i have an NAD 2 channel rated at 20 (or 25) watts per channel with NAD's typical 3db headroom which equals other makers 50w/ch amps.
i bought an onkyo 55w/ch surround reciaver and was REALLY impressed with it. despite being a home theater reciever, it images better than the nad in 2 channel mode and has more treble clarity and extension.
despite being entry level, the onkyo sounds great AND it's D/A converters clearly stomped those on my old sony cd player.
when i compare the sound of my budget system to high dollar equipment, i'm happy with my investment.
the biggest complaint i'd have about my onkyo is that it can't do 4 ohms, so i can't upgrade my speakers to magnepans.
from what i've read, denon's are a little better specwise, but i already had an onkyo dvd and i liked the look of the onkyo better than a similarly priced denon.
harmon kardon sounds great, but it's much more expensive than onkyo or denon.
sony has always sounded too soft and polite to me.
i returned the kenwood stereo that i bought as the channels didn't match. one was alot quiter and volume changes threw balance corrections off again.
yamaha has always been a nice value. when i auditioned sony/jvc/pioneer/harmon kardon/yamaha recievers side by side (years ago), the sony was the softest, pioneer had the best sound in cheap recievers and the yamaha and harmon were very close, but the yamaha was significantly cheaper.
i'm plenty happy with my onkyo with my current speakers. when i do get magnepans, THEN i'll buy nad for it's 4 ohm ability again. with 8 ohm loads, i like onkyo better than nad. in a side by side treble comparison, my nad sounds like a sony.
