Totem Hawk: Outdated compared to newer spks??

No I haven't heard Elements. I used Forrests with tube amp and solid state amp. In both cases I liked them a lot. For the small difference vs. Hawk it's huge step-up.

The Elements are something special, but at a different price point. I have never compared Forrest and Hawks. I have Aeros and Sttafs.

I have a 19-year-old pair of Mirage M5si's that still kick ass. They scale up and down really well with the source material, energize a room realistically, very natural sounding midrange and fast but relaxed treble, bass extension to about 26 Hz, and very uniform tonal balance and dispersion. What's not to like?

When something works very well, it becomes a classic, capable of being competitive for years to come. This doesn't surprise me with an older Totem model because Totem was often ahead of the curve and it often took competitors 5 years just to catch up.

One point that you may be aware of, Sunnyjim, is that the Totems sound their best when using high current amps due to their low sensitivity and the need for reserve power.
Agree with Czarivey that the Hawk is good, but if you can swing the cash, the Forest is the better buy.

The Hawk is very room dependent, meaning that it is fussy with its placement regarding walls, type of floor. But overall, a good speaker.

Agree with Lowrider57, even my Arro's benefited from a move from a Simaudio Moon i-5 to a Magnum Dynalab MD-209 and the extra power.

I listened to the Arro's, Staff, and Hawk side by side and picked the Arro's. Fortunately, the room was about as big and cluttered as my "listening room" aka bedroom, aka Home Theatre aka Office, so it worked out well. I will add the proviso that the Arro's lack bass, but what there is is very good.