Marantz SR6004/SR5004 Owners' Thread - Page 9

Thank you winston. BTW, maybe HDY 90xx is for 6004 and HDY 93xx is for 5004 models. Although it is very suspicious that they both have the same model # of "CLT5W034YU" in America.


Maybe it is not a bad idea to post this request on 5003/6003 thread as well. Not all people read 5004/6004 thread.

By the way, something has happened, maybe the burn-in phase went to finale.

I mean, you all must know that the amp sounds way better in source direct mode than in stereo mode. This is due the fact that in stereo mode the signal goes through the internal DSP which affects the signals quality.

Things have changed; I can't tell the difference between those modes almost at all anymore. Since one hour ago, or then I noticed it.

I have never used Audyssey eq settings or m-dax but briefly tried them so this can not be because of this.

From the beginning and even two days ago I allways noticed clear performance improvement in highs when swapping the source direct mode, but not anymore. I just tested this on both my passive main speakers and active monitors, and with analog input and digital input source; the difference has almost totally vanished! The stereo mode's (= sound that has been edited in the DSP) sound have improved like hell!

I tried to put the speakers to Small mode, because this definitely activates the high-pass filter and also the DSP. I tested again; no difference.

I also changed the Speaker C switch at the back to "off", and tried again. Again, no difference. (But I absolutely suggest that you keep Spekser C setting at "on" if you use 5.1 or fewer speakers system. it maybe channels the amplifier's power automaticly differently because it knows that there are no surround back or front height speakers, who knows.)

I changed the amp's setting couple of days ago, so I figured that this improved stereo mode could be due these changes. Couple of days ago I changed the speaker levels so that I raised them all to nearer/more near to +0 db (They were between -9 and -7,5 db before, now they are between -3 and -1,5 db) I left them slighlty under +0 db because some audyssey's corrections are +3 and cople are +4, so that the line levels would stay near zero. Don't raise the main level above +4db, you have to drop the speaker level if you boost some frequency more than +4db. You get what I mean. Again I don't use audysseu but only sometimes, but I still keep these setting below the + 0 for the situations were I apply to use audysseu.

So, I dropped the levels equally back to where they were, between -9db and -7,5db. Again, no difference. The good sound of the stereo mode persisted!

I can't get the old worse stereo mode sound out anymore, no matter what I do. The stereo mode sounds 99 % as good as source direct mode. Couple of days ago this difference was huge in every aspect of sound. Instantly after swapping from stereo mode to source direct, I could tell that highs were clear as sky and bass was tight and controlled. I even ordered high level input cable to my subwoofer because I wanted to be able to play it in source direct mode because it sounded so fantastic that I cound not return to stereo mode listening. So I thought.

Now the amp sounds almost the same in both the source direct and stereo mode. Stereo mode's improvement is dramatic. Analog input source has slightly bigger difference than digital input, but the difference between the modes is almost non-existent in both.

I can't explain this but with the fact that the internal DSP has broken in or something. If somebody knows that this is due the some setting, please tell. In any case, this is most delightful news.

I think we can deduct from this that the power supplies are the same between 5004 and 6004. What do you think?

Every evidence tells so, at least to me. Inspector Legis was correct . Thanks for sharing the info, winston.

So if the power supplies are exactly the same, how did they manage to produce 15 more watts on 6004

Is it just an advertisement or they did not want to ruin 6004 sells because of the cheaper price of 5004?

Who posts on 5003/6003 thread about this new scientific findings!

THEORY:
The fact that the power supply's transformer (where the sticker is) is the same between models, there is little room for differences in RMS power. I think that the transformer has everything to do with the maximum RMS power.

The dynamic/peak power could be different between 5004 and 6004 if 6004 uses bigger capasitors or has more of them than 5004 does. Capasitors give "fast power" in power peaks (like to huge lfe/bass effects and music that has fast and big alterations in dynamics and sound pressure) while the transformer is responsible for continuous (RMS) power.

PRACTISE:
I think that there are two big capasitor right behind the transformer you prevously checked the sticker at. They look something like this: link. I don't know whether they are capasitors or not, because they do not state how many micro farads "uF" they can reserve.

I can't quite find out what it says on the other side of them but I can see the front part. It says:

NEG
KL5
(M) 85 "degrees Celcius"
07

Then I see the horizontal line of amplifiers at the center of the receiver, starting from the right side of the receiver streching all the way to left side of the receiver.

There are 7 amp groups and every one of them has:

1) one white transistor (shape is something like this, minus the legs),
2) small roll of copper wire behind the transistor, and
3) two small capacitors behind transistor and copper wire roll.

I bet you can see these groups, just look straight down to the center of the amp and there they are going from left to right.

Their specs can be little tricky to see. In my 5004 the capasitors are rated 63V and 100uF each. (I think there might be some extra capasitors as well, maybe, or then not)

I could also see behind one of the white transistors (the most left one, it was leaning slightly towards) and it said:

0,27 (ohm) KX2 5W
KW0931

I tried to google on these both, but no hits.

There are no "warranty void if removed" stickers to my knowledge (I might triple check on these ) so I might open this receiver tomorrow. The cover is easily removable. In the name of receiver knowledge Btw, removing the cover once a year and blowing away all the cumulated dust/grit may extend the amp's life time.

You are right, 6004 has different capacitors, I remember reading about this when comparing 6004 and 5004 highlights in marantz web site.

in http://us.marantz.com/Products/172.asp it says:

* Marantz Custom High Quality Block Capacitor (for 6004)

but for 5004 it does not exists.

Also when you check the 6004 details it says:

A space-efficient and well regulated EI-core transformer pairs with an array of custom 20,000 microfarad capacitors to provide instantaneous current delivery when a demanding source calls for it. Even the power supply devoted to HDMI and DSP circuits is a linear design that avoids the noise common to switching supplies. HDMI circuits benefit from a phase lock loop (PLL) in the power supply for reduced jitter and even better sound quality. In addition, the analog audio circuitry sits on its own circuit board for maximum isolation.

Then from your post, 5004 and 6004 have same output power but 6004 handles bass frequencies much better. So I guess if you only use the receiver in stereo mode, they should have equal performance even in bass and lower frequencies right? Since there is no demand from other 5 channels.

I hope that isn't also advertising.

Yes, you can do the same thing with two smaller capasitors, as long as there are two capasitors. Any two capasitors can give away their reserved current as fast as any other two capasitors, where they differ is the maximum "current explosion". This matters when listening in high levels and the played soundtrack has big dynamic range (sounds that are very quiet, and sounds that very loud and sudden, not constant).

So, when it comes to the high level listening of movie's sound track and very sudden ground shaking ultra low freguencies, then bigger capasitors give better power and feeling to the lowest freguencies as these frequencies consume great amount of power (luckily they invented a separated subwoofer with it's own amplifier ). Transformer does not respond to the demand of power as quickly as capasitor, so it does not catch up so good in the most sudden dynamic changes. If you listen to music, which usually has limited dynamic range (nearly the same "volume" all the time), it does not require capasitors power but transformers RMS power. Whether you listen to stereo or multi channel, does not matter so much with music. Some classical songs do have big dynamics though.

Winston should check what capasitors the 6004 has behind the transformer and you can also check how big are the capasitors of every channel.

I just opened the engine bonnet of the 5004, and holy foking shite, those two big capasitors behind the transformer are 16 V, 20,000 uF [sic] capasitors (=same that are in 6004). Every day with Marantz is a surprise. So, also the capasitors are the same between 5004 and 6004... Or does 6004s have more than two?

It is extremely hard to take a photo of the capasitors, as the info's side of the capacitor faces backwards towards the rear panel and there is like 0,75 inches slot where I could see them with a flashlight. I will try to photo them nevertheless, but tomorrow. (it's 4 am here )

The cover was easy to open, feel free to check those out. I am actually curious if the US model also has them, but I bet they do. When opening, press the screwdriver hard against the screw, so the screwdriver won't jump around and **** up the screws.

I'm even more enourmous Marantz fan now!

"A space-efficient and well regulated EI-core transformer pairs with an array of custom 20,000 microfarad capacitors to provide instantaneous current delivery when a demanding source calls for it."

I think by “array” hopefully they meant more than two, but I am only hoping here, otherwise all the people who got 6004 have been cheated.


Unfortunately mine is in a bad place and I already ruined my TV entertainment cabinet so it could fit and have enough air otherwise I opened mine and let you know how many is there.


Yeah me too. Knowing that 5004 is this great is way better than what I had in mind. I always knew it is a good amp, but being $400 cheaper than 6004 always made me feel uncertain. Now by knowing both have the same power supply I can sleep easier at nights even if they have different number/combination of capacitors.

Increasing the center channel made dialog louder but not clearer. I tried increasing until it was just too much compared to the other channels, -3.0 I think. The problem is that this also make background noises in a movie louder.


I know the placement is not optimal, but unfortunately there's nothing I can do about it. I previously had a Marantz sr7400 and I had no dialog problems with it using the same speaker setup, but no Audyssey of course.

I'm also looking for a new receiver/speaker package.
Does anybody got experience with the Marantz SR5004/SR6004 and the new Monitor Audio RX6?

Next month in the AudioVision (German) magazine, there will be a group test of the new receivers in the 1000 range. And of course the Marantz SR6004 will be part of the test. I will keep you updated on the verdict!

Translation of the Marantz SR6003 test in AudioVision last year.
http://translate.google.com/translat...istory_state0=

I did not look in a 6004, sorry if my nightly post was confusing.

I derived the fact, that 5004's and 6004's capasitors are of the same capasity ( I used the word "same" though), from Marantz's website description that Lost quoted here:


I managed to take a photo and then zoomed it (with Vista's zooming tool and print screen) so the text is readable. I took couple of other photos too.

I think that 20k microfarad capasitors are not so common in av-receivers even 6004's price range, not to speak of 5004's price range. I think Marantz has done a great job.

This style of comparison should be more common here in consumer forums. Checking the receiver's capasitors capasitance and quantity tells the story of peak power of the receiver, and it is very easy to find out.

If 6004 has more of those capasitors, it must have a whole different board under them. One wouldn't fit in to 5004's board as there are many micro components at the surface all over the place. If I had to bet, I would place my money on "6004 has also two" option just becase the two receivers have been so similar this far, but I wouldn't go all in, hah

Winston, you could also check the Onkyos' capasitors in addition, if you can do it easily.

What-Hifi review of the SR6004
http://whathifi.com/Review/Marantz-SR6004/

I don't mean to attack someones person, but What Hi-fi is the most unscientifical and hobbyist reviewer there is. But nice that they did the review also.

Lack of dynamics? That's total bull. Same time they praise the Denon AVR-2310 for it's low level dynamics. Hifimaailma ACTUALLY MEASURED the peak power of the amps' in the test, and the Denon were the worst receiver in the test in regards of peak power. It was also commented that Denon lacks the power at low frequencies. Marantz had 33%, in some cases near 50% more dynamic power than Denon, but still Denon is a more of a dynamic beast to What Hi-fi's liking . Maybe the Denon-pink sun glasses would drop of from the eyes if they'd see it's actual peak power, or would start to measure them in their tests.


The fact that they actually used the automated set up without fine tuning it could also have skewed the output. Marantz balances the subwoofer so good that Room EQ Audio Wizard shows exactly the same level with main speakers. Sub becomes unnoticeable in music except those song that have ultra low freguencies. I use 40hz low pass for sub (= BK Electronic Monolith). Some people like more of a "loudness" type sound where bass and treble is slightly/moderately emphasized, maybe What Hi-fi reviewr is this kind of a "pro" . Those might want to raise sub's level by 2-4 db after automated calibration.

Winston if you decided to open your receiver please take a few shots like Legis so we can compare the inside of these two beasts. Not so much documentary like Legis did, just from top of the receiver


Thanks Legis, but I won't place my money anywhere and I will wait for Winston experience of 6004's inside Maybe they used 7x2=14 20,000 microfarad capacitors. We should wait a little.

Anyway, my conclusion is, these two receivers are both exceptional compared to what they offer in terms of power, quality and soundstage. Marantz is on the right path here, only if they could add more bells and whistles they were perfect in all areas.

The two major 20k capasitors (the most top left yellow box at the "overview" picture I uploaded) at the power supply section of the unit are the ones that matter in regards how much the amp can give peak power. The capasitors at each amplifier are something else, I don't know what their function is because they are so small (2x100 uF).

Maybe they are there still for some minor boost for better control, because 4 capasitors (2x 20k + 2x 0,1k) always give more sudden of a surge than 2 capasitors alone. Single capasitor's discharging speed and therefore peak currect/current surge is limited.

I was only trying to find a relation between the "array" word and capacitors

BTW, have you posted about this discovery on 5003/6003 thread?

EDIT:
It seems that we did it at the same time

I hope we got some updates soon...

I dont mean to sound like an ass about this, but what exactly do you think you are discovering?

You guys are going on and on about the capacitance, and while its slightly above average for a receiver its really nothing to rejoice about. If you are looking for greater dynamics then get an external amplifier.

I guess you missed the point. We are only trying to discover if 6004 and 5004 use the same power supply and corresponding circuits. In no matter we are trying to compare these receivers with pre-pro amplifiers or equipment.

We have a feeling that Marantz has used same things in 5004 and 6004 and the advertised power of 6004 (110W) versus 5004 (90W) is just advertisement for better sells.

I understand your point.

Manufacturers are not too specific about the components that they use in their receivers. Consumer has to buy a receiver without knowing these facts, which at least some of us would like know. Therefore this is purely out of curiosity. I like to know what my receiver has had "for lunch" since good components are greatest quarantee of quality.

If this kind of research would be more common than it is now, would that mean that consumer's could buy their receivers knowing these facts beforehand. This would show to the manufacturers that consumers are component-enlighted, and they would have to compete in matters of components quality more than now.

These facts might not be so significant to somebody, but I quess this is just a point view to home theater. But they are quite significant and especially statistically significant when comparin receivers in a price range.



EDIT: Slightly over average capasitors? Onkyo's flagship TX-NR5007 uses 22,000 uF capasitors. (ref.)

I also doubt their expertise, that's why i prefer the German (AudioVision) test But it's always funny too see different opinions about this unit.
Next week i have a listening session planned (SR6004 and the Monitor Audio RX6).

ahhhh gotcha



But in reality it doesnt even matter. 110w vs. 90w. will see no real world differences.

i got ya, but manufacturers are not specific because most people just dont care so it really lessens the need for them to post that kind of info.


Whats your point? The site fails to mention how many caps there actually are, let along the transformer size. Being that it is THX Ultra II certified though will at least gurantee it's a large enough transformer to handle a decent load that some speakers would give it (semi low impedence drops).

P.s. - its capaCitors, sorry im not usually the spelling nazi

I know what the majority is like in this matter and in general, and... never mind. You got the point. I know it might make poor ignorant Average Joe's head dizzy if technical specs were little more detailed. :irony:

It's still the fact that some consumers are aware of these things. And it's good to be able to understand also their point of view.



Let's not mix the facts. You referred only to capasitor's quality in your comment. I commented you also in this view, never ment to speculate with the quantity of Onkyo's capacitors. I was just saying that they(Marantz's capacitors) are nearly as good. Neither did I intent to comment on the transformer.

Regarding those capaCitors, I hate proofreading. But maybe we can forgive me since English is my 3rd language (and in Finnish and Swedish it is spelled with s ).



At least you don't deny the fact that the one with more power is better.