An audiophile dilemma

Chris,

My brother auditioned speakers in Swiss (Geneva) audio store. Sales guy presented smaller speakers first and my brother liked them a lot. Then he switched to more expensive larger speakers and my brother liked them even more to finally play the largest, most expensive speakers of this line that sounded absolutely excellent. They took break and talked for a while about prices and options. Seeing hesitation salesman offered one more audition of not very expensive but a "gem" of a speaker. My brother liked it as much as the last big speaker. "That was the first speaker you heard" salesman said. My brother left store with pair of those.

The OP doesn't say that the stage monitors are every bit as good as some expensive audiophile speaker. Instead he talks about being happy with the stage monitors. His question is whether the audiophile oriented products are better than the JBLs. Related to that question is whether everyone really needs all the speed, low resonance, detail and resolution offered by modern loudspeakers. It's not like everybody wants a 600HP car.

What's the dilemma?
If the JBLs sound better to you and they are cheaper, isn't that a good thing?

Are those high end (and very expensive) speakers really better than the JBL's?

All things considered, NO! The media we are playing was not recorded by God. None of it sounds live. So why spend a lot of your hard earned money trying to reproduce imperfections mo better! I am considering JBL myself. I have owned JBLs model: L-150 and 4311 and LX-44. loved them all.
cheers