Focal XS and B&W MM-1 multimedia speakers

Hmm... I've never listened to the b&w yet... But the focals are at the apple store- and I've auditioned some. They sound good-ok... Have you auditioned them yet?

The Focals have a subwoofer [2.1], but the B&Ws do not - as they are 2.0.
Generally speaking, in my experience, 2.0 systems have better clarity as all of the $cost goes into the 2 speakers. Whereas the Focals, have much of the $cost put into the subwoofer and enclosure.

Of course, the Focals will have better bass - deeper anyways.
Depends on what you prefer.
Personally, I like 2.0 systems more.

They are pricey speakers, are you sure you want to go this route instead of some other HT speakers and a dedicated amplifer? Just saying you might want to shop around a bit but I haven't heard these so they may be a great system.

At that price you could get some really nice studio monitors. Something like KRK's or mackie supposedly sound excellent. Have you considered the audio engine A5's or the Swan MKIII's? If desk space is a concern then they wont work for you compared to the 2 you're looking at. But they do sound beautiful and require your asus xonar to work. They're also much cheaper!

At 500/pair... There should be many options. 500 including subwoofer is possible too: if you look for deals/sales

But because there are so many brands out there, what's your music preference? Movies?? And I'd suppose you are using the speakers closefield?

Read tons of reviews, then audition the top handful.

Meta-Review of Speakers:
Electronics Product Reviews - Editorial - eCoustics.com
The link should take you to the Editorial Reviews of speakers. You can also look up 'User Reviews".

These sites are for reviews of "Affordable Equipment":
Affordable$$Audio :: The E-zine For Frugal Audio Enthusiasts

GoodSound! - The Experts on Affordable High-Performance Audio

Also, check out Paradigm and PSB speakers, they usually get very good reviews and are known (at least Pardigm) for sounding better than more expensive/esoteric offerings.

Good Luck, and let us know what you get!

If you're planning on going the passive route, the amp out of your avr, or most avrs, won't cut it compared to a stereo integrated amp.

Entry-level passive setups honestly don't sound as good as the audioengine a5

cool... similar to the uses that i use my 2.0 system for.

If you want to try your receiver and some passives: might I suggest the AudioEngine AP4's.... they are the newest speakers from them.... and are passives. Silk dome tweeters, 4" Kevlar woofers... and a frequency response of: 58hz-22khz - - and they are tiny [about 1/2 size of a regular piece of paper] for their range. --- Also, they are front ported - which I think this helps with stereo imaging.
Audioengine - Upgrade your music

They are $249/pair for the black or white ones*... and also come in solid real bamboo [at a higher price]. You'd still have $ for a subwoofer!

Well... hope this doesn't become a long thread about the difference of powered speakers, active speakers, and passive speakers.
--- but I think both have its positives and negatives... but as for sound quality, imo, they are equal.

I have 2 sets of powered speakers for music listening [and portability] - one DIY 2.1 system and a pair of AudioEngine A2's. I've also auditioned the A5's and think they are amazingly efficient and sq is great - but thought they were sorta big...
My Living room system is a 7.1 surround sound: Klipsch Reference Rs series powered by a Pioneer Amplifier -doing 24bit/192khz pcm or Dolby Digital EX or DTS-Neo6.

My AudioEngine A2's are great - stereo imaging is awesome, highs are crisp, stereo separation is amazing, and the bass is decent for closefield- definitely loud enough... But the Klipsch passives are equally as crisp, loud, detailed etc - and enough power [pioneer 7.1 amp is rated at 100watts peak/channel - not too sure about rms rating...] to fill the whole living room, and I have a Klipsch 200watt rms powered 10"sub which is decent.

Point is though... the A2's are probably mated alot better - perfectly matched internal amp, crossovers, with the drivers --- and operate at over 90% efficiency, and were cheap!-@$200set-it's a steal - but they are imposible to upgrade if needed.
The AVR system is different... I can change any of the components at anytime - if I feel like upgrading or replacing something that decides to stop working [knock on wood!]. Albeit, it was total cost: about $1000[clearance prices] - but in the OP's case, he doesn't have to get the 7.1 system - just a 2.1 = 5 less speakers, and he can try using just 2 passives without a sub first. Then later, when he decides to go full 5.1 or 7.1 surround - it is a easy upgrade... especially when he already has the AVR.

Come on now, comparing the tiny A2s with your full-sized klipschs? The A5s are a whole different beast from their little (not just in size) brothers.

My point is simple: It will be very difficult to get better sound with an entry level passive setup than a simple pair of active a5s. For the same price, an int. amp will generally be much better and more efficient at driving passives than an AVR. I checked out that denon avr you listed, sure the price is high, but it will definitely not compete with an dedicated stereo amp. With passives, the amp is probably as important as the speakers themselves. Unless you need all that surround sound and other capabilities an AVR has, there's no reason not to get an amp instead.