In the cost-no-object arena (ca. a 20K+ sub/monitor or full-range speaker)--- I'd say both set-ups can be great. That said, trade-offs exist at reasonable cost. A sub/monitor combo at a combined cost of 5K vs a fine full-range speaker at 5K --- now I'd go with the full-range speaker more often than not. Subwoofers at the 1.5K range are typically boomy, slow and do not integrate well and the coherence of the full range speaker will win out far more often than not. This is especially true when trying to mate a sub with a planer speaker (Maggies, or the like).
I have also heard many try to mate a modest subwoofer (or multiple subs) with lowthers and other horns --- man... I would take a full range speaker over that almost any time as the incoherence is a problem.
That said... with a high performance, really good sub or an array of such subs one can do quite well.
The point... it all depends --- as system cost goes up the two choices become more equal --- at lower cost the trade-offs are manifest (bad coherency, unnatural sound in the sub/monitor combo and bass control in the full range --- to varying degrees.
I have owned systems of both types and generally prefer the full range speakers.
I have also heard many try to mate a modest subwoofer (or multiple subs) with lowthers and other horns --- man... I would take a full range speaker over that almost any time as the incoherence is a problem.
That said... with a high performance, really good sub or an array of such subs one can do quite well.
The point... it all depends --- as system cost goes up the two choices become more equal --- at lower cost the trade-offs are manifest (bad coherency, unnatural sound in the sub/monitor combo and bass control in the full range --- to varying degrees.
I have owned systems of both types and generally prefer the full range speakers.