Help with Totems

Help me with the Totem lineup. Is the Arro or Staff the lower model? Please describe the sound differences if you are in the know. Thanks
I have had Hawks, sold them but presently own model one's
Forests,winds and Sharmans I have never listen to the Arro or Staff but I believe their are like the Hawks and I hated the sound of the Hawks. Three years later I find out from a dealer that the drivers in the model ones, Forests,winds and Sharmans are different then what is being used in the other models thus the reason for the different sound. If you can afford it try either the model ones or the forests and don't waste your money on the others
Arros cost less and have less bass; that doesn't mean they are "lower" or inferior. It depends upon your application, i.e., room dimensions, electronics, speakers, etc. If you can, audition any prospective purchase in your home. However, if you do, make your best effort to buy from whomever allows you the opportunity to audition.
i have owned the arros, model 1's, totem taw in-walls, and multiple pairs of mani 2's. the arros are an amazing speaker. for a smaller room and located in the right spot, they produce amazing bass for such a small speaker. i would own the arros over the staff in a heart beat. the hawks are a much better speaker than the staff. the hawks compete with the forest, the forest is easier to drive than the hawk.
I owned the Arros. They cost less than the Sttafs, but like Lars said, I don't think it's fair to characterize one as inferior to the other. I agree with the others with regard to the Arros working well in a small room at moderate volume; they sound very good within their limitations. I've only heard the Sttaf briefly, but from my impressions I gather that the Sttaf is a little more warm/forgiving, whereas the Arro is a bit more articulate/involving.
I like the Arros much more than the Staff and have owned both. The Forests are better than either. But the Staff are a poor compromise from my perspective.
Have owned the Arros and now the Hawks. The Arros are a surprisingly articulate speaker and image very well IMO. In the right room they produce a good deal of bass relative to it's size. I auditioned the Staffs prior to purchasing the Arros and found them to be a little more laid back with a slightly warmer sound. I now own the Hawks which I believe have a superior bass to both, tighter with greater extension. The Hawks present a good soundstage that when I audtioned them prior to purchase extended well beyond the speaker cabinet. As I have read so often here YMMV.
Rbstehno . . . how do you speak with such authority about Sttafs if you haven't owned them?

I have Sttafs and Mani-2's. The Sttafs are my second pair and are an irresistible speaker. I have not compared them to Arro's so can't describe the difference. In a small (ie ~ 12x12')room, they are amazing - including bass performance (you look around for the subwoofer). They throw a sound stage well beyond the room walls, and while they aren't as articulate as the Mani-2's, they cost less than half, and can't be faulted as in-articulate in my opinion.

They are indeed a warm speaker. If you pair them with a good sub in a larger room they blow you away.
i auditioned the staff speakers in my house using my equipment while i was debating on the arros. i liked the arros better. all that i remember is that the staff were not exciting compared to the arros and compared to the model 1's that i had in another setup, the staff fell short. just like i have compared the older winds to the mani's using the same gear/room/etc.. and preferred the mani's. if you spend enough time with a speaker and you compare it with something else using the same room/equipment, you can get a good feel on how you like them and how they compare to something else.
i would agree with you if i used different rooms and gear and had days even hours between listening sessions, then that would be a mistake.
Since i sold my arros, i have tried to buy another pair a few times for my den, but i have not considered listening to the staff again. that is the kind of taste the staff left me in.
The Arro's are quicker, throw out a wider sound-stage, and are generally tend to sound more forward along the treble.

The Sttaf's have a fuller sound, possess a deeper sound-stage, and tend to have more of a warmer presentation.

Both speakers respond real well to (good) tube electronics and gear from the likes of Unison Research, Naim, Blue Circle Audio, Monarchy Audio, etc..

I tend to prefer the Sttaf because its the more versatile speaker in the genres of music it can handle. I also like a warmer sound. Then again, that is nothing more than my preference. Both speakers are excellent.
I recently listened to both pairs hooked up w/ entry level naim gear.

Arros - quick, light, open, very good imaging, crisp. Bass is good quality, but does not plummet very low and, as such, is not a great choice when it comes to low notes. However, it is a sin of omission so, if coupled with a good sub, you're good to go. suit small to medium room (medium rooms likely partnered w/ sub, but not necessarily so, depending on your listening preferences). Easy to drive. Arros are the cheaper of the two.

Staffs - definitely warmer, more bloom. More full frequency, but less detailed. Can be played louder without breakup. Also easy to drive. Can perhaps handle more styles of music than the Arros. Suited for larger rooms than the Arros. Staffs push more air due to larger cone.

I preferred the sound of the Arros (although not enough to buy them) and i listen more to rock/alternative - whatever you want to call it, whereas my then-girlfriend, who was into dance/hip hop crap -oops- 'music' preferred the staffs by a wide margin, not appreciating the finer qualities/detail of the Arros.

Hope this totally non-technical description helps. =]

Hey loose, what did you end up buying if anything. What else have you listened to and what did you like.
The Arros partnered with the Dreamcatcher sub is a very resolving and satisfying system. They blend in seamlessly and provides very good bass reach and definition. I have had this combo for almost 10 years and I listen to all genres of music including bass heavy techno dance, rock and pop. You can have a look at my setup on virtual systems.