I am not directing this post at anybody in particular, but I feel as though too many people on forums are not specific enough about their recommendations and are blindly listing equipment they believe sound good.
It is imperative to focus in on what exactly someone's needs are.
Will you be listening on the computer or on an iPod? Studio mixing or musicality? Neutral or warm? The questions span on, and on...
I've heard monitors in the $1000 price range that sound excellent at doing what they do best, which is to produce the signal as precise and clean as possible for mixing purposes, but then turn around and sound like complete garbage with music playing through them. Sure, they might be technically superior to many loudspeakers out there, but it does not simply equate to listening pleasure. Although this is not true with all monitors, they are true for many and I have heard my fair share to sufficiently support and voice this opinion.
Since we are on the topic about the Swans MKIII, they sound better than many "true" monitors in the same price range in regards to pure musicality and enjoyment. They are detailed, yet forgiving. The bass is warm without being dry and blends well with the rest of the frequencies. The midrange, although it is not their strongest strength, is good enough to create a convincing sound stage.
Am I saying the Swans MKIII knock out all the competition in every way? Absolutely not. However, they represent a great value and do not simply let the amplification or the price tag fool you. Although those factors play a role in the sound quality a loudspeaker produces, it is hardly a solid indication of real sound quality. Trust your ears first. The Swans do what they intend to do, which is to play music, movies, and video games incredibly well.