Warm Sounding Speakers

I owned the 901s back in the 80s. After reading Jeff's review I feel vindicated for liking them.
Actually, I do think Jeff nailed it in his review.

Price? Monitor vs floorstander?
Those questions aside, I'll make my recommendations.
Soliloquy 5.0 monitors. The most natural sounding speakers I have ever heard/owned. I have tried numerous times to upgrade from them but nothing works as well. Never fatiguing, always easy to listen to and I don't feel as if I'm missing any detail. I was reading a review of a dac the other day and the author mentioned the dac seemed a bit bright so he tried it out with his 5.0s which he claimed were intentionally voiced to have a warm sound.
For a floorstand speaker I recommend Meadowlark Audio Kestrel, the original Kestrel and not the model II. Very similar sound to the Soliloquy with just a tad deeper bass.
Both of these speakers image very well also. Also, both speaker companies are out of business so maybe my taste is not what the market likes. I have to say I can't tolerate speakers that I consider "audiophile" speakers with an over abundance of treble energy.

Johnnyb53
I can't believe you'd recommend the original Kestrel over the Kestrel II.

I have owned both and if you are looking for warmth, the original Kestrel has it all over the II. I lived with the Kestrel IIs for a few months and when I put the Kestrels back in the my reaction was "ahh, there it is." Actually, they were Kestrel Hot Rods but the difference is minimal as far as I can tell. Yes, I have owned both. Johnnyb53, do you have experience with the Meadowlarks?
I kind of figured the op was looking for a speaker for a spare/second system as I wouldn't recommend the Kestrels as replacements for his Maggies.

I also had some extended phone conversations with Pat McGinty back then--about his design philosophy, values, business model, etc. I probably gave the wrong impression with my post. I was sorry to see Meadowlark hang it up. I thought they overall had a good line,They were ahead of the curve with their 1" MDF cabinet construction and resonance control. It's just that the first Kestrel probably crossed over too high, leaving the midrange to beam for a half octave or so.
Johnnyb53

I don't want to hijack the op's thread but this is interesting to me as I have owned three different pairs of the original Kestrels, one pair of hot rods and two of the standard Kestrels. There was quite an age difference between the standard Kestrels I owned and there was also a difference between the crossovers. I know this because the last pair of Kestrels (oldest by serial #) I bought, thanks to UPS, came with both of the crossovers rattling around in the bottom of the cabinets.
Before repairs, I looked at the crossover in the newer pair of Kestrels to see how they should go back together. I was surprised to note there were major differences in the parts and wiring used as well as the layout of the crossover. The newer crossovers were built to a much higher standard. Of the three pairs of Kestrels, I always felt the newer pair had a bit cleaner sound, a bit more resolution maybe.
Also, the Kestrels are very good when getting up and walking around. They keep that three-dimensional thing even when standing right between them. I demoed a pair of Magnepan 12QRs a few years ago and could not stand how much they change when leaving the sweet spot. This comparison was done with the Kestrel hot rods.
I do realize replacing the op's Maggies with Kestrels is a crazy idea. But if "warmth" is what you're looking for, the Kestrels are great.
BTW, although they were good looking speakers, I did not like the Kestrel II at all. Would never recommend them for sound quality. Of course with any internet advice, YMMV.