Marantz power amps any good - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Forum Jump: 
 8Likes
  • 2 Post By commsysman
  • 1 Post By commsysman
  • 1 Post By Knucklehead90
  • 1 Post By cswiger
  • 2 Post By cswiger
  • 1 Post By Crimguy
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 23 Old 01-02-2016, 11:41 PM - Thread Starter
Advanced Member
 
nesto719's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Colorado Springs ,Co
Posts: 871
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 437 Post(s)
Liked: 74
Marantz power amps any good

Am i getting caught in the marketing trap about the lower wattage of the marantz amps vs a parasound or other . Are these marantz power amps any good
nesto719 is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 23 Old 01-03-2016, 10:37 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
commsysman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Southern California
Posts: 7,063
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1122 Post(s)
Liked: 587
Quote:
Originally Posted by nesto719 View Post
Am i getting caught in the marketing trap about the lower wattage of the marantz amps vs a parasound or other . Are these marantz power amps any good

Marantz makes pretty good amplifiers, and the prices are right. Their power ratings are very conservative, while some others are not. PEAK power reserves are ultimately more important than continuous power in any case. 50 watts of continuous power can be quite adequate IF the amp can deliver peaks that are 2 to 3 times higher. High quality amplifiers are designed with bigger power supplies that can deliver a lot of peak power. That is the main reason they cost more (and sound a lot better).

The typical Japanese receiver is engineered to put out a certain RMS power from 2 channels for a good-looking data sheet, but the cheap power supply design gives very little reserve or peak power beyond that. That is why they ultimately sound crappy and will not drive speakers lower than 8 ohms worth a damn.

The Marantz MM7025 is rated for 100+ watts per channel RMS, and it really has a lot more true power than the typical Japanese receiver (over)rated at 130 watts or so. For $799 it is hard to beat. It is a perfect amp for the AVR owner who wants to put more power in the front 2 channels and free the AVR to run the remaining channels.

I have tried Parasound amplifiers and do not care for their sound quality (until you get into the really expensive ones).

Marantz, Musical Fidelity, Vincent Audio, and Cambridge and NAD put out well-designed amplifiers. They are consistently the good-sounding ones (along with some really expensive ones, of course, like Krell and Audio Research).
vzphoneman and 44ct357 like this.

Last edited by commsysman; 01-03-2016 at 10:44 AM.
commsysman is offline  
post #3 of 23 Old 01-03-2016, 03:42 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
bluewizard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Posts: 4,915
Mentioned: 38 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2412 Post(s)
Liked: 1592
Marantz has been making amps since 1953, one would guess they've figured it out buy now.

But many factors matter.

How much do you have to spends?

What are your priorities?

Do you favor power over quality?


Marantz are good amps ... in their price range. Though if you check the full line, Marantz covers from Hundreds to Thousands per amp. You get what you pay for.

Next - Stereo Power Amps or Home Theater Power Amps?

Stereo Power Amps tend to be Class-A/B, where are Home Theater Power Amps tend to be Class-D or Digital Amps. For pure music, I prefer Class-A/B amps; simply for efficiency, many people prefer Class-D Digital Amps for Home Theater.

Unless I am mistaken, the Parasound multi-channel Home Theater amps are all modular Class-A/B. They consume more power and generate more heat, but many feel they sound better. Opinion ... everybody's got them.

Rather than ask a question in isolation, how about some perspective.

How will the amp be use?

What will the amp be used with?

What are the dimension of the Room the system will be in?

How much money do you have to spend?

Are you going Pre-Amp/Processor/Power-Amps or is it better to go AVR?


Assuming a person can afford it, Parasound makes a 3-channel Power Amp (250w/ch), You could combine a 2-channel Parasound Amp on the Front channels, then the 3-channel on the Surround and Center for a 5.1 system.

Or as an alternative, a 2-channel on the Front, and a 5-channel on the Center and Side/Rear Surrounds for a 7.1 channel system.

You can also mix-and-match. I don't seem much value in Parasound's AV Pre-amp as it seems all Pre-Amp and no Processor. So, I could see a Marantz Pre-Amp/Processor on the Front end and Parasound Power amps on the back end.

Marantz does make a 2-channel Power Amp (140w/ch, MM7025) and they make a 5-channel (MM7055, 140w/ch), and a 7-channel (MM8077, 150w/ch). So, in this case, I might have the 2-channel 7025 on my front channels and the 7055 covering the rest in a 7-channel system.

Though, if I had the money, I would prefer the 250w/ch Parasound Amps. (A21 =2-channel, A31=3-channel, and A51= 5-channel)

Budget, preferences, and circumstance
really carry very strong weight in making your choice; far more than this brand vs that brand.

But to the core question, Yes, Marantz amps are good, and have consistently been in business making good equipment since 1953, while many other big name brands have fallen by the wayside. They didn't endure by making crap.

Steve/bluewizard
bluewizard is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #4 of 23 Old 01-14-2016, 02:50 AM
Member
 
44ct357's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: Cape Town SA.
Posts: 63
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 22 Post(s)
Liked: 14
Quote:
Originally Posted by commsysman View Post
marantz makes pretty good amplifiers, and the prices are right. Their power ratings are very conservative, while some others are not. Peak power reserves are ultimately more important than continuous power in any case. 50 watts of continuous power can be quite adequate if the amp can deliver peaks that are 2 to 3 times higher. High quality amplifiers are designed with bigger power supplies that can deliver a lot of peak power. That is the main reason they cost more (and sound a lot better).

The typical japanese receiver is engineered to put out a certain rms power from 2 channels for a good-looking data sheet, but the cheap power supply design gives very little reserve or peak power beyond that. That is why they ultimately sound crappy and will not drive speakers lower than 8 ohms worth a damn.

The marantz mm7025 is rated for 100+ watts per channel rms, and it really has a lot more true power than the typical japanese receiver (over)rated at 130 watts or so. For $799 it is hard to beat. It is a perfect amp for the avr owner who wants to put more power in the front 2 channels and free the avr to run the remaining channels.

I have tried parasound amplifiers and do not care for their sound quality (until you get into the really expensive ones).

Marantz, musical fidelity, vincent audio, and cambridge and nad put out well-designed amplifiers. They are consistently the good-sounding ones (along with some really expensive ones, of course, like krell and audio research).
dont forget arcam and the rest of the stereo systems.
Retro rules, that pure deep tone blows one away!
Had a quad 909, done a few 303/404's, but the 909 blew the roof off.
44ct357 is offline  
post #5 of 23 Old 01-14-2016, 07:30 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
Glimmie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 9,190
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1102 Post(s)
Liked: 1026
In the 50s and 60s, the American made Marantz amps were exceptional. Today the reap insane proces on Ebay.

In the 70s while most solid state amps were poor by today's standards, Marantz again was still one of the best. IIRC, they were he first to produce a 200wpc amp ahead of Phase Linear and Dynaco.
Glimmie is offline  
post #6 of 23 Old 01-14-2016, 11:28 AM
Advanced Member
 
Osamede's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 728
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 86 Post(s)
Liked: 66
Can someone illustrate these Marantz quality of sound or power reserves in terms of test measurements compared. Or is this more a matter of reputation?

Also Marantz and Denon are basically the same company, so if Marantz is such a good value, then wouldnt the best move be a Denon comparable? I remember last time I was looking at buying an AV receiver for example, I was close to getting the Marantz SR7005 but in the end I went with a Denon 3312. This because I could not find anything concrete that differentiated the internal components or performance of two - and the Denon was half the price.
Osamede is offline  
post #7 of 23 Old 01-15-2016, 08:14 AM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
commsysman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Southern California
Posts: 7,063
Mentioned: 18 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1122 Post(s)
Liked: 587
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osamede View Post
Can someone illustrate these Marantz quality of sound or power reserves in terms of test measurements compared. Or is this more a matter of reputation?

Also Marantz and Denon are basically the same company, so if Marantz is such a good value, then wouldnt the best move be a Denon comparable? I remember last time I was looking at buying an AV receiver for example, I was close to getting the Marantz SR7005 but in the end I went with a Denon 3312. This because I could not find anything concrete that differentiated the internal components or performance of two - and the Denon was half the price.

They may be made by the same company, but Marantz is the premium product and Denon is engineered for a bit lower performance at a lower price.

General Motors makes Malibus and they make Corvettes; one is for hauling Joey to his soccer game, and one is competitive on the racetrack with Porsche and Ferrari.

They are both Chevrolets.
golfjules likes this.
commsysman is offline  
post #8 of 23 Old 01-15-2016, 08:33 AM
 
lovinthehd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: OROR
Posts: 16,231
Mentioned: 50 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4588 Post(s)
Liked: 4802
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osamede View Post
Can someone illustrate these Marantz quality of sound or power reserves in terms of test measurements compared. Or is this more a matter of reputation?

Also Marantz and Denon are basically the same company, so if Marantz is such a good value, then wouldnt the best move be a Denon comparable? I remember last time I was looking at buying an AV receiver for example, I was close to getting the Marantz SR7005 but in the end I went with a Denon 3312. This because I could not find anything concrete that differentiated the internal components or performance of two - and the Denon was half the price.
They were both better regarded under original ownership, both brands have had ups and downs and now they share ownership and Marantz has been anointed the more premium brand and priced accordingly. They share a lot though....
lovinthehd is offline  
post #9 of 23 Old 01-15-2016, 08:44 AM
Advanced Member
 
Osamede's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 728
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 86 Post(s)
Liked: 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by commsysman View Post
They may be made by the same company, but Marantz is the premium product and Denon is engineered for a bit lower performance at a lower price.
This is the part I was unable to detect in those comparable products, after moving past the marketing spiel. Cant speak as to the entire product line, but I found that one curious...
Osamede is offline  
post #10 of 23 Old 01-15-2016, 12:42 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
fatuglyguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: southern CA
Posts: 2,440
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 456 Post(s)
Liked: 1238
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osamede View Post
This is the part I was unable to detect in those comparable products, after moving past the marketing spiel. Cant speak as to the entire product line, but I found that one curious...
Every Marantz AVR from the SR50XX and up features the Marantz HDAM tech, which is not used in their Denon counterpart:
Quote:
Marantz HDAM (Hyper Dynamic Amplifier Module) technology found on the company’s Reference Series components provides superior low noise wideband performance in an all-discrete configuration, compared to conventional op amp ICs. HDAM technology provides an ultra-fast slew rate for true wideband response and maximum dynamic range to deliver optimum sound quality with today’s high resolution audio formats.
Whether that makes a real measureable or audible difference, I don't know. But it's certainly a feature difference.

Brand positioning is also a bit different -- Denon mostly focuses on Home theater + portable stuff (headphones/bluetooth speakers). Marantz for 2-channel hi-fi and power amps (Reference series, PM series integrateds, etc.)

film Sony 65A1E|Sonus faber Liuto, Smart Center, Venere Wall|B&W DB4S|Sony ZA5000ES|UDP 205|UB820
2ch Sonus faber Toy|REL S/5|Sony TA-A1ES|Wadia 321|Sony SCD-777ES|Sony PS-HX500 + Schiit Mani|AQ Niagara 5000
desk Sonus faber Toy monitor|REL T-Zero|Rega Brio|AQ Dragonfly Cobalt/Victoria|Mac mini|AQ PowerQuest 3
living Sony 55X930E|Monitor Audio Silver RX1|Marantz NR1508|Panasonic UB900
fatuglyguy is offline  
post #11 of 23 Old 01-15-2016, 12:50 PM
Member
 
Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 29
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 14 Post(s)
Liked: 2
Quote:
Originally Posted by commsysman View Post
Marantz makes pretty good amplifiers, and the prices are right. Their power ratings are very conservative, while some others are not. PEAK power reserves are ultimately more important than continuous power in any case. 50 watts of continuous power can be quite adequate IF the amp can deliver peaks that are 2 to 3 times higher. High quality amplifiers are designed with bigger power supplies that can deliver a lot of peak power. That is the main reason they cost more (and sound a lot better).

The typical Japanese receiver is engineered to put out a certain RMS power from 2 channels for a good-looking data sheet, but the cheap power supply design gives very little reserve or peak power beyond that. That is why they ultimately sound crappy and will not drive speakers lower than 8 ohms worth a damn.

The Marantz MM7025 is rated for 100+ watts per channel RMS, and it really has a lot more true power than the typical Japanese receiver (over)rated at 130 watts or so. For $799 it is hard to beat. It is a perfect amp for the AVR owner who wants to put more power in the front 2 channels and free the AVR to run the remaining channels.

I have tried Parasound amplifiers and do not care for their sound quality (until you get into the really expensive ones).

Marantz, Musical Fidelity, Vincent Audio, and Cambridge and NAD put out well-designed amplifiers. They are consistently the good-sounding ones (along with some really expensive ones, of course, like Krell and Audio Research).
Interesting. I hope you are not referring to the Parasound Halo line of amplifiers as not sounding good. IMO (and the majority of others)...they are quite good sounding amps. To each their own I suppose.

_______________
PS Audio BHK Signature Preamp | PS Audio BHK Signature 300 Monoblocks | Auralic Aries G2 | AURALiC Vega G2 | Auralic LEO GX | KEF R11 | Dual SVS SB13-Ultra | Roon Nucleus+
Orosie is offline  
post #12 of 23 Old 01-15-2016, 02:49 PM
Advanced Member
 
Osamede's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 728
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 86 Post(s)
Liked: 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by fatuglyguy View Post
Every Marantz AVR from the SR50XX and up features the Marantz HDAM tech, which is not used in their Denon counterpart:


Whether that makes a real measureable or audible difference, I don't know. But it's certainly a feature difference.
That was the one that baffled me the most. I could not ever get a clear definition of what that actually was; could not get an actual claim as to what it did, nor could I and verify that it was or wasn't in the Denon counterpart.

One of common marketing tricks is is to talk up something on the higher priced model that may very well be on the others but not mentioned. Or to talk up something meaningless in terms of sound, like I think it was Yamaha that used to talk up the extra foot on its receivers.

The only place I could find somebody compared those two models by opening them up, seemed to indicate same boards on both. So really "HDAM" is one thing I would love to sort out.
Osamede is offline  
post #13 of 23 Old 01-15-2016, 04:32 PM
The Village Idiot
 
Knucklehead90's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: State of Confusion - 98823
Posts: 9,535
Mentioned: 15 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 852 Post(s)
Liked: 797
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osamede View Post
That was the one that baffled me the most. I could not ever get a clear definition of what that actually was; could not get an actual claim as to what it did, nor could I and verify that it was or wasn't in the Denon counterpart.

One of common marketing tricks is is to talk up something on the higher priced model that may very well be on the others but not mentioned. Or to talk up something meaningless in terms of sound, like I think it was Yamaha that used to talk up the extra foot on its receivers.

The only place I could find somebody compared those two models by opening them up, seemed to indicate same boards on both. So really "HDAM" is one thing I would love to sort out.
Its my understanding that the HDAM feature in higher end Marantz products relates directly to how the analog preamp sections are powered. It may be the same as in the AVR's - I don't study these things - I just listen. Denon and other AVR/AVP manufacturers often use op-amps in the preamp section - just something I read a few months ago but can't verify and I don't have a link. Op-amps aren't necessarily bad - depends on how well they are engineered and how much power they are expected to output.

From the PM6005 integrated Marantz website:

Marantz HDAM Technology
Our exclusive HDAM technology features precision discrete components that provide wide dynamic range with low distortion, outperforming conventional op-amp integrated circuit chips. HDAM modules are used in the digital audio converter stages as well as the critical analog audio stage.


I was highly impressed with a Marantz SR-5008 that I owned a while back. Did this sound so good because of HDAM? I don't know but it is installed in the 5008. I compared it directly to an Emotiva XSP-1 stereo preamp since I had both in the audio rack. I used the Crown 1500 for both and used FLAC files from my computer via a Behringer USB DAC. The differences were at best subtle in everything but bass management - IMO the 5008 won out in that department since it has Audyssey XT. I was surprised there weren't more differences other than the bass. I expected the XSP-1 to outshine the lowly AVR! Since my song towers don't require a sub I compared them with and without a sub. I didn't level match etc - I simply adjusted the sound to where I like it with my built-in SPL meters - AKA EARS! I listened to one for a day then the other over the course of a week or so. I decided to buy another Marantz after that comparison and ended up with another one. I'm very happy with the performance of the AV7702 in 2 and multi channel audio. I have zero plans on another 2 channel preamp. 2 channel is 90% of my listening - 10% of that is tv/radio and the rest is music.
fatuglyguy likes this.

Yamaha A-S1000 - Salk Song Towers - HTPC (Linux) - Oppo 103 - Marantz TT42 (WWG1WGA) --- Twas a woman who drove me to drink. I never had the decency to write and thank her ~ WC Fields
Knucklehead90 is offline  
post #14 of 23 Old 01-15-2016, 04:42 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
turnne1's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Indianapolis Indiana
Posts: 6,550
Mentioned: 7 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2317 Post(s)
Liked: 614
Quote:
Originally Posted by commsysman View Post
They may be made by the same company, but Marantz is the premium product and Denon is engineered for a bit lower performance at a lower price.

General Motors makes Malibus and they make Corvettes; one is for hauling Joey to his soccer game, and one is competitive on the racetrack with Porsche and Ferrari.

They are both Chevrolets.
in the lower end models I think its basically the same thing in a different case
You may see some unique qualities in the Marantz 8802 preamp...but I am betting it shares considerably with the denon X7200 receiver

Quote:
Originally Posted by lovinthehd View Post
They were both better regarded under original ownership, both brands have had ups and downs and now they share ownership and Marantz has been anointed the more premium brand and priced accordingly. They share a lot though....
I would agree...this is not the same company of the 70's and 80's
Its now owned by Bain capital and from my understanding not performing the best financially

Warren

Rm 1 LG65E7 Marantz 8802A prepro Sherbourn 5/1500A and HK PA2400 amps B&W CM10s..CM2 center...CM6's.rears
Rm 2 Sony 49x900E Denon X7200 Celestion 305 speaker system
Rm 3 Sony 55x930E Yamaha A1060 Kef 2005.2 speaker system
Rm 4 Sony 65Z9D
turnne1 is offline  
post #15 of 23 Old 01-15-2016, 06:21 PM
Advanced Member
 
|Tch0rT|'s Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Lower mid Michigan
Posts: 898
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 196 Post(s)
Liked: 139
I've been using a Marantz MM9000 5 channel amp for a few years that's been powering 5 MartinLogan ESL's that have varying ohm loads 4ohm - 6ohm and have crazy impedance swings. I've had no issues with it at all and no desire to swap it out with anything else.

My Home Theater/Video Gaming/HTPC/2 Channel rig (Mitsubishi, MartinLogan, Marantz, DIYMA, and others)

|Tch0rT| is offline  
post #16 of 23 Old 01-15-2016, 06:32 PM
Advanced Member
 
cswiger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Sunnyvale, CA
Posts: 681
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 335 Post(s)
Liked: 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by Osamede View Post
That was the one that baffled me the most. I could not ever get a clear definition of what that actually was; could not get an actual claim as to what it did, nor could I and verify that it was or wasn't in the Denon counterpart.

One of common marketing tricks is is to talk up something on the higher priced model that may very well be on the others but not mentioned. Or to talk up something meaningless in terms of sound, like I think it was Yamaha that used to talk up the extra foot on its receivers.

The only place I could find somebody compared those two models by opening them up, seemed to indicate same boards on both. So really "HDAM" is one thing I would love to sort out.
Well, here's a set of pictures comparing the audio board for a 2013 model Denon and the similar 2013 Marantz model with HDAM circuitry populated:

http://www.audioholics.com/av-receiv...-sr6008-sr7008



fgsouza likes this.

Primary (2.1): Thiel CS 1.2 / Velodyne F1000 sub / Adcom GFA-555 Mk2 / Rotel 970BX / Sony CDP-CA9 ES
Secondary (5.1): Paradigm Mini-Monitor v.3 / CC270 v.3 center / ADP-170 v.2 surrounds /
SVS SB1000 sub / Marantz SR-6010 / AppleTV + Win7 PC / BenQ BL3200PT
cswiger is offline  
post #17 of 23 Old 01-15-2016, 06:48 PM
 
lovinthehd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: OROR
Posts: 16,231
Mentioned: 50 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 4588 Post(s)
Liked: 4802
Well that's nice in the pre-amp section, what are the differences in the amp section (since the question is about Marantz power amps....).
lovinthehd is offline  
post #18 of 23 Old 01-15-2016, 07:10 PM
Advanced Member
 
Osamede's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 728
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 86 Post(s)
Liked: 66
Quote:
Originally Posted by Knucklehead90 View Post
Its my understanding that the HDAM feature in higher end Marantz products relates directly to how the analog preamp sections are powered. It may be the same as in the AVR's - I don't study these things - I just listen. Denon and other AVR/AVP manufacturers often use op-amps in the preamp section - just something I read a few months ago but can't verify and I don't have a link. Op-amps aren't necessarily bad - depends on how well they are engineered and how much power they are expected to output.

From the PM6005 integrated Marantz website:

Marantz HDAM Technology
Our exclusive HDAM technology features precision discrete components that provide wide dynamic range with low distortion, outperforming conventional op-amp integrated circuit chips. HDAM modules are used in the digital audio converter stages as well as the critical analog audio stage.


I was highly impressed with a Marantz SR-5008 that I owned a while back. Did this sound so good because of HDAM? I don't know but it is installed in the 5008. I compared it directly to an Emotiva XSP-1 stereo preamp since I had both in the audio rack. I used the Crown 1500 for both and used FLAC files from my computer via a Behringer USB DAC. The differences were at best subtle in everything but bass management - IMO the 5008 won out in that department since it has Audyssey XT. I was surprised there weren't more differences other than the bass. I expected the XSP-1 to outshine the lowly AVR! Since my song towers don't require a sub I compared them with and without a sub. I didn't level match etc - I simply adjusted the sound to where I like it with my built-in SPL meters - AKA EARS! I listened to one for a day then the other over the course of a week or so. I decided to buy another Marantz after that comparison and ended up with another one. I'm very happy with the performance of the AV7702 in 2 and multi channel audio. I have zero plans on another 2 channel preamp. 2 channel is 90% of my listening - 10% of that is tv/radio and the rest is music.
And then there is this piece of jargon:
https://denon.custhelp.com/app/answe...%2Fv-receivers
http://www.denon.com/pages/GlossaryDetail.aspx?GId=18
D.D.S.C
(Dynamic Discrete Surround Circuit)

Ideal multichannel audio output is to reproduce sound of identically high grade from all channels. Denon continues to focus on discrete configurations of surround circuits in order to reproduce this ideal multichannel sound.

A single IC chip is generally used in processing A/D, DSP, and D/A conversions that are vital to sound quality. The D.D.S.C. uses separate components to process the important sections of the A/D, DSP, and D/A conversions and therefore significantly improves signal processing capability and performance. In addition, the approach of developing and incorporating high-quality dedicated elements in the sections that configure the circuitry makes it easier to develop a high-grade, advanced surround circuit compared with the method where all processing is concentrated within a single chip.
Osamede is offline  
post #19 of 23 Old 01-15-2016, 07:12 PM
Advanced Member
 
cswiger's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Sunnyvale, CA
Posts: 681
Mentioned: 5 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 335 Post(s)
Liked: 190
Quote:
Originally Posted by lovinthehd View Post
Well that's nice in the pre-amp section, what are the differences in the amp section (since the question is about Marantz power amps....).
The power amp section by itself is supposedly almost identical between Denon and Marantz. There's a likely mild difference in house sound between the brands which is probably on the order of ~1 db over the 10 octave range of audible sound.

However, the Marantz amps tend to have gold-plated RCA jacks and speaker binding posts, which Denon doesn't usually have except for their top-of-the-line/flagship models. The Marantz models tend to have more snubber caps for noise reduction along the connectors, more primary filter capacitance for the amps, and use better quality caps.

That being said, something is badly wrong if one power amp sounds significantly different from another power amp after being level matched to account for any difference in gain. (I'm talking about running within their normal operating conditions; sure, you can easily have differences in peak current and thermals and protection circuitry just from changing the power supply section.) Let the preamp/receiver handle surround upmixing, tone controls, DSP effects and so forth. The power amp sections are supposed to reproduce their inputs more loudly, not change their input by adding significant coloration.
lovinthehd and Crimguy like this.

Primary (2.1): Thiel CS 1.2 / Velodyne F1000 sub / Adcom GFA-555 Mk2 / Rotel 970BX / Sony CDP-CA9 ES
Secondary (5.1): Paradigm Mini-Monitor v.3 / CC270 v.3 center / ADP-170 v.2 surrounds /
SVS SB1000 sub / Marantz SR-6010 / AppleTV + Win7 PC / BenQ BL3200PT
cswiger is offline  
post #20 of 23 Old 01-16-2016, 09:35 AM
Senior Member
 
Crimguy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 201
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 51 Post(s)
Liked: 39
My 2 kopeks:

I've been using a NR1403 for 2 channels for over a year with a pair of 685's. When I checked the output levels I learned I like things really loud (>90db with peaks even higher). I've never experienced clipping of the amp, even though it's rated at a modest 50wpc.

Then again, I've never clipped my Yamaha rx-v657 in the home theater, reaching ungodly sound levels over the years (my neighbor stopped me once telling me how much she liked Return of the King lol).

On both distortion is a non-issue. Sound is basically identical in "straight" mode. So as far as output and resolution I'd say they're all firmly mid-Fi and for those purposes identical.

Interestingly, I had a bit of a problem with the Yamaha recently where it wasn't powering on (it is 10 years old and my daughter spilled water into it a few years ago so I wasn't terribly surprised). I did a search on YouTube on how to fix it and an electrical engineer had a similar model that he was fixing. He commented on the extremely high quality caps Etc in the unit. Rumor is that Yamaha has gotten cheaper innards in the past decade but I've never seen anything definitive on the subject.

In short I wouldn't lose sleep over the issue. Even if you had a true 100 or even 200wpc amp I'd wager you would rarely if ever employ more than 30 watts to power your speakers. I was able to get very loud with an amp that was putting out 15w with my B&W's.
lovinthehd likes this.
Crimguy is offline  
post #21 of 23 Old 01-30-2016, 06:45 AM
Member
 
Superslim's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2015
Location: UK
Posts: 175
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 76 Post(s)
Liked: 23
Quote:
Originally Posted by commsysman View Post
Marantz makes pretty good amplifiers, and the prices are right. Their power ratings are very conservative, while some others are not. PEAK power reserves are ultimately more important than continuous power in any case. 50 watts of continuous power can be quite adequate IF the amp can deliver peaks that are 2 to 3 times higher. High quality amplifiers are designed with bigger power supplies that can deliver a lot of peak power. That is the main reason they cost more (and sound a lot better).

The typical Japanese receiver is engineered to put out a certain RMS power from 2 channels for a good-looking data sheet, but the cheap power supply design gives very little reserve or peak power beyond that. That is why they ultimately sound crappy and will not drive speakers lower than 8 ohms worth a damn.

The Marantz MM7025 is rated for 100+ watts per channel RMS, and it really has a lot more true power than the typical Japanese receiver (over)rated at 130 watts or so. For $799 it is hard to beat. It is a perfect amp for the AVR owner who wants to put more power in the front 2 channels and free the AVR to run the remaining channels.

I have tried Parasound amplifiers and do not care for their sound quality (until you get into the really expensive ones).

Marantz, Musical Fidelity, Vincent Audio, and Cambridge and NAD put out well-designed amplifiers. They are consistently the good-sounding ones (along with some really expensive ones, of course, like Krell and Audio Research).
The Marantz MM7025 is rated at 140 wpc at 8 ohms
Superslim is offline  
post #22 of 23 Old 01-30-2016, 12:31 PM
AVS Forum Special Member
 
head_unit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Sunny L.A.
Posts: 1,758
Mentioned: 23 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 778 Post(s)
Liked: 419
Quote:
Originally Posted by nesto719 View Post
Am i getting caught in the marketing trap about the lower wattage of the marantz amps vs a parasound or other . Are these marantz power amps any good
As pointed out, Marantz is a long and revered name in audio. I don't think anyone would dispute that they make good amps.
- Are Marantz amps the best dollar per watt? No, Behringer iNukes probably hold that crown.
- Are Marantz amps the best sounding? That depends on your whole system and your ears. Some people swear to hear vast differences, others maintain that IF (and it can be a BIG if!) amplifiers are not clipping they are not distinguishable. My first take is that other things such as speakers, room treatment, cartridge and turntable will make far far more difference to the sound. My second take is that if differences are distinguishable it takes an expensive system. I doubt anyone would hear differences between amplifiers through, for example, some car 6x9s mounted in a box on a back porch.*

It's hard to really answer the implications of your question without knowing more about your system and what you are listening to and so on.


*This all presupposed "well behaved" amplifiers which are not clipping even on peaks, don't have weird ultrasonic oscillation, don't have some unusual frequency response. This last presupposes low output impedance, thereby excluding tube amps and some Class D amps whose output impedance modifies the frequency response. That's not to say those amps are bad, I personally like tube amps, but that they have gross distinguishable characteristics which override the kind of subtle sound differences I'm talking about.
head_unit is offline  
post #23 of 23 Old 06-27-2020, 12:22 PM
Member
 
Tex_Thai's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Mae Sai, Thailand
Posts: 152
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 81 Post(s)
Liked: 71
Hey Guys,
May I bump this old thread to ask a question about my Marantz MM7025 amp? If this is the wrong place, could someone please point me to the right place to ask? Thanks.
I bought this amp around 16 months or so ago, so I think the warranty must be expired. But am finding that one channel is outputting a LOT less sound than the other channel.
I have the amp powering a couple of surround speakers in a 7.1.4 home theater, all GoldenEar Technology Triton 2 floorstander, powered bass speakers, roughly 6-8 ohms. They are connected by balanced cables and the balanced switch is selected on the rear of the unit for both. One channel is clearly lagging behind in output compared to the other channel (and all the other amps I have for my system) by at least 3-5 dB. I have confirmed this by changing speakers, the output is so low that I have the speaker level maxed out and yet I had to change over and let it power a rear surround speaker, as I consider this speaker of lesser importance than the rest of the boys.
Any thoughts or suggestions, things to try? I just got the AV 7705 pre-processor that drives it back from the repair shop, thought that might be a coincidental problem with it, but it seems to be working fine now.
Any help appreciated.
God Bless,
Wayne
Tex_Thai is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
Reply 2-Channel Audio

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off