AV Receiver good enough for high end audio?

as a non-techie, i've never fully understood why a well-engineered, no-compromise avr couldn't sound as good as comparably priced separates. now, i know in the real world manufacturers do make compromises, esp. in the amp sections, and that single-box components present challenges with power supplies and internal signal interference. however, i've owned or heard some avrs--most recently arcam avr 600 which sounded awfully good for 2ch music.

i agree with much of the foregoing--as hifihvn's data evidences, most mass-market avrs have wussy amp sections with woefully overhyped power ratings which won't effectively drive audiophile-grade speakers. (in fairness, i do think hk and nad are considerably better than their peers in this regard). when you get to the more rarified air of b&k, arcam, krell etc. (can't speak to sunfire), the ground rules are different--their amps are really good and, i believe, they use substantially the same components as their well-regarded separates. it's not clear whether the skeptics have actually compared them to similarly spec'ed separates--not expensive tubes or $15k worth of elite megawatt gear, but $5k worth of reasonably powered ss gear. i keep returning to the arcam avr500/600 which, at least in 2ch mode, puts out a legitimate 120w/ch and purports to be stable down to 2 ohms. from what i heard, it sounded very "high-end" paired with the type of speakers that most people would pair with $5k worth of electronics. granted, it wouldn't be the choice of someone looking to pair his $50k wilsons, but i sense that a discriminating listener playing in a more attainable realm would be very satisfied.

now we're having fun....