I have been on many forums and you rarely get a lot of consensus as to what the best is or the most accurate or whatever. Speakers tend to have inherent advantages and disadvantages - the single driver speaker for example has no crossover and is supremely coherent - Certain Electrostatic panels would also be included. So game set match to these speakers in certain areas. But a Big horn will often thump then in macro dynamic ease and the ability to create a live scale feeling. Big multi-driver cone speakers usually have the deepest bass and most bass impact and often the most treble impact. When you have a dedicated driver doing one thing it can do that one thing really well - but they all lose ground (often a lot of ground) on cohesion.
Some speakers (systems) have a a certain something something (as they say) that for whatever reason pulls the ole heartstrings while another somewhat similar speaker doesn't. For me it is the AN E (and AN J) and while I like and could own 2 dozen other speakers this one ticks the balance box for me - it doesn't do any one thing better than many other speakers but the overall package beats the sum of the individual strengths. I greatly prefer the sound of AN speakers to any Wilson speaker for example. Which isn't to say that the AN E is "better" but it is better but it is "better" to me. And since I'm the one spending the money and have to live with them.
I have had my "desert speaker" now since December and they are good enough to be my final speaker.
One note though about being disappointed with pricey systems is that room set-up and synergy are keys to all these evaluations. Consider that I have been to several shows dealers over many years auditioning a ton of things and have literally chosen some rooms as bottom five sound only to hear them at the very next audio show and rank them top 5. This in fact has happened with MBL and YG Acoustics, and Focal. Even with systems - You can very much like the sound of speaker with one set of gear and then not much care for it with other gear. I prefer my AN E speaker with 2A3 and 211 over 300B for example - and yes it is a BIG difference. The 300B presents and over there sound and is delicate and extremely "pretty" sounding which is why a great many people will choose that tube over the one that I prefer in the 2A3 which is big and ballsy and more upfront. But I listen to more than just classical music so the 2A3 has more drive - the 211 is the best for me but quite costly.
A SET based system would never win awards for technical superiority so you are not going to win forum arguments. But I went down that path for a decade with the measurements are kind approach and never liked the music. But disotrtion was low and frequency was flat. Meh.
Jupiter1610 hits in on the head for me. My dealer in Canada that carries B&W and AN and has had numerous speakers come and go have what my dealer calls "speakers for selling" and "speakers for owning" where he would put the B&W, Paradigms and others he sells in the first camp and Harbeth/AN/ and some other less sexy bit good sounding stuff in the second.
But let's be clear - that is HIS opinion and MY opinion. Those sonic merits that B&Ws possess in a big SS power system do have their merits and if those merits are critical or supremely important then Harbeth/AN won't be your cup of tea.
As I noted Tastes change - back in the middle 90s B&W was my "wish for" speaker. Now that I have my AN E and I listen to a B&W I think - how in the world was B&W my favorite? I love the looks of so many other speakers though over mine. Mine are so boring looking compared to those big sexy speakers like Focal MBL etc.