Gdhal:
Since you are a JBL guy I'll contribute to your quandary as I myself was a JBL user for many years.
In the late 70's I purchased some L212s, and modded them by time aligning the drivers. While not the most "timbre" accurate they imaged like crazy and had dynamics to die for. But time and smog took their toll and the surrounds disintegrated, forcing me to look for an alternative.
Zd won't like this but I ended up with B&W 804S which retained many of the things I like about the JBLs. They do not image quite as well, but dynamic range is great, and I began hearing things in program material I did not hear with the JBLs. For the money you are talking about, used B&W s might be an option.
And regarding specs, they are basically meaningless. I time aligned the drivers in my L212s and that did not alter the specs 1 dB, but the difference is sound stage depth and imaging was incomparable.
Since you are a JBL guy I'll contribute to your quandary as I myself was a JBL user for many years.
In the late 70's I purchased some L212s, and modded them by time aligning the drivers. While not the most "timbre" accurate they imaged like crazy and had dynamics to die for. But time and smog took their toll and the surrounds disintegrated, forcing me to look for an alternative.
Zd won't like this but I ended up with B&W 804S which retained many of the things I like about the JBLs. They do not image quite as well, but dynamic range is great, and I began hearing things in program material I did not hear with the JBLs. For the money you are talking about, used B&W s might be an option.
And regarding specs, they are basically meaningless. I time aligned the drivers in my L212s and that did not alter the specs 1 dB, but the difference is sound stage depth and imaging was incomparable.