PMC vs. Salk Sound Speakers. Which is better?

Love my IB2i. They do everything extremely well, to my ears, and seamlessly. But I do think they're too pricey. That said, given how much I enjoy them, I don't regret the expense.

Salks are good speakers; I've heard one of the recent flagships. I think my Thiel CS3.7's are better, though. The Thiel's are within your range used and I'd recommend them if you have a very good front end and amp. If not, the Salks are more forgiving. Haven't heard the PCM's.

Exactly, how did you choose these two speakers as potential choices? I would love to hear an answer to that question.

My best advice, and truly the only advice is to do your research -- reviewers are pretty straight up, outside of Stereophile-- and then purchase what seems like your preference. This is America, so we have way too many choices. I could tell you that Zu Audio will satisfy your soul, but that is for you to decide. It did satisfy my soul and more.

Bottom line, ya gotta drop some money to find out for yourself

Seriously, you're judging the quality of the crossovers based on the number of components? What does a "generous amount of parts" even mean?

Audiozen,

Perhaps you are confused in regards to number of parts and sound quality. Some of the world's most highly-regarded speakers have very few parts. Take Fried speakers, for example. Their designer, Bud Fried, used anywhere from 6-10 parts p/crossover and achieved miraculous results. Or take a pair of Spendor SP1/2s. Derek Hughes used 12 parts p/board and created one of the all-time classics. Yes, there are designers who use more parts and also get superb results, but to say that there is always a positive parts/sound correlation is simply not accurate.