An audiophile dilemma

Unless you desperately seeking the approval of others, you should buy what you like. (Even if you admit your likes and dislikes are swayed by popular audiophile opinion, you should still know that you'll never get 100% consensus -- there will always be some audiophiles who think you're an idiot for choosing any particular piece of gear.)

The problem is there are endless variables to consider in speaker design. The characteristics that impress me may be meaningless to you.

That's not to say you shouldn't remain open to new ideas, but just don't accept them automatically because someone said so.

So, give the JBLs several good, long listens. If they still impress you as the best option in that price range for you, go for 'em.

It's annoying to see this straw-man debate over and over.

Yes, there is often an audible difference between two pieces of equipment. But, we're all human and therefore our perception is influenced by non-audio factors. These include visual aspects, brand, comments from others, our mood, surroundings, and so on.

Both factors are always present to some degree. That's why "enormous" differences often shrink substantially when the non-audio influences are removed or reduced.

Our ego, however, likes to think our own perception is the penultimate standard. This often leads people to belittle those who don't hear as they do.

The problem with non-audio influences is the subconscious factor that heightens one person's perception may be meaningless or even a negative for another.

So, yes, you should buy what you like and not someone else's preference. Then enjoy it, but don't expect the world to bow before your sublime and sophisticated taste.

Not sure how this got missed in this discussion, but a major factor in the preference for this speaker over that one goes back to the fact that people differ considerably as to how they prioritize the many sonic variables involved.

On a very simple level, the designer has to juggle dozens upon dozens of variables, making choices along the way. Inevitably some things get sacrificed for others. The cone material and voice coil configuration that handles extreme volume peaks well may not be the perfect choice for another sonic consideration. Super-expensive parts may help to some degree, but alone will never solve all the problems.

Hence, one very expensive "great" speaker rarely sounds like another very expensive "great" speaker.

A good example for me are the Wilson speakers. They are highly regarded, but the times I've heard them they've never impressed me as having a natural sound. I call it the "Kodachrome" effect -- in my book, the designer just couldn't resist the temptation to juice things up a bit compared to live acoustic music.

That said, I recognise that Wilson has a serious following who think they are the penultimate in speaker design. Lots of people think Wilson came up with the perfect balance in speaker design an lots of others don't.

There will never be a universal consensus as to what the perfect speaker should do. There are just too many variables in play and too many differing opinions about priorities.