Help with Totems

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.

Thanks guys, helpful as always. Merry Christmas

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. =]