Marantz 6003 vs 7002 vs Yamaha V1900

[polsol]

Sorry if some are tired of my query but I'm looking for a receiver that will 'stand the test of time'.
Given that primary enjoyment is from 2 channel CD music and the receiver will be coupled to Paradigm speakers (maybe a little laid-back I guess), which of these receivers would be the best choice, ignoring that the Yamaha V1900 is more expensive?
Not overly worried about video upscalling as I would buy new input components to suit.
Ultimately I guess that this purchase will be my last receiver/amp so should last 10 years (hoping for more but one never knows).
Right now my Denon 5.1 1404 receiver delivers good sound but, coupled with the Paradigms, might be a little too 'easy going'
The Paradigms are superb at vocals with the Denon but the upper and lower reaches might be somewhat subdued.
Any help/suggestions appreciated.
BTW, where I am, audtioning is an impossibility, especially with components from different agents

 

[PENG]

BTW, where I am, audtioning is an impossibility, especially with components from different agents

I suggest you read as many review as you can. Some people would say Marantz is warm and yamaha is not, but I think that is only true in the old days. Class A/B linear amplifiers are well established nowadays and every reputable manufacturers know how to make a good amplifer that can faithfully and transparently amplify the input signals with inaudible distortion and ruler flat frequency response from 20 to 20,000 Hz.

It boils down to features and ergonomics of your own preference. Between the comparable 7002 and 1900 I would take the 1900. It is 5 lbs heavier but to me that is neither a positive nor a negative. Based on lab measurements from a couple of reviews, the 1900 seems to have more dynamic power but less all channel driven power. It actually turned out better output numbers in 1,2and 5 channel driven tests and only lost the battle in the 7 channel driven tests. Anyway, I would consider their power outputs comparable but the 1900 has more bells and whistles to play with.

 

[polsol]

Thanks for the reply Peng,

I'm not really into to too many 'bells and whistles' in an amp.

From where I sit the main differences between the SR7002 and the V1900 are:
Marantz has THX
V1900 has video upscaling.

Is video upscaling necessary? I've read that many implementations are not that good anyway.

My current plasma has no HDMI nor does it have 1080p and I'm not that displeased with the picture from the Panasonic. However will upgrade the TV later on to full HD. Just wondering if there's a real visual improvement with the upscaling feature enabled?

I suppose the majority of my viewing is TV and guess that satelite decoders will eventually go HDMI/HD if this hasn't happened already?

Thus is 'video upscalling' a short lived feature that will be obsolete in the near future (other than for old DVD use) and having THX might be more practical in the long run?

 

[Lordoftherings]

I think that the Marantz SR7002 is a nice receiver, so as the SR6003.
They both have excellent reviews at several places.

The SR6003 delivers almost 100 watts times seven in a recent review of Sound & Vision. And check also at Secrets of Home Theater and High Fidelity.
Here: http://www.soundandvisionmag.com/receivers/3143/marantz-sr6003-av-receiver.html
And here: http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/component/content/article/529.html


There is a review of the SR7002 at Secrets of Home Theater and High Fidelity.
Here: http://www.hometheaterhifi.com/component/content/article/487.html

Bob

 

[MUDSHARK]

I only have experience with the Marantz 7002. I can vouch for the reliability as I have not had any problems with it. The HDMI performs well without glitches, the power section is equal to driving Infinity Kappa 6 ohm speakers, and the on-screen menus are very straightforward, and using the bit-rate method on the blu-ray player does not create any problems (hand-shake or whatever). I also have a yamaha music server connected utilizing the Marantz DAC. The sound quality is excellent, rivalling the NAD cd player in the den.

FWIW

 

[PENG]

I'm not really into to too many 'bells and whistles' in an amp.

Then the 7002 may be what you want.

Is video upscaling necessary? I've read that many implementations are not that good anyway.

I think you are right, more often than not media disc players do a better job upscaling. I am not sure if the 1900 has the ABT chip for video processing but even if it does, there is no guarantee it will do a better job than the average BD players. I use a cheap DVD player to play DVDs and save my Reon (comparable to the ABT in terms of upscaling capability) equipped BD player to play BDs only.

My current plasma has no HDMI nor does it have 1080p and I'm not that displeased with the picture from the Panasonic. However will upgrade the TV later on to full HD. Just wondering if there's a real visual improvement with the upscaling feature enabled?

It depends, my guess is that a ABT, Reon based BD player, the latest Panasonic BD players, Oppo, and the Toshiba XDE will likely do a better job upscaling than most receivers including the 1900 and even the Reon equipped Onkyo/Integra receivers.

I suppose the majority of my viewing is TV and guess that satelite decoders will eventually go HDMI/HD if this hasn't happened already?

Thus is 'video upscalling' a short lived feature that will be obsolete in the near future (other than for old DVD use) and having THX might be more practical in the long run?

Video upscaling may be a short lived feature but I am not sure having THX is more practical. I paid enough for my Denon 4308 but it does not have any THX certification and I am not sure if I am missing something "practical" but for sure I am not willing to pay extra for it.

By the way, if you are interested, here are a couple of links to some British magazine reviews on the Marantz and Yamaha:

http://www.homecinemachoice.com/reviews/new_reviews/yamaha+rx+v1900+av+receiver+02+03+09

http://www.whathifi.com/Review/Yamaha-RX-V1900/

http://www.whathifi.com/Review/Marantz-SR7002/

Note the Yamaha's impressive 5 channel driven into 4 ohms power output:

175W (5 channels driven, 4 ohms ,
0.5% THD)

 

[polsol]

Having waded through reviews there is not much to chose between the Marantz 6003/7002 and the Yamaha V1900.

However, as I read it neither Marantz has OSD via the component or HDMI outputs. Is this correct?

I don't mind having to switch the TV over to composite to do the Marantz set-up but I would prefer that things like source selection, volume changes appeared on the TV during 'normal usage'. Otherwise the OSD is basically useless.

As always, comments/suggestions/recommendations appreciated!

Turning to the audio power output, the 6003 seems to have the best 5 channel power into 8 ohms - although the 'power' output might have differed between reviewers (e.g. at clipping or at 0.5% THD).
If the 6003 does have a better 'power spread' over the channels driven (i.e. as in changing from stereo to 5.1) it would seem to indicate that the continuous output power of the power stage is better which should give better control over the speakers, especially at LF.
Thus from this perspective the 6003 is the better choice - all else being equal.

 

[MUDSHARK]

No, the on-screen menus work fine via HDMI. I have s-video, component, and hdmi inputs but just a sole HDMI output to the plasma display.

 

[lsiberian]

I like the THX modes myself. It think they are fun. But I like a receiver with many modes to play with.

 

[Lordoftherings]

Having waded through reviews there is not much to chose between the Marantz 6003/7002 and the Yamaha V1900.

However, as I read it neither Marantz has OSD via the component or HDMI outputs. Is this correct?

I don't mind having to switch the TV over to composite to do the Marantz set-up but I would prefer that things like source selection, volume changes appeared on the TV during 'normal usage'. Otherwise the OSD is basically useless.

As always, comments/suggestions/recommendations appreciated!

Turning to the audio power output, the 6003 seems to have the best 5 channel power into 8 ohms - although the 'power' output might have differed between reviewers (e.g. at clipping or at 0.5% THD).
If the 6003 does have a better 'power spread' over the channels driven (i.e. as in changing from stereo to 5.1) it would seem to indicate that the continuous output power of the power stage is better which should give better control over the speakers, especially at LF.
Thus from this perspective the 6003 is the better choice - all else being equal.

Sound & Vision usually calculates total harmonic distortion (THD) at 0.3% in their measurements, which is quite realistic from real life performance. So you can trust their total power output figures with all 5 and 7 channels driven and take it as a fair face value. The SR6003 has indeed impressive power figures, even with all 7 channels driven (just short of the magic 100 watts). Not many receivers can achieve similar results.
The Denon AVR-989 (2809ci) has the exact same results as the Marantz SR6003, but retail for $200 more.

By comparison, the Yamaha RX-V3900 has very similar results, but list for $900 more than the 6003, from the same site.

So, in the end the SR6003 seems to be quite a good deal, I agree with you. And the SR6003 is only $700 at accessories4less. It also have Audyssey MultEQ. MSRP was originally $1,100.

Bob

 

[polsol]

Thanks Bob or the detailed info.

Here (Kuwait) the SR6003 is about $35 more than the SR7002, which is why I thought that the 7002 might be the better option in the longer term, not to mention more inputs, 'audio grade components' and THX.

Decisions, decisions.

Must decide within 24 hours. Money's burning a hole in my pocket

 

[lsiberian]

Thanks Bob or the detailed info.

Here (Kuwait) the SR6003 is about $35 more than the SR7002, which is why I thought that the 7002 might be the better option in the longer term, not to mention more inputs, 'audio grade components' and THX.

Decisions, decisions.

Must decide within 24 hours. Money's burning a hole in my pocket

I must stress the importance of checking out a receiver before you buy it.

Play around see what makes your happiness flow.

 

[polsol]

Thanks lsiberian,

Problem is here you are lucky if you can find the receiver 'hooked up' - even to the power supply

Which is why I'm being 'ultra careful' and asking lots of questions. Could audition the Denon range but then again they are 25 - 30% over the US 'suggested retail price'.

WIll see if I can find alternative resellers for Marantz and Yamaha.

 

[Lordoftherings]

Thanks Bob or the detailed info.

Here (Kuwait) the SR6003 is about $35 more than the SR7002, which is why I thought that the 7002 might be the better option in the longer term, not to mention more inputs, 'audio grade components' and THX.

Decisions, decisions.

Must decide within 24 hours. Money's burning a hole in my pocket

For more informations, check the review of the Marantz SR7002 also at Sound & Vision Mag. Power wise, they have similar test bench results:

............SR6003............vs............SR7002...........

1ch. = 155 watts........................150 watts.........
2ch. = 130 watts........................133 watts.........
5ch. = 111 watts.........................93 watts..........
7ch. = 96 watts..........................83 watts.........

Into 8ohms, THD at 0.3%.

SR6003 = Audyssey MultEQ, HDMI (3/2), 29.1 lbs, MSRP: $1,100
SR7002 = Audyssey MultEQ, HDMI (4/2), THX Select2, 33.1 lbs, MSRP: $1,400

Both the SR6003 and the SR7002 had been reviewed at both Sound & Vision mag. and at Secrets of Home Theater and High Fidelity.

It is indeed a tough choice between these two great receivers. Either one will make you a winner.

Peace to you and all yours in Kuwait.

Bob

 

[polsol]

Thanks Bob,

I've pretty much settled on the SR7002. Apart from on screen input selection changes and volume it's got the best combination of characteristics of the available choices here.
Pretty much each receiver has it's own pros and cons but Marantz seems to have the best kudos for sound, especially in stereo mode. As mentioned, sound quality is my most important parameter.
It also has those pretty blue lights
Now if I can brave the traffic tonight I'll get it then otherwise I'll pop in in the morning.
Cheers

 

[Djizasse]

For me the choice is really simple. I don't care about THX, but I do care about the design on the 6003 I could use the extra hdmi port though :\

I thought the 7002 to be more powerfull than the 6003

 

[Lordoftherings]

Thanks Bob,

I've pretty much settled on the SR7002. Apart from on screen input selection changes and volume it's got the best combination of characteristics of the available choices here.
Pretty much each receiver has it's own pros and cons but Marantz seems to have the best kudos for sound, especially in stereo mode. As mentioned, sound quality is my most important parameter.
It also has those pretty blue lights
Now if I can brave the traffic tonight I'll get it then otherwise I'll pop in in the morning.
Cheers

Yep, the SR7002 is a very good looker that should attract the young ladies for sure. I wish you a lot of sound enjoyment and a happy life with all your new found friends.

Cheers & Congratulations,

Bob

 

[Lordoftherings]

Some useful info.

For me the choice is really simple. I don't care about THX, but I do care about the design on the 6003 I could use the extra hdmi port though :\

I thought the 7002 to be more powerfull than the 6003

The SR7002 and the SR6003 are both great designs. And if our friend the OP can use that extra HDMI input on the SR7002, the better it is.

As for the power results, I also thought originally that the 7002 was more powerful, but at close look, we can call it even.

Marantz at least is not giving more power with their newer models. And they have some pretty good efficient power supplies in their amp sections.
The Marantz SR6003 is the same equivalent (power results) than the Denon AVR-2809ci (or AVR-989), the Marantz SR7002 and the Yamaha RX-V3900.

Here's their power results at 8ohms from 0.3% THD (from Sound & Vision):

...........SR7002............SR6003............AVR-2809ci.............RX-V3900.......

1ch. = 150 watts........155 watts...........155 watts.............189 watts*.....
2ch. = 133 watts........130 watts...........130 watts.............150 watts*.....
5ch. = 93 watts.........111 watts...........112 watts*............100 watts......
7ch. = 83 watts..........96 watts...........100 watts*.............88 watts.......

* = highest # for 1,2,5 & 7 channels.

So, as you can see, they are all equal.

Now;
The SR7002 is THX Select2, Audyssey MultEQ, HDMI (4/2), 33.1 lbs, $1,400 list.
The SR6003 has Audyssey MultEQ, HDMI (3/2), 29.1 lbs, $1,100 list.
The 2809ci has Audyssey MultEQ XT, HDMI (4/1), 31 lbs, $1,200 list.
The V3900 has YPAO, HDMI (4/2), VRS ABT-2010, 38.5 lbs, $1,900 list.

So, in the end, it all boils down to extra features (# of HDMI ins & outs, Ethernet, Music streaming, USB port, type of room correction, THX, preouts for all channels, type of video processor, GUI & navigation, remote control, etc.), value (street price) and name preference (eg. Deny, Yammy, Onky, Mary or Piony), between these four receivers.

Is that make any sense at all to you guys?

Bob

Note 1: I got more similar comparisons to these with other receivers, like Onkyo TX-SR805, TX-SR876, Denon AVR-3808ci, AVR-4308ci, Yamaha RX-Z7, Pioneer SC-05, SC-07, and Marantz SR8002.

2: And also with the flagship receivers, Denon AVR-5308ci, Yamaha RX-Z11, Marantz AV8003 & MM8003 combo, Pioneer SC-09, Onkyo TX-NR906 ans Sony ES STR-DA-5400ES.

3: And I got some ideas about Arcam AVR350, Harman Kardon AVR 7550HD, Integra DTR-9.9, NAD T 785, Rotel RSX-1570 and Sunfire TGR-3.

4: Also on Separate Amps, in particular Emotiva amps, because they are in a class of their own, for performance + value.

5: Also on Surround Processors, in particular Onkyo PR-SC886P, PR-SC885P, Integra DHC-9.9, DTC-9.8, Denon AVP-A1HDCI, Anthem Statement D2/ARC, Classe SSP-800, Krell Evolution 707 ($30,000 ), NAD M15 HD, Lexicon MC-12 HD, Meridian 861, Primare SP32, Simaudio Moon CP-8 and Theta Digital Casablanca III HDMI 1.3 Edition.

6: And not least, TacT TCS mkIII. Wish I can afford that one...

* I just love this hobby.

 

[PENG]

Here's their power results at 8ohms from 0.3% THD (from Sound & Vision):

...........SR7002............SR6003............AVR-2809ci.............RX-V3900.......

1ch. = 150 watts........155 watts...........155 watts.............189 watts*.....
2ch. = 133 watts........130 watts...........130 watts.............150 watts*.....
5ch. = 93 watts.........111 watts...........112 watts*............100 watts......
7ch. = 83 watts..........96 watts...........100 watts*.............88 watts.......

* = highest # for 1,2,5 & 7 channels.

So, as you can see, they are all equal.

Now;
The SR7002 is THX Select2, Audyssey MultEQ, HDMI (4/2), 33.1 lbs, $1,400 list.
The SR6003 has Audyssey MultEQ, HDMI (3/2), 29.1 lbs, $1,100 list.
The 2809ci has Audyssey MultEQ XT, HDMI (4/1), 31 lbs, $1,200 list.
The V3900 has YPAO, HDMI (4/2), VRS ABT-2010, 38.5 lbs, $1,900 list.

So, in the end, it all boils down to extra features (# of HDMI ins & outs, Ethernet, Music streaming, USB port, type of room correction, THX, preouts for all channels, type of video processor, GUI & navigation, remote control, etc.), value (street price) and name preference (eg. Deny, Yammy, Onky, Mary or Piony), between these four receivers.

Is that make any sense at all to you guys?

I am sure you noticed the impressive power of the 3900 and the 1900 into 4 ohms. To me that is more important because it tells me in real life listening the Yamaha will actually sound more powerful than the Marantz. Their lower ACD numbers indicate they are limited by the power supply, not the amp sections. And before you say anything yes I do know any of the Onkyo 8XX, 90X (2008/9 models) tops the Yamaha in terms of power into 8,4,2 ohms, ACD or not.

 

[Lordoftherings]

I am sure you noticed the impressive power of the 3900 and the 1900 into 4 ohms. To me that is more important because it tells me in real life listening the Yamaha will actually sound more powerful than the Marantz. Their lower ACD numbers indicate they are limited by the power supply, not the amp sections. And before you say anything yes I do know any of the Onkyo 8XX, 90X (2008/9 models) tops the Yamaha in terms of power into 8,4,2 ohms, ACD or not.

LOL. You seem to know already whats on my mind even before I speak.

I'm with you about the 4ohm figures, but if your speakers are pretty much an 8ohm load, you won't benefit much from the extra power at 4ohms from the Yamahas or the Onkyos.

That's why I choose my receivers according to my own speakers, so my Onkyo receivers give me actually over 300 (369 actually at 1% THD) watts per channel in Stereo and about 175 watts times seven!

My 805 put 330 watts at 0.1% THD per channel, with two channels driving 4-ohm loads, and 369 watts at 1% THD. (My main speakers are exactly 3.9 ohms). Do I need a separate amp? I really doubt it.
My 876 gives similar results.

Also ny 805 (2007 model) with all channels driven continuously (all 7 of them), into 8-ohm loads at 0.1% THD is giving me just over 120 watts per channe.
And at 1% THD (into 8-ohm), it gives me 152 watts per channel!

So, I concluded that at about 1% THD into 4-ohm loads (all 7 channels driven continuously), it will give me conservatively about 175 watts per channel!
By the way, all my 7 speakers are all rated at 4 ohms.

Do I need an external amp to give me 400 watts per channel, all 7 channels driven continuously? Probably not, but I'm getting the Emotiva XPA-3 anyway, to releave my Onkyo.

Wow! I just love this hobby even more by the minute...

As for the OP, the Marantz SR7002 will do just fine in his case.

Cheers,

Bob

Note: The Yamaha RX-V3900 does indeed very good into 4-ohm loads showing a gain of roughly 2-dBW without complaint.