Totem's "Hawk" and "Forrest":How Hi-End Are They?

Forest is much stronger and better on higher volumes(110dB continuos what do you think?). They realy breath on high volumes. Since all Totems have relatively stable impedance they're considered to be a tube- friendly. Even specs on Forest say that you can use minimum of 30W of tube or 50W of SS amplification. I drive my Forests with VTL MB100 in triode mode 50...55W/ch at most. In seldom cases I switch to ultra-linear 110W/ch.

The Hawks have superb soundstaging/imaging.

My 2 cents: I listened to the Hawks with ARC and CJ and was not too impressed. I could not put my finger on it - they just seemed a little light and recessed sounding. The effect was the same on both setups. Then we swapped the Hawks for JM Lab Cobalt 826 and I was much happier. They were clearer and more lively in general. Don't go by labels like "high end" as they are different for everyone. Good luck!

One more thing that is realy in common to all smaller Totem speakers and monitors:
They're all designed for relatively small rooms and therefore the demand on efficiency is low. They all have superb imaging and staging even including the cheapest floor-standing Arros.
Applying them for the large room will realy demand endless power to drive them.

I was browsing in a hifi store some years ago, listening to small speakers. Most were just noisemakers. Then I heard a pair of Totems. Their high-end perpective was immediately evident. Relatively accurate frequency response, low distortion and noise, clarity with high resolution. I didnt buy them, but they are very good speakers.