One point of clarification worth mentioning…….

John does, month after month, year after year discuss the virtues of sound in relation to amplifiers. The key word however, is “amplifiers”, and not “receivers”. That distinction is, month after month, year after year, overlooked. I am in complete agreement with John in regards to amplifiers. I’ve done enough testing on my own (completely un-controlled), to determine that amps do not sound “different”. Tubes are a different animal, and do not pertain to this. The only discernable difference I have been able to make out between amplifiers is in regards to high dynamic peaks. It is at these times when a more robust amplifier does in fact give the perception that there is an improvement in sound quality. However, at normal listening levels, I can not make out any difference in “sound”.

The other half of this perpetual “receivers sound different” topic, is the processing section of the receiver. It is this part that I believe separates one receiver from another and leads a person to the conclusion that one sounds “different” or “better”. Even when they are put in a “Pure” or “Pure Direct” mode, I find it very difficult to believe that each does not add some form of processing to the data stream which could lead to one sounding different than another.

I am not surprised at all to hear that Peter prefers the sound of the Pioneer over the Onkyo. Pioneer fans love their Pioneers and continually speak to how they just sound better. I have not owned Pioneer since the late 70’s, so I have no opinion to share.