Marantz vs Denon

[KEW]

I feel Denon offers better value.
Marantz can get away with charging more ("what the market will bear") because of their rich audio heritage and name recognition among consumers.

That said, I am happy both companies exist because they both offer some different feature sets. I expect to pick up one of the Marantz NR slim profile AVR's for a stereo/HT system. I like the low profile and the Main R & L pre-outs.

 

[markie606]

On another forum, a member shared how he had a very nice ten year old system that he and his wife and friends would thoroughly enjoy. His speakers were Miller Kreisel (5 B-1600 bookshelves) along with 2 subs, and his receiver a Marantz 7500. Late last year he decided to upgrade his receiver to get new features. He got the Denon 4250. His speakers went from sounding full, room filling and dynamic to thin and harsh, albeit cleaner. He tried everything to fix it, to no avail. Thinking it might be that the Denon amps had trouble with the 4ohm M&K speakers, he bought Outlaw amps and used the preouts on the Denon. There was some improvement in the sound, notably it was quieter where it should be quiet. Nevertheless the same basic problem remained. So on the advice of a dealer he purchased a Marantz 8801 and bang, problem solved. A person on the forum then insisted that the Denon 4250 and the Marantz 8801 were essentially identical "except for the amps in 4520 and HDAMs in 8801." Well whatever, the Marantz 8801 clearly made him happy, and the Denon 4250 (which he eventually sold) did not, to the point that he no longer had friends over to listen to music. And that's where the rubber meets the road isn't it. This guy also upgraded his speakers and that made an even bigger difference, especially for improved clarity and dynamics. Perhaps if he had tried the Denon after he had upgraded his speakers the Denon wouldn't have been objectionable.

Mark

 

[PENG]

On another forum, a member shared how he had a very nice ten year old system that he and his wife and friends would thoroughly enjoy. His speakers were Miller Kreisel (5 B-1600 bookshelves) along with 2 subs, and his receiver a Marantz 7500. Late last year he decided to upgrade his receiver to get new features. He got the Denon 4250. His speakers went from sounding full, room filling and dynamic to thin and harsh, albeit cleaner. He tried everything to fix it, to no avail. Thinking it might be that the Denon amps had trouble with the 4ohm M&K speakers, he bought Outlaw amps and used the preouts on the Denon. There was some improvement in the sound, notably it was quieter where it should be quiet. Nevertheless the same basic problem remained. So on the advice of a dealer he purchased a Marantz 8801 and bang, problem solved. A person on the forum then insisted that the Denon 4250 and the Marantz 8801 were essentially identical "except for the amps in 4520 and HDAMs in 8801." Well whatever, the Marantz 8801 clearly made him happy, and the Denon 4250 (which he eventually sold) did not, to the point that he no longer had friends over to listen to music. And that's where the rubber meets the road isn't it. This guy also upgraded his speakers and that made an even bigger difference, especially for improved clarity and dynamics. Perhaps if he had tried the Denon after he had upgraded his speakers the Denon wouldn't have been objectionable.
I
Mark

With due respect, subjective reviews are not always reliable. My Marantz separates didn't sound better than my Denon 4308 when in 2 channel pure directseparates, but my subjective review is no more, or less credible than your friend's.

 

[KEW]

On another forum, a member shared how he had a very nice ten year old system that he and his wife and friends would thoroughly enjoy. His speakers were Miller Kreisel (5 B-1600 bookshelves) along with 2 subs, and his receiver a Marantz 7500. Late last year he decided to upgrade his receiver to get new features. He got the Denon 4250. His speakers went from sounding full, room filling and dynamic to thin and harsh, albeit cleaner. He tried everything to fix it, to no avail. Thinking it might be that the Denon amps had trouble with the 4ohm M&K speakers, he bought Outlaw amps and used the preouts on the Denon. There was some improvement in the sound, notably it was quieter where it should be quiet. Nevertheless the same basic problem remained. So on the advice of a dealer he purchased a Marantz 8801 and bang, problem solved. A person on the forum then insisted that the Denon 4250 and the Marantz 8801 were essentially identical "except for the amps in 4520 and HDAMs in 8801." Well whatever, the Marantz 8801 clearly made him happy, and the Denon 4250 (which he eventually sold) did not, to the point that he no longer had friends over to listen to music. And that's where the rubber meets the road isn't it. This guy also upgraded his speakers and that made an even bigger difference, especially for improved clarity and dynamics. Perhaps if he had tried the Denon after he had upgraded his speakers the Denon wouldn't have been objectionable.

Mark

I would really want to see details on that. If he had Dynamic EQ off on the Denon and on on the Marantz, that would explain it.
There are several other setting which would yield similar results, it could be that Audyssey ran different for the two different receivers.
I have both Marantz and Denon AVR's and when I experience a difference in sound there is a difference in setup.

 

[markie606]

With due respect, subjective reviews are not always reliable. My Marantz separates didn't sound better than my Denon 4308 when in 2 channel pure directseparates, but my subjective review is no more, or less credible than your friend's.

Ah. If you are an honest, experienced listener with good hearing, then I would find your report just as credible as the person's report I described. In all probability, like you, your friends wouldn't be able to tell a difference with your two setups either. So I would believe you, and I believe him. If you were in *his* room with his equipment you would have heard just about the same qualities as he did. The question becomes, why did he hear such a difference in his system, and you didn't in yours. And of course there are lots of possible reasons.

Mark

 

[markie606]

I would really want to see details on that. If he had Dynamic EQ off on the Denon and on on the Marantz, that would explain it.
There are several other setting which would yield similar results, it could be that Audyssey ran different for the two different receivers.
I have both Marantz and Denon AVR's and when I experience a difference in sound there is a difference in setup.

Yes those would have been the expected, plausible explanations. But there was a resident expert on the Forum in question and the two were in long dialog to ensure those kinds of things were not the issue. I just tried posting the link to the thread but was denied because I don't have enough posts under my belt.

Coincidentally, like you I've also got my eye on the slimline Marantz receivers - specifically the NR1506 - to run some mini towers I'm eyeing, namely the Tekton Lore-m or the Lore-s.

Mark

 

[KEW]

I think you may be able to post a link after you have made 5 posts.
Assuming all of the i's were dotted and t's crossed, there is always the chance of a malfunction.
Then there are psycho-acoustics where someone has a biased expectation it will sound better, so it does. This can be problematic unless you have a setup that actually allows you to quickly switch back and forth between AVRs which are level matched. Our ability to listen to one setup, spend 5 minutes switching things around then listen to another setup and accurately compare them is suspect.

 

[PENG]

Ah. If you are an honest, experienced listener with good hearing, then I would find your report just as credible as the person's report I described. In all probability, like you, your friends wouldn't be able to tell a difference with your two setups either. So I would believe you, and I believe him. If you were in *his* room with his equipment you would have heard just about the same qualities as he did. The question becomes, why did he hear such a difference in his system, and you didn't in yours. And of course there are lots of possible reasons.

Mark

First of all, I do agree with you to a point. My hearing is not perfect, but I can easily hear the difference between speakers and their placements. I also used to claim and post as such, that my Bryston sound better than my 4308 etc. I believe sooner or later, after people spent lots of money on this hobby, they will know that for good sound quality, get the best speakers you can afford and then collect the best quality recording you can find. After that, just sit back and enjoy the music.

As Dr. Floyd Toole said in the video linked in a recent thread, if you can see it, forget it. So yes, I will trust subjective comparison reviews that are done properly to eliminate Placebo effect. I used to get easily influenced by dealers who tried to sell me high profit margin electronics. It is not hard to convince people that a $20K separate prepro/amp must sound better than a $3K AVR regardless of everything else including speakers.

Again, my comments were based on pure direct, if no or minimum processing is involved. I did find my AV7005 and AV8801 have more pronounced output to my surround speakers than the Denon 4308 but as you mentioned there could have been other contributing factors. The 4308 definitely did not sound thin and harsh at all whether it was on its own or hooked up to the power amps.

 

[markie606]

I think you may be able to post a link after you have made 5 posts.
Assuming all of the i's were dotted and t's crossed, there is always the chance of a malfunction.
Then there are psycho-acoustics where someone has a biased expectation it will sound better, so it does. This can be problematic unless you have a setup that actually allows you to quickly switch back and forth between AVRs which are level matched. Our ability to listen to one setup, spend 5 minutes switching things around then listen to another setup and accurately compare them is suspect.

Yes and he minded his p's and q's as well. Malfunction crossed my mind too, but seeing that the sound of the Denon was somewhat cleaner than his old Marantz to me it is unlikely. I think the most likely explanation is that his unique speaker and setup situation happened to hit the Denon at a point of vulnerability. It would be unlikely that others with more typical systems and setups would experience this ime.

Psycho acoustics can certainly be a factor, and it has different aspects. This guy was expecting his new Denon to improve his system and was taken by surprise that it didn't deliver what he wanted, leaving him miffed and disappointed. So this particular aspect of psycho acoustics - expectation bias - was actually reversed! This shows that some people are not slaves to such bias at least when it comes to music. But he had probably grown accustomed and mentally conditioned to the warmer Marantz sound, and I wouldn't be surprised if that aspect of psycho acoustics played at least some part.

Mark

 

[markie606]

First of all, I do agree with you to a point. My hearing is not perfect, but I can easily hear the difference between speakers and their placements. I also used to claim and post as such, that my Bryston sound better than my 4308 etc. I believe sooner or later, after people spent lots of money on this hobby, they will know that for good sound quality, get the best speakers you can afford and then collect the best quality recording you can find. After that, just sit back and enjoy the music.

As Dr. Floyd Toole said in the video linked in a recent thread, if you can see it, forget it. So yes, I will trust subjective comparison reviews that are done properly to eliminate Placebo effect. I used to get easily influenced by dealers who tried to sell me high profit margin electronics. It is not hard to convince people that a $20K separate prepro/amp must sound better than a $3K AVR regardless of everything else including speakers.

Again, my comments were based on pure direct, if no or minimum processing is involved. I did find my AV7005 and AV8801 have more pronounced output to my surround speakers than the Denon 4308 but as you mentioned there could have been other contributing factors. The 4308 definitely did not sound thin and harsh at all whether it was on its own or hooked up to the power amps.

You might have hit a major point there; if the Marantz in pure direct was sending out more sound to the surrounds than was the Denon, that could easily contribute to a thinner sound. Wouldn't explain the harshness but it might well be part of the story, good one.

I've listened to Bryston systems before, specifically at multiple TAVES shows here in Toronto. They always sounded authoritative, dense and meaty. Of course it doesn't hurt to have a large, wood panelled room as they do. And playing tracks by Leonard Cohen certainly adds to that! Honestly I can seldom tell at audio shows what is contributing to a particular quality of the music - whether it is the recording, the speakers, the room, the source, the amps, the prepro, the dac, the power conditioning, the cables or what. I generally put the speakers, the recording and the room as 1,2,3 in priority, but I have seen and heard quite noticeable differences introduced by associated gear. Of course it all becomes a matter of diminishing returns! It seems you came to the conclusion that you were overestimating the positive effect of the Bryston gear, if I am understanding you correctly. If so then sure stuff like that happens. But look how much older and wiser you are now!

Mark

 

[markie606]

Should have mentioned that placement and angling of the speakers within the room is extremely important, but perhaps that is a given. I recall some years ago, a reviewer at Audioholics sharing that when he swapped out one amp for another, he had to reposition his speakers to get optimum effect for that particular amp! Very interesting indeed.

I'l' see if I can post the link to the old Denon related thread from the other forum now:

http://forum.ascendacoustics.com/showthread.php?5911-Help-a-New-Forum-Member-Set-Up-a-System-That-ROCKS

Mark

Success!

 

[herbu]

His speakers went from sounding full, room filling and dynamic to thin and harsh, albeit cleaner... This guy also upgraded his speakers and that made an even bigger difference

Mark, thanks for chiming in w/ your insight. The first statement gives me a bit of pause. The sound went from better to worse, but cleaner?

Personal preferences aside, I would think "cleaner" is better. Perhaps the cleaner sound revealed some other problems w/ the room acoustics or speakers. And possibly the muddier full, room filling and dynamic sound was preferable. But it's difficult for me to fault an AVR for sounding "cleaner".

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

On another forum, a member shared how he had a very nice ten year old system that he and his wife and friends would thoroughly enjoy. His speakers were Miller Kreisel (5 B-1600 bookshelves) along with 2 subs, and his receiver a Marantz 7500. Late last year he decided to upgrade his receiver to get new features. He got the Denon 4250. His speakers went from sounding full, room filling and dynamic to thin and harsh, albeit cleaner. He tried everything to fix it, to no avail. Thinking it might be that the Denon amps had trouble with the 4ohm M&K speakers, he bought Outlaw amps and used the preouts on the Denon. There was some improvement in the sound, notably it was quieter where it should be quiet. Nevertheless the same basic problem remained. So on the advice of a dealer he purchased a Marantz 8801 and bang, problem solved. A person on the forum then insisted that the Denon 4250 and the Marantz 8801 were essentially identical "except for the amps in 4520 and HDAMs in 8801." Well whatever, the Marantz 8801 clearly made him happy, and the Denon 4250 (which he eventually sold) did not, to the point that he no longer had friends over to listen to music. And that's where the rubber meets the road isn't it. This guy also upgraded his speakers and that made an even bigger difference, especially for improved clarity and dynamics. Perhaps if he had tried the Denon after he had upgraded his speakers the Denon wouldn't have been objectionable.

Mark

Was he also able to hear differences among speaker cables and interconnects?

Significant differences among DACs?

Night-and-day differences among amps?

If yes, then, of course, he heard a significant difference between Marantz and Denon.

As already mentioned, I would say that the only way the sound was different was because the EQ settings (or usage) was different between the Marantz & Denon - like one used Audyssey and one did not. Or one used DEQ, one didn't. One used Dynamic Volume, one didn't. Or the Marantz had more gain level (higher trim setting).

 

[PENG]

Was he also able to hear differences among speaker cables and interconnects?

Significant differences among DACs?

Night-and-day differences among amps?

If yes, then, of course, he heard a significant difference between Marantz and Denon.

As already mentioned, I would say that the only way the sound was different was because the EQ settings (or usage) was different between the Marantz & Denon - like one used Audyssey and one did not. Or one used DEQ, one didn't. One used Dynamic Volume, one didn't. Or the Marantz had more gain level (higher trim setting).

I agree with you to a large extent. The funny thing is, over the years we (yes I know you too) spent a lot of our resource on electronics yet in the end we know full well it is the recordings and the speakers that matter the most. Electronics are important too, just that you don't have to spend much to reach the point of diminishing or even vanishing return. The room too, but I think most people know that already. It is hard to convince people, they have to find out for themselves.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

I agree with you to a large extent. The funny thing is, over the years we (yes I know you too) spent a lot of our resource on electronics yet in the end we know full well it is the recordings and the speakers that matter the most. Electronics are important too, just that you don't have to spend much to reach the point of diminishing or even vanishing return. The room too, but I think most people know that already. It is hard to convince people, they have to find out for themselves.

Everyone has a different belief. We definitely can't convince them, and they definitely can't convince us. They share their beliefs. We share our beliefs.

One of my wife's uncles said he believes speaker cables make a huge difference. He also said B&W sounds much better than Revel & KEF. I'm not arguing with him. I just smile like this.

 

[PENG]

Everyone has a different belief. We definitely can't convince them, and they definitely can't convince us. They share their beliefs. We share our beliefs.

True, but I know people who changed from one to the other over time and after spending tons of money, but not the other way around.

 

[mtrycrafts]

Ah. If you are an honest, experienced listener with good hearing, ...

Mark

And who decides these qualities to be present in a person? Who certifies?

 

[mtrycrafts]

... But there was a resident expert on the Forum in question a...

Mark

Again, who decides and who certifies this? Is this and my other post to you a guarantee that these 4 traits eliminates human bias, the placebo effect?

 

[mtrycrafts]

...

Psycho acoustics can certainly be a factor, and it has different aspects. This guy was expecting his new Denon to improve his system and was taken by surprise that it didn't deliver what he wanted, leaving him miffed and disappointed. So this particular aspect of psycho acoustics - expectation bias - was actually reversed! This shows that some people are not slaves to such bias at least when it comes to music. But he had probably grown accustomed and mentally conditioned to the warmer Marantz sound, and I wouldn't be surprised if that aspect of psycho acoustics played at least some part.

Mark

No. Psychoacoustics IS a factor, period. As to being slaves, we are. Cannot eliminate such biases no matter what he thought should happen. His subconscious didn't tell him what he thought should happen.
More reason to do controlled listening, if sound quality differences matters and is a decision maker or breaker.

 

[AcuDefTechGuy]

True, but I know people who changed from one to the other over time and after spending tons of money, but not the other way around.

The more experience we have, the more we know things and know what we want.

No way I would spend all that money going back in time.