<font color='#000000'>I stopped by my local high end audio store to have a look at the NAD T773 receiver which had also made my short list. They only sell NAD and Arcam receivers, and suggested that I might also want to consider the forthcoming AVR-300. I asked to compare the NAD, which they had with the AVR-200 which was sitting right next to it in their sound room.
For the record, the speakers were Linn Ninka's, all listening was done in direct stereo mode. I didn't catch the CD player, but I'm sure it was good, and I listened to the same jazz cd on both receivers. The connections to the CD and speakers were direct, he went behind and unplugged one and attached the connectors to the other, that is, no switching matrix.
Now, I'm somewhat new here, and the fact that I'm pleased as punch with my Cambridge Soundworks Towers might lead some to assume that I have a 'tin ear'. Not really the case, and if anyone is interested, I'd be happy to talk about how a spent a pleasant day several years ago shuttling between a CSW showroom and a high end audio store doing a detailed comparison between those Towers and Paradigm Reference Studio 80's, in which the Towers held their own (in other words, IMHO they're a hidden gem in an otherwise undistinguished line). In any case, I'm more than a bit of a cynic about overblown claims of audio goodness, and given the quality of the two receivers in question, fully expected to have to listen to the sales guy expounding on differences that I would pretend to hear.
NOT SO!! I don't impress easily, and the Arcam managed to impress me. The soundstage more than doubled in size compared with the NAD and also dramatically increased in depth. The amount of detail was stunning, given everything else was the same, and as I'd listened to the NAD first, I had thought it very good indeed in that regard, for about five minutes it was, indeed, the best receiver I'd ever heard. These weren't subtle effects, unless one considers being hit by a truck to be 'subtle'- it was immediately and dramatically obvious. As it was a 5.1 set up in the room, my first thought was that he'd snuck in a surround DSP mode, so I walked around and listened to all the speakers. Nope, just pure stereo.
Anyone have any opinions or ideas as to why this should be? I would not have expected two units are about the same price point, actually the NAD as more expensive than the Arcam I was listening to, to be so dramatically different.</font>