Quicksilver M60 vs Early Silver 88


Anyone have experience with these two. I am Demoing a pair of M60 with 6550 tubes and I do love the sound. But have been leaning more towards a pair of Silver 88’s. Besides a 30% increase in power. Are the 88’s better in other ways? Tube replacement would be cheaper Since the 88’s have fewer tubes. Running Vandersteen speakers. 
0afa1cfe 0eea 4069 976e 0a5be70cf2fapstores
Sounds like a question you should ask the manufacturer, he is very accessible and welcomes these type of injuries, he was certainly helpful in a similar decision I was in need of making.

I’ll give him a call..
I own a pair of Mid Monos, fantastic amps....love them.   I am willing to bet the M60 is a major value at their price.

Cant say enough good things about Quicksilver....
I heard a pair of M60s many years back, can't really comment with any meaningful comparison with the later Silver 88, compatable with the kt150 tubes and what I currently use. The Silver 88 is a most exceptional amp with nada a one irritant that fatigues over time. I never heard a Quicksilver I didn't like. They really are an amazing value in tube amplification.

I agree with tooblue, give Mike Sanders a call. He is direct and a no bs guy. He'll give you his honest opinion.  
I agree they are great amps... I have been listening to a set of m-60 with Tung Sol 6550, Vandersteen 2ce sig ii and an Atma-sphere UV-1 point to point and it’s not just music... It’s an experience..... Wished Mike had a Minnesota or Wisconsin Dealer....  Value wise hard to beat...  But I have listened to a Atma-sphere m60 briefly and that also was incredible....