Manly Steelhead - any downside??

Thanks to Nkonor for reviving this thread.  I bought a Steelhead just a few months ago, and so far I quite like it. My gripes would be as follows:
(1) Input resistance choices for MM.  The MM input offers 47K ohms and then a series of very much lower resistances that are totally irrelevant for MM cartridges.  I do realize that the optional low (under 1000R) input resistances are actually for using MC cartridges through the MM inputs, if one wants to bypass the built-in autoformers that are in the circuit path if you use the MC inputs, but still...  
(2) I was rather surprised to read that nkonor prefers using the Steelhead as a full preamplifier rather than feeding its output to his Spectral preamplifier, since most others have reported that it sounds best as a phono stage.  I too am using mine as a full function preamplifier, and I agree with others that it is not at all lean in sound quality.  In that regard, the topology of the White Cathode Follower output circuit uses a lot of capacitance (30uF) and a low value shunt resistor (10K).  This is to ameliorate problems related to using high capacitance interconnects.  However, I cannot believe it would not sound better with a lower value capacitance (e.g., 3 or 4uF) and a larger shunt resistor (100K ohms).  The latter combo of C and R would result in the exact same bass cut-off, and I am going to try it.  Lower coupling C should sound better. Maybe this is why others report that the Steelhead sounds best as a phono stage, because if you take the output ahead of the "line stage" section, you avoid this possibly suboptimal output circuit.  (I do understand why Manley may have chosen the values for R and C; you never know what folks might use as cables and what downstream equipment they might expect the Steelhead to drive.)  There's more to this stuff than rolling tubes.

The Kong, Before having done any modifications or tube rolling with the Steelhead, I would rank those 3 as follows: MP1>Steelhead>Janus.  This is my Janus with upgraded coupling capacitors (using V Caps and polystyrene film and foil output capacitors on both the line and phono stages).  The stock capacitors in the standard non-Signature Janus really drag down its potential, IMO.  My MP1 is not stock, either.  My only problem with it is that one of the modifications I performed was to replace the bottom tube(s) in the phono input dual-differential cascode with a bipolar transistor, as used by Allen Wright in his RTP3C.  This gives the phono stage so much gain that it is unusable with all except very LOMC cartridges.  Not a bad problem to have, but I cannot run it with MM cartridges.  The Steelhead sounds very good with MMs in my basement system, as is.

Noromance, 6 Moons reviews are among the most unbelievable reviews to be found on-line, IMO, but I will take a look.  There are several other reviews or posts on Audiogon claiming that this or that phono stage is also superior to the Steelhead; I don't let stuff like that faze me. The TEAD is solid state, is it not?  I am still waiting to fall in love with any solid state phono stage.  Many are "very good", to my ears, but all so far fail to reach that juicy musical Nirvana I perpetually seek.  

I happen to have a stash of 6900s, but I use them in my amplifiers, two per chassis, and I am loathe to further diminish my supply.  However, in the past I had come to believe that 5687s (the parent of the 6900) can sound just as good in audio applications.  The 6900s are needed if you're building a guided missile, in 1965.