Actually, selling/buying AV receivers is a lot like it is with cars - each model has it's own qualities, features, and options. You chose according to your needs, likes, and wants.
I would qualify you as to your speakers you have chosen - and you should chose speakers before the power source, yes! If you do it the other way around, it's really backwards.
So, since I don't know your speakers, room, lifestyle, acoustics, listening habits, etc, it's hard to recommend the best choice for you.
Also, how are you connecting your source(s) to your receiver? Do you need direct analog inputs? Or are you only needing digital connection for your sources? This all matters, and some choices will be better than others, depending.
In many cases, I would often chose a lesser priced receiver, and then use the extra money I saved to add an EXPONENTIALLY BETTER MULTI-CHANNEL AMPLIFIER TO THE MIX!!! - as long at the receiver level offered the features I wanted. And now, you can get HDMI 1.3, Dolby HD/DTS Master, video upscaling,
and, advanced EQ circuits (YES, CRITICAL FOR SMALL ROOM ACOUSTICS, IF YOU DESIRE FLAT, ACCURATE, WELL BALANCED SOUND!)
If it were me (and I don't totally know your connection/ source needs), I KNOW FOR A FACT, that you'd get much better overall sound from your digital sources (likely DVD, HD-DVD, Satalite box, music server/Ipod, etc), if you bought a more modestly price receiver, at $1k or under, and then used the other money left over to invest in a better outboard amp!! The amps in ANY RECEIVER are usually compromised pretty well in terms of quality and current delivery!
Basically, sound quality differential between (all things equal and considered) a $3k receiver by itself, and a $1k receiver (or less, often) with a good 3, 5, or 7 channel amplifier connected to the system (instead of using the amps in the receiver) is HUGE!!!!! Basically, the dynamic potential, and overall sonic refinement of a better outboard amp in the system, FAR OVERCOMES any fancy features benefits a larger receiver has! So consider.
I personally WOULD NOT buy a $2k receiver, EVER!!! If I had to use a receiver in my system (and I would rather use a pre/pro if possible), I would use a lower price point, but otherwise good sounding unit (considering digital connections, likely), add an amp, and be WAY AHEAD OF THE GAME!
You see, in the end, it's ALL ABOUT SOUND quality and picture quality for your AV experience! (at least in terms of gear as a factor). Anything else is down on the totem pole, IMO.
That all said, I would say a receiver is good enough in mid-fi applications, by themselves, when you drive very efficient speakers (like horns), or speakers with active woofers, at the least). There are few exceptions, depending on variables, IMO. Still, receivers are on the weak side in terms of power delivery, dynamics, overall sound quality, refinement, etc. So consider your variables. If you rock, play loud, run speakers as "full range", etc, you'll need more power. And even if you run small monitors as "small/80hz", you'll find that dynamics are far superior from a dedicated amp.
If however you deem a receiver is all you want or need, I would keep speaker choices limited, run them as "small", regardless, and look to connect things digitally! If you need direct analog inputs for pure sources, you will find you have no EQ in the circuit, which is very helpful for making the system/room balance!
To answer your question, I would lean toward the more expensive Marantz's over any Onkyo personally. Don't care for Onkyo's sound, myself.
I would qualify you as to your speakers you have chosen - and you should chose speakers before the power source, yes! If you do it the other way around, it's really backwards.
So, since I don't know your speakers, room, lifestyle, acoustics, listening habits, etc, it's hard to recommend the best choice for you.
Also, how are you connecting your source(s) to your receiver? Do you need direct analog inputs? Or are you only needing digital connection for your sources? This all matters, and some choices will be better than others, depending.
In many cases, I would often chose a lesser priced receiver, and then use the extra money I saved to add an EXPONENTIALLY BETTER MULTI-CHANNEL AMPLIFIER TO THE MIX!!! - as long at the receiver level offered the features I wanted. And now, you can get HDMI 1.3, Dolby HD/DTS Master, video upscaling,
and, advanced EQ circuits (YES, CRITICAL FOR SMALL ROOM ACOUSTICS, IF YOU DESIRE FLAT, ACCURATE, WELL BALANCED SOUND!)
If it were me (and I don't totally know your connection/ source needs), I KNOW FOR A FACT, that you'd get much better overall sound from your digital sources (likely DVD, HD-DVD, Satalite box, music server/Ipod, etc), if you bought a more modestly price receiver, at $1k or under, and then used the other money left over to invest in a better outboard amp!! The amps in ANY RECEIVER are usually compromised pretty well in terms of quality and current delivery!
Basically, sound quality differential between (all things equal and considered) a $3k receiver by itself, and a $1k receiver (or less, often) with a good 3, 5, or 7 channel amplifier connected to the system (instead of using the amps in the receiver) is HUGE!!!!! Basically, the dynamic potential, and overall sonic refinement of a better outboard amp in the system, FAR OVERCOMES any fancy features benefits a larger receiver has! So consider.
I personally WOULD NOT buy a $2k receiver, EVER!!! If I had to use a receiver in my system (and I would rather use a pre/pro if possible), I would use a lower price point, but otherwise good sounding unit (considering digital connections, likely), add an amp, and be WAY AHEAD OF THE GAME!
You see, in the end, it's ALL ABOUT SOUND quality and picture quality for your AV experience! (at least in terms of gear as a factor). Anything else is down on the totem pole, IMO.
That all said, I would say a receiver is good enough in mid-fi applications, by themselves, when you drive very efficient speakers (like horns), or speakers with active woofers, at the least). There are few exceptions, depending on variables, IMO. Still, receivers are on the weak side in terms of power delivery, dynamics, overall sound quality, refinement, etc. So consider your variables. If you rock, play loud, run speakers as "full range", etc, you'll need more power. And even if you run small monitors as "small/80hz", you'll find that dynamics are far superior from a dedicated amp.
If however you deem a receiver is all you want or need, I would keep speaker choices limited, run them as "small", regardless, and look to connect things digitally! If you need direct analog inputs for pure sources, you will find you have no EQ in the circuit, which is very helpful for making the system/room balance!
To answer your question, I would lean toward the more expensive Marantz's over any Onkyo personally. Don't care for Onkyo's sound, myself.