Amann and Escher's analysis and Pugh's RMA. I started studying real analysis with Rudin's book, but it's really terse, i somehow made it through the first chapter (After reading 3 times :D) and solved some problems but here we are, i feel like i really didn't understand that chapter. So, i found two texts to study analysis and leave Rudin's PMA, they are :

*

*Amann and Escher's, 'Analysis' (3 volumes)

*Pugh's 'Real Mathematical Analysis'

Both are rigorous and intuitive. (Am i correct? This is what reviews says so?)
I liked Amann and Escher's analysis, but by reading reviews on Amazon and a answer on this platform, it says that they present the material in a generalized form and i am afraid that i miss the usual special case way and well i maybe at a disadvantage in that sense.
My Questions :
1)Should I just study Amann and Escher's analysis alone?
2) Or study from Pugh's RMA
3) Is reading Amann and Escher's analysis enough or am i going to miss some stuffs for a usual analysis course?

I think Abbott, Understanding Analysis, or Bartle, Sherbert, Introduction to Real Analysis are two modern classics that are often used instead of Rudin. Amann is great, but I think it might be a bit too much if it's the first time you see this material, especially if you would like something that explains the context a bit more than baby Rudin.
