I've noticed that the obstruction is bigger in the Tal than the Meade.
However, I've also read that the contrast is inherently better in the Tal
design.

In one review of the Tal, the large obstruction is blamed for poor contrast.
The Meade's CO is already bigger than the Celestron's and effective light grasp
on the Celestron is also higher.
I doubt you could go terribly wrong with any of these scopes.
If you haven't read this, check it out.
http://www.cloudynights.com/reviews2/tal200k2.htm
Meanwhile you can also find a review that says the Tal outperforms the 9.25. A
grain of salt as always and few people will say they picked the wrong scope.

RB