Counterpoint products were excellent.
Can you fault them? Sure, but you can do that with any product. Regardless of cost.
I would say that they kept the tube flame burning during the zenith of the big, bruising solid state muscle amps. The tube input was the thing that distinguished them. While it's true that they played in the high current field, I believe they were required to. The premier speakers of that time required a lot of juice to come alive. Apogee, Carver, Duntech, Hales, Magnepan, Martin Logan, PSB, Thiel.
Let's face it, if you were a high end amp at the time, and you could not feed these speakers what they need, current, you would not be able to sell anything. Your amp, in comparison to Classe, Krell, Mark Levinson, and Rowland would sound limp, strained, harsh, and constricted. Those were the direct competitors of Counterpoint. A step or two above Adcom, AMC, B & K, and NAD. A step above Aragon.
A lower powered amp at the time fell into the classification of lower priced, lower quality(back then quality was quantity), exotic - owned by lunatic fringe, or foreign(European - also considered lunatic fringe at the time).
The amps could basically drive anything you needed to drive. Their products could drive a 2 ohm load, and if my memory serves me correctly, maybe even a 1 ohm load. The sound was rich, due to the 6DJ8 and mosfet outputs. But, I feel that there was definitely some mosfet haze, if not to the degree of Adcom, which I feel is the classic example mosfet haze. I can also say that the sound was a bit etched, electronic, and unnatural. But, so were all of the other competitor's amps. There wasn't a sense of lightness or speed of the products, but again, that was the rule of the day. Even of the time's best amps. I would say it was partly due to the "bigger is better" war that was going on regarding power supplies; transformers and capacitors. Part of it were the parts available. Part of it was that "simpler is better" was not embraced by many then.
Parts quality has come along way in the past decade. And, I am certain that had Counterpoint survived, they would have progressed in a manner similar to Jeff Rowland. A continual upward path, resulting in a refinement and smoothness improvement. None of these big amps needed more power. In fact, over the past 5 or so years, speakers have become much more efficient. Mostly necessitated by the reemergence of tubes.
Would I buy a Counterpoint amp now? Sure. If the sound was what I was looking for. The prices, always reasonable for their quality, are good. As has been mentioned, in the right combination, Counterpoint can offer heaven. As always, an audition is required to see if your tastes merge with the marque. I would also agree with the assessment that the power amps as significantly more reliable than the preamps.
