Not really, to be honest - I didn't answer the thread as I really didn't understand what you were asking for.
If you mean we should rank every piece of equipment in absolute performance terms, I fundamentally disagree, because the high-end, expensive equipment would always win out, leaving anyone with less cash feeling 'what's the point?'.
I feel such a system would be elitist and discouraging, making people as likely to spend the money on something totally different (new sofa; saucepans; shoes) rather than the best home entertainment kit they could afford for their budget (which would probably be far, far better than what they already have or have had in the past).
That doesn't mean we think budget is best - we just believe in true value for money. Something like the Leema CD player at £2K+ can be equally good value as a Marantz player at £270 when compared to the performance of its peers.
If you look at our full Awards listings, or our Best Buys page we run in every issue of the magazine (both elements soon to appear here online), you'll see we have recommendations at every price point - each step up represents a genuine increase in performance.
We also offer system-building advice - from those Best Buys pages to the 'Now Add These' panel to go with each Test winner -to point readers in the direction of the ideal partners for our top-rated products.
If anyone ever has a question about how far they could stretch the performance of a particular component in terms of partnering kit, please ask us here - with our testing, we always throw all sorts of combinations of partners with products, to see what they're truly capable of, so I'm sure would have plenty of suggestions.