Yes, I've listened with dented tweeters before and all was fine.

With my actives properly wired up now, I am going to retract my previous statement about passives being garbage. I'll give you some context.

Up until this morning, I had the tweeter channels swapped on the right and the mids on the left. I also had the BGC switch set to FAR2 which boosted the rear array by 3dB. Of course what it was actually doing was boosting the front mids on one and the highs on the other. The end result was that the upper range was hot. This resulted in what sounded like greater clarity. It's well known that the louder speaker and especially boosted upper end, can fool listeners into believing it's better. So in that department, I got fooled into believing the fidelity of the actives was so much more superior than the passives.

In fact, the M5s, M100s and active LFRs are quite close in fidelity. Where the actives differ greatly is in the following: a) the resolving of detail horizontally, vertically and into the soundstage, b) the quantity and quality of bass across its entire range and improved fidelity in the mids and highs, and c) their dynamic capability which speaks not only to peaks but how well they can accelerate and decelerate.

These three improvements add up to a far more satisfying experience than passives. The v4 passives will do all the above but not as well. But you can't possibly understand or know this until you've experienced it.

Can they get better? Let's just say I can't find any faults. I haven't heard any faults with any v4 but I can clearly hear big improvements as I move up.

House of the Rising Sone
Out in the mid or far field
Dedicated mid-woofers are over-rated