|
David | I've been following this board for a while and very few posts on the Marantz models although the features and the price are comprable to the ONKYO, DENON, AND HK.... If someone has any opinions on the Marantz I would appreciate it... Thank You |
|
Anonymous | I've been listening to many receivers over the last few weeks and have settled on a Marantz due to their superior sound in stereo. I've gone for the 7300 over the 5300 as it has enough power to get much better definition from the speakers--even at low listening levels. I didn't hear the 6300 but pricewise there isn't much in it so the 7300 wins... |
|
Anonymous | I just purchased the sr5300. I choose it over yamaha because I thought the sound was smooth yet detailed where the yamaha was detailed but excessively bright. I've had it home for two days and am running mission m70 series speakers. I am thrilled with this unit and think my money was well spent.Setup was very easy and i just love when the volume is cranked up and at the quite times in a movie there is no hiss at all, just dead silence. |
|
Rich C. | I read in some reviews that these Marantz models have a buzzing sound, at low volumes, when using digital cables surround modes. Anyone experience this? Also, has anyone had any experience with Marantz technical support? Is it any good? |
|
di bari Stéphane | Hi, I am also looking for a reiceiver and I am pretty new. I am looking at both marantz 4300, 5300 and denon 1803. But the shopkeepers confuse me: one says the marantz is way better in both 5.1 and stereo for a lower price. The other says that denon is good in 5.1 and great in stereo while marantz is great in 5.1 and "just" good in stereo. Does anyone have more experience with these 2 amp? any advises? (maybe on what should I listen on each to ear a difference?) also with a 80w amp, what is the max size of speakers I can use? (80w or more?) |
|
Anonymous | so no one has opinions on marrantz??? marrantz Vs Denon is a fight with no spectators? |
|
Joe G. | Marantz products are much better than Denon! There in a different class. Denon is more of a consumer product, while Marantz is more of an industry product! Marantz receivers start at the bottom of High-end audio/video, and go well into the middle of high end! They've also been around for 50 years! They also make "reference" series dvd/cd players and tuners! They also make pro audio/video components. Their plasmas are high end also. I've been in the high-end audio business for many years, and have used both products, but will use Marantz any time over Denon or Yamaha!!! The only time I don't use marantz receivers, is when money is no object! Then I would use the best processor made, the Lexicon MC12 and LX-7 amplifier (7 channel) to complement it. But they cost about $12,000 for the processor and $6,000 for the amp.! Marantz's on screen display is easy to use, when you follow the directions. It all depends what you want to do with your system. The SR7300 and up have component video jacks for HDTV's and any other similar device. The SR8300 and up comes with the touchscreen remote. |
|
Hawk | di bari Stephane: I had the opportunity to spend an hour listening to several Marantz products just this morning. In one sense, your questions are ironic since both brands are owned by the same company (Marantz and Denon are both owned by DM Holdings, LLC). Yet, they have very different sounds. If a salesperson told you that the Denon is better in stereo than the Marantz, he/she is either lying or deaf. I have a Denon and it is very clear to me that Denon has identified the HT market as the direction it wants to go. Conversely, Marantz has had a long history of trying to be a very "musical" product. In no way am I passing judgement on either brand, I am just pointing out that they are going two different directions as a brand. This difference in direction also influences the sound each produces. The Denon is a bit cold and dry, albeit very clear, especially when producing sound from a digital source (DVDs and CDs). Many people like this sound because they appreciate the detailed sound. But it is not to everyone's taste and it does not make for the most enjoyable experience when listening to two channel stereo music. I do not recommend a Denon if you like to listen to a lot of music. The Marantz is warmer (although not as warm as say a Pioneer Elite or a Harman/Kardon) and smoother to listen to. It does far better on stereo music than does the Denon (at the same price point). Now for some people, this means that you trade off HT quality by being more musical. I happen to disagree. I believe that if you can get music right, you will get the HT right. Furthermore, I have looked into a few of these products and for my money, Marantz tends to give you more of those things that provide better sound, but aren't things that you can see. For instance, at a MSRP of $399, you can get either the Denon 1603 or the Marantz 4300. The Denon has component video switching, a "feature" that makes it easy for the salesperson to point to as a reason to buy. The Marantz doesn't offer component video switching. But the Marantz offers five channels, each with its own amplifier, but the Denon runs all channels through a single amplifier. You can't see the separate amplifiers, but it definitely makes a difference in the quality of the sound. So you can buy features, or buy better sound. For some buyers, the features are more important than the improvement in the sound. That is why there are plenty of customers for both products. So you have to decide what is most important to you. I would suggest that you pick your speakers first, that is, decide what you like and can afford for speakers, then choose a receiver that works well with those speakers. For instance, B+W speakers work very well with Denon IMO, but I would recommend something a bit brighter for the Marantz, such as JM labs. It is better to choose the speakers first and then get the appropriate receiver. I hope this is of some help to you. |
|
elitefan | FYI TO ALL, See Kostas's posting on problems with his Marantz 5200. Interesting. |
|
R_L | Hi Hawk, do you know who's the main shareholder of DM Holdings? It's the Dutch Philips Electronics! (Together with a few investment banks.) |
|
Anonymous | When I was shopping for a new receiver, I narrowed my choice to the Marantz 5300, Yamaha RXV530 and the Denon 1803. I finally decided to get the Maranz 5300 over the Denon 1803 and the Yamaha RXV530 to use on my existing AR S50/S40, Velodyne Subwoofer speakers. For me, the sound of the Maranz (for music) is more defined, natural and a bit/tad warm (which I prefer). Also, the Maranz seem to handle better peaks than the Yamahas. The Maranz 5300 is really a major upgrade for me, I use to have an Onkyo ProLogic receiver which really sound bad when playing CD music. Also, I have read somewhere that the Maranz have "real" discrete amplifiers while the lowend Yamahas don't. Beside, I got the Maranz at a better price. |
|
Hawk | R L: Not according to the press release announcing the creation of DM Holdings. Denon's shareholders got 70%+ of the stock in Dm Holdings and Phillips got something like 14.7%. Makes sense to when you look at the respective brands market share. I have copied the press release below: Marantz, Denon Complete Merger D&M Holdings Inc., a joint holding company formed to merge the operations of Marantz Japan Inc. and Denon, announced yesterday the completion of the merger. The two companies will maintain the established Marantz and Denon brands. Denon's and Marantz' combined experience in the home theater, A/V consumer electronics and professional audio markets exceeds 130 years. D&M Holdings (Sagamihara City, Japan) has succeeded Marantz as a publicly traded concern on the Second Section of the Tokyo Stock Exchange. Ripplewood Holdings LLC, Denon's largest shareholder, will become the majority shareholder in D&M Holdings, which has 1,650 employees around the world. Royal Phillips Electronics, which owned 49% of Marantz Japan, now owns 14.7% in D&M Holdings. Tatsuo Kabumoto, former chairman and CEO of Marantz who is now president and CEO of D&M Holdings, said D&M Holdings will capitalize on the strategic benefits resulting from the combined companies. "The merged company formed will create a powerful force in the premium home theater and audio-video market. By combining these two companies, D&M will be able to obtain significant improvements in margins and cash flow. Moreover, D&M will be well-positioned to take advantage of the growth in this market segment given the high demand of home theater products and the digitalization of this market segment," Kabumoto said. All shares of Marantz and Denon were transferred to D&M Holdings, making both entities wholly owned subsidiaries. Former Marantz shareholders received one share of D&M Holdings for each Marantz share, and former Denon shareholders received 0.4416 shares of D&M Holdings for each Denon share. Former Marantz shareholders will hold approximately 30% of the new company, and former Denon shareholders will own approximately 70% of the new company. The Denon and Marantz brand names will be maintained, as well as their sales and marketing, and brand-specific product and distribution channels. |
|
Anonymous | If you want quality, go Marantz. My Dad bought a stereo reciever in March of 1973. Guess what, it still powers my entertainment system! However, I am looking into buying a sr7300 just because I'ld like to have the support of the 6.1 format and more powerful sound, but 30 years is one heck of a return on investment! |
|
| di bari Stephane is right on the money. Exactly to the point ...and completely accurate. Well done. I agree that some people say "oh ...this is better at music ...and this one is better at home theater. Hogwash!!! Look at the fine print in the specs! Marantz: .05% THD for the 6 "discrete" power amps. Marantz:.2% THD for the FM Tuner. Marantz IS a bit Warm! Ummmm ...warm ...! Get speakers first ...then match the receiver. IMO ...I want a warm, accurate receiver that is musical FIRST, this will translate over to the Home Theater abilities. Second, get some speakers capable of handling transient attacks, very efficient speakers. I have Klipsch Reference series ...and they friggin rock. Very life like. With the Marantz it smoothed out the horns on the Klipsh's. Very dynamic, nautral sound ...incredible. By the way the Klipsch are 99db Sensitivity ...which means a little power goes a long way. For example: 1watt of pure power on a 90db sensitivity speaker will produce 90db ...to get to 93db's you must double the power ...to get 96db's you must triple the power ...to get 99db's out of the same speaker you must "quadruple" the power!!! On the other hand ...a tad cold receiver and warm speakers. Please! Writing it even sounds bad. Cold and mushy! Get it. Moral of my story: A tad warm, musical receiver and efficient, transient attack capable speaker = warm music and home theater able to crack!!! Why do you think movie theaters and concerts use horns ...because they have the money and choice. By the way ...don't you think digital in all it's glory is a bit COLD. Yes, digital is good at placement and moving from point A a to point B ...but it LACKS WARMTH. Thanks, my two cents Rob |
|
Hawk | Rob: Hmm. Your math is just a bit off. To get to 96 db, you must quadruple the power, not triple it (i.e, 4 watts of power, not 3). The power doubles the previous value each time you add 3 db. That means to get to 99 db, you multiply it by a factor of eight, not quadruple it. I am glad you like your Marantz and Klipsch. It is a good combo. I firmly believe everyone should get what they like. As I have said before, "one size does not fit all." Same is true for HT systems. However, for some people's ears, they prefer a more laid back sound, or some have locked in on very bright and aggressive receivers, and they need to have speakers that are more laid back to balance them. If this is not your taste, so be it. However, I personally prefer your formula. I love a good warm accurate amp with fast, transient speakers. Digital is relatively cold (I am rediscovering my vinyl collection and it sounds great!), but digital is very convenient. I have recommended the Marantz to go with Klipsch speakers before on this forum and I am happy to have empirical confirmation. |
|
valeem | Anyone who's interested, You do all realise that Marantz is in the process of introducing a new range of receivers. This is the new line up as far as I know from September onwards: SR4400 £350 SR5400 with DTS 24/96 £450 SR5400 OSE(original special equipment)£550 I presume this one will replace SR6300 SR7400 £700 SR8300 £1500 SR9300 £2000 Expect improvements in sound and features. Also it might be wiser to buy one from the existing range as Marantz are well known for reducing prices on outgoing models, through a well known hi-fi retailer in Britain at least. I recently picked up a SR4300 for £200 while the cheapest I could find anywhere else was £260(net included). What's the situation like over in the states. |
|
G-Man | Digital recordings give you pretty much exactly what you put in, if the source material contains noise then that noise will be reflected in the digital recording. Hence, CD's copied from analog sources will copy the "hiss" unless some form of "noise" reduction is used by the engineers. However, the tape-hiss and much of the compression that is inherent to the analog format is absent from digital recording (unless they add compression on purpose). So one would need a hellaciously well-recorded and mastered analog tape to be comparable in accuracy to a digital one. But this analog tape when transfered to a CD would sound great. The sound from the analog tape transfered to an LP would degrade over time--from dirt, groove distortion from the phono cartridge/needle, etc. Unlike analog recording, digital recording has no "sound" of its own. Rather, modern digital recording gives back exactly what you have put into it. Oddly enough, since the character of analog recording's effect (such as Tape Compression) is fundamentally absent from digital recordings, many believe the resulting sound to be "thinner", "colder", "harsher" from a comparative point of view. However, based upon the above description of "tape compression" this lack of digital recording is subtractive rather than additive i.e. we are perceiving an absence of an effect in digital quality compared to analog rather than digital lacking "sound of its own." In modern recording and listening, if you prefer analog---you prefer the perceived warmth of compression and hiss. It is somewhat akin to tubes versus solid state. The "warmth" some like in tubes is nothing more than the added distortion. Bob Carver (in some of his modern Sunfire receivers and amplifications) has added a function that mimics this "tube" and "analog" sound by compressing and distorting the digital algorithm (while in the digital domain) or altering the sine wave while in the analog domain. Many people who grew up with LP's and analog recordings are so used to this distortion they prefer it over the unadulterated sound. The human brain often likes harmonic distortion. Because a digital recording is a binary representation of an analog waveform, this signal must be converted to a language that can be recorded by the computer system, then converted back to an analog waveform to be heard as "music." This process is called Analog to Digital conversion (A/D) and Digital to Analog conversion (D/A.) It follows that the quality of these A/D and D/A converters have everything to do with the ultimate outcome of the digital recording. Good DAC's can be bought from $50 to more than $1,000. Usually recording studios only buy the $500 and higher DAC's. So, unless you are listening to an LP or a tuner through a straight analog pass through in your receiver or pre-amp---you are listening through a DAC. I don't know if there are any reasonably (or even unreasonably) priced receivers that allow this to happen. There aren't that many separates that do this, although the Aragon Soundstage I own permits a by-pass of the DAC's. I am confident that my Pioneer Elite 49txi does not. |
|
| Thanks Hawk: I was a little sleepy when I posted. You are right. I "meant" to say double the power for each 3db increase ...which would lead to a needed power increase of 8, not 4 like I stated. I agree to that If it sounds good to you ...it is good. A warm power source, and horn-loaded, highly efficient speakers just seem more logical and sounds more human to my brain ...anyway were all here to share and learn. Need more sleep! Yo VALEEM: Hello. Over here in USA Marantz is trying to put the "noose" on retailers. They will not honor warrantys unless you by from their "authorized" dealers ...and they keep the Marantz prices sky high. I've looked everywhere and the cheapest discount from full list price for the SR5300 is $549.00 ...though I did find it online for $465.00. Also the SR6300 sells nomraly for $665.00-$695.00 ...though I found it for $565.00 from the same Un-authorized dealer as above. I've noticed great deals with the Onkyo TX-SR601 ($379.00) and TX-SR701 THX Select ($599.00). I found Marantz's pricing philosopy when I was looking for my Klipsch speakers. I only have 1 Klipsch dealer in my city ...and he wanted FULL list price ...I got it on-line, from authorized dealer for 45% off list price, saving me about a $1,000.00!!! A $1,000.00!!! Peace ... Rob |
|
Hawk | Rob: I hear you. Beleive me, WE ALL NEED MORE SLEEP! LOL! Valeem: Rob is correct that it is getting harder to negotiate for a Marantz. Also, I have seen Marantz dumping smaller retailers for smallish regional chain stores in my area. I am not sure what is going on. |
|
G-Man | I have a friend in Wisconsin that owns 2 audio/video stores. His original store has been operating for at least 25 years. He has lost a few representations over the years for selling at 15%-30% under MSRP. Invariably what happens is that competing retailers whine to the manufacturer about the retailer selling "out of his territory" and at "discounted prices" and they want protection. I remember he sold Polk, Denon, NAD, and others that had gotten pulled from his representation. These competitors generally find out about his pricing from consumers that complain to their local dealers that they can get XYZ product at 20% less from this retailer. This gets the complaint ball rolling. Lucky for him he still has some good representations: Onkyo, Harman Kardon, PSB, KEF, ATI, Jamo, Sony and Sony ES, etc. So price fixing and protectionism is alive and well. |
|
valeem | R.G.Raymos + Hawk: Hello guys! I'm very surprised to hear that you guys have to pay so much for your Marantz gear in the states. For many years now we have come to believe that everything, and I mean everything, is much cheaper in the states. Would you believe that people used to fly from Britain to the states to do some shopping and they'd still be saving money? It's a shame Marantz feel they need to do what they do, it just stops more people from enjoying their fine products! Does anyone know if their warranties are honoured worldwide? If you have a minute maybe you'd like to check out the following website: www.richersounds.com or www.richersounds.co.uk They are authorised dealers for everything they sell. They mention they are also a clearing house for manufacturers. Do you have a similar retailer in the states? |
|
valeem | P.S. I bought an extended 3yr warranty from these guys for my SR4300 for £20. This warranty entitles me to a free service once a year as well as a loan machine if mine needs a repair as well as other benefits. Oh! and if I choose not to use the servicing and need no repairs done they will refund my £20. They are an honourable company! |
|
Anthony Law | Valeem, I did a goggle search using "Marantz SR7400" and it's most interesting. Only 1 site (UK) came up. Same prices as your post. The interesting part is, they're also listing old model NADs at insane prices: T741 £130 T751 £170 T761 £200 BTW, if you think prices are high in USA, you should see Canada! I'm currently deciding between a NAD/Marantz AVR: T742 C$900 (US$620) T752 C$1400 (US$965) T762 C$1900 (US$1300) SR7300 C$1300 (US$900) SR7300ose C$1600 (US$1100) And that is *before* 14.5% taxes on top! |
|
valeem | Anthony Law: I have phoned this retailer a number of times to enquire about some of their amazing prices and guess what? They never seem to have those products! There either no longer available or out of stock. I can't see them having the new Marantz range just yet. I think its a question of taking orders and keeping people waiting. |
|
| The only thing that bother's me about Marantz is the low power rating the got on the following website (Stereo Review/Sound & Vision test) http://www.geocities.com/Area51/Hollow/3401/ratevsac.htm for the SR7200. I mean to be rated at 105w x 6 and measured at 27w x 6 is quite a discrepency. |
|
valeem | Smitty: I'm very surprised to see Marantz's poor showing in the list you supplied especially considering the other comments posted on this forum concerning them being one of the 'honest' manufacturers. Can anyone shed some light on this please? |
|
Hawk | valeem: The Sound & Vision testing revealed what many of us already knew--the Marantz x200 line, such as the 7200 they tested, was riddled with problems--not just their power ratings, either. I think Marantz has tried to be honest, but every manufacturer of receivers has had a problem generation, and the Marantz got caught last year. The new line, the x300 series, seems to have solved the problems uncovered in the x200s and they are a pretty good line of receivers. The manufacturing of the product was moved back to Japan, and a new line of power supplies were purchased for the new generation. The software bugs were tracked down and fixed. Would I buy an x200 from marantz? Obviously not, but I do like the 7300 a lot and I have recommended it a number of times. As bad as the 7200 was (as evidenced by the S&V results), the 7300 is a sweet receiver that I can highly recommend. BTW, even brands like Yamaha have real duds--consider the RX-V630. It is a real stinker. Has the same amp section as the 730, which could only provide a whopping 37 wpc when driving 5 channels according to S&V, but was rated by Yamaha to be a 75 wpc receiver. In the 630, Yamaha cut even more corners especially in the pre/pro section. Trying to listen to music through a 630 is absolute torture (we should use it in the interrogation of terrorists--they would cave in minutes). So no manufacturer is immune from having a bad unit from time to time. |
|
valeem | Hawk: Thanks Hawk you've restored some faith. |
|
B.Free | Hawk, Your insight has been very helpful in narrowing my choices for a new system. Like so many who have posted questions and comments on this forum, I have really struggled trying to select a receiver and speakers from the many options out there.I have been auditioning speakers for the past year+, always ending up falling in love with speakers (and receivers, for that matter) I can not afford, until recently. Although I do not like the way Circuit City, Best Buy etc demo their equipment, I just had to listen to the Athena Technologies Audition Series, AS-F2 with accompanying center channel, AS-C1 and surronds, AS-B1 after all the glowing reviews I have read on the A.T. speakers. They require a "warm, accurate" receiver to bring out the best in them. Hawk, my question to you is; are you familiar with Athena Technologies speakers and two, would you suggest the Marantz 7300 or ELITE 45/53 TX? |
|
Anonymous | Hawk: Marantz receivers are designed and engineered in Japan yet 'Made In China' as the print reads on the back of my model. |
|
Hawk | Anon: I was speaking of the Marantz 7300, which the early ones at least were apparently is built in Japan, where the previous generation (7200) was built somewhere in southeast asia (I don't remember where exactly). I have no doubt you are right about the less expensive marantzs |
|
Tim | This thread has been very useful in helping me reach a decision. I've been considering either a Marantz 4300 or Yamaha RX-VX440RDS amplifier; does anyone have any opinions either way? Decent music performance would be a benefit as I will probably be running my (cheap mini-system) CD through it as well. Also, any suggestions for a good speaker match? Something small, possibly the Mission M70 set? |
|
Tim | Oh, I just found the exact thread I need. https://www.ecoustics.com/electronics/forum/home-audio/4417.html Apologies for not checking properly before posting. |
|
valeem | Does anyone know if there is a safe, easy and reliable way to test the output of our receivers? |
|
Dejan | Hi! Can someone put some light on this cause I'm little confused.I have Marantz SR5300 and according to manual it takes 6-16 ohm speakers.The speakers I plan to get are(Eltax Monitor 3) and they are 4-8 ohm.Would it be safe to connect them and run in a long term.What I would like to say is if the speakers are 8 ohm than its clear ITS SAFE, or if amplif. takes 6 ohm its safe again, but with this between inf.its vey confusing to me. Thanks!!!!!!!!!! |
|
Anonymous | Dejan: All Eltax are telling you is that their speakers can be driven by amps with an impedance range of either 4,6 or 8 ohms and because the Marantz receiver can drive speakers with an impedance of at least 6 ohms then this pairing will work fine together. I have noticed that Eltax have only just recently started to label their speakers in this way and before the change they were rated at 6 ohms only. |
|
Anonymous | Is the 4300 High Current? |
|
Anonymous | How come all the Marantz line is built with the AC input and outlet so close to the RCA audio in? What's up with that I'm sure this could end up in interference no matter how good of an isolation you have, look at all of the other products there is a full separation of the AC from the audio lines. Comments? And by the way is it high current? |
|
Anonymous | To those in doubt on brand and quality, I have an SR96 connected to the DP870 processor and 3 Audio Control C101 equalizers. The sound is pure and clear far surpassing expectations. To test speakers, a True RMS multimeter will be necessary. |
|
| Hawk, Truly impressive knowledge. I read your comments with great interest and amayzed by the detailed and accurate answers you have provided, well done. I went for the SR5300 and now looking for suitable speakers. You mentioned the JMLab, which model should i choose ? I'm currently living in Germany, are you familiar with "our" local brands like Quadral ? it seems they have pretty good sounds at fairly low prices. What other brands should i check ? Ma budget is about 1300$ . Thanks in advance Ami |
|
Hawk | Ami: Thanks for the comments. JMlab is a french company and should be available in Germany, thanks to the EC. I know Quadral, but not very well--not very good distribution here in the States. Still, as warm as the Marantz is, you should be able to find a good speaker in your area. My general impression of German loudspeakers that I have heard (Canton, MB Quart, etc.) is that they are pretty bright and articulate (unlike audio salepeople here, I do not mean that as a putdown--it is just a description to better allow me to choose appropriate matching components). Quadral as a brand appears to me to be in the same camp. A bright and articulate speaker is just what the Marantz needs to get the most out of it. Combined with your Marantz 5300, you should be in great shape. Same is true for Cantons and MB Quarts. |
|
Anonymous | Ami, Have you run your 5300 yet or are you without speakers? I just wanted your impression as I have heard two opinions about the SQ of the 5300. One says its Warm the other says its more towards Neutral. I am trying to locate one so I can demonstrate it but no luck so far. I have the Monitor Audio B2's which are foward and a little bright sounding. I'd appreciate a first hand account if you wouldn't mind. |
|
Anonymous | Hawk The MB Quarts I've seen are 4 Ohm. Will the 5300 be able to safely drive them? |
|
| Thanks Hawk !! I think I will go for the Quadral Platinum 420, it seems to have very clear and punchy sound. I have compared it with Canton, JBL E80 and Monitor Audio S6 (wonderful as well, just too pricy ). I am a bit puzzle by the frequency response of the other speakers, The way i know it the front speakers should have below 30 ( as in 30-24000 e.g.), but when i look at JMLab for example, most of its speakers have above 50 (as in 50-22000). Those this specification detail mean anything in regard to the speaker quality ? Quadral are all good in that sense. As for Anonymous question, Yes I am currently without speakers. I found the Marantz with a great discount on the Web and I just snaped it. Will be happy to report it once the speakers arrived. |
|
Anonymous | Hey guys since this is a marantz thread can anyone give an insight about this: Many say that marantz is more of a musical receiver while yamaha is more of an ht receiver bec of its cinematic effects, will you agree that marantz perform better on musical soundtracks or yamaha is still the winner since it's still with regards to movies, ht, cinema or whatever you call it thanks. |
|
Hawk | B. Free: I just went through and re-read the posts and I realized you asked me a question and I missed it. My apologies for not responding to your August 31 post before now. Either of those receivers should work well with the Athena speakers. Both the Marantz and the Pioneer Elite are warm and a bit laid back which compliment the sound of the Athena speakers well. Now, if I were to choose between the two, I would get the Marantz 7300 because I happen to believe it is a really special receiver. Don't get me wrong, either one is very very good, but when I heard the Marantz demo'ed with my own speakers, it was really special sounding: warm, very musical, and transparent. It is a receiver that I could listen to all day and still want more. |
|
Hawk | Anon 1: Good issue with the MB Quarts. It is my understanding that the Germans tend to rate their speakers just a bit differently that we do in North America. Their 4 ohm is largely a minimum rating whereas here, we tend to give "nominal" ratings. Anon 2: Last May, I directly compared a Marantz 4300 (MSRP of $399) with a Yamaha RX-V730 (MSRP of $699, I think). I tried several different speaker systems and used both CD music and DVD soundtracks for my evaluation. The Marantz was better for me for both music and HT. I found the Yamaha to be "fatiguing", with an exaggerated and rough sounding treble. The comapratively cheap Marantz was much smoother sounding and more engaging. So, IMO, I would disagree with your proposition based upon a couple of hours in the soundroom to myself. I think the Marantz is better on both, particularly since it has a much better power supply. But we all have our own preferences . . . |
|
Anonymous | Hawk What I mean is if marantz will perform better than yamaha when it comes to movie tracks on movies (while watching the movie). Someone told me that denon 1803 is a better choice than marantz 6300 because denon has more "punch" than marantz in terms of ht. The guy also told me that marantz is so smooth that it doesn't fit for action movies. |
|
ken | Anyone can tell me his experience with Harman Karton AVR-325? I am thinking seriously of buying one. Any alternative choice? Thanks! |
|
Anonymous | Hi, I recently purchased some KEF KHT 2005 speakers and am now looking to upgrade my receiver. Getting very confused with all the models out there but keep coming back to the Marantz 7300. Wondering if any thoughts on a good match for the KEF speakers?? The store I purchased the KEF speakers from had it matched with the Marantz 5300 and it sounded incredible. Of course that was in the store. Thanks |
|
P & C | Hi, to the guy considering pairing the Marantz SR7300 and Athenas, I've had my system with the 7300 driving AS-B2s mains, AS-B1 surrounds, AS-C1, and the ASP400 sub for a month and a half now, and I am very happy with my choice. I use the system for music 95% of the time, and I listen to mostly Jazz vocals and classical vocals. Actually since getting my system, I have auditioned many other speaker/amp combinations because I felt like the amount I spent on the speakers that I use for music: mains+sub ($230+$400), was too little in comparison to my receiver ($900). Hence, I decided to look for a pair of speakers in the $1500 range for music. So I've been auditioning at every opportunity I get - you can follow my exploits if you search for postings from "P & C" under the thread "Best speakers for $1000-$1500" at rec.audio.high-end on usenet. To sum it up so far, I have been hardpressed to find a CLEARLY and INDISPUTABLY better sounding set of speakers in that price range that were matched with electronics at a similar price point, for the type of music that I listen to. Those that have sounded better cost an order of magnitude more than my current system. An example of a clearly better set of speakers were Sonus Faber Grand Piano, at ~$3500. The B&W CMD 1NT that I listened to probably sounded less congested on large orchestral pieces but I just cannot justify the roughly 5x increase in price over my B2s just for what I could hear to be minor improvements. I am willing to spend the money for better sound, and perhaps a better match with the marantz. I have a long list of recommendations which I am yet to work through... so by no means am I saying that it doesn't exist at the $1500 point for a pair of speakers, but I have a suspicion that it might mean electrostatics or magneplanars and getting some power amplification that can handle 4 ohm loads. It will be interesting to see what will come of my search. However, if nothing came of it, I would be entirely satisfied with what I currently have - save for the nagging awareness that the amp/speaker budget breakdown of my system is skewed the wrong way. |
|
| I've been lurking on this thread...its very good. Thanks for all the insights. In my case, I'm looking at some of the mid-range Marantz...specifically, the SR8300. Does anybody know anything about it? Granted, it's pretty steep but when you think that my last receiver - Bob Carver - lasted 12 years...it doesn't seem so bad. My biggest concern is that it will be able to handle all the new digital technologies. In that respect, I am curious if -- and how -- this receiver could be hooked up to my PC to play MP3's (or whatever) off my hard drive. How does that work? And, can the SR8300 do it? Thank you very much in advance. |
|
Hawk | Anon: Everyone has his or her own preferences. I can appreciate that someone wants more "punch" when playing action scenes on a DVD. However, my guiding principles are two-fold: First, how realistic is the sound; and second, how listenable (I think this is a word) is the receiver. Now regarding the realistic standard, I have been around long enough to have heard just about all of the tricks that audio engineers resort to. But, I want to hear what the actual sound is like. It is much harder to make music sound good, so I tend to do a lot of my evaluating with stereo music. If it presents a good soundstage and I can, with a good recording, determine where the instruments are on stage, I think it is pretty good receiver. On DVD playback, I am pretty amazed at what the recording engineers are able to capture. That is exactly what I want to hear--what they intended that I hear. You know, for the filming of the "Wild Bunch", Sam Peckinpaugh resorted to recording the firing of the weapons inside of a metal trash can to further emphasize the sound. He got the desired effect, but do I need my receiver to also emphasize it further? I don't think so. Not everything has to have "punch", especially if the director didn't intend for it to have "punch." Now this leads into my second point of being "listenable". I have, from time to time, purchased a component or two that exaggerated something, usually the top end, but I once had some B*I*C speakers that really over-enphasized the bottom end. After a little while, I found I could not listen to them for an appreciable period of time--kind of takes the joy out of owning the system. If something--and the Denon 1603 is a great example--over-emphsizes something to give it more "punch", you will probably find the sound fatiguing to listen to and may not even play back the whole DVD because of it. I just don't see the point in owning something that isn't going to give you the joy of using it. Some people may prefer a Denon 1603 over a Marantz 6300, but I would bet that that person would be upgrading a whole lot sooner than the purchaser of the 6300. I was really jazzed by owning my B*I*C speakers, too, but I got rid of them within a few months for something I enjoyed lsitening to for hours at a time. To me it is no contest--I think the Marantz is much more enjoyable both for music and for HT. Sorry to rant . . . |
|
Hawk | P & C: I would never have any nagging doubts about my system if I were as happy as you are. The "ratios" you speak of are merely rules of thumb that do not take into account the great value that the AS-F2s are. Consider yourself fortunate among men, and enjoy your system. As I have posted on some other threads, Marantz made something special with the 7300. You have an awesome combo, my friend. Enjoy! |
|
Hawk | Walker: I have never done this before, but it seems to me that if you merely run a patch cable from the stereo out jack on your sound card (3.5mm stereo jack) that terminates into a pair of RCA connectors, you could plug them into any Aux input on the back of your receiver. These patch cables are readily available at most stereo stores. BTW, the Marantz 8300 is a great receiver, but have you considered separates? At the price of the marantz, you could get the Outlaw Audio 950 pre/pro and the 7100 amp and save yourself $200. The sound is pretty incredible, too. |
|
| I am an owner of a marantz sr7300 amplifier and also an Eltax Millenium 300 Speaker system with impedance rating 4/8 ohms. I would like to know if the speakers match with the mentioned amplifier. Also is it normal that the amplifier mentioned heats up when in use?? |
|
GT | "As I have posted on some other threads, Marantz made something special with the 7300." Hawk, when you speak so highly of this Marantz is it the regular 7300 or the 7300ose? |
|
Anonymous | How does the Marantz SR-7300 compare to the NAD T752 or T762 recievers? I am attempting to decide on what type of reciever to purchase. I would like to pair one of these recievers with a pair of Tannoy Revolution R2's of R3's. Can you give me any recomendations, as to the recievers or a better choice of speakers? Any help would be appreciated. Thanks |
|
Hawk | The Marantz is pretty mellow compared to an NAD, which is very powerful sounding (much more powerful than the power ratings given by the respective manufacturers). This may explain in part why I believe the NADs sound more like separates than just a receiver. NAD has power reserves that the Marantz can only dream of. I regularly recommend both as they both give a very musical sound that you can listen to all day and not get tired (unlike some other brands). Either will provide you with a very satisfying experience. I am afraid that I have not heard the Tannoys, however. I have heard good things about them, but sadly, I have never had the chance to actually hear them. Actually, I like most British speakers: B+Ws, KEFs, Missions, Heybrooks, Regas, etc. In fact, I own a pair of Missions and a pair of Heybrooks (but I have sold my B+Ws for financial reasons). I have no doubt that Tannoys would tend to be very similar, which is a very pleasing sound. Either the marantz or either NAD work very well with any of these speakers. |
|
B. Free | Hawk, Apology not needed but thanks,anyway. By the looks of your participation in discussion groups, I do not know how you have time to read and reply to all the question directed your way. I have the same question as GT above, is your glowing praise for Marantz 73xx for the 7300 or the OSE? In your humble opinion, is there a better choice in speakers for what the Athena's cost? Like one of the comments above, it seems like I should spend more money on speakers but the Athenas with the right receiver seem unbeatable!? Go CUBS! |
|
valeem | Hawk: So are you saying that Mission M71i's will work well with a NAD C320BEE? I have come to believe that Missions are forward sounding and excitng just like the NAD sound? Are these characteristics compatible with both speakers and amplifier? |
|
Anonymous | Mr Hawk & Pros, need help on deciding the system Receivers : Denon AVR 1603 vs Marantz SR 4300 or Denon AVR 1803 vs Marantz SR 5300 Speakers : JBL SCS 20 vs Jamo A410 PDD vs Yamaha NS-P430 with QD Bass Which of those makes the best combination in sound and value for money I will mostly use for music 70% and Movie 30% THX |
|
G.DawG | Marantz SR-5300 and JBL IMO. The Marantz would make a good combo for the music and would still sound good with HT. |
|
| Has anyone heard of Snell speakers? I was wondering how they compare to other speakers in their class. Thanks |
|
| Thanks mr G.DawG for your comments, How about JBL SCS150SI for Marantz SR 43400/ SR 5300 Would it make a good combo for music and sounds good for HT ? THX |
|
Anonymous | Ok Marantz but what about Onkyo arn't they of higher products than Marantz? |
|
AZMAN MOHD | HI GUYS.I AM A GUY FROM SINGAPORE AND I HAVE BEEN READING YOUR OPINIONS ON SOME MARANTZ A/V RECEIVERS WITH INTEREST.FOR YOUR INFO,I MYSELF IS CURRENTLY OWNING A MARANTZ SR8300 A/V RECEIVER WHICH I BOUGHT FOR USD1100 NEW AND GOLD IN COLOUR.BEFORE THAT I WAS USING A DENON AVR3801.PERFORMANCE WISE PERSONALLY I WILL AGREE THAT MARANTZ SOUNDED BETTER THAN DENON IN STEREO.FOR HT,MARANTZ IS MORE DETAILED ESPECIALLY THE DIALOGUE AND SURROUND CHANNELS.FOR LOW FREQUENCIES CLOUT,BOTH WERE ON PAR.GENERALLY FOR HT,BOTH DENON AND MARANTZ ARE EXCELLENT,BUT MARANTZ EDGES DENON FOR ITS MUSICALITY.WELL ONE MORE POINT TO NOTE,MARANTZ SR8300 LOOKS THE PART WITH ITS WELL DESIGNED BUT SIMPLE FASCIA. COMPONENTS HOOK UP: MISSION 702 BOOKSHELF FOR FRONT CHANNELS MISSION 70C CENTER CHANNEL JBL CONTROLX REAR CHANNEL AR 150W 10INCH ACTIVE SUBWOOFER SONY DV745 DVD PLAYER |
|
Anonymous | Hi. I need a new AV-receiver and wanted to buy the Marantz SR 5400 for its stereo sound. However, I still own quite a few of old records, and the marantz does not support a record player. Does anybody (especially you, Hawk) have an opinion which receiver would be the best choice (in this price range)? Thanks!! |
|
Tim | Can't you just plug your record deck into a spare analogue input on the SR5400? Using normal stereo RCA plugs? I wasn't aware that record decks needed a different sort of connection. |
|
bram van den oever | dear all, Can someone tell me what the great advantage of the maranz 4300 to the 5300 is. The reason is the that the 5300 is a little bit out of my budget (100 pounds more) but i want to know if its worth it! cheers bambam |
|
Jazz Jam | Hi Guys, I'm researching a $500-$600 receiver. Marantz 5300, H/K 325, Yamaha RX-V640 or Denon 1803 are short listed choices. Its for both music and home theater, though I live in an apartment in San Fran so can't really crank it up too much. Which one of these would allow me to listen to separate sources simultaneously? I'm currently owning AR-M1 and JBL LX--44 speakers, though seem to be a mismatch. Any speaker advice would be great as well. |
|
Hawk | Anon and Tim: Ahh, there i nothing like the old vinyl as CDs have all the ambience filtered out of the recording (hence the push for DVD-Audio and SACD). However, just plugging a turntable into a high level output will sound horrible and the sound has not been equalized and boosted to the high level input's requirements. You must have a phono pre-amp. I really like the Sumiko ProJect Box for $120 from The Needle Doctor. bambam: Big jump in quality from the 4300 to the 5300. Don't know if it is worth 100 pounds, or not (that is a lot!), but the power supply is bigger and the signal-noise ratio jumps by 13 db, which is a big jump indicative of a much cleaner design inside. Also has an aluminum face plate instead of plastic. Jazz Jam: I suggest two other receivers on the thread you started. Of the ones you list, the only one I would consider for music is the Marantz 5300. Most HT receivers, including the Denons (which I have) and the Yamahas are simply terrible at reproducing stereo music. |
|
Tim | I asked around a little after posting that above and I was completely wrong. You cannot plug your deck into a regular input. You must have a proper phono input. Sorry if I mislead anyone. |
|
John Miller | Have been reading with interest as I am about to order a SR7300 to go with a set of KEF Q1 bookshelf speakers. From the discussions I gather that the above combination should be ok. Does anyone have any comments before I commit? Also there is a SR7300-OSE. What does one actually get for this? Local salespersons seem quite vague on it. Don't know I suppose. Also horrified that the SR7300 does not have Turntable capability. This was a specific on my purchase specification and I was clearly given to understand that the SR7300 met this. How can it be that such a connection is not available? Could someone elaborate some more as a Turntable is an absolute must for me. Would it mean that I would be best advised to go to another setup, or make, altogether? |
|
Hawk | John: 1. Your proposed system sounds good to me. I have heard it at my local Marantz/KEF dealer and I think you will be pleased. 2. The OSE is a limited edition that supposedly uses a better power supply, copper shielding instead of tin and a couple of other minor improvements. I do not think it is worth the extra $300. 3. The lack of a turntable input is quite common. In an effort to save some money and provide other features, most receiver makers have eliminated the phono preamp. Your alternatives are to go to a Denon 2803 or above (like I did), a Yamaha 1400 and above, or an Onkyo/Integra 701/6.4 and above, which all have phono inputs. However, you will sacrifice a good deal of sound quality and detail to get it (I know from personal experience). I frankly find those receivers to lack warmth and detail--they make the music very sterile to listen to. My Denon has been served with an eviction notice. I would stick with the Marantz 7300, which is one of the truly "sweet" sounding receivers out there and simply add a remote Phono preamp, which are actually widely available. I recommend the Sumiko Pro-Ject Box, a small phono preamp that will accept either a moving magnet or moving coil cartridge and costs ~$120. Other alternatives for about the same price or just a little more include products from NAD, Parasound, and Rotel. It will sound better than the built in phono preamps, too. |
|
Suraj | Hi Guys, I am interested in purchasing either the Marantz SR8300 or the SR9300 A/V receiver. However, I have noticed that the back panels of both models indicate a speaker system of 6-8 ohms. I have a pair of JBL LX-66 speakers that are rated at 4 ohms and rated at approximately 150 watt RMS. My centre is rated at 6 ohms and my rears are rated at 8 ohms. Would if be safe to hook up my 4 ohm speakers to either the SR 8300 or the SR 9300? Would doing this damage the receiver or speakers? Thanks Suraj |
|
Hawk | Suraj: There is almost no way to really know. Speakers are rated at a certain impedence, but that impedence is not constant, but will vary by frequency. Furthermore, the speaker manufacturer will rate a speaker, but one never knows if that rating is nominal or minimum. However, given the size and cost of the models you are considering, I think you will be ok. Both have huge power supplies and given the cost, one would presume they have good thermal protection circuitry. However, given the cost of what you are considering, why haven't you looked at an Outlaw 950/7100 combo? (See them at www.outlawaudio.com). It has more real power, rated to handle 4 ohm loads, sounds better IMO, and is cheaper. Just a thought . . . |
|
Hawk | Jim: I just checked Parts Express, and found a phono preamp for about $70. Now I haven't heard it, but it is an intriguing product. Check it out here: http://www.partsexpress.com/pe/pshowdetl.cfm?&DID=7&Partnumber=245-035&ctab=5 |
|
IfIonly | I have read these postings top to bottom, and I have been researching (on the web) for nearly 4 days to make an A/V receiver purchase decision. I believe I have narrowed my decision down to the new Marantz SR7400, 7300ose, or possibly 8300, and I am waiting for Marantz USA to send me some paperwork. We are primarily movie watchers, so I purchased the new Kenwood 7070 with all the THX processing. I took it back, because it had no up/down video switching, and my speakers "hissed" when ANY power was given to them. I knew at this point I could not rely on the advice or knowledge of a retail chain employee. It is difficult to find large amounts of Marantz reviews, but I have not heard anything "bad" about the Marantz products, therefore I am 99.999% sure I am going with Marantz, although I am not commited to anything yet. I am going to use my "budget" Harman-Kardon HKTS-5 theatre speakers with the new unit. I wouldn't characterize them as "warm", so they should be an O.K. mate. I am stuck with the speakers until I get a bigger/new house. The receiver is my building block at this point. I want it to do everything, and do it well. So, I guess what I am looking for is the opinions of the more experienced audiophiles. Such as: Do I really need THX? The 8300 is nearly twice the price, and does not have all the new dolby processing of the 7400, but it may be worth the money. Should I go with the 7300ose, or 7400? Or, should I even get a Marantz unit? Please feel free to give my any and all of your opinions. I very much need some feedback. Thanks all. |
|
Hawk | IfIonly: 1. Marantz is a good product line. 2. You do not need THX. THX certification only adds to the cost and I think it is rather worthless. The THX certification is supposed to guarantee a certain level of performance, but I noticed that the Onkyo 900 is THX certified and although rated at 120 wpc, it is only capable of doing 54 wpc when driving all seven channels according to the June issue of Sound & Vision, so I must ask myself what is THX Labs certifying? 3. Each of those models you have mentioned are very good (although I have not yet heard the 7400--I read its spec sheet and was quite impressed). The nicest upgrade on the 7400 is the video up-conversion, which is supposed to be a true up-conversion. Earlier up-conversions, like that on my Denon 3803, only passed an S-video signal through to the component video outputs. My dealer told me the Marantz 7400 converts the NTSC standard signal into a true 480i. If this interests you, you should confirm it as I am relying on this man's word He may not be telling the truth. Other than the video up-conversion issue, I don't think you will hear any difference between the 7300ose, 8300 and the 7400. So, you may wish to save the money and get an older model. I hope this is of some help. |
|
IfIonly | Hawk, I am curious to see what the "official" 7400 spec sheet from Marantz says about the unit. If this thread is still running when I get the paperwork I will let you know. Thanks again. |
|
| Hi all. I just thought I would chime in on the Marnatz. I bought a Marantz SR7000 three years ago and I am very happy with its performance. I listen to it through Paradigm Monitor 9s, ADP-370, CC-370 & PS1000 sub. Everything was bought new at the same time. I have to say I really like the sound of the Marantz with music & HT as well as the sound of the Paradigms. I am looking at upgrading my receiver. Since I am going to build a new house I figure I should upgrade to 7.1. I disregarded the Marantz because of a bad review I read about the 7200 (I think, it was the first 6.1 after the 7000)on how the sound quality was bad and especially after I read the review on the SR7000 before I bought it and I quote from the review "It is the most musical receiver I have heard". I think it was reviewed in Home Theater. I think if it wasn't for the 7.1 I would just stay with the SR7000. So, I hope the SR7400 is just as good as the SR7000 I own now. On a sperate note. I like the speakers I have but, want to go with in ceilings/ in walls. Has anyone ever heard the Paradigm in ceilings/in walls? If you are wondering why the in ceilings is because my theater is doubling as a Family Room and I would like to keep them hidden. |
|
| One other thing is over at the AVS forum there is alot of praise about H/K line. What the hell is Logic 7. I have never used any DSP on my SR7000. I listen in what ever format the disc is recorded in. Am I missing something? Thansk, Wade |
|
GT | Logic 7 is proprietary processing technique that creates discrete 5.1 and 7.1 soundfields from 2 channel recordings. It's similar to Dolby Pro Logic II with a slightly different sound. Sounds really good when listening to TV, VCR or old Pro Logic recordings. I myself prefer it to Dolby PLII which HK's also include. Is it worth eliminating all other receiver choices but HK? No. Its a nice feature that HK incorporates into their receivers, but if you already have a very good Marantz, NAD, or Elite unit I wouldn't swap it out just for Logic 7. Logic 7 was created by Lexicon, a high end Harman Intl company specializing in home theater and professional electronics. Lexicon processors have much more advanced and powerful version of Logic 7 which can be used over Dolby Digital and DTS sources. The HK version is watered down but still very good. Since you can't overlay it on top of 5.1 sources its not a "must have" feature. Nice but not critical. |
|
| Thanks. Most of everything I own on DVD is at least Dolby Digital 5.1 or DTS 5.1. What is the other DSP modes for? Anytime I use them the sound seems weak and thin. |
|
Hawk | Wade: Almost all of the other surround modes actually are used to convert a 2 channel stereo signal into a surround format. |
|
| Hawk: What is your opinion on upgrading to 7.1? I was thinking of going to a Marantz SR7400 when they come out. Is there any surround modes that will take a 5.1 digital mix and give you a matrix 7.1? It does not look like there is a whole lot of software available in 6.1 digital and I have not even heard that there is a 7.1 digital mix. I'm just looking to get some ideas. Thanks, Wade |
|
| Hawk: Also, if I upgrade to a new receiver would I be better served by an NAD receiver. If so, which one? Thanks, Wade PS Do you get paid for this? Man you post all over the place and people look for you specifically to answer questions. Maybe you should consider changing your name from Hawk to Guru. It is nice to see people to take the time to help others. |
|
wado | Marantz SR96. Help !!!!!! Does anyone know this product or model receiver and if it's any good ? Need some good advice. Was looking at HK also but am concerned about this Marantz it might be out dated. I bought it for under $200 with DP870 dolby digital. WOuld I be better with HK or maybe aSR5200 ??? Any opinions welcome. Thanks |
|
Hawk | Wade: 1. No, I don't get paid. I wish I did, though! Seriously, and I am not trying to make a big deal out of this, I am disabled, but ambulatory. I get out of the house once a week or so and use my time listening to equipment and music as it is my passion. I want to have the best system I can in my house so that I can enjoy my time at home (not really big on watching TV, but I would like a good movie from time to time). I enjoy sharing what I learn when I go out to listen and if I can help, that is a real bonus. I do spend a lot of time on this forum, but unfortunately, I have the time to spend. 2. Whether you go to a 7.1 system is entirely a personal preference. I do not see the benefit myself as 5.1 gives me everything I want or need. Everything is formatted for 5.1 (dolby digital and dts), so you never need to worry about incompatibility. You already have a really nice system, but if you want the 7.1, you would get a very nice system with the Marantz and another pair of Paradigms. There is not much material out in 7.1 either (I am aware of only the latest Bond movie), and I think that 7.1's chances of becoming a standard have been hurt by the release of Yamana's latest flagship receiver, which is a 9.1 receiver (talk about excess!). I think the software makers (movie studios) will not want to invest in the 7.1 format if there is a chance it will be overtaken by another new format (9.1). It is all a bit muddled after 5.1. 3. Now, I have made it pretty well known that I really love the sound of the NADs. I have not heard another receiver line that is as clean and clear sounding, with a relative absence of any coloration, as the NADs. Add those factors to the incredible power supply and capacitors they have, and you have a very dynamic sounding receiver that can handle almost any speaker and source material. If you wanted a 7.1 receiver, I would suggest the new NAD T 763, which will do 7.1. If you are satisfied with 6 channels, check out the 762, which is being closed out for $899. If I were to get a receiver other than an NAD (I currently own a Denon and have come to view it with some contempt), I like the Marantz, especially the 7300 (a 6.1 receiver), which I believe has a very sweet sound, very similar to the NAD. I believe the 7400 should be just as good, but as you discovered earlier, Marantz had a real winner in the 7000 and then had a total meltdown with the 7200 (which actually sounded pretty good, but since its power supply was so weak, it just couldn't produce strong volume), so we can't take anything for granted. What a product looks like on paper and what it sounds like can be two very different things (as I discovered with my Denon). 5. "Hawk" is a moniker several people hung on me several years ago when I was still a practicing attorney due to my attention to details. I am not at all sure it was a compliment. Still, I have become used to it. Warmest regards. |
|
| Thanks Hawk I appreciate the time you take and the detail of your comments. I think at this moment I may just keep what I have. No sense in adding extra speakers and another receiver for channels I probably won't even use that often. But you never know that could change by time I'm done typing. Best Regards PS By the way as far as formats go I thought I read somewhere that there was a 10.2 format in the works. So, if Yamaha is going 9.1 why not 10.2. If that is not enough maybe we should all just line are walls with speakers all the way around like a wallpaper border. |
|
Hawk | Wade: LOL!!! Yeah, I have heard rumors of a 10.1 system, and if you can believe it, a 12.1 system! I have no idea where this will end, but is seems that the mass market manufacturers (Denon, Yamaha, Onkyo, sony, etc.) have no better ideas than to add more channels. Seems they have a deal with the speaker manufacuteres to get us to buy more speakers. Maybe they get a kick-back. I think sticking with your current set-up makes a lot of sense. Your Marantz is a very nice receiver and the Paradigm speakers are top drawer. I am not sure that you would hear much, if any, improvement by changing your system. Thanks for the kind words. |
|
wado | THANKS FOR THE FEEDBACK !!!!!!!!!!!!!!! |
|
IfIonly | Hawk, The "paperwork" Marantz sent me is nothing more than a 2003 product catalog.=(worthless to me) I specifically asked for info on the new SR7400. I will try again. |
|
Hawk | IfIonly: Bummer. Did you see their press release on the product? If you are interested, it gives a decent description of the Marantz 7400. Here is the link: http://www.dba-pr.com/clients/marantz/releases/receiverscedia2003.htm I hope this helps. |
|
Anonymous | Hawk, finally I had time to return to the forum. Thanks a lot for the detailed comments on the phono preamps, indeed you earn a lot of bonuses! And yes - I love my vinyls too! |
|
Anonymous | Hawk, fyi: the ProJect PhonoBox is cheaper across the atlantic: € 89,- (see pg. 17 in: http://www.phonophono.de/pricelist_eng.PDF) |
|
Erwin | Dear all, First of all: apologies if this is not the right entry at the right place - I tried to go through most of the postings but couldn't find a more suitable place. Just bought a Marantz sr5300 with a DV4100 OSE DVD player. As I'm no expert I basically followed the shopowner's advice who recommended me this (discounted - €600 for both) set. As I know now from reading previous postings I think the advice was quite okay w.r.t. the receiver at least. Things still should be optimised with new speakers but that's something for later... My question here is as follows. I linked the receiver and dvd player both with analog and optical digital cables. When listening audio CDs using the digital connection, the first 1/2 second or so of the first track of every CD I use is being skipped. In analog mode, this does not happen. Quite irritating, does anybody know why this is happening (and what can be done about it)? The manual isn't particularly helpful... Thanks in advance! Erwin |
|
ryan | hawk....very informative info...thanks!. got this speced out for my room. marantz dv4300 dvd player...marantz sr7400 reciever...harman kardon pa 4000 amp..pioneer pdp 503cmx with pioneer pda 5002 video card and then heard the aurora video card was better??... and finally a pair of jbl s412pll for my living room and 5 sets of jbl hti8 in walls throught my a apartment.finally someone told me the yamaha rxv2400 was a better reciver beacause something inside that made the plasma screen work better couldnt really understand him!! im 22 years old and just plan on really CRANKING on my music when i listin to it! please give any advice on the equipment or what you might think would work better.. thank you sooo much! |
|
Hawk | Erwin: Your experience regarding the inability of the receiver to play the first half-second of a CD is quite common. It is the nature of the DSPs to detect that a signal is coming in from the optical inputs and switch to that input. Unfortunately, it does take a half-second or so for the receiver to respond to the signal. This has been the subject of a lot of posts which complain about the NAD receivers, which also do this. Last weekend, I tried an optical digital cable on my Denon and the results were the same, and we have had posts from Harman/Kardon and Yamaha owners who have also complained about it, too. So, I don't believe it is a fault within your receiver--instead, it is "the nature of the beast." We have found that it can be corrected by using the analog inputs instead of using the optical digital inputs on the receiver. This means your DVD player is doing the digital to analog conversion instead of the receiver, but you have a nice DVD player and I don't think it will result in any diminution in the quality of the sound. Try it and see what you think. Good luck! |
|
Hawk | ryan: Hey, dude, that is a pretty nice rig for only 22 years old! I am impressed. Both receivers, the Marantz and the Yamaha, are quality receivers. However, I do not understand, nor believe, that the Yamaha does something to improve the video signal on a plasma screen. That, my friend, is B.S., and should be dismissed as such. I would recommend the Marantz receiver for your. You have already purchased the JBL speakers, which can be a bit coarse when cranking the music. Therefore, the marantz is the better choice as it is a much smoother sounding amp than the Yamaha. The Yamaha is a tad on the bright side and that can be a bad combo with the JBLs. With the Marantz, you will be better able to CRANK the music! Don't know what you need the H/K amp for--the Marantz receiver will get the job done. I also can't help with regard to the video cards. Try posting that question on the forum below in the Home Video section. Good luck! |
|
Erwin | Hawk, Thanks for the info. Didn't check threads on other brands, so sorry for the perhaps obvious question. Still it is strange to me that this is perceived as normal by the manufacturers. But well, for the rest I'm really quite happy with this new set. It's a big improvement since my previous one (a Sony which held out for appr. 10-15 years, not bad but of a different league). Regarding the analog vs digital signal - found that out, and reallly I don't hear any difference between them. For sure not with the speakers I have at the moment... Thanks also for all the info on speaker options given in various postings. I now know what to look out for - as soon as money grows back again I'll have a look at it, let's see what the Dutch market offers... :-) |
|
AdamT | Regarding the optical delay, this isn't something that absolutely has to happen. I've played CDs for years through the optical connection going to a Denon AVD-2000 decoder (now dead) and there was no delay whatsoever. |
|
Hawk | AdamT: I agree. It isn't something that absolutely has to happen. I suspect it is a software thing and the software is supplied by the chip maker rather than the receiver maker. I hope I didn't mean to suggest that this delay has to happen. I think it is unfortunate that it happens at all. I am just saying it is common (too common, for that matter!). |
|
jasonl | been lurking here for quite some time now and the information that i gather here are just superb now i need some advise as well, i've decided on getting the Marantz 7300 but still cant decide for the speakers. im choosing among the following sets: Acoustice Energy Evo 3B pack http://www.hifibitz.co.uk/Warehouse/details.asp?ProductID=AEAEVO3BPKGLM Monitor Audio B4 pack http://www.hifibitz.co.uk/Warehouse/details.asp?ProductID=MONB4AVBE B&W set consisting of: B&W 601s3, B&W LCR60, B&W 600s3 and B&W ASW 300 now which do you think would "match" the 7300 better? thanks a lot in advance :-) |