Replacing Forests???


OK, I am looking for some friendly advice. After going through 3 pairs of Forests in a 6 month period, my dealer is allowing me to trade them back in for full value towards another speaker set-up. I am a HUGE fan of the Totem sound, and have never had problems with Totem before these Forests.

I have owned the Tabus and Arros with great results. Moving to a larger space forced me to move away from the Arros and up the Totem line. I had longed for the Forests for a long time, but the problems I've had with these in the short history of owning them has me throwing in the towel with them!

This is a 2-channel music/HT set-up powered by a Simaudio i-5. I am thinking of going with one of the following 2 options:

Totem Sttaf with 2 Dreamcatcher subwoofers

(or)

Totem Hawks

Although I think I am more partial to the Sttaf sound, as I have never been 'wowed' with the Hawks on the gear I've listened to them on (Naim/NAD - both bad; Ayre - pretty decent, small hotel room set-up), I would love to hear people's opinions.

Any comments/suggestions would be greatly appreciated!
jh2os
Well I listened to the Staffs in my system this weekend and was surprised at how good they sounded - well, I shouldn't say surprised, but impressed.

When I moved the Arros to the larger space I quickly realized that I needed to move to a larger speaker as the Arro just couldn't flesh out the soundstage in the larger room - this prompted the purchase of the longed for Forests. The Sttafs had quite some presence in my room - not that of the Forests, nor the pinpoint detailing and precision, but they they didn't have a 'chuffing' woofer either! ;)

Having listened to the Sttafs on their own, I can say I probably wouldn't even need to add a sub? I am not a bass junkie and the presentation seemed full enough for me to enjoy. I would also like to keep the room less cluttered - less two subwoofer 'boxes', and the system simpler as well.

Now I just have to decide if I give the Hawks a shot against them? I guess the only way to know for sure is the bring them home and compare.
I played the Sttafs on their own (ie no sub) for about 6 months. They have very good low end, especially for their size. The speakers I upgraded from provided deep bass - flat to 22 hz, and it wasn't until I played my old progressive rock cd's that I decided something was lacking. If your tastes don't include rock and progressive with deep bass tones as a key element, then I imagine you'll be quite happy without adding a sub.

If it were me, and I believed I wouldn't need a sub with the Sttafs, I would certainly give the Hawks a try (if trying them is an option). I think they buy you about 5 hz deeper extension (ie 38hz - 33hz), but the bigger advantage from what my salesman told me is tighter and more precise - whether it's enough difference to impress you can only be deternined one way. When I bought mine, I maxed my budget with the Sttafs so decided not to look further . . . The great part about them is I had no regrets that I didn't have more money - they're such a great sounding speaker - but I think this is true about the entire Totem line.
Yeah, coming down from the Forests, the Hawks may retain some qualities of precision that the Sttafs can't hold onto? I am hoping to give the Hawks a listen in-home in the near future so I can let my ears decide...
Jh20s,

I am eagerly awaiting your comparision of Hawks with Staffs and Forest. I am in the same boat as you trying to decide between Staffs, Hawks, Forest, SF GP Domus and SF Concerto Domus.

I will highly appreciate if you can post your observations of Hawks and I will really appreciate if you can post your comparision of Staff, Hawk and Forest.

Grakesh
Grakesh,

You have been mulling this decision for quite some time now. Why not go down to a dealer and make a judgment of you're own? You will always be pulling at you're hair "wondering" if you don't listen for yourself.