Marantz SR5007, SR6007 & SR7007 A/V Receiver Preview

[admin]

Yes, the comparison between the new Marantz and Denon lines is apt - they share a lot of the same features such as Apple AirPlay, 3D pass-through, 4k upscaling, Audyssey MultEQ XT, and more. But lots of receivers have these features. What distinguishes the Marantz offerings from the rest of the crowd, is the number and types of connections. These are receivers for those that aren't first time buyers. These are for those that might have (or plan on having) external amps. For owners of legacy gear that either don't want to or can't afford to upgrade. The new SR5007, SR 6007 and SR7007 A/V receivers from Marantz appear to be truly high end offerings for discerning buyers. Solid build quality, great cosmetics and generous power offerings are all hallmarks of Marantz A/V receivers that they appear to be continuing with the new 07 series of A/V receivers.

Discuss "Marantz SR5007, SR6007 & SR7007 A/V Receiver Preview" here. Read the article.

 

[uncola]

Very informative article, as a noob to audio I had no idea the two brands were so closely related. Does Marantz also have higher end versions of denon's higher end receivers like the 4311?

 

[PENG]

Very informative article, as a noob to audio I had no idea the two brands were so closely related. Does Marantz also have higher end versions of denon's higher end receivers like the 4311?

It seems to me currently Denon takes care of the higher end AVR such as the 4520, 5308, Marantz takes the mid range separates, the AV7005 (may be AV7007 coming soon?) and Denon continues to support the high end separates, the AVP-A1HDCI(A). Between the two D&M has everything covered.

 

[bguijt]

Does it have 96kHz/24bit AirPlay capability?

Do any of these receivers offer the AirPlay capability to play Apple Lossless 96kHz/24bit media files? Both my AppleTV (2011 model) and AirportExpress downsample to 48kHz/16bit.

I would prefer to have a capable receiver (or a more capable protocol wrt. Airplay) over adding yet another media player device (e.g. Squeezebox Touch).

 

[MDS]

Marantz retains oodles of legacy connection options and for some that may well be a plus. For me, it's exactly the opposite of what I want.

I like the Denon 2213CI - just one or two legacy inputs (just in case) but mostly focused on HDMI. I also like that the new Denons have a large display and not the tiny little port hole with 1 point font that these middle age eyes couldn't possibly read from 12 feet away.

 

[PENG]

Marantz retains oodles of legacy connection options and for some that may well be a plus. For me, it's exactly the opposite of what I want.

I like the Denon 2213CI - just one or two legacy inputs (just in case) but mostly focused on HDMI. I also like that the new Denons have a large display and not the tiny little port hole with 1 point font that these middle age eyes couldn't possibly read from 12 feet away.

I agree that little port hole is not very user friendly. I just picked up a 1912 for a great price and it has a reasonably large display. I like that port hole on my Marantz AV7005 but sitting from 13 ft away I have to leave the drop down door open in order to see the bigger display. The port hole is great as an extra display but not if it is the only one.

 

[racquetman]

HDBaseT

So when are we going to start seeing HDBaseT show up on some of these products? Or did that standard die and I just missed the announcement?

 

[smurphy522]

So when are we going to start seeing HDBaseT show up on some of these products? Or did that standard die and I just missed the announcement?

HDBaseT is likely to show up on a Samsung, LG or Sony receiver before any others. Due to the fact they are the majors who support that initiative.

 

[Sugarbear]

Would it have made more sense to compare the SR5007 to the 2313 and the SR6007 to the 3313 in the first place?

It seems this would have been better than knocking the Marantz for being more expensive that its "Denon counterpart" and then noting that it's features compare better to the next Denon up the line which, ironically, also has a very similar price.

 

[Ziontrain]

No offense but this article feels like it was dictated by D&M. First we get at admission that these things are the exact sane inside, then some attempt to justify charging more mobey for 5 cents worth of industrial connectors claiming to be hi-fi?

Sorry but this laughable. And it only confirms my recent conclusion last time I was buying a receiver that there is little of value out there, and nothing that justifies an "audiophile" tag. This is why the entire inustry is crippling the low-mid range receivers by removing the possibikity to connect them to proper amps. if you reject their amps they want to charge a huge tax.

 

[Breako]

The extra 7 outputs on the Marantz is brilliant because it easily permits those with a 2 or 3 or 5 channel amp to easily ugrade a 3.1 or a 5.1 system to a 7.1 system which is exacly my status. It permits lots of backwards compatibility. I currently have a 5 channel 1075 Rotel amp and a dated Rotel 1068 prepro. The truth is for most HT setups rarely do you need loads of power for the surrounds. This new Marantz 7007 will permit me to drive my fronts and middle, B&w 805 diamonds and HTM2, with 3 of the 5 rotel channels. The rears and sides can be easily handled by the Marantz, leaving 2 dedicated Rotel channels for zone 2 B&w PM1's, and 3 additional receiver powered channels. More makers should provide this type of flexibility. It permits those wih a nice multi channel amp or amps looking to expand their HT or update their processor to do so while gaining access to an additional zone without buying unnecessary additional equipment or losing use of those amps in their new HT setup. As much as I like Marantz, I would not use the SR7007 to drive the 805's or the HTM2, but I feel perfectly comfortable using it to drive the surrounds, and I suspect it woud have no issues whatsoever perfectly running the pair of PM1's if I choose to go in that direction. Overall, I think someone did their homework when they added the extra outputs. In my case, I likely would not even consider the unit without them because it would render my Rotel 1075 incapable of being part of my new 7.1 setup.

 

[jlettie]

Marantz sr7007

I feel the Marantz SR7007 will not have the same build quality and reliability as the SR7005. The SR 7007 is made in China. This is a big step down for Marantz. Everybody knows the quality of the products produced in China.

 

[fuzz092888]

It's not necessarily that the build quality of China is worse. It's how much the company in question (this time Marantz) wants to invest in ensuring QC at the factories and in choosing factories wisely. China is capable of making products that are every bit as good as those produced elsewhere, but QC is a real issue without someone watching over their shoulder the whole time.

 

[j_garcia]

I feel the Marantz SR7007 will not have the same build quality and reliability as the SR7005. The SR 7007 is made in China. This is a big step down for Marantz. Everybody knows the quality of the products produced in China.

They've been building the majority of their lilne in China for years, so I don't expect any difference from them.

Now I want to see the AV7007 and the AV7005's price will drop too

 

[Johnrf2]

Audioholics should talk about sound, not features

I expected that a review of a piece of AV gear by a magazine with audio in its name would have at least a mention of the sound quality of the unit. Instead, we get a list of features seemingly copied from D&H's catalog. What a shame that in this day and age we are getting reviews written by corporate stooges who can't tell the difference between the sound from a pair of $10 ear buds and a finely crafted, well designed and engineered speaker whose sole purpose is to provide an exceptional listening experience.
Please, how about some real audio reviews next time?

 

[Adam]

Re: Marantz SR5007, SR6007 & SR7007 A/V Receiver Preview

A review should indeed have that. This is just a preview.