My own take on the situation is that the price/performance curve on electronics is asymptotic (anybody remember your geometry?) meaning that the curve approaches, but never attains perfection.
I don't know how to link to a curve which illustrates my idea, but hopefully this will be clear enough. The numbers presented are for illustrative pruposes only.
Your entry level Sony, for instance, will get you 99% of the way to perfect. A middle range receiver from Denon, Onkyo, H-K, or similar will get you 99.9%. Go to the flagship receivers from these companies, or Rotel, and you get 99.99% of the way to perfection. Whip out the Krells, or other ultra-expensive esoterica, and you are 99.999% of the way there.
The point is, that after a certain point, you pay an order of magnitude more money for an infinitesimal benefit. Personally, I don't think I can tell the difference between 99.9% perfect and 99.99% perfect, but maybe some people can.
For most people, I think it would be a waste of money to buy anything more expensive than a mid to upper eange Denon, Onkyo, H-K or Yamaha. There are probably some people who are capable of hearing that increased .001% of performance, and who are willing to spend 10 times as much money to get it, and to them I say, knock yourself out. Just don't try to tell me that my equipment sounds "harsh" or "lacks soundstage".
The reason that Onkyo makes the integra line is to make money. There is a higher profit margin on expensive gear.
Don't even try to tell me that you didn't expect your new amp to sound any better than your old amp. In my experience, your brain can alter your perception of sound far more than any change in equipment.
Mark
