Pro/Con Floorstanding VS Monitor, which's better?

I've had both. Monitors are easier on the eyes. Well made ones are elegant. Floorstanders dominate the space they populate. They're more dynamic. All I can suggest is walk the walk and discover which you prefer for your environment.

One of the audio magazines (I forget which, but I think it was British) recently did a comparison of comparable models within 4 or 5 major speaker brands; that is, for example, they compared a Proac monitor to the Proac floorstander with similar speaker elements. In all the cases, the reviewer preferred the monitor, and the monitor cost less. Sorry I can't pinpoint the publication; perhaps you can find it online.

Davetherave, What Hi-Fi did this last year. They liked the B&W CDM7 over the CDM1. I remember because all others they liked monitor over floorstander.

Good question... since we're talking about speakers with comparable performance, I'd probably go with monitors with a good set of speaker stands, in large part because I prefer the aesthetics of monitors. But having good monitors pretty much calls for having good speaker stands--the stands have a big effect on performance.

Depends on your room..for transparency,out of box imaging,and few difraction issues monitors will prevail in a small room...in larger rooms the added bass of a floorstander will fill out the sound...few monitors have enough low end to compete...they will end up sounding very lean...case your wondering...not a good thing..