Best Powered Monitors

All three of your choices are good. More analytical or clinical is a good description...you will find less flavor from pro gear and generally more dynamics - it just tries to reproduce what is on the source as accurately as possible. There will be less coloration, bad recordings will sound bad, great recordings will sound great, differences between recordings will be more apparent then you are probably used to - no general characteristic sound and no window dressing. If you can live with some of your recordings sounding clearly bad (beacuse they are) then go for it!

There is a comment in this thread that hi-end enthusiasts don't usually like pro audio components. Why is that?

They tend to be revealing, harsh, clinical and inflexible - often designed to hear into the mix. They make an excellent choice for critical listening. A good recording will sound extremely good but a bad one may be revealed to be bad - warts and all. Many enthusiasts like to color the sound to their individual tastes and to have something they can really call their own. Many professionals want something accurate and standard that can be relied upon for consistent reproduction at any SPL level - this means what they hear can translate to other systems and still sound as intended.

If you accept higher expert authority (i.e. Artists and Presitigious Studios use XYZ active speakers => so they must be OK), then go for it! If you trust your own senses and want them to be the final judge/expert then a mix/match system tailored to your tastes may be a better investment.

Remember that many studios and high end professional system are in bespoke acoustically treated facilities. This probably ensures that these type speakers perfrom their best. In the wrong untreated room, active speakers may be disappointing compared to someting appropriately colored.