Hi, Jimmy:
As I have commented before in these pages, speakers present THE greatest degree of variability of any component in an audio system (I know some will argue this point, but based on 40 years of audiophile listening -- and selling high-end gear -- I stick to my guns).
Phono cartridges and speakers are usually the only two electrical transducers in a normal audio system (transducers being the components that transform mechanical energy into electrical energy (cartridges), or electrical energy into mechanical energy (speakers)). The ideal for a transducer is to perfectly duplicate the original audio signal, without introducing distortion, non-linearities, etc. This is much more difficult to do accurately than most people think.
Over the past 100 years or so, a lot of different approaches to speaker design have been tried: horns, dynamic cones, electrostatic panels, magnetic planar panels, ribbons, ionic drivers, etc. Beyond the obvious differences in the design of the speaker, you must then wrestle with the kind of materials used (there are at least a half-dozen different material compositions being used today in the cones of dynamic drivers alone), the inherent non-linearities of the voice coil or driving element, the effects of the crossover (if one is used), etc. A similar range of problems occurs in the design of cartridges, with the added complexity of extremely small size and incredibly tight tolerances.
Ultimately, once the design of a speaker has been decided, the "art form" takes over from the science, and speakers must be tuned by ear. Given the variability in human hearing, with the differences in acuity -- not to mention that there are probably significant subjective differences in HOW each of hear and translate sound in our brains -- and what each of thinks sounds "good", it should be no surprise that there is a LOT of difference in how speakers sound.
If you read this forum often, you have seen the on-going debates between the adherents of dynamic speakers vs. the lovers of electrostatics vs. the admirers of horns, etc. What all of this demonstrates, in summary, is that only YOU can decide which speakers sounds "best" to you and appeals to your asthetic tastes.
The other aspect of your question addresses the relative performance and value of expensive vs. less expensive speakers. I recently posted the summary of an article about value in high-end audio which was written by Richard Hardesty, wherein he made a number of points about the prevalence of hyperexpensive speakers (and other audio gear) which often carries the implied promise of much better performance than more modestly priced equipment. Hardesty commented that high price is NOT necessarily a guarantee of higher performance. With speakers, there are a lot of really excellent speakers today in the $2500-3500 range (for a stereo pair), such as the Thiel 1.6's, Vandersteen 3A Signatures, Magneplanar 1.6R's, to mention only three. The most salient point that Hardesty made in his article is that you should audition all audio gear, and particularly speakers, without regard to price. You will probably find that many of the mid-priced products offer all of the performance of the higher-priced spreads, although they may lack some of the "status appeal" and appearance of the more expensive competition.
Sorry to ramble on, but speakers have long been, and continue to be (IMO), the most difficult single audio component to buy. You are wise to solicit input from others, but ultimately you will have to do a LOT of listening (remember: put your price prejudices aside), and then trust your own ears.
As I have commented before in these pages, speakers present THE greatest degree of variability of any component in an audio system (I know some will argue this point, but based on 40 years of audiophile listening -- and selling high-end gear -- I stick to my guns).
Phono cartridges and speakers are usually the only two electrical transducers in a normal audio system (transducers being the components that transform mechanical energy into electrical energy (cartridges), or electrical energy into mechanical energy (speakers)). The ideal for a transducer is to perfectly duplicate the original audio signal, without introducing distortion, non-linearities, etc. This is much more difficult to do accurately than most people think.
Over the past 100 years or so, a lot of different approaches to speaker design have been tried: horns, dynamic cones, electrostatic panels, magnetic planar panels, ribbons, ionic drivers, etc. Beyond the obvious differences in the design of the speaker, you must then wrestle with the kind of materials used (there are at least a half-dozen different material compositions being used today in the cones of dynamic drivers alone), the inherent non-linearities of the voice coil or driving element, the effects of the crossover (if one is used), etc. A similar range of problems occurs in the design of cartridges, with the added complexity of extremely small size and incredibly tight tolerances.
Ultimately, once the design of a speaker has been decided, the "art form" takes over from the science, and speakers must be tuned by ear. Given the variability in human hearing, with the differences in acuity -- not to mention that there are probably significant subjective differences in HOW each of hear and translate sound in our brains -- and what each of thinks sounds "good", it should be no surprise that there is a LOT of difference in how speakers sound.
If you read this forum often, you have seen the on-going debates between the adherents of dynamic speakers vs. the lovers of electrostatics vs. the admirers of horns, etc. What all of this demonstrates, in summary, is that only YOU can decide which speakers sounds "best" to you and appeals to your asthetic tastes.
The other aspect of your question addresses the relative performance and value of expensive vs. less expensive speakers. I recently posted the summary of an article about value in high-end audio which was written by Richard Hardesty, wherein he made a number of points about the prevalence of hyperexpensive speakers (and other audio gear) which often carries the implied promise of much better performance than more modestly priced equipment. Hardesty commented that high price is NOT necessarily a guarantee of higher performance. With speakers, there are a lot of really excellent speakers today in the $2500-3500 range (for a stereo pair), such as the Thiel 1.6's, Vandersteen 3A Signatures, Magneplanar 1.6R's, to mention only three. The most salient point that Hardesty made in his article is that you should audition all audio gear, and particularly speakers, without regard to price. You will probably find that many of the mid-priced products offer all of the performance of the higher-priced spreads, although they may lack some of the "status appeal" and appearance of the more expensive competition.
Sorry to ramble on, but speakers have long been, and continue to be (IMO), the most difficult single audio component to buy. You are wise to solicit input from others, but ultimately you will have to do a LOT of listening (remember: put your price prejudices aside), and then trust your own ears.