AV Receiver good enough for high end audio?

I'm wonding if most posting here can agree that, even if it was possible to build a "super receiver", from which to build your audiophile "hi-end" system around - given the ever changing digital landscape these days - it makes little sense to throw thousands(?) into a piece that will be outdated in a year ot two at best!
I think it makes far far more sense to simpy pick up a good multichannel amp (or combo's), which you know mates well and properly drives your speaker setup, from which to build your foundation upon (speakers and amp). Then, you can simply add an otherwise very good clean sounding AV receiver on the budget end as a pre/pro for the system, which does all the most up to date digital process and such! (I think you can pick up something a used AVR354, for instance, for like $200 on the net).
Let's face it, anything that even remotely approaches "hi-end" sound for an AV receiver would have to be thousands, retail! And, typically, as discussed, the amp sections in these AV receivers are typically the weakest point. Just makes much more sense to me to be able to toss a $100 to $200 range receiver, offering otherwise state of the art digital processing and feature-set wise. And then you can simply replace it ever year or two, with whatevers' new, er from the year before, for cheap! - of course still using your tried and tru amp to drive it all.
I've always said it, and I'll say it again. I'll NEVER spend $1000 for an AV receiver ever, period! What for? When I can have the same receiver for 10 to 20 cents on the dollar in a year or two, and just use it as a pre-pro if I want!
This of course is all concerned with using "receivers" in a system, basically. Otherwise, uhem...go pure separates, yeeeah.

Hifihvn,

You don't get it. The reference I made was not about your reference to politics, but instead to the same type of flawed intelligence that's created two needless wars. They're equal in that they're both mired in flawed intelligencia.

Fact. I drove 7 ML's speakers in an all ML system with a Sunfire Ultimate II Receiver to greater than adequate levels, without once experiencing any issues whatsoever. Ironically enough, but not to those who've actually owned Sunfire amps, the amplifier is the strongest suit of the receiver you seem so bent against, even though you've never heard or used one.

By your own admission you've never heard the Sunfire Ultimate, let alone had the opportunity to hear it in an all ML system. All you've provided as repetitive diatribe is the sound of a blank page read from some reviewers comments.

What's that sound like? Oh that's right, it's dead silence.

It's pointless for someone to comment on any component without having first hand experience to share. All of your comments are based upon someone else's experience: this reviewer said, and that reviewer said. What's your experience...by your own admission you've got none. The flaw in your logic is equal to someone refusing to view a movie based upon a reviewer's negative feedback.

The only opinion that matters is what's between my ears while I'm sampling a product in my own humble abode. Reviewers opinions are meaningless, as is forum commentary from those who've no first hand knowledge of a product. Again, that's the same type of ignorant logic that's directly responsible for the creation of unnecessary death, destruction, and mayhem.

Hifihvn,
I don't know about the Sunfire factory, but the output devices.....International Recitifier devices were made right here in Southern California.....At least Carver USED these devices in past designs. I am admittedly not current.

I have the Marantz sr9300 (several years old) and I am very pleased with the audio output on stereo or mono depending on the source.I also utilize it for SACD for the few disks that i do have. I know most "knowledgeable" folks will say separates are the only way to get hi end audio sound and this may be the case, but my Marantz SR9300 coupled with my analog source and Klipshorns (for stereo) more than satisfies my sweet tooth for clean sound especially in the analog arena.
Now, it is not a 200 Dollar reciever as it was the topend av reciever for Marantz when it came out around 2000-1.

"Now, it is not a 200 Dollar reciever as it was the topend av reciever for Marantz when it came out around 2000-1."

As was the $5k retail Sunfire Ultimate Receiver when it was released, but that's meaningless to the naysayer's on this board who've not sampled any product beyond a reviewers suggestions or a personal bias. You can lead some folks to water but...and that's as it should be. I've owned mega priced gear, and it's not that much better to justify its price. That's my point.