Quicksilver Preamps?

I got it from Upscale about six months ago

@oddiofyl Where did you find your Mullard NOS 6201s? I can’t find them stocked anywhere.

I just got a QS Line Stage (non remote) in yesterday. I currently run Odyssey Candela -> Odyssey Kismet -> Tekton Moabs. I love the Odyssey combo, but I had a QS LS in the past and really liked it, and I think it might be a great match with my Moabs. Others have said they pair great with Odyssey amps as well.

@decooney Thanks to your suggestion, I'm running PSVANEs in my amp and really enjoy them. Great clarity, smooth, and very reasonable price. These are under the radar at the moment, but anyone with expensive tubes should consider them for swap in/out experiments.

@oddiofyl fortunately some of the builders like mike at QS and a few others realized a while back the supply of good 12AX7s was drying up and others such as 12AT7, 12AU7 are more plentiful both NOS and new-manufacture too.

I popped out my 60s Blackburn Mullards and tried a pair of the new PSVANEs and they sound pretty good for new tubes, much better than than the stock EI Yugo and JJs that came in my QS amps stock. Fun to run the PSVANE for a while to mothball some of the more rare Mullards as a backup option. As you noted better tubes can make a nice difference.

I just put Mullard NOS 6201 in my Sonic Frontiers and it was a big improvement over the JJ 12at7 I had in there.  Good thing about this tube variety is there are several new production that are good and finding quality 12at7 NOS is much easier and cheaper than 12ax7 or 6922.  Both of which are getting scarce and pricey

I have only bought NOS from Upscale Audio and Brent Jessee 

That 6201 I got was from Upscale and it cost a little more but triodes were perfectly matched and it makes this piece sound much better than a $500 used pre should.   Unit was quiet before but dead quiet now and big sound , great bass , mids and high freq are clear and very detailed.  It had a Brimar 4024 that was dark    Seller said it was nos but I seriously doubt it.  Anyway I had 3 diff tubes in there and the 6201 was easily the best    

I bought it largely on Yogiboy’s posts. I have not compared it to anything other than the Schiit SYS it replaced. It was a small step up from the SYS but I’m starting to think my previous speakers didn’t translate upstream gear changes. So I think maybe that’s why I wasn’t as impressed as I wanted to be when I got it.

I can think of a few line stages I’d like to demo and compare but that’s not money I can part with these days. So I typically research what people perceive to be the best 12AT7 tubes and then see if I can get a pair and see.

Over the years I’ve owned many preamps and the Quicksilver has bested all of them!!

I'd like to A/B my Quicksilver against a "truly hi fi" preamp someday. I don't doubt it can be bettered, but I've not had the chance to see whether it would be bettered by 50% or 10% or 1%, etc. To my ears of course, which are the only ones I've had the privilege of using.

I WASNT ranting at you....  just the Mid Fi reference in general.     I understand...  Quicksilver is definitely underrated.   So good for the money.. .Im sitting here listening to my Mid Monos and asking myself "why am I buying a new Amp? 

I'm having a 300b amp built but will be keeping the QS for sure.   They will do duty in a second system.   If Mike built a low powered SET   I would have bought it.  He did actually,  several years ago and they are quite rare.

I agree. Note I put it in quotes. Directed at the poster who called Quicksilver mid-fi. Might have been another thread. Sorry for the misunderstanding. 

Quicksilver is not Mid Fi at all!!!! 
They play nice with most gear too. Preamps are so tough to “A” / “B”, it’s not like hooking up two sources and toggling back and forth.   Call Johnny at Audio Connection in NJ...

Well I for one love my "mid-fi" Quicksilver Full Function. Upgraded Mullard MC1 long plates and metal base 5AR4. It's all good.

I have the non-remote version and tube changes have been fun to play with. I will mod it when the warranty period is over and may not feel a need to change it until everything else changes around it. I love it.

Some of the purist QS fans like the non-remote version claiming it sounds better.  Have friends with both and they like them.  Put really good caps in it and some nice tubes and decent interconnects and you'll enjoy it for many years. When you are done, someone will take it off your hands willingly.  

I had one on loan years ago, ans I thought that the sound was what some would consider classic tube in that the timbre and textures were good, and it was not at all harsh, but I thought that it was a bit lacking in drive and the big architecture of some other preamplifiers. Agree with pmm, not the best, but good value.

Forgot to add—I went from Quicksilver 8417 amps to Silver 90s. Wish I had picked up a 190, 6C33C, and 120 monos—I obviously love Quicksilver amplifiers. They will drive anything within their power rating, seemingly immune to low impedance loudspeakers.

I started with Audible Illusions 2B ——> original Quicksilver Full Function preamp (better bass and dynamics) ——> Jadis JPL (bigger sound stage and more colorful) ——> Audible Illusions 3A (truer timber—I am apparently sensitive to this—not quite the bass or dynamics of the Quicksilver but really good; more realistic than the Jadis). Downside is too much gain. If I were in the market today, I would look at Supratek, Benchmark, and CODA.

They drive the tubes so they last about a year before microphonics and what not starts.

id like to add to the OP’s inquiry from Previous  owners and what they moved up to.

Search the discussions. Plenty of mention.
Are they competitive?-Yes; Truly high end?-No, just a great value.
" they're extremely minimalist"-not to be judged by this, you`ll need to listen to one, in your system.