Reactions to HP's review of Antique Sound Lab amp?

Zaikesman....I normally do not jump out there and buy something without a listen (especially from a company that I know very little of). However, with that said, I do know that I have been advises a number of times that my speakers would do much better with a more powerful amp to drive it. The cost for a higher wattage amp was a bit stiff.....but when this guy came along (Hurricane) with such a glowing review and reasonable cost (I should say MORE then reasonable) I decided to go for it.

As to HP's review....I am pretty much in agreement with his recommendations and reviews of equipment......but not always. For instance, my speakers. He had the bigger brother of my speaker as a reference but did not care too much form the model I purchased. I, however, fell in love with them! So, HP and I do not always see ear to ear....

Yes, there is a an excitement and anticipation for this new "baby"....I do feel like the expectant father. The only difference with this is that I am not committed to this baby I it cries or acts up to much.....!!!

Everytime you swap out a piece of equipment there is some element of risk. Whether you've devoted 60 hours of comparative in-home listening or simply took the plunge within 10 minutes of just looking at the product there's a roughly equal chance that within 2 or 3 years you'll want to upgrade again. Barring some technical mismatch (impedance, i/o sensitivity, etc.) I would hope that any product with audiophile aspirations would reach 80-85% of its performance level when matched with virtually any other audiophile product. With these thoughts in mind I argue that buying based upon a magazine review is as valid as any other method of equipment selection. Harry Pearson has a long track record of stating his equipment preferences. If someone has preferences that coincide with Pearson's, then they'd probably be quite happy with any product he raves about. The worst that can happen is within a few months from now when Pearson proclaims another amp as the best, the owner of the ASL will have to survive with the "second best" amplifier on the planet.

Onhwy61, although I'd probably have to agree with you about the eventual upgrade situation regardless of how a component is chosen initially, I have to take exception with the idea that buying from a review is just as good as any other way. The two may not be linked - audiophiles could simply like to upgrade, no matter how carefully made or fulfilling of expectations their previous purchase was. I have had an experience where buying a piece that was very widely well-reviewed left me in complete disagreement with the critical consensus, but since I got it used there was no problem when I sold it. Since reviewers get to listen to much more gear than I ever will (or want to), what they say can be useful, especially if you have a familiarity with their history and some gear they've covered, but I still tend to regard reviews as being best used only for guidance in choosing what to audition, if at all possible.

Rwd: You are certainly right in one respect - that your new amps may be better than what you currently have. Let's hope so!

I took some of these in on a partial trade. The amps I have were upgraded with Coincident wire and Svetlana 6550s. I have since sold them because I don't have tube friendly speakers at the moment, and I don't like having an inventory of audio stuff lying around. I can tell you that these amps were extremely impressive. I was very skeptical when I first heard them. I'm no fan of HP, but I think his review of the Hurricanes is pretty accurate.

Any comments or experience with the reliability of these amps? How about biasing problems?
There are some interesting comments and thoughts from the controversial author, Anthony Salvatore, editor of the web ezine: www.high-endaudio.com. There is a lot to peruse and muse upon therein.