Thanks for the response again, I will defiantly check some local sources and see what comes up vs. online.
I spent some more time researching on these fourms and elsewhere, and seem to have come up with some answers . . . and some more questions. Basically, at this price range the realms of integrated amps and receivers are merged.
1. "Integrated Amplifiers"
The two key players here are the Super T-Amp and the Pioneer A-35R. They are priced almost exactly the same, however the Pioneer has better specs at 45W/channel @ 8 ohm. The T-Amp is a class T amp, and the Pioneer . . . isn't. I really don't know what the topography is.Super T-AmpPioneer A-35R
Now, the big question. Am I missing something with these? The Pioneer has much better specs, and from searching ahas garnered some good reviews, and is the same price as the competitor . . . but the T-amp gets all the attention. Why? Is there something not in the specs that I am missing?
After a lot of research, in my price range ($200 ish) there is really only one receiver that looks attractive, the Panasonic SA-XR55. According to the AVSforum thread, the sound quality is great in 2.0 mode, and it will use both dual and bi-amp mode at the same time to get up to 100W/ch.Panasonic SA-XR55S
So, we have two more questions . . .
1. The receiver is essentially a class-T amp. It's $25 more then the super T-Amp and puts out 80W/ch. more. hrmmmmm . . .
2. It's incredibly hard to find any comparison between the SA-XR55 and the A-35R, even though all sub-$200 roads seem to lead to one of the three referenced amps. While the XR55 puts out twice the power, the Pioneer Elite series has a reputation for great sound quality, and I am going to guess "great" in the integrated amp world and "great" in the receiver world are very very different things.
Also I find allegations everywhere that companies play fast and loose with their wattage ratings at this price point, so we have yet another layer of ambiguity.
Any thoughts? Maybe answers