Diversity of opinion over what

I think people have preconceived ideas about products based on other non-truth (other than aural) sensory cues, such as visual, or third party affirmations (reviews). To illustrate my point, these example would possibly spark the ire of those affected by such pre-conceived notions:
1) McIntosh components are cold and analytical sounding.
2) Audio Research components are warm and euphonic.
3) Solid state components are overly warm and tube components are etched and hard to listen to.
Silly? Well, for number three, how many times do reviews of very expensive tube equipment state it has the best traits of solid state amps, and comments on good solid state equipment describe a sound that is not "etched" or in other ways having those negative traits associated with solid state (or, sounds like tubes)?
I think the bottom line is unless you listen to a given piece of equipment with a given loudspeaker, you really don't know how they will react together. All of these biases and preconceived notions really just lend themselves to salesmanship. Sell a product. Hype.

Excellent posts with all of the above comments, and not to forget "speaker-room interactions" too.

Off topic: I noticed it takes a day or longer before a reply is being posted???

I suppose I must offer a defense of JMlabs or as we are all seeming to say synergy, taste, preferences, etc. In my constant cycling through gear I ended up with a pair of the original JMlabs Micro-Utopias, more suitable to my new 900sf condo then my previous Alon Lotus's. I ended up through a bit more trial, error, and swapping pairing them with tubed electronics from Deja Vu, a pp EL-34 amp and a preamp. Now if you were to ask my opinion of my speakers I would say they are sweet little speakers that have a nice combination of transparency and warmth. Bright? No way. Is it my room? Electronics? Me? Surely a combination of all of the above, so I guess as they say ymmv. But leave my poor JMlabs alone! Just kidding.

I am not offended at all. I agree that the JM Lab Focals are detailed analytical and have the "Metal Tweeter" syndrome.
I also am deeply aware of the synergystic effects that other elements of the system have on the percieved sound that any one individual component may seem to posess. I found wonderful sound using Tube power amps high caliber copper cables, a tubed pre that uses 6SN7s which I have a fairly large collection of. In all the system sounds still clean and detailed but wonderfully involving and much "warmer". Others may still call the sonic cold steely analytical in the negative sense , but I absolutely do not hear it that way any longer.
One salient fact though is that there was some agreement on the characteristic sound of the speakers! So you see there is some agreement in certain situations.
Thanks Steve

But Steve, you did say the sound with the MF A308 was "hard, cold" which I take for detailed and analytical, when paired with your JM Labs speakers. I'm sure that tubes can tame the JM Labs speakers, but that doesn't mean the MF A308 is any guiltier of being hard and cold than you JM Labs. Mate the MF A308 with some warm, musical speakers and the sound would probably be fine.
analytical speaker + analytical electrics = Bad.
wam speaker + warm electronics = Bad
warm electronics + analytical speakers = Good
analytical electronics + warm speakers = Good.

Are you starting to see where I'm headed with this? Yes, the room and cables come into play too. A live room probably needs warmer gear while a dead room would prefer more analytical gear. It's all about system matching.

I mean I know what your talking about. I had a Mark Levinson No. 38S preamp in my system once and it sounded terrible. My wife even noted that "her car radio sounds better than that". I sold it to a guy who loved it. I don't think that ML is bad, it just did not work at all in the system that I owned at that time.