Opinions on Singapore Angels?

[Samhain]

I'm kind of tossing around the idea of adding one of these to my 90 gallon in the future. They are really pretty, and kind of resemble a butterfly without a lot of the heartache that goes along with keeping said butterflies in a reef tank! I do understand they aren't entirely reliable around coral, and that a QT period is necessary to ensure that they are actually eating well. But other than those couple things, what are the prevailing opinions on keeping a Singapore in a 90 gallon? WetWebMedia seems not averse to putting one in a 75, and Blue Zoo says 55 or larger, but LA says 125 and up. So does anyone here have experience with these guys? Are they as neat as they look and sound?

 

[little_fish]

I would go with LA recommendation and say your tank is a little short for one.

 

[x19]

I use LA as the basis for a lot of my decisions, but I would consider WWM much more definitive. Though the phrasing "not adverse" isn't the same as their saying the fish would thrive in that space.

 

[Samhain]

I was mistaken, it wasn't a 75 in the query but an 85. And I say 'not adverse' because he is usually quick to point out if a fish is in too small a tank for it, but he didn't bring that up at all. Bob seems to fuss about any of the rest of the chaetodontoplus angels being in less than about 200 gallons, but he only states that a 37 gallon is too small (obviously).