I couldn't disagree with Rushton more. I have directly compared Quicksilver to SST and there is NO comparison. Quicksilver is in another league. Don't get me wrong, I did like SST when I first tried it...but SST is minor league when compared to Quicksilver.
First off you didnt let Quicksilver break in long enough. The instructions say 72-96 hours. I didn't like the initial listening either, but based on the manufacturers recommendations, I ran my system for several days WITH signal and then did some critical listening. I found the results anything but "fatiguing" or "un natural", in fact the total opposite was the case. There was less noise, less congestion, instruments had VERY distinct separation. The music was more enveloping rather than being thrust at me. The singer had moved a foot or two more forward, but there was infinite space behind them now. There were no boundaries to the right and left sides as there were before. A HUGE sense of space and openness like never before.
Brightness and messes up tonal balance and overtone structure? Not here. Im hearing something totally different.
I agree with Jack Seaton, Im hearing things that I never knew were on recordings before, including the two months I used SST.
I was so impressed with what Quicksilver did for my two-channel that I treated my home theater system
same results, absolutely incredible. I have an extensive DVD collection and naturally I have some favorite/reference movies and concerts. Again
I am hearing voices more clearly and with texture and body through my center channel that are chilling they are so real. Sounds that were very subtle before Quicksilver are now very apparent. But as good as Quicksilver is on Audio
the Video is even better. Since applying Quicksilver about 6 weeks ago, I have turned my color levels down 30% and my black level down 15%. Immediately after applying Quicksilver I had to turn the color down about 20% and the black level down about 10%. The picture continues to improve every week.
SST not only lacks in performance, the application is a nightmare and the removal is worse that that. Be prepared to remove something closely resembling gum on the bottom of a school desk when removing SST. Quicksilver removes very easily in seconds and is totally removes easily with one swipe of an alcohol swab. SSTs swab is also very clumsy, you CAN NOT apply to an S Video cable with this eyeliner applicator. I say can not, you could if you want it all over the sides of the barrel and have a total messand the risk of shorting out your pins! Quicksilver has a very sleek brush that is a sheer pleasure to use .Walkers applicator is like trying to use a jack hammer for precision work.
After reading Rushtons posts here and elsewhere, it appears to me that he may be on a promotional campaign for Walker products. While I like some of Walkers products, I call them like I see them. I also wonder how objective of a review Rushton could make after I look at his previous posts about the Procenium and SST elsewhere? It is apperant that Rushton has an agenda. Although he may or may not be employed by Lloyd Walker, it would be a safe bet that he got some direct affiliation with him.
I have read the numerous Testimonials by Quicksilver customers like Jack Seaton, and ALL of them contradict Rushton and parallel my experiences.
One suggestion to Rushton, contact Quicksilver and request your money back. Quicksilver has a 100% satisfaction guarantee.
Quicksilver improved my neighbors $2000.00 Audio/Video system just as much as it did my reference system . There not is the same league by any means, but the improvements were very similar.
Quicksilver is literally like changing a component, the improvements are anything but subtle and at $64.95 it is a freakin steal!
In closing Rushton
No, Im not buying it, I smell the stench of ulterior motives in the air!
