I'm resurrecting this topic to add my humble opinion:
I guess that one thing that is often forgotten is that our idea of "the sound" is different, everyone of us has different references in tone and sound, also in music.
for example, I can't stand the sound of fluorocarbons in any option because, to me, they sound to "thin", with too much mid frequencies and poor on basses and highs.
yes, they have a wonderful "string to string definition", but to my "likes" they feel too thin and with a "plastic" feel in sound.
my ukulele references, however, are Cliff Edwards, George Formby, Roy Smek and those era of players, when they only had gut strings and their ukuleles sounded very "punchy" and bright on the highs, and I noticed that my ears do prefer Aquila for that reason: they have the brightness on the highs, a good punch on the lows and make the ukulele sound a lot "vintage"
in my opinion it's just this, it's about our references.
FE: I play bass guitar, and we have many type of strings, in particular roundwound and flatwound.
the flatwound are the "vintage" strings used since the 50's, when the bass was born, and they are the typical sound of the 50's and 60's (and a big part of the 70's), with a mellow tone and less sustain.
in the mid 60's they started making steel roundwound strings, with a metallic and bright tone and more sustain, and they started a new era of sound.
if you like the Beatles, you don't want roundwound strings, but if you like the Who, you need round
today we still use a lot flatwound strings when a "vintage" sound is needed, and it's a tone you can't get from rounds (and viceversa).
it's all up to what you like and feel in your head.