Tweeter characteristics

I'm looking to (i.e., my wife is making me) replace a pair of Aura 837-D 3-way floorstanders that feature a dipole ribbon tweeter. Of course, I'm using this opportunity to upgrade. My two top contenders are the Vienna Acoustics Bach Grand and the Audio Physic Yara.

I had an opportunity to listen to the Bachs this weekend, and I thought perhaps the silk dome tweeter provided a "mushiness" on the high end. (I plan on a home audition to see if that was just a function of the audio shop's setup.) I have not had an opportunity to listen to the Yaras yet, with their fabric dome tweeter.

This brings up a couple of questions: is this "mushiness" on the Bachs a characteristic of the silk dome tweeter? Could I look to get something closer to the precision of the ribbon from the fabric dome of the Yaras?

I'm using for music and home theater, with an H/K AVR125, Denon DVD2200 and LAT Renaissance speaker cable. Thanks for any thoughts.
Just why is she forcing you to sell, looks or the tweeters performance?
"Precision" in the world of tweeters/high frequency reproduction is a relative term, and what to Brand x owners think sounds precise might sound bright and edgy to Brand Y owners. What your ears hear as a mushy, soft sound is likely a lot closer to what real (live production) high frequencies sound like, with the emphasis on overtones and harmonics as opposed to transients. I'd advise auditioning the Bachs for as long as the dealer will allow. My bet is that your ears will grow to appreciate the softer, less fatiguing sound of their tweeters.
The tweeter is the least expensive driver in most speakers. If it is too apparent, strident or dominant then the mid range may be lacking in the speaker design/driver quality.

I would chose a speaker based on the mid range qualities first, followed by bass driver accuracy and LF bandwidth, and finally a tweeter that matched.

Soft dome tweeters are a classic design which has been proven many many times.

Overly bright tweeter sound helps sell speakers in five minute demos but it is tiring when listening for long periods and may mask other deficiencies in the design.

Balance is the key!
Shadorne nailed it IMHO.
The Aurasounds use the Linaeum tweeter, it's not a ribbon. Aurasound owns (or did own?) the Linaeum technology which they also outsourced to some other brand names...Radioshack, RCA, and I think one other company...I own a couple pair of Aurasounds.

I would look at some of the ribbon hy-brid systems on the market if I were you, or...E-stats and non hy-brid planers even... The Linaeum tweeter is only a taste of what a better design will give you.

BTW, I picked up my Aurasounds cheap at Ebay with plans of trying them as rears or sides in an Apogee based hometheater setup. Plans changed and I sold my extra pair of Apogees so never did get around to giving the Aurasounds much of a try out. I did think that the Linaeum tweeter sounded better than most conventional tweeter designs...not nearly as good as the true ribbons in my Apogees though.

Thanks for the thoughts.

I'm being "encouraged" to change speakers due to aesthetics only. I'm actually pretty pleased with the sound of the current setup, but they're turning out to be a bit too big for the room. :)

I do actually value midrange sound over other characteristics; however, the highs on the Bach really jumped out at me. I was auditioning using an acoustic jazz CD, and it was the sound of the piano that was striking me in particular.

Sogood51: Thanks for the clarification on the ribbon/Linaeum issue - I didn't know there was a difference! (It just looked like a ribbon to me.)

My next step will be to get the Bachs in-home to give them a go. I'm certainly not knocking the speaker - imaging and soundstage were phenomenal. It was simply that difference in the highs that caught me off-guard.