Out of curiosity, recently I purchased an new Marantz pm7200 amplifier. I owned a nad 370 amp and a marantz cd19 cd player. I liked to listen with headphones through nad 370 or marantz cd at late night. Oddly, I always have the feeling that marantz has a more refine and real sound compare to nad! Have heard several marantz' previous amps but didn't liked them, they sounded big but dull and not refine with bad soundstage. After read some good reviews on What HiFi and Hifichoice I decided to give the new marantz a try, afterall it's cheap. But to my suprise, right after I hooked it up to my system, it sounded far better than my expectation! Sounded quite different from its predecessors. What impressed me most is: it has a very refine, detail and sweet sounding midrange, totally outclass nad 370(which I considered should be a better amp!). Also it has better soundstaging than nad, wider and deeper, now I can hear that the drummer or pianist is behind the singer. Nad definitely has a cleaner, more controlled and powerful bass but the marantz is deeper. However, nad has better highs, it has more weight, sounded extended and crisper. One important factor in order to get the best sound out of the 7200 is to use a better cable, eg. cardas crosslink. Both are excellent mid-fi amps, Marantz is a bit more musical.
nout
Unregistered guest
Posted on
Well, as a Marantz PM 7200 owner myself I'm glad to see a NAD owner saying something nice about a Marantz amp.
But why did you buy a new amp when you already have a very good one (NAD C370)? Is the Marantz for you second music system or what? And why Marantz and not NAD C352 or NAD C372? Oh well, you've made a good choice anyway
About the better sound of the two: Comparing both amps through headphones only doesn't do them any justice. Those build-in headphones amps are mostly really cheap and very plainly build. NAD is known for their crappy headphones jacks on their amps (they have a seperate one which is really good). So maybe your Marantz has a better headphones jack than your NAD.
Having said that, I agree with the descriptions of Marantz' sound: sweet and refined midrange and deep, very deep bass. And its soundstage is amazing too. I compared my Marantz PM 7200 with NAD C352 (and Rotel RA-02) and I came to the same conclusions as you did when comparing PM 7200 with NAD C370. Although I think that Marantz's treble is very extended and crisp in comparison with NAD C352, but without being agressive. And yes I think Marantz is more musical too.
soundquest
Unregistered guest
Posted on
Why did I buy the Marantz? Well, as I mentioned before, simply out of curiosity. I don't mind to have one more excellent amp, afterall it's a crazy hobby. I have 2 sets of system. The main/reference system consists of higher-end gears with a BAT pre/MF A3cr power amp combo. The second one was with Nad C370. I compared the Nad and Marantz with my reference system through speakers not headphones.
soundquest
Unregistered guest
Posted on
Why did I buy the Marantz? Well, as I mentioned before, simply out of curiosity. I don't mind to have one more excellent amp, afterall it's a crazy hobby. I have 2 sets of system. The main/reference system consists of higher-end gears with a BAT pre/MF A3cr power amp combo. The second one was with Nad C370. I compared the Nad and Marantz with my reference system through speakers not headphones.
soundquest
Unregistered guest
Posted on
Why did I buy the Marantz? Well, as I mentioned before, simply out of curiosity. I don't mind to have one more excellent amp, afterall it's a crazy hobby. I have 2 sets of system. The main/reference system consists of higher-end gears with a BAT pre/MF A3cr power amp combo. The second one was with Nad C370. I compared the Nad and Marantz with my reference system through speakers not headphones.
