I like all of your synths! Everyone has nice synths!
I think it's interesting how many of us have big horrible analog nightmares, and nice crisp digital recording systems to record them with. Ha ha!
Regarding monitors:
What are they for?
1. To portray what is actually happening in your mix
or
2. To portray what your audience is going to hear?
Look, I'd love to have a monitor setup that would accurately portray every frequency present in what I do... however... I think that sort of arrangement is far more expensive than I can afford, no matter what synths I have. It is far LESS expensive and troublesome, etc. just to listen to listen to each mix in a number of places and be happy with the average.
Let's face it some of us are analog synth nuts, and some of us are some other kind of nuts, and some of us are fidelity nuts. Some of us are not going to understand the motives and aesthetic of some of the other of us because we come from different tribes.
I personally understand the desire to have amazing monitors, and to have high-fidelity sound... but as an analog nut, quality of sound is more important to me than purity of sound. I would much rather record my ARP 2600 through its speakers with the hissy reverb all the way up for that QUALITY of sound than I would like to have it disassembled, re-opamped, and recorded into some extremely high-end system, for the purity, etc.
At the end of the day, listeners are going to like the music or not. They probably won't know if the mix was generated with an excellent, expensive, high-end monitoring system... just like they won't be able to tell whether the synth is a Mini or a Yamaha PSS-etc.

We obsess over the details because these are the things we love.
Did that mention enough synths so as not to be OT? I don't want to fuel anyone's fire, I was just hoping to bridge some gaps!
