It was okay. Not especially well-built, which led to a huge argument with Bob, as was a problem with much of his product at the time, Time-Lens or not. I was a dealer. I had a terrible time with the line and it broke my heart but when I showed the rep what was what, I got the call from Bob. In the end he agreed to buy back every item, but I kept the Amazings that the rep and customers who knew them all agreed was the best sounding pair they'd ever heard, including the demo pair AT Carver.
I realize there aren't many options in true muscle receivers today, but $500CA is too much for that. It will need to be gone through if it hasn't been. If it has had a lot of work done (caps, power supply, hand resolder everything) pass. If you want a "boat anchor" as we used to call the big receivers, a surprisingly decent modern choice is the Outlaw RR2160 which had good modern features and a big power supply, and 100wpc and loops and tape and defeats and hdfm and multiple digital inputs and other stuff that makes sense. It's WELL under a grand, probably shipped to Canada.
Frankly, the Carver wasn't that terrific sounding. It was, as I said, okay. The Outlaw is a solid Class 2/B whatever you want to call it. Amazing for a modern receiver. It has balls. It's not harsh. It's not tubes, but it's not harsh. It stages. It doesn't wimp on lows and has bass management.
An oldie that you might actually ENJOY more would be something like the Tandberg 2075 (or the better sounding 2055, but not enough power), mentioned, but they have varactor tuning that is always having a snit, even in the 70s new. I loved their silky lush sound and the staging was good, but it may not have been as clear as the Marantz 2285b, one of the greatest super-receivers of the era. Stupendous tuner (I mean, jaw dropping), and it's massive in every way with a rich low end.
185 real wpc. Drop-dead gorgeous classic Marantz looks, they're in high demand. A 2285B is half the power but you might never hear the difference, and was probably the best selling heavy-metal receiver in their line, then the 2270B. And there are quad models with big watts and dolby, SQ and CD4 decoders built in (if you're lucky).
Kenwood had a couple of good monsters and the Pioneer SX1250 is their famous heavy metal, a truly great receiver. Sansui had the 9090db that was great, too, but the looks of the Marantz sold it over that super piece.
For phono sections, Marantz, Pioneer were good. There were few non-discrete phono circuits and the Pioneer, iirc, had a true separate discrete headphone amp, and Tandbergs were especially nice. All allowed changes in loading in the high end models, especially the 4ch models from any of them.
An interesting and very good sounding receiver from the early 80s was by Revox. It was built very well, very repairably with pull out cards like a console computer in the day.
And it sounds like Revox. Which is to say, good. Not megawatts. 85wpc iirc but really nice and cool, very professional styling, etc.
Hey, look, for my fun receiver I have an HK (also awesome from back then) for my bench. But I actually use the previous Outlaw as the center of my current system, driving 3a Master Controls, the final handmade custom version (1 of 100 pairs made). Those speakers are better than pretty much any amp ever. They sounded great on the Coda 10, but, come on... $10G 20 years ago?
The Outlaw is surprisingly good. It's retro styled (hence RR or Retro Receiver) has lotsa goesinta and comesoutta connections, doesn't seem to do anything weird and has a MOTORIZED volume control on a REMOTE so it's not stepped horrible digital stuff.
For a bit more, it's new, it's good, it does things you may not have thought of and it's kinda cool looking, though my B+K amp doesn't fit well looks-wise with it. Oh well, what are you going to do.
The Carver is simply not a great receiver. Pass on it, especially at that price. An NAD or Rotel 100wpc, either, will sound better and they're easier to do routine cleaning, etc. Good luck!