Digital Amps - Your opinions and why so few?


Hi, I'm in the market for new amps for Maggie 3.6r's and just wondered what your experiences/opinions are on digital amps.
The technology seems well developed, and the advantages seem very tangible 'on paper'. I spoke with a tech guy at Tact Audio concerning their S2150 amp, and the 'specs' are very impressive. They amps also provide the facility to replace the speaker x-over. In a 2-way speaker, you can use two digital amps and program each amp with the associated crossover parameters.
I also spoke yesterday with a real gentleman, Henry, the designer/founder of H2O digital amps. I found him by following a buzz on the apogee audio website, where people using the difficult to drive apogees are dumping off their big Krells and Pass amps, and getting in the queue for the H2O. The few people already using the H20's are raving about them.
Then of course there are the Spectron amps, though I read somewhere recently that they may be going out of business?

The point is, if this technology has matured, and these amps can compete with convential amps, and they are cheaper, lighter, give off less heat, generate higher watts from a smaller/lighter chasis, and.....wait for it....may actually sound better dollar for dollar, why don't we see more of them around?

Rooze
PS - I'm considering dropping big $$$$$ on a pair of new S2150 Tact digitals, please, please talk me out of it, and tell me these amps are crap....
128x128rooze
Check out the Ice Technology in the Rowland 201 and 501 amps also for another high power amazing sounding amp. If you can go with the 501 at 500watt into 8ohm and 1000watts into 4ohm. I owned MGIIIa's and 1.6, both love as much current as you can give them and lots of space off the back wall.
rowland 201 has a purer sound & darker background compare to pass X150.5. Pass however has a touch more warmth and piano note is more weighty but less details. Both goood.
ZR1600 is a good choice for planar speakers. There are several mods available for it. I compared it head-to-head with JC-1 monoblocks and it controls bass better than any amp I have heard, including the JC-1's. Here is a recent shootout:

http://www.audiocircle.com/circles/viewtopic.php?t=13174
Thanks for comments offered so far. I want to believe that a pair Carverpro zr1600 can sound better than a pair of Pass X600's, it's just difficult to digest, given their retail price difference. I'm not a hifi 'snob' and have no 'issues' with Carver amps, or Bob Carver, as some people on AG seem to have. I just don't want to go through another round of buying and selling.
Vince, I know you've been flying the flag for the H2O's, I'm sure the amp is every bit as good as you suggest. I'm worried however about buying into something that doesn't have a real track record. Also, the fit/finish looked a bit unprofessional on the photo's that Henry sent, so resale value and reliability is also a concern, that and his price has gone up $1000 on the monos, not to mention the 3 week leadtime.

I wish someone could do a head-to-head between Tact and Pass, or Carver and Pass etc.
Audioengr....you mentioned bass performance when comparing the ZR and JC1's. Were the ZR's stock or modified?...what other insights can you offer about the two amps, beyond the bass performance? I read the shootout you listed and it seemed inconclusive. Clearly one of the people was a tube fan, and didn't respond well to the presentation of the ZR, the other people seemed undecided on the relative merits of each of the two modified Carvers.

Anyone else with digital experience that could offer a side by side comparison with high end analogSS?

Thanks

Rooze