john550, there's a very simple reason the Arcam was not compared to the 'LX83 Pioneer: the latter did not arrive in our test rooms until after the Arcam review had been and gone.

By establishing the Arcam's performance alongside a cheaper (excellent) product, however, we come to the conclusion that there is better value for money - though the Arcam (as the review state) has a rare musicality that may appeal to many, regardless of price.

Now, may I politely suggest you spend more time (if you're truly interested in performance) actually listening to these products rather than making clumsy swipes at our tests.

if the 1300stg vsx-lx53 is the one to consider against the 2500stg arcam,what bracket does this put the sclx-83 in?How does it deserve four stars @ 2500?oohh,im getting really confused by WHFs ratings.If WHF believes the vsxlx53 is the one to get im begining to believe,as in the review even the arcam seems stingy compared to a machine half the price.I think three stars would seem more sensible when you consider the lx-83 also.

I was astounded when testing a few competitors to the avr600 only to find the arcam head and shoulders above the rest and even better behaved like a high end amp in two channel music. I have now started to listen to all my old 80's90's cds and constantly hear sounds i never noticed before together with a beautiful analogue sound that you never tire of. I thought the reviews were all hype until i heard the avr600.Yes its expensive but so is a porsche 911. Buy one you won't be dissapointed.