Post your suggestions on the best of RECEIVER

HI. Do you guys have any ideals about of three Receivers of these:
1. AVR ARcam 300
2. AVR B&K 507
3. AVR MArantz SR 9200

My question is which one is the best sound among of them. Please share your informations and advices. Thanks for your posts, coz I have a plan to buy a Receiver for my sound system and my listenning is 50/50 music and movies
F326b9f6 f61d 40fe b6c6 563881879f60ldt_csdt69
Having just gone through the same process with the following being my contenders:

B&K 507 S2
Arcam 300
Rotel 1067
Denon 3800 Series (3802 and 3806 and 4306)

I would rank them in the order that I have them listed with the Rotel and Denon being very close in HT. The B&K and Arcam were slightly better in HT and significantly better in stereo (important to me as I only have one system).

I demoed the B&K and Denon in my home, but the Rotel and Arcam at dealers only in dedicated listening rooms. I run B&W speakers.

I realized after 6 years of continuous moving, during my in-home testing that I had a Denon 3802 that I had never previously hooked up and thought I had sold (always finding old stuff with so many moves), hence the reason for that model being included. I found that the 3806 and 3802 sound identical and having tested these first was almost ready to just keep the 3802. The 3806 was an easier set-up.

Then I listened to the B&K which IMHO was light years ahead of the others for stereo, although the Arcam was pretty good in this area too (at the dealer).

In stereo the B&K's pros:
Better overall sound (tighter lows, more neutral mids, better air in the highs)
Better separation of instruments and voice
Better sound staging and imaging (deeper, wider, taller)
Definately better definition (but not bright, B&W speakers)

Here is the master statement: my wife actually commented that she thought the sound of the B&K was better (unsolicited) than the Denons (as should probably be expected at three times the price), but this is from the lady who doesn't know why we need all these speakers when the TV already has them!

Other pros for the B&K:
incredible company, they actually e-mailed me back the same day on a couple of technical questions I had about hook ups that were not so standard (ie. bi-amping, second zone, etc. . .)
B&K is easily upgradeable via the internet and future protected
Remote is one of the best included remotes I have ever seen (after using this remote with kids 6 and 10) I would actually pay $500 just for the remote
Notch filters for the lower ends - while I have set these up, I am not 100% sure if I will use them. Not sure I like the idea of additional processing (but I guess if you are looking at a HT theatre minimal processing is not too much a concern), but I guess for some rooms that have incurable anomolies these are probably a godsend.

Strongest recommendation is to the B&K for all around
Arcam second
Third would be a used Denon if HT is the primary focus, but not if critical stereo listening is intended! For a couple hundred buck you can get a pretty competant HT (only) receiver with a second zone for the dining room or deck.

Never listened to the Marantz, only did some reading and I can't comment on what I have read without first listening.
Never listened to the Arcam 350, which I would have liked to hear (dealer did not have one available)
Previously owned Rotel and just not that confident in their build/reliability - had issues with unusual noise (almost a hum) that could never be fixed (stereo only system)

For HT ONLY and watching your budget carefully, I would recommend a Denon which you could find for under $500.

But, and since it is on your list, I would recommend the B&K over the Arcam and over Rotel and Denon. Over Marantz??? (I hope so or I will be kicking myself!)