PMC vs. Salk Sound Speakers. Which is better?

You can't judge the quality of a crossover by the quantity of its components. Many times, simpler is better, and that simplicity is most likely driven by the choice of drivers in the speaker.

IMO: As far as quality of parts in Salk crossovers, he uses whatever it takes to satisfy his customers. If the customer desires different/better parts than his standard crossover he will accommodate them with anything they want, the sky's the limit. At some point he will tell them they're wasting their money though.

Rja, very true. I just ordered a pair of Soundscape 8's from Jim, and was thinking of upgrading the capacitors in the tweeter position. Jim told me he thought it would be a waste of money to upgrade the other caps in the crossover (mids and woofers). And I had asked him to cost out Duelund VSF Copper vs. Mundorf Silver In Oil. We settled on the Mundorfs primarily due to cost as the Duelunds may be a little bit better in sound quality but not at three times the cost of the Mundorfs. Dennis Murphy is recognized as being an expert in crossover design and I believe his ethos is simpler is better(he designs the crossovers in the Salks). Having not heard any PMC's I can't comment on them vs. Salk.

As to why I would choose the Salk's, a number of things come into play. As Rja mentioned, the customizability of components and finishes is one reason. The fact that I am getting a well thought-of high end speaker at direct sale without a middle man (dealer) makes it much more a ffordable than comparable speakers. The type of bass system employed favors deep but tight bass in my room (two 8-inch woofers and 12 inch passive radiators per speaker) rather than a sealed box or ported speaker. The fact that my amplifier is 250 watts per channel and the sensitivity of the Salk's is 87db/watt( no inability to drive them here!). The driver choices are also a factor as the tweeter is a very highly respected ribbon (RAAL) and the midrange is perhaps one of the best in audio (Accuton ceramic).And Dennis Murphy's crossover simplicity appeals to me rather than a much more complicated pathway. Add to these factors that I heard the Salk's at a show and the sound spoke to me, and there you have it. The PMC could be better, I dont know, but due to the factors listed and the sound I heard, the choice of speakers was clear to me. Whenever someone asks "is this one or that one better?", it brings up a sticky issue. There will always be a better speaker than the one you or I have, but can you afford it and just how much better is it? Is a $100,000.00 dollar speaker ten times better than a $10,000.00 one? We all hear differently, have different ancillary components and different rooms, so my idea of better maybe be your idea of crap. Without having the two speakers in question available to do a side by side comparo in your home, with your equipment,I feel the question is moot.

With regards to the original question you must hear them yourself - getting others opinions is only really of value getting ideas about what you should listen to and perhaps the best way to audition them.

But I am sitting here shaking my head at the quality of parts Vaopr1 said are used in PMC speakers - electrolytics - my god - in a $14k speaker. My new speakers cost $15k and they use Duelund Cast Copper capacitors - at $14k you would expect something a bit better. And yes you can tell the difference - I have heard comparisons of speakers where the only difference was Mundorf Silver In Oil and Duelund VSF Copper - The Duelund murdered the Mundorfs - but electrolytics - the mind boggles.

I have heard PMC's although not the model mentioned - they were average to my ears. I haven't had the pleasure of hearing Salk speakers but I know people whose ears I trust that have and they are fairly impressed.

However if you are considering $14k I would have a look at plenty of other speakers as well as the PMC. In that price bracket I like the Rockport Mira 2.

Thanks
Bill