Proac 1sc vs. Reference 3a mm decapo i

Ive had the Proac Response D15 for a while now and have wondered how the Proac1sc compares with the Reference 3a decapo i in terms of tonality and midrange aplomb?

Im in need to switch to monitors and really love the Proac sound- but wonder how it compares with the Reference3a decapo i.
for moitors, the new proac 2, is the ticket...then the reference and then the 1
i forgot another that bests the one, and perhaps the de cappa...the proac studio 100
I guess what im interested in is identifying the differences in sound qualities of the two. The D15 from my experience has a slightly forward respresentation which i think helps the tonality/realism of the midrange at the price of being rather forward in is presentation. This works well for more intimate vocals-strings-soundstages---but i feel that when moving to larger orchestral works that forwardness works against the realistic sense of depth/breadth that orchestral music should convey.(this may also be more of a 2way speakers inherent drawbacks) Having not spent any time with the 1sc- or Ref.3ammdecapo im very curious given the decapos rave reviews----where the two fall in the yin/yang their prowess and maybe what each is conceding to the other.
the studio procs are less forward then the d's, both very balanced and have nice weight for classical. the reference is perhaps more open, but the livelier dynamics don't necc lend themselves to classical. the new proac 2 is an improved version of the classic 2, which i've always thought was competitive or superior to the harbeth and spendor monitors.