What is Good Quality & Simple to use AV receiver?

Willand:

That's interesting about the Marantz. How did you or where did you obtain that bench test data? Yes I believe that 70% derating value is conservative. My first real receiver back in the 1980s was NAD and it lasted for decades. NAD offers some of the best power supplies in the business for the money. Headroom has always been abundant. I've since switched over to Rotel, Marantz, and B&W as the primary brands in my sound system. Got the Rotel RMB-1075 multi-channel amp at 120 watts/ch/8 ohms/20hz-20khz conservatively. Potent to say the least. But you can't miss with NAD. Enjoy that T773. Helluva unit !!

Who ever got it to test that way just solved the worlds energy
problems.Perhaps a perpetual power amp?It may have been tested
at 1khz only.The SR6003 only consumes up to 600 watts total, that includes thermal loss.They have a lot of loopholes for rating receivers to get by the FTC true RMS 20-20,000hz rating.Here is Marantz stating it only consumes 600 watts in the link.Not to many receivers meet the all channel 20-20,000 true rating.[http://us.marantz.com/Products/2515.asp]

Marantz states 7x100 watts 20-20,000khz.I'd love to here why it consumes 600 watts.Oh,they did leave out continuous!Typical loophole they like to use.It may still be a good sounding receiver even though they don't give the real power rating.[http://us.marantz.com/SR6003_Spec_sheet_11182008.pdf]

Denon
Marantz
Yamaha
NAD
would all be on my audition list

What is a good AV receiver that has a class D amplifier section?