Not trying to. It just seems that way because I post a lot when I'm here.



Not attacking you. You and curegeorg made some very valid points about the new receivers tending to have more of the new features included, with the receivers being upgraded more frequently and all. What was upsetting was that you felt so strongly about statements like that above in saying that the receiver absolutely had to be better than the receiver. I said numerous times that the Pioneer selected would do a god job and may end up being the best choice. It was the automatic assumption that the receiver is better that got annoying. It is a little troubling trying to figure out how things like the USB and I-Link make the sound so much more superior when they are really just convienent ways to transfer information.

Have you purchased it? Did you check on what loads it can play down to? I bought a Marantz SR6200 a few years ago and found out later it could play down to 4 ohms just fine. Maybe you'll be lucky too and can save a few bucks (ok more than a few ).

I'm not saying a single thing to curegeorg his decision even though he also purchased a receiver to use as a pre-pro. FYI, it probably got to a few people when you said you had the receiver, but didn't. A friend of mine has a bad habit of that. He's a decent guy, but he literally drives people up the wall when he does that.

[This message has been edited by JT Clark (edited May 11, 2004).]