Any project involves making some choices along the way from concept to final product. Inevitably, something gets traded off. These guys (supposedly) sacrificed price-point for 'perceived quality'.

I emphasise the word perceived here, because they've made at least one choice that sounds like a good idea, but doesn't do anything useful, and actually wastes money that might better have gone towards a real benefit. I mean, of course, the 10 guage steel chassis. A brutally strong chassis is very expensive to make, but as anyone who has any vibration testing experience (like a long road-trip), can tell you, they would have been much wiser to use lighter guage steel, and apply the cost savings toward shock-mounting the chassis.

Which raises two points to ponder.

1) When you spend your hard-earned cash for something, you're expressing confidence in the design and functionality of that item.

2) How much you spend is directly proportional to your agreement with the manufacturer.

In this case, such an obvious lack of understanding the cost/benefit of their mechanical choices reduces my confidence in their electronic design.

Informed consumers understand that there is no such thing as a 'no compromise' product. The key to purchase satisfaction is to choose the combination of compromises that you think you would have made if you had been consulted during the design and production process.

In some cases, that means trusting someone elses judgement. That's where reviews come in handy.

BTW, you are [u]expected[/u] to covet that amp! Covet translates into [u]sales![/u]