PMC IB1 Vs. Harbeth M40

I have not heard the Harbeth but have heard the IB1s extensively. It depends on your musical and sonic tastes. I found the IB1s to be too "punchy" for my tastes. I felt the bass was a bit pushed out or forced, which the higher end MB2s corrected. But you may consider that simply as dynamic to your tastes. With that said, I do like the IB1s and would be happy with them if I had ended up with them.

I have owned Harbeth M30s and M40s in the past year, I kept the M40s, I use them for home listening, they are superb. I haven't heard the PMC model. I don't believe M40s should be put in the same category as the PMC IB1 model. The PMC is designed to go lower in frequency, to generate more SPLs, especially at low frequency. The Harbeth strength is neutral accuracy, faithfullness to the original sound, they were developed for the BBC as broadcast reference monitors. They aren't intended to be thrashed with heavy compressed material like pop/rock or movie soundtrack. I'm getting terrific results with an 80 Watt per channel solid state amp.
Ted in New York

Tedr227's characterization of the PMC IB1 is incorrect. The IB-1 actually does strive for accuracy. I own the IB-1's and have listened to Harbeth M40 at a local Harbeth audio dealer. They are both wonderful speakers, however, the more expensive IB-1 has much better bass.

The PMC is designed for accuracy and neutrality - in fact it succeeds more than the Harbeth at these things. PMC were also developed for the BBC as broadcast reference monitors. They are most certainly not designed for compressed recordings, they have incredible realism and dynamics.

I have the mb2-xbd-active.