Your post moved me to google ratesvac to see if there were any posts which suggested that the site's tests raised "unwarranted suspicions," or are regarded by the audio community as misleading. I only went through 3 pages, but I did not see any discussions which would support your contention. To the contrary, several respected audio sites, and discussions refer to ratesvac test results as authoritative.
Your suggestion that it is misleading to test multichannel receivers for output with all channels driven confuses me. Seems to me that it is misleading for manufacturers to rate a 7 channel receiver at 100 watts per channel (or 7x100 watts) when the receiver is not able to produce even half that output with all channels driven.
I had a Sony STDB1070 receiver which Sony rated at 6x100 watts. Although I liked the receiver, and thought its processing section was pretty darn good for the money, I always thought its power output was seriously overrated. Sure enough, ratesvac tested the 1070 and found that it was putting out only 31 watts per channel. Now, it is difficult for me to understand how you can say that Sony's rating of 6x100watts (that was what the sticker on the receiver said) is proper, while ratesvac publication of the true 'all channels driven' output of 31 wpc is misleading. Perhaps you can explain that to me.
