Quicksilver Audio M-60 Mono Tube Amplifiers

M-60 Mono Tube

Power Amplifier (pair) 60 Watts (1995-1998)

User Reviews (11)

Showing 1-10 of 11  
Marvin Schwinder   AudioPhile [Sep 13, 2006]
Strength:

Spectacular mid-range with remarkable, lifelike reproduction of the human voice. Natural highs. These throw a deep soundstage. Very musical. Smooth.
Well built and built to last. Over 17 years of ownership, I've needed only 2 or 3 modest cost repairs.

Weakness:

Bass not up to the standards of the mids and highs. Bass is flabby.

I've been using these original 8417 mono amps for 17 years. I listen a few hours some weeks, other weeks not at all. I alternate among several sets of 8417 tubes, whcih are not manufctured any more. These amps sound best with the 8417 tubes, which in my experience seem to last forever.

These amps produce lifelike three dimension sound images which suck you into the music. Properly fed with a pristine signal, playing through well set-up speakers, the Quicksilver 8417 monoblocks bring it home, alive. Superlative.

Customer Service

Excellent service by Mike Sanders of Quicksilver, inventor and owner of Quicksilver Audio.

Similar Products Used: Ayre V3.
OVERALL
RATING
5
VALUE
RATING
5
Dean   Audio Enthusiast [Jan 03, 2003]
Strength:

Excellent sound, sturdy build and convenience afforded by separate mono amp units

This model is the original 8417 mono amp now using Sovtek 5881 tubes. Matched with Audio Research SP9 MkII preamp and Sonus Faber Concerto Grand Piano speakers, the monoamps sound great with tight bass, natural mid and crystalline high. With minor modifications, these monoamps may accommodate a variety of tubes namely EL 34, KT 88, 6L6 and 6550. But if you can still find the rare gems of tubes, the 8417s, go get them and your effort will be highly compensated.Kudos to Quicksilver Audio!

OVERALL
RATING
5
VALUE
RATING
5
scientist1953   Audio Enthusiast [Dec 08, 2002]
Strength:

Imaging and sound stage.

Weakness:

EL34 is not the best with them.

Somewhat thin with original EL34 with Quad US monitor. Boy, what a difference with 6550C! (Russian Made, requires matching eight of them, costing quite a bit.) They produce beautiful imaging and almost holographic sounds stage. I always used directly from a high-end Sony CD player without preamp.

OVERALL
RATING
5
VALUE
RATING
3
Paul Birkeland   Audiophile [Jan 24, 2000]
Strength:

Sound

Weakness:

Heat, weight

I traded in my adcom on the PS amp. It didn't work very well so I took it in and took a chance. I took home the two monoblocks, along with a pair of castle eden's. I was a very happy camper. WIth my arcam CD player, I was able to hear new sound couldn't distinguish on my old system. Before I had some electrostatic speakers, I'm glad I got rid of them. The warmth with tubes and conventional speakers is amazing. Definately an A+.

Similar Products Used: Adcom GFA-5800, PS Audio 200cx, JoLida 202a, Parasound HCA 750
OVERALL
RATING
5
VALUE
RATING
5
Craig   Audiophile [Aug 03, 2000]
Strength:

Imaging, awesome amp the price

Weakness:

bass a little thin

Well i bought these for a thousand bucks with, el-cheapo el-34's installed....I was not happy as the majic from my system was gone, I have Lamm research mono's also, but don't use them very often as i have allot of little kids running around. Back to the QS...after re-tubing with gold aero kt-88's (about 100.00 each)....wow!! a cheap priced amp that sounds almost as good as the Lamm (12,000 give or take). The only minor complaint is the bass is a little thin...everything else is great!!! My other equipment is as follows:

Altis Reference CD
Audio Research DAC-2
Audio Research LS 15 preamp
QS Mono 60's
Joseph Audio Reference 30 Speakers
Light-Star Silver interconnects and spearker cables

Similar Products Used: ARC, CJ,
OVERALL
RATING
5
VALUE
RATING
5
Walter   Audiophile [Apr 08, 2000]

These are excellent amps, especially for the money. Quicksilver uses a very simple circuit, which, as here, usually improves the sound. I liked them from the first time I turned them on. The image well, are very musical, and are sweet without being euphonic. They are only 60 watts, so as one of the reviewers noted, they may not put out a lot of bass and would not work with inefficient speakers. I use monitor speakers and a subwoofer, so for me they are just about perfect. I may never buy another pair of amps. I bought mine from Richard Messer at Renaissance Audio in Florida. His prices are very competitive and he is a good guy to deal with. 941-955-5888

OVERALL
RATING
5
VALUE
RATING
5
John Gaynor   an Audiophile [Sep 04, 1999]

I wrote a poduct review before now i have compared these amps in direct comparison to other amps. I compared it to arc vt 100 and at first I was dissapointed with the quicksilvers .the arc blew it away in the soundstaging department but the vocal on the quicksilver was without reproach.I was still not happy with the quicksilvers because of the lack of information. THAN I tried 6550's watch out. The bass wow it is so tunefull extended not TIGHT BUT REAL.the soundstage opened up but with perfect timber.thhe highs and mids make the ARC sound so steril. I will say it is euphonic more than immidate , not solid state fast but REAl magical .I love it . im now using silver audio syphony 32's they are great reference quality. NOTHING BAD everything is musical and right

OVERALL
RATING
5
VALUE
RATING
JOHN GAYNOR   an Audiophile [Aug 10, 1999]

Before purchasing these amplifiers I reveiwed Conrad Johnson, Graff, Sonic Frontiers, Bryston, and a few others. These amps presented the music with a timber and clarity that the other amps could not achieve. In comparison, the Conrad Johnson had a golden hue in the sound stage. The Graff was brighter and the Sonic Frontiers was sterile. I still love these amplifiers, but the Quick Silvers were more transparent liquid and presented the vocal and mid range in a first class maner. The Bryston, I love, but was too expensive and the mid range wasn't as magical. Elsewhere on this web site a person states that the Quick Silver compared with the Conrad Johnson had a slow presentation. I have found this is not true. I believe it was the associated equiptment wires, pre amp etc...

Associated equiptment
Audible Illusions 3a
Marantz 67 sig.
Cal sigma 2
Monarchy dip
Canard digital cable
Panasonic 414 DVD
Silver audio 4.0 with WBT 108
Kimber KCAG with WBT 108
Silver audio symphony 32
custom speakers
18DB per octave
designed in leap

OVERALL
RATING
5
VALUE
RATING
Rick   an Audio Enthusiast [Oct 06, 1999]

The Quicksilver M60 monos were my first adventure into tube amplification. The M135 mono amps were not in my budget so I bought the M60s. I was not disappointed. I had been listening to a large Adcom amplifier for years, I found it hard to listen to from the start. It had lots of power but it was harsh. The M60s in comparison were musical. They may not have had the bass response of the large Adcom but that did not matter. I listened to them for hours and was never disappointed. I tried going back to the Adcom just to see. I didn't make it through one track on a CD before switching back. I am sure there are better amplifiers out there and of course worse. I found that the M60s were gems and would recommend them to anyone.

OVERALL
RATING
4
VALUE
RATING
FRED   a Casual Listener [Oct 05, 1999]

When I first listened to the Quicksilver power amps I closed my eyes and said this is it.The speakers that were hooked to these were the Vandersteen 2CE Sig Superb,and cost is fair.

OVERALL
RATING
5
VALUE
RATING
Showing 1-10 of 11  

(C) Copyright 1996-2018. All Rights Reserved.

audioreview.com and the ConsumerReview Network are business units of Invenda Corporation

Other Web Sites in the ConsumerReview Network:

mtbr.com | roadbikereview.com | carreview.com | photographyreview.com | audioreview.com