-8 speakers (pretty low efficiency but lovely sounding) and was planning on driving them with a pair of Carver TFM 35's (in bridged mode) after replacing my Musical Fidelity A3cr and liking the sound. Without getting into of the merits of whether the Carver sounds better than the MF amp, I'd like to know if there is any difference in voicing between the Carver TFM 35 and the 35x version? As I said, I plan on bridging them and using one per channel.
I had a TFM 35 years ago, and was always curious myself. I've heard they sound the about same from some, and did away with the actual TFM sound, and just got the THX rating, from what others said. Bob Carver already left the company I think, but not positive. I looked at your planar speakers (sound great I imagine) and they recommend up to 200 watts max. I don't see any need to run them bridged. The amps already give 250 watts@ 8 ohms, 350 watts@ 4 ohms. Without the bridging, they will have more power if your speakers dip below the 8 ohm average, and that's common for a lot of speakers do this. In bridged mode, 8 ohms was the lowest ohms they'll handle going by memory. I've had plenty of amps in my system, and never heard one in bridged mode sound as good as the regular stereo mode. Try them both ways, and you may agree. Don't forget, the audio signal has to go through twice as many gain parts ( left and right combined ) in bridged mode, instead of its normal stereo mode. If it does sound better to you also, you won't need the extra amp. The speakers don't appear to need all the extra power, if they even get as much, with any lower (below 8 ohm) dips. I hope this helps.
The TFM 35 manual mentions the Transfer Function Calibrated, and the TFM 35X doesn't unless I'm overlooking it. My PDF search isn't finding everything as it should either. I wouldn't count on them sounding identical. I've heard a little difference in Hi-end monoblocks that were up to spec in the past. With the new owners, they may have used some different parts also. I looked at the speakers again and they look like they do stay above 8 ohms most of the time. Carver manuals links. [] []
Thnaks. I had heard these with a 500 watt per channel amp in a showroom (vs 150) and it really opened up the sound (especially in transients). Also, these speakers are very low in sensitivity (84db) and I was really using the extra 3db or so of actual apparent volume change (when doubling the power) for the headroom (hence my question about matching the voicing). So, to expand the thought, how do you feel about bi-amping (woofer/planar panels) if the amps do, in fact, sound somewhat different after the departure of Bob Carver and the hoops that LucasFilm imposed for the THX designation?
I'm guessing you'd be using half of each for the top and bottom. I haven't heard the THX, I don't think there would be much volume gain, if any volume gain, and I think it would be trial and error as to which one would be best for the highs and lows. One thing I do remember is the first Transfer Function Calibrated (non-THX) one is polite and laid back sounding. The soundstage was closer to the speakers or wall behind them. If the other newer doesn't have it, I would guess it might sound a little more forward (out in the room ) if it has a different sound.