Marantz NR1605 only 50w rated / - AVS Forum

AVS Forum > Audio > Receivers, Amps, and Processors > Marantz NR1605 only 50w rated /

Receivers, Amps, and Processors

flthere's Avatar flthere
02:13 PM Liked: 10
post #1 of 34
08-04-2014 | Posts: 8
Joined: Dec 2009
I'm just starting to build a home theater and am interested in getting the B&W 684 S2 fronts and HTM62 speakers.

I am looking at getting the slim line Marantz NR 1605 or the Yamaha RX675, and wondering which one would be a better choice.

On the downside, Marantz is rated only (50 W + 50 W (8 Ω/ohms, 20 Hz – 20 kHz with 0.08 % T.H.D.)) OR (70 W + 70 W (6 Ω/ohms, 1 kHz with 0.7 % T.H.D.)). Is that sufficient to drive the B&W 684 S2 rated 25-150W ??

My only concern is that is it really 50W ? Will the sound produced be enough in a 13.5 x 17.0 mediaroom ?

Thanks in advance !
MichaelJHuman's Avatar MichaelJHuman
02:22 PM Liked: 118
post #2 of 34
08-04-2014 | Posts: 18,947
Joined: Nov 2006
I can only say that 50 watts is loud. I don't know how loud you like music. If you want to know how loud 50 watts is, consider that 1 watt will drive most speakers to about 90 dB SPL which I guarantee you is loud. That's at one meter away. Say 6 dB SPL loss for distance very roughly. So you need 4 watts to get that same 90 dB. If you want to push 100 dB, you are looking at needing to double the power three times, or 32 watts.

The 684 speakers are not the most efficient speakers on the planet, but I suspect 50 honest watts is sufficient. If you had double the power, it would only be 3 dB more SPL.
flthere's Avatar flthere
02:50 PM Liked: 10
post #3 of 34
08-04-2014 | Posts: 8
Joined: Dec 2009
Thank you for your quick response !

I am really trying to get the right info regarding Watt and dBs and searched a lot since last night. I really don't like it too loud, just don't want the home theater sound being muffled in comparison.

While reading threads/forums, I see that many people add amp to B&W speakers. Is it really needed or will the Marantz be sufficient to drive them properly to get a good output?
MichaelJHuman's Avatar MichaelJHuman
05:06 PM Liked: 118
post #4 of 34
08-04-2014 | Posts: 18,947
Joined: Nov 2006
Home theater sound will not be muffled. Worse case scenario I can think of would be some distortion on the loudest parts of movies if volume was set too high.

Also, as long as you use a powered subwoofer, and you should, the lower frequencies are handled by the subwoofer's own amp which will help out.

Make sure you can return it if you don't like it, and I think you can buy with confidence at least in terms of having enough power.

If it helps, I hooked up Yamaha's lowest model to my own system using B&W 600 series speakers, including the very inefficient center speaker. I had no complaints. That would be the Yamaha RX-V375.
IntelliVolume's Avatar IntelliVolume
06:46 PM Liked: 65
post #5 of 34
08-04-2014 | Posts: 1,017
Joined: Apr 2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelJHuman View Post
Home theater sound will not be muffled. Worse case scenario I can think of would be some distortion on the loudest parts of movies if volume was set too high.

Also, as long as you use a powered subwoofer, and you should, the lower frequencies are handled by the subwoofer's own amp which will help out.

Make sure you can return it if you don't like it, and I think you can buy with confidence at least in terms of having enough power.

If it helps, I hooked up Yamaha's lowest model to my own system using B&W 600 series speakers, including the very inefficient center speaker. I had no complaints. That would be the Yamaha RX-V375.

Michael is correct and spot on about the powered subwoofer thing -- by adding a powered sub to your system (unless you already have one) you drastically reduce the strain on an amplifier or a receiver's amplifier because all that low bass information is now being handled by the sub, thus allowing more "headroom" in your amp(s) for better dynamics, SPLs and delivery of mids and highs in a film soundtrack. Bass is what strains an amp the most because woofers need a good amount of power, generally speaking, to really get moving...


With regard to Mike's comments about distortion -- I agree, and also suggest that you never turn your system up to where distortion, clipping or edginess begins to creep in, as these elements are some of the worst killers of systems and speaker drivers...most novices to stereo or home theater are under the assumption that "too much power" is horrible, should be avoided and is what blows speakers. In reality, there's really no such thing as "too much power" and it's unclean, distorted signals that do damage to speakers and electronics...feed your speakers good, clean, undistorted power and there's no chance of damage. It's not a matter of "can this loudspeaker handle this amplifier," it's more a matter of "can this amplifier handle this loudspeaker (and its impedance loads)" if it's anything...
flthere's Avatar flthere
12:34 AM Liked: 10
post #6 of 34
08-05-2014 | Posts: 8
Joined: Dec 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelJHuman View Post
Home theater sound will not be muffled. Worse case scenario I can think of would be some distortion on the loudest parts of movies if volume was set too high.

Also, as long as you use a powered subwoofer, and you should, the lower frequencies are handled by the subwoofer's own amp which will help out.

Make sure you can return it if you don't like it, and I think you can buy with confidence at least in terms of having enough power.

If it helps, I hooked up Yamaha's lowest model to my own system using B&W 600 series speakers, including the very inefficient center speaker. I had no complaints. That would be the Yamaha RX-V375.
Thanks Michael again. I am surely adding a sub (BIC 12" or the Polk 12" powered). I'm looking for clean and crisp sound with good base, and hence leaning on the Marantz/B&W combo. And thanks for checking it by connecting your own B&Ws with the Yamaha.
IntelliVolume's Avatar IntelliVolume
03:42 PM Liked: 65
post #7 of 34
08-05-2014 | Posts: 1,017
Joined: Apr 2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by flthere View Post
Thanks Michael again. I am surely adding a sub (BIC 12" or the Polk 12" powered). I'm looking for clean and crisp sound with good base, and hence leaning on the Marantz/B&W combo. And thanks for checking it by connecting your own B&Ws with the Yamaha.

First of all, what you're looking for is BASS, not "base"...second, did I not suggest also that by adding a powered sub into the mix it will greatly reduce the strain off your receiver or amp because low bass info is what creates the most demand of current? This should give you more "clean and crisp" sound because your AVR can then concentrate on powering clean, honest highs and mids...
Gecko85's Avatar Gecko85
03:57 PM Liked: 95
post #8 of 34
08-05-2014 | Posts: 2,229
Joined: Aug 2005
Quote:
Originally Posted by flthere View Post
I'm just starting to build a home theater and am interested in getting the B&W 684 S2 fronts and HTM62 speakers.

I am looking at getting the slim line Marantz NR 1605 or the Yamaha RX675, and wondering which one would be a better choice.

On the downside, Marantz is rated only (50 W + 50 W (8 Ω/ohms, 20 Hz – 20 kHz with 0.08 % T.H.D.)) OR (70 W + 70 W (6 Ω/ohms, 1 kHz with 0.7 % T.H.D.)). Is that sufficient to drive the B&W 684 S2 rated 25-150W ??

My only concern is that is it really 50W ? Will the sound produced be enough in a 13.5 x 17.0 mediaroom ?

Thanks in advance !
When looking at power ratings, always look at the 20Hz-20kHz number...that's the "real" number. Others are just a brief 1kHz spike and not worth anything.

So, the Yamaha you mentioned has: 90 W per channel (8 ohms, 20 Hz-20 kHz, 0.09% THD, 2 ch driven)

So, less than double the wattage of the Marantz...which means less than 3db difference. Either one should drive your speakers fine. Is more better? Hard to say...I guess if you like ear-splitting loud, then maybe. But either of those amps are going to go loud enough to piss off your neighbors.
flthere's Avatar flthere
05:16 PM Liked: 10
post #9 of 34
08-05-2014 | Posts: 8
Joined: Dec 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by IntelliVolume View Post
First of all, what you're looking for is BASS, not "base"...second, did I not suggest also that by adding a powered sub into the mix it will greatly reduce the strain off your receiver or amp because low bass info is what creates the most demand of current? This should give you more "clean and crisp" sound because your AVR can then concentrate on powering clean, honest highs and mids...
Yes IntelliVolume, thank you .. I really meant bass (spelled as base coincidentally ) ... I now get the point that absolute numbers are not that tells the full story on hearing. Just ordered BIC F12. Thanks again!
flthere's Avatar flthere
05:25 PM Liked: 10
post #10 of 34
08-05-2014 | Posts: 8
Joined: Dec 2009
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gecko85 View Post
When looking at power ratings, always look at the 20Hz-20kHz number...that's the "real" number. Others are just a brief 1kHz spike and not worth anything.

So, the Yamaha you mentioned has: 90 W per channel (8 ohms, 20 Hz-20 kHz, 0.09% THD, 2 ch driven)

So, less than double the wattage of the Marantz...which means less than 3db difference. Either one should drive your speakers fine. Is more better? Hard to say...I guess if you like ear-splitting loud, then maybe. But either of those amps are going to go loud enough to piss off your neighbors.
Thank you Gecko85 for your response. I don't expect to pump it up too high anyways ... Just want it to be good enough. Once the mediaroom is setup, I'll definitely post back.

Looks like both the receiver and speakers are newly designed/produced in 2014, so don't see much of reviews/feedback yet.

One last question, how come there are two numbers for the receiver, i.e. 50W at 8 ohms and 70w at 6 ohms:

50 W + 50 W (8 Ω/ohms, 20 Hz – 20 kHz with 0.08 % T.H.D.)) OR (70 W + 70 W (6 Ω/ohms, 1 kHz with 0.7 % T.H.D.))
IntelliVolume's Avatar IntelliVolume
05:29 PM Liked: 65
post #11 of 34
08-05-2014 | Posts: 1,017
Joined: Apr 2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by flthere View Post
Yes IntelliVolume, thank you .. I really meant bass (spelled as base coincidentally ) ... I now get the point that absolute numbers are not that tells the full story on hearing. Just ordered BIC F12. Thanks again!

No worries; enjoy your system!
Wolfy701's Avatar Wolfy701
05:20 PM Liked: 5
post #12 of 34
09-21-2014 | Posts: 28
Joined: Aug 2014
I too am interested in slim receivers and have looked at Pioneer, Yamaha and Marantz. I am primarily a 2-channel guy but want to keep my 5.1 options open. Only thing in the specs that concerns me -- (1) pretty high THD 0.08%, I am used to 0.05% or better (2) Marantz does not state the brand of DAC in its receivers. Yamaha RX-S600 uses Burr-Brown 192/24. Does anyone know what's the Marantz DAC?

So far I like Marantz the best (USB, HDMI/MHL inputs on the front panel, warmer sound) although I am worried about long-term reliability, as some Amazon reviewers mentioned issue with 'freezing' or 'lockup'.

The relatively low 50wpc in the Marantz should be ok if you have high-efficiency speakers. My current amp is a 50-watt two-channel Onkyo A-5VL and can easily drive my Boston bookshelves playing "Also Sprach Zarathustra" to house-shaking volumes.
grasshoppers's Avatar grasshoppers
06:40 PM Liked: 165
post #13 of 34
09-21-2014 | Posts: 1,841
Joined: Dec 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wolfy701 View Post
I too am interested in slim receivers and have looked at Pioneer, Yamaha and Marantz. I am primarily a 2-channel guy but want to keep my 5.1 options open. Only thing in the specs that concerns me -- (1) pretty high THD 0.08%, I am used to 0.05% or better (2) Marantz does not state the brand of DAC in its receivers. Yamaha RX-S600 uses Burr-Brown 192/24. Does anyone know what's the Marantz DAC?

So far I like Marantz the best (USB, HDMI/MHL inputs on the front panel, warmer sound) although I am worried about long-term reliability, as some Amazon reviewers mentioned issue with 'freezing' or 'lockup'.

The relatively low 50wpc in the Marantz should be ok if you have high-efficiency speakers. My current amp is a 50-watt two-channel Onkyo A-5VL and can easily drive my Boston bookshelves playing "Also Sprach Zarathustra" to house-shaking volumes.
Don't mean to sound snooty or anything but,....
Your speakers and the "room" that you listen to
Your music in (how the sound waves interact with
The rooms acoustics ie reflections etc) have a FAR
Greater impact than the "perceived" differences between
.08% and .05% THD! Same thing applies to the DAC's
Which have generally perfected for many years now.

I have had my Marantz for 6 years now...not so much
As a hic cup.
Wolfy701's Avatar Wolfy701
07:02 PM Liked: 5
post #14 of 34
09-21-2014 | Posts: 28
Joined: Aug 2014
Quote:
Originally Posted by grasshoppers View Post
I have had my Marantz for 6 years now...not so much
As a hic cup.
Good for you...I suppose there are lemons in everything we buy, but in general I notice more user complaints about broken Marantz and Onkyo products than other major brands.

I guess if I decide to go with Marantz I'll need to buy a long SquareTrade warranty.
grasshoppers's Avatar grasshoppers
07:13 PM Liked: 165
post #15 of 34
09-21-2014 | Posts: 1,841
Joined: Dec 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wolfy701 View Post
Good for you...I suppose there are lemons in everything we buy, but in general I notice more user complaints about broken Marantz and Onkyo products than other major brands.

I guess if I decide to go with Marantz I'll need to buy a long SquareTrade warranty.
The Marantz comes with a 3 year warranty.
In my experience with modern electronics
If they make it thru the first year you are usually
Good to go.

I am always skeptical of online reviews...how many
Thousands of users have good products and don't write
Reviews?? (Like me!) also some of these users that have
Issues aren't the brightest bulbs on the shelf. LOL
jdsmoothie's Avatar jdsmoothie
08:07 PM Liked: 1684
post #16 of 34
09-21-2014 | Posts: 45,991
Joined: Sep 2007
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wolfy701 View Post
I too am interested in slim receivers and have looked at Pioneer, Yamaha and Marantz. I am primarily a 2-channel guy but want to keep my 5.1 options open. Only thing in the specs that concerns me -- (1) pretty high THD 0.08%, I am used to 0.05% or better (2) Marantz does not state the brand of DAC in its receivers. Yamaha RX-S600 uses Burr-Brown 192/24. Does anyone know what's the Marantz DAC?

So far I like Marantz the best (USB, HDMI/MHL inputs on the front panel, warmer sound) although I am worried about long-term reliability, as some Amazon reviewers mentioned issue with 'freezing' or 'lockup'.

The relatively low 50wpc in the Marantz should be ok if you have high-efficiency speakers. My current amp is a 50-watt two-channel Onkyo A-5VL and can easily drive my Boston bookshelves playing "Also Sprach Zarathustra" to house-shaking volumes.
1. Anything < 1% THD cannot be perceived, so moot point between .08% and 0.05%
2. Burr Brown
3. No MHL
Wolfy701's Avatar Wolfy701
08:26 PM Liked: 5
post #17 of 34
09-21-2014 | Posts: 28
Joined: Aug 2014
OMG! Just checked BestBuy website, turns out this baby can pump out 700W --

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/marantz-700w-7-1-ch-4k-ultra-hd-and-3d-pass-through-a-v-home-theater-receiver/4094028.p?id=1219096316807&skuId=4094028




jdsmoothie's Avatar jdsmoothie
08:28 PM Liked: 1684
post #18 of 34
09-21-2014 | Posts: 45,991
Joined: Sep 2007
^^
Not quite. Only 50W/CH into 2CH at 8-ohm.
IntelliVolume's Avatar IntelliVolume
09:12 PM Liked: 65
post #19 of 34
09-21-2014 | Posts: 1,017
Joined: Apr 2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by Wolfy701 View Post
OMG! Just checked BestBuy website, turns out this baby can pump out 700W --

http://www.bestbuy.com/site/marantz-...&skuId=4094028



LOL, Wolfy, Smoothie is right...you have to look at these specifications VERY carefully...


Here's what it says from the site you posted:


100W x 7 at 6 ohms, 1kHz, 1-channel driven


Do you know how ridiculous of a statistic and rating this is when it comes to product specs...specifically with amplifiers and receivers? The ONE kHz, ONE channel driven inclusion should have given this away, as these are somewhat absurd numbers that are all but meaningless; you should be looking at the more realistic two or all channel driven ratings at 8ohms (but 6 is okay too as many boutique brands of speakers run at six ohms)...


THIS is a bit more realistic:


50W x 7 at 8 ohms, 20Hz - 20kHz, 0.08% THD.
IntelliVolume's Avatar IntelliVolume
09:14 PM Liked: 65
post #20 of 34
09-21-2014 | Posts: 1,017
Joined: Apr 2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdsmoothie View Post
^^
Not quite. Only 50W/CH into 2CH at 8-ohm.

Smooth,


Where did you see the 50 watts x 2 rating? I only see their specifications into seven channels, unless I glazed over it somewhere...
jdsmoothie's Avatar jdsmoothie
09:17 PM Liked: 1684
post #21 of 34
09-21-2014 | Posts: 45,991
Joined: Sep 2007
^^
Most (if not all) AVR brands will benchmark their marketed rating into at most only 2 CH (some only 1CH) which is true for Denon and Marantz models as well. 5CH rating would be about 80% of that and 7CH (on 7CH models) would be about 60% of that.
IntelliVolume's Avatar IntelliVolume
09:18 PM Liked: 65
post #22 of 34
09-21-2014 | Posts: 1,017
Joined: Apr 2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by jdsmoothie View Post
^^
Most (if not all) AVR brands will benchmark their marketed rating into at most only 2 CH (some only 1CH) which is true for Denon and Marantz models as well. 5CH rating would be about 80% of that and 7CH (on 7CH models) would be about 60% of that.

Oh, but you just did the math on that, correct? They didn't include the two channel rating, right?
jdsmoothie's Avatar jdsmoothie
09:30 PM Liked: 1684
post #23 of 34
09-21-2014 | Posts: 45,991
Joined: Sep 2007
^^
Huh? 50W into 2CH and roughly 40W into 5CH.
IntelliVolume's Avatar IntelliVolume
09:32 PM Liked: 65
post #24 of 34
09-21-2014 | Posts: 1,017
Joined: Apr 2013
^^


Oh -- I was just saying that I didn't see a two-channel spec on their site...
jdsmoothie's Avatar jdsmoothie
09:34 PM Liked: 1684
post #25 of 34
09-21-2014 | Posts: 45,991
Joined: Sep 2007
Nor will you likely see it on any brands site. If the marketed rating on an AVR is 100W/5 or 7CH, take that to mean 100W/2CH.
kikkenit2's Avatar kikkenit2
03:26 AM Liked: 89
post #26 of 34
09-22-2014 | Posts: 1,537
Joined: Nov 2006
Quote:
Originally Posted by IntelliVolume View Post
Oh -- I was just saying that I didn't see a two-channel spec on their site...
Sound and Vision is the main player these days in bench testing receivers. Read enough reviews here
with the power for 2 channel, 5 channel and 7 channel output tested and a pattern is exposed. It shows that
what manufactures claim as 7 channel power is really 2 channel. The falloff as channels rise is fairly consistent.
http://www.soundandvision.com/catego...ceiver-reviews
MichaelJHuman's Avatar MichaelJHuman
10:53 AM Liked: 118
post #27 of 34
09-22-2014 | Posts: 18,947
Joined: Nov 2006
Some manufacturers now clearly state that they rate the receiver as two channels driven, at least in the official specs. 100x7 watts, just means every channel is capable of 100 watts, but not all at once.

Maybe one day there will be a standardized multi-channel amplifier rating system, but I have my doubts.

The two channel ratings are usually accurate, an in some cases actually a bit lower than bench tests.

THX tried to address this issue using some burst testing method, but THX spec receivers seem to be a thing of the past.

Even Yamaha's lowest powered model puts out enough power for reasonable listening levels according to my own standards. For music, more power is a consideration because (a) it's less dynamic than movies which requires a higher constant power, (b) sometimes people really crank up the volume for various reasons and (c) some people are more sensitive to any distortion in music compared to movies. Sadly it's hard to know what to recommend for music. Even if you buy Yamaha's top of the line model vs. their bottom of the line model, power-wise you haven't even managed double the power - the low impedance capability might be double though.
IntelliVolume's Avatar IntelliVolume
04:41 PM Liked: 65
post #28 of 34
09-22-2014 | Posts: 1,017
Joined: Apr 2013
Oh, okay -- I didn't realize Smoothie (and now others) were claiming that "it should be taken to be understood" as a two-channel rating even when the specs dictate seven channel output...


I suppose that's fair enough; sure, when a manufacturer claims "X 7 channels" it should probably be that times TWO channels...


This whole debacle is why manufacturers like Onkyo were forced to begin rating their products' amplifier power into two channels (now you see their AVRs stating "into two channels driven" where in the past, like with products such as my 605 AVR, the rating was typically "into seven channels driven"); at the end of the day, THIS is specifically why I always tell people not to get so hooked and held up on power specifications when choosing a receiver...the numbers are usually all but meaningless when you take into consideration the number of speakers being fed, their impedance loads, their efficiency, etc. etc...


I would simply stay away from those "in the box" systems that have the stickers on the front that proclaim "10,000 WATTS X 10 CHANNELS!" when the entire system costs $250...


And the ratings such as the kind Marantz supplied for this product we're talking about here should be looked at closely and considered accordingly (that is, into ONE channel driven at ONE kHz etc.).
IntelliVolume's Avatar IntelliVolume
04:45 PM Liked: 65
post #29 of 34
09-22-2014 | Posts: 1,017
Joined: Apr 2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelJHuman View Post
Some manufacturers now clearly state that they rate the receiver as two channels driven, at least in the official specs. 100x7 watts, just means every channel is capable of 100 watts, but not all at once.

Maybe one day there will be a standardized multi-channel amplifier rating system, but I have my doubts.

The two channel ratings are usually accurate, an in some cases actually a bit lower than bench tests.

THX tried to address this issue using some burst testing method, but THX spec receivers seem to be a thing of the past.

Even Yamaha's lowest powered model puts out enough power for reasonable listening levels according to my own standards. For music, more power is a consideration because (a) it's less dynamic than movies which requires a higher constant power, (b) sometimes people really crank up the volume for various reasons and (c) some people are more sensitive to any distortion in music compared to movies. Sadly it's hard to know what to recommend for music. Even if you buy Yamaha's top of the line model vs. their bottom of the line model, power-wise you haven't even managed double the power - the low impedance capability might be double though.

I totally agree with all this, Michael -- especially your sentiments regarding Yamaha's "lowest-powered model putting out enough power..." This is so true, that most of the time and realistically, even a respected manufacturer's least-expensive receiver will do absolutely fine for an average living room's home theater setup and sometimes even beyond (based on the kind of speakers that are connected to it, etc.). It reminds me of a letter that someone once wrote in to Home Theater Magazine that I read in which the author stated something about the "things he has learned in all his years of buying and listening to consumer electronics" and the first thing on his list was something about "so-called 'entry-level' gear will do just fine for 99-percent of us..."


That really stuck with me...
IntelliVolume's Avatar IntelliVolume
04:46 PM Liked: 65
post #30 of 34
09-22-2014 | Posts: 1,017
Joined: Apr 2013
Quote:
Originally Posted by kikkenit2 View Post
Sound and Vision is the main player these days in bench testing receivers.
http://www.soundandvision.com/catego...ceiver-reviews

Indeed; previously Home Theater Mag...

Gear in this thread
Reply Receivers, Amps, and Processors

Subscribe to this Thread

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.2.3