Van Quatro, Thiel 2.4, PSB Synch One, Merlin, Salk

A lot of great high flyers speakers in this group.

Any favorites out of this list, any experiences with comparisons?

Vandersteen Quatro
Thiel .4
PSB Synchrony One
Merlin VSM
Salk Sound HT2 TL or HT3
Room size? Listening preferences?
Vandersteen Quatro is a terrific speaker and an easy pick for me among your choices.
Thank you Audiofeil.

Bsal, Room Size - open, 15x20, but I listen across the small dimension and do not necessarily need to fill the room with a rock concert.
Preference is accurate midrange, very open, clear sound, large soundstage, 3d imaging. I'm not into lush or warm. I do like a very good extended treble response.
I also listen to a lot of classic rock, am not really a classical fan.
I may add the aerial 9 to the list.
Thiel 2.4's are awesome for their price to performance ratio. Based on your preferences...these are it. Cheers.
Slight edge to the Thiels over the Quatros, but it's just my preference. I think they are both very good, and spent alot of time with both before going with my Harbeth/REL combo.
PSB Synchrony One for me. They have nice strong clear midrange and highs. Deep bass response. Beautiful cabinets. I run them with a McIntosh MA6900 and they sound awesome. Retail $5000 but get them on the gon for $3500 or so.
I owned the Salk HT3 and they have a mid range to die for. IMO this is a great full range speaker. It is one of the best speaker I have ever owned or listen to. I bought a used pair a few months ago and they get better each day.

Great cabinets, wife really like them. Great highs and fast accurate bass.

That being said there are some great speakers out there and when you hear the ones you really like you will know immediately.

Good luck.
I would give the Thiel 2.4s a listen. They are highly resolving and get tone colors and timbral textures accurately. They are soundstaging and imaging champs. They do not plumb the depths of the LF spectrum but they have more than ample fast and tuneful bass. They have been unfairly tagged as being clinical/analytical. With high quality associated equipment (and at least 100w/ch of clean power), they are nothing of the sort rather they deliver what you are looking for in spades. And from an aesthetic point of view, I think they have a furniture-grade/meticulous finish and are easy on the eyes. If you have a chance to audition them, I would highly recommend them.
I have the 2.4s powered by a CJ CA200 control amp. They extend nicely top and bottom with a smooth and silky midrange. The thing I really like about them is the huge image they present. It is difficult to listen analyicially for too long simply because the music takes over and pulls you in. Several audio buddies have also commented on this feature upon listening. They do need at least 100W/ch of quality power though to sound best. They are not harsh but do need at least 200 hours of moderate level (80 dB) break in.