Music Reference vs. Quicksilver

I have an RM-10, and just think it is great. Small, beautiful, and sounds wonderful. I think you will find only fans of both the amps you mention. I say you should buy both, compare them, sell the one you don't prefer, and then report back on this forum about the sonic differences.

Music Reference gear is pretty bulletproof and great sounding plus with the RM-10 tubes last up to 10,000 hrs....

The Quick Silvers are going to be more colored. If you need to do lower impedences go Music Reference.

I've owned RM9's and an RM200's prior.

i woned older quicksilver and an earlier roger majeski amp.

i liked the earlier quicksilver ams, the 8417 and ms 190. since then, the designs have changed. they are less tube like, in the classic sense. riger majeski's amps never sounded tube like to me.

thus, i would consider other low powered tube amps such as some of the single ended triode varieties.

I have not heard the current Quickies, nor the Muse References. I do have a bkgrd of experience with Quicksilver from when I owned several Quickie products. From this experience, I can say that Quicksilver provides some of the best and no-nonsense customer service in the high end industry. To my way of thinking, that level of quality support holds a lot of weight when making a purchase decision.

In addition, the Quickie products are engineered quite well by a very smart designer, and built quite solidly.

Tubes108, I agree with you, but keep in mind that the very same can be said about RM, both the man and the product. Two classic designers, if that can be said of a person.