Marantz SR5015, worth it in my case?

[sideskroll]

Hi guys, I'm not sure if I'm posting this question in the right forum. I hope I am...
Anyway, my situation is as follows, up until a couple of days ago I had the Andrew jones speaker setup (2nd revision) (Except for the sub, I have a much better sub inherited from some other system...)powered by an old (entry level-cheap) Pioneer VSX823. Truth be told I have no complaints and the combo worked and sounded fantastic. Anyway, The AVR just recently proceeded to "retire" itself after almost 10 years of service (AKA died on me)…
Anyway, to make a long story short, up until today actually, I was already determined to get the Marantz SR5015 as its replacement (huge upgrade on the process) but I thought maybe Id run it by the "pros" on this site before pulling the trigger.
Would the Marantz be overkill for the entry/mid level Andrew Jones speaker system? The main reason I had Marantz in mind is because the main use I give to the system is music. Home Theatre being an afterthought. And I've always being under the impression/knowledge/however you want to call it that Marantz is one of the most "musical" brands out there (Just like SONY is known for being anything BUT flat/neutral).
My second option would be the Yamaha RX V6A, much MUCH cheaper. Similar specs (it even has an extra HDMI port). Not sure about its quality though... and its guarantee is 1 yr against 3 from Marantz...

TL;DR: Marantz SR5015 + Andrew Jones speaker system= WIN? Or would you recommend anything else? Obviously it MUST be at least 100w 2ch driven... (if not higher). Also, bear in mind that this will be IT. As in I will probably keep this same setup for the next 10 years just as I did with the cheap entry level Pioneer before it. So quality/life expectancy is also part of the equation.

Thanks, and Ill be looking out for your suggestions.

 

[lovinthehd]

A brand being "musical" is pretty much marketing nonsense. An avr from Denon or Marantz (sister brands, share quite a lot of tech) would be fine, just shop for the feature set/connectivity you want/suits your needs. Yamaha would be a good brand for avr too. Sometimes if you're after the most current features in 8k/HDMI 2.1 etc you might have to check a particular model for issues/bugs. If that Pioneer sufficed, your proposed avrs should be fine.

 

[bsac]

Not sure about the nonsense comment but I owned a RV-1 (flagship) and a TSR-7810 for the past 3 years. I switched brands from Yamaha to Marantz because I found Yamaha to thin sounding and the all the DSP effects to be "nonsense" ...and I'm a musician and pro-audio guy so I have lots experience here. Also it depends on the speakers you run. I run Klipsch so the Yamaha and Klipsch pairing is extremely bright and not that smooth like I get with Marantz. I do like Yamaha's menus better and find Marantz menus prehistoric in comparison. But, in terms of sound I'm loving the switch so far.

 

[lovinthehd]

Not sure about the nonsense comment but I owned a RV-1 (flagship) and a TSR-7810 for the past 3 years. I switched brands from Yamaha to Marantz because I found Yamaha to thin sounding and the all the DSP effects to be "nonsense" ...and I'm a musician and pro-audio guy so I have lots experience here. Also it depends on the speakers you run. I run Klipsch so the Yamaha and Klipsch pairing is extremely bright and not that smooth like I get with Marantz. I do like Yamaha's menus better and find Marantz menus prehistoric in comparison. But, in terms of sound I'm loving the switch so far.

Yes, different implementations/types of dsp are where particular differences might be discerned, but mostly its just preference. I'd not compare differences this way, but rather the basic function of the avr compared the same way to another. Flavor of dsp or type of room eq can be where differences/preferences may be had....but still doesn't make something more "musical" than another.

 

[fmw]

Not sure about the nonsense comment but I owned a RV-1 (flagship) and a TSR-7810 for the past 3 years. I switched brands from Yamaha to Marantz because I found Yamaha to thin sounding and the all the DSP effects to be "nonsense" ...and I'm a musician and pro-audio guy so I have lots experience here. Also it depends on the speakers you run. I run Klipsch so the Yamaha and Klipsch pairing is extremely bright and not that smooth like I get with Marantz. I do like Yamaha's menus better and find Marantz menus prehistoric in comparison. But, in terms of sound I'm loving the switch so far.

The point is that the two units had different effects. That is a matter of personal preference. If you remove the effects the two units will sound identical at the same volume level. If effects are the goal of your search then choose what you like. The brand itself isn't the issue.

 

[PENG]

The point is that the two units had different effects. That is a matter of personal preference. If you remove the effects the two units will sound identical at the same volume level. If effects are the goal of your search then choose what you like. The brand itself isn't the issue.

We tried many times to explain such misguided concepts to people so that they wouldn't pay premium for no/or very little additional benefits, but people naturally tend to find reasons why one would "sound better" than others. So manufacturers/brands, such Marantz managed to take advantage of such human behvior/psychology and squeeze higher profit margin from the non technical (and with no or little investigate instinct) consumers.

The OP likely could have spent about the same amount, if he's in the USA or Canada (not elsewhere in the world) and have gotten better "sound quality" (in theory) and significantly more features, even channels, on something a Denon AVR-X3700H. That's incredible, but yet people would happily pay more for the misconception about the so call "Marantz sound". Very sad, but many times I wish I never said/post any supporting facts as the owners who got suck in to those beliefs probably would be happier if they didn't know and might start believing the truth, but there is always that urge to try telling the truth and that it might just help people saving their hard earn money (not always black and white such as for the Marantz vs Yamaha, but the Marantz vs Denon is...based on scientific facts).

 

[Swerd]

The OP likely could have spent about the same amount, if he's in the USA or Canada (not elsewhere in the world) and have gotten better "sound quality" (in theory) and significantly more features, even channels, on something a Denon AVR-X3700H. That's incredible, but yet people would happily pay more for the misconception about the so call "Marantz sound".

Marantz was once, in the 1950s, an independently owned company that produced a few highly regarded & very expensive audio products. Since then, the name was sold over & over. A highly regarded brand name's reputation often seems to lag behind reality by several decades. Other less highly regarded brand names are simply dropped.

Over the years, the name Marantz was owned by Superscope, Philips Electronics, D&M Holding, and most recently by Sound United. How could Marantz products be the same as they once were before 1964? Some history from Wikipedia:

• 1952 Saul Marantz sells his first audio product, the "Consolette" pre-amp.
• 1964 Marantz acquired by Superscope Inc., located at the time in California.
• 1966 Beginning with the Model 25, and then 22 and 28, Marantz starts manufacturing its products in Japan through a partnership with Standard Radio Corp.
• 1974 A manufacturing plant is opened in Belgium. It operated as Marantz Europe (1974~1985).
• 1975 Standard Radio Corp. changes its name to Marantz Japan Inc.
• 1980 Superscope sells the Marantz brand, dealer network, and all overseas assets (except US and Canada) to Philips Electronics.
• 1983 Marantz's audio enhancement technology (Marantz Enhanced Digital Stereo) is introduced
• 1992 Philips acquires US and Canada trademarks and dealer network.
• 1997 Saul Marantz dies aged 85.
• 2001 Marantz Japan Inc. acquires the brand and all overseas sales subsidiaries.
• 2002 Marantz Japan and Denon merge to form D&M Holdings, to later be joined by other higher-end audio equipment brands such as Boston Acoustics.
• 2008 Philips sells its remaining stake in D&M Holdings, ending a 28-year relationship between Philips and Marantz.
• 2014 Marantz Professional acquired by inMusic Brands.
• 2017 Sound United LLC acquires D+M Holding.
• 2022 Masimo acquires Sound United LLC.

 

[PENG]

Marantz was once, in the 1950s, an independently owned company that produced a few highly regarded & very expensive audio products. Since then, the name was sold over & over. A highly regarded brand name's reputation often seems to lag behind reality by several decades. Other less highly regarded brand names are simply dropped.

Over the years, the name Marantz was owned by Superscope, Philips Electronics, D&M Holding, and most recently by Sound United. How could Marantz products be the same as they once were before 1964? Some history from Wikipedia:

• 1952 Saul Marantz sells his first audio product, the "Consolette" pre-amp.
• 1964 Marantz acquired by Superscope Inc., located at the time in California.
• 1966 Beginning with the Model 25, and then 22 and 28, Marantz starts manufacturing its products in Japan through a partnership with Standard Radio Corp.
• 1974 A manufacturing plant is opened in Belgium. It operated as Marantz Europe (1974~1985).
• 1975 Standard Radio Corp. changes its name to Marantz Japan Inc.
• 1980 Superscope sells the Marantz brand, dealer network, and all overseas assets (except US and Canada) to Philips Electronics.
• 1983 Marantz's audio enhancement technology (Marantz Enhanced Digital Stereo) is introduced
• 1992 Philips acquires US and Canada trademarks and dealer network.
• 1997 Saul Marantz dies aged 85.
• 2001 Marantz Japan Inc. acquires the brand and all overseas sales subsidiaries.
• 2002 Marantz Japan and Denon merge to form D&M Holdings, to later be joined by other higher-end audio equipment brands such as Boston Acoustics.
• 2008 Philips sells its remaining stake in D&M Holdings, ending a 28-year relationship between Philips and Marantz.
• 2014 Marantz Professional acquired by inMusic Brands.
• 2017 Sound United LLC acquires D+M Holding.
• 2022 Masimo acquires Sound United LLC.

Thanks for the detailed chronology. Synergy likely had taken place since 2002 based on above info, but my comments on their similarity, in some case virtually identical design in the audio signal path, would be applicable to year models from about 2015/16 to 2020; and that's mainly based on info in the available service manuals and owner's manuals. That may still be the case for the 2022/23 models, but in that case it would be based the info in those Masimo "training" videos only. So, most of what I have been saying about that, are facts based, whereas the Marantz sound talks are just talks and are mostly baseless, though there could be some truth to very limited extent such as the FR roll off some Marantz AVRs/AVPs do have (but under specific conditions only).

The hilarious part is, they have finally provided the option to select the default DAC filter and the sharp/fast roll off filter that they said was for the best measurement results. In that sense, they basically admitted it's not the HDAMs, but just (okay may be mostly) the FR difference between the DAC de-constructional filters (or something like that...). Their slim line series don't have HDAMs anyway, but people continue to hear that warm/musical sound. That's really the only part I dislike, because a) that difference cannot justify the premium they charge in North America, probably justifiable in other parts of the world. As an EE who can read the basic schematics and block diagrams, it is hard for me not to call them out on the HDAM thing every time I saw post who use that as a reason for the better/musical/warm/high slew rate BS sound. The claim that they used premium parts vs Denon's is mostly false, "mostly", because in some specific case, such as in their AV 10 they most likely do use some relatively better parts than the Denon AVRs, and they also use gold plated connectors in their mid range AVRs whereas Denon only use them on the top 2 models. Other than that, the all important DAC, volume control, opamp chips are the same. Their power amp sections are near identical, same output devices, same block capacitor values, the list goes on..., even the rail and bias voltages are the same to the decimal point!

 

[diwit]

Hi guys, I'm not sure if I'm posting this question in the right forum. I hope I am...
Anyway, my situation is as follows, up until a couple of days ago I had the Andrew jones speaker setup (2nd revision) (Except for the sub, I have a much better sub inherited from some other system...)powered by an old (entry level-cheap) Pioneer VSX823. Truth be told I have no complaints and the combo worked and sounded fantastic. Anyway, The AVR just recently proceeded to "retire" itself after almost 10 years of service (AKA died on me)…
Anyway, to make a long story short, up until today actually, I was already determined to get the Marantz SR5015 as its replacement (huge upgrade on the process) but I thought maybe Id run it by the "pros" on this site before pulling the trigger.
Would the Marantz be overkill for the entry/mid level Andrew Jones speaker system? The main reason I had Marantz in mind is because the main use I give to the system is music. Home Theatre being an afterthought. And I've always being under the impression/knowledge/however you want to call it that Marantz is one of the most "musical" brands out there (Just like SONY is known for being anything BUT flat/neutral).
My second option would be the Yamaha RX V6A, much MUCH cheaper. Similar specs (it even has an extra HDMI port). Not sure about its quality though... and its guarantee is 1 yr against 3 from Marantz...

TL;DR: Marantz SR5015 + Andrew Jones speaker system= WIN? Or would you recommend anything else? Obviously it MUST be at least 100w 2ch driven https://glamgossiper.com... (if not higher). Also, bear in mind that this will be IT. As in I will probably keep this same setup for the next 10 years just as I did with the cheap entry level Pioneer before it. So quality/life expectancy is also part of the equation.

Thanks, and Ill be looking out for your suggestions.

Both the Marantz SR5015 and the Yamaha RX V6A are reputable brands and can provide a good listening experience. However, there are a few factors to consider when deciding between them. The Marantz SR5015 is known for its musicality and is often considered one of the top choices for music-focused setups. It offers high-quality sound reproduction and is designed to deliver a satisfying audio experience. If music is your main priority and you want a receiver that is specifically tuned for musical performance, the Marantz SR5015 could be a great choice. On the other hand, the Yamaha RX V6A is a more budget-friendly option with similar specifications. While it may not have the same reputation for musicality as Marantz, it still provides good sound quality and has features that make it suitable for both music and home theater use. When choosing between the two, it's important to consider your specific needs, preferences, and budget. If music is your primary focus and you are willing to invest in a receiver known for its musical performance, the Marantz SR5015 could be the better option for you. However, if you are looking for a more cost-effective solution that still offers good audio quality for both music and movies, the Yamaha RX V6A might be a suitable choice. Ultimately, it's recommended to listen to both receivers if possible, either in a store or through a reputable dealer, to get a better sense of their sound characteristics and decide which one aligns more closely with your personal preferences. Additionally, reading reviews and seeking advice from audio enthusiasts or professionals can provide further insight into the performance and reliability of the receivers. Considering your intention to keep the setup for the next 10 years, it's worth noting that both Marantz and Yamaha are well-regarded brands known for producing durable and reliable audio equipment.

 

[PENG]

The Marantz SR5015 is known for its musicality and is often considered one of the top choices for music-focused setups.

There are always some, who would consider that, but it is mostly based on subjective, hearsay kind of talks, not objective assessed because of facts and figures. The RX-V6A offers comparable specs and I have not seen any evidence or indication that it would not sound as "musical" as the SR5015.

I would suggest the OP not consider such claims, and focus on features, audio specifications, and bench test results.