Right!
And all Speakers are not designed equal for sure...
Inside of a certain minimal quality cone response domain it is certainly possible to improve at high cost. but better clarity and less cone distortion, so great it will be, will not nullify the minimal lower cost design working especially in a passively well treated room and in a mechanically controlled one...An improvement dont nullify something or all design from which it improve upon ...
All aspects of sound are not only frequencies response accuracy of the speakers but also the room response to the speakers and a part of the superioir clarity and except for better dynamic and better timbre accuracy gained whith better working cone design , there exist also, imaging, soundstage, listener envelopment, which depend also nore of the room response itself and not only from the speakers response especially if this higher end cone is not in a well treated and well acoustically control room to begin with...
Then in S.Q./price ratio acoustic treatment and acoustic mechanical control is better improvement than just higher end speakers in a normal room, compared to speakers of a less costly design in a highly controlled room ...
The better bang for the buck is always acoustic in my experience.... Some vibrations control, and decreasing of the electrical noise floor with many simple solutions will help also greatly...
All that is a simple calculus S.Q./price ratio ... Acoustic is always the main factor for me up to a pont...Bad or not so well designede speakers cannot for sure be redeemed by room acoustic...
Just focussing on the speakers is probably good for the OP. But deciding between passive and active is worthwhile. If the OP has speakers already, then just staying with those seems like the most cost effective.
They can always look at room treatments and room correcting amps/DSP, which may be a better bang/buck.