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. 
128x128pstores
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 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....