Simon As per your request. Where to start? Firstly after what can only be described as a very shaky and somewhat embarrasing start (software version 4.06) - see: www.tagmclaren.com I am running on "pseudo- fix-it" software version 4.07 and am still on the odd occasion getting currupted DTS playback a la' Dalek's (oddly enough this only happens with PS2 Vice City and not as yet with dvd soundtracks, most of the other nasty "bugs" do not seem to be present other than not being able to apply THX2 music to DTS streams. Tag "claim" to have fixed these with version 4.08 but there are already reports of problems installing this so i will hold off a bit. Perhaps, dare i say it a little more soak test time was/is required. i am still very pleased indeed with the "out of box" performance of the unit regardless of the addition functions. TMREQ is not "for the boys" IMHO and reading available case reports/studies is a necessary rather than optional requirement. The amount of work involoved in chasing the "ideal curves" should be considered in terms of days rather than hours, however the two foremost opinions i have on the front/center/rear/back channel re-eq is that i feel it is fair to say that the speakers performance are much more uniform, which on the outset may seem quite an obvious conclusion but it certainly does work and homogeous is a word i would use rather than perhaps "extra quality" claims. The second is that like The Matrix "knowing the path is not the same as walking the path" . It is not until i turn off TMREQ that i am aware of it's presence (apart from the sub channel that is) which all things being equal is a good thing i guess, but in truth i am not overly offended by what i am hearing without it, i am fortunate in that "so far" i have not had to apply massive amounts of re-eq to the front channels. There is a lot of work to be done on my tdm34's (di-poles) which almost seems as though this is endemic to the speaker design rather than the room, i realise this sounds like "rubbish" and i am sure someone far more knowledgable will confirm this but the fact remains that these seem to want more work. The surround backs (which are Kef 201's) are actually connected to surround left and right but specified as such for movie playback to allow them to be used as rear channel's for SACD (does that make sense?) are reasonably linear also. The sub re-eq is a thing of beauty and anyone who has a Tag and is not plannig on changing/up-grading to Dual Sharc spec IMO would be well advised to looking into re-eqing the sub channel at least via other units, there's plenty here on this subject (BFD) and suffice it to say that at this level/expense (Tag DS) i am wary of any "night and day" claims, however in absolute honesty even my other half can tell immediately as to when re-eq is applied or not to the sub channel, it is that obvious/good, my sub performance really has moved to "the next level" and although i had no current plans to change my sub's i have even less inclination to do so now, fantastic stuff i kid you not. Extended bass management allows you to make "the most" of the available performance from your speakers, and redirection rules (which allows you to define sub requrements for individual processing modes to include 2 channel etc) is the "icing" to a very comprehensive bass management control only lacking perhaps in multiple sub options, although i use multiple sub's and find the existing management and TMREQ in no way limiting. THX2??? Well it does what it say's on the box i guess. It most certainly opens the side/back channel soundfield WIDE open and you are immediately aware of the extra speakers being bought into play, i am as yet to be convinced as to it's necessity however. It is pleasing (to me) to see the latest incarnation of THX processing has now abandoned decorrelation on the rear channels for PL2 programs which i have always thought as perhaps a "wires crossed" approach to PL2. I love what my new DS Tag does and current gremlin issues aside have absolutely NO qualms whatsoever about recommending the unit based on "in room" performance and potential. I much (i have to say) prefered it to the AV8, which i would also recommend as a quality product. regards Steve.