Which receiver PLEASSSSEEEEEEE

[PENG]

There is no substitute for listening with ones own ears, I don't care how many spec sheets or lab data one reads.

We all know many people believe just that but engineers and scientists have to go with facts and figures. They don't get their PhD by presenting their papers that simply contain their views and beliefs without supporting data. Audio video equipment are designed by scientist and engineers. What you hear is not necessary the same as what others hear. To me it is all about fidelity, that is, how close is the reproduction to the orginal recording ("live"). Anything that produces its own tonal characteristic regardless of whether you call it warm, bright, dynamic, dark, thin etc., are not fidelity and it will be impossible for us to tell others which one to go with because we all have our own preferences.

Since one camp's belief is not going to convert the others anytime soon, I suggest we agree to disagree, let both side present their views (based on perception, specs, or lab data or whatever) and let the OPs decide what they choose to explore further or to believe.

 

[AVRat]

How much are you willing to spend? Maybe you can still get in on this deal. http://forums.audioholics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=59425

 

[jostenmeat]

I have the 8002 and it is outstanding, I agree with gpmagic's recommendation over its sibling brother, Denon

However, you do realize that Marantz and Denon are both owned by the same parent company D&M Holdings, Inc. formed in 2002.

Forest Man

Denon's 3*** series is closer to Marantz 7*** series

So in this example a Marantz 8*** model

I would like to point out that Marantz does not offer MultEQ XT, with any product, not even their flagship. If one was to use to this technology, which I find to be the most value laden feature in a modern receiver (though there are plenty who disagree), this alone should make even the mid level Denon superior sounding to the best Marantz available, IMHO.

 

[musta9]

I would like to point out that Marantz does not offer MultEQ XT, with any product, not even their flagship. If one was to use to this technology, which I find to be the most value laden feature in a modern receiver (though there are plenty who disagree), this alone should make even the mid level Denon superior sounding to the best Marantz available, IMHO.

The Marantz 8002 has Audyssey MultEQ - is there a big difference between the MultEQ and the multEQ XT? I am very interested in this function since my room dynamics is far from ideal - I have high ceiling, my listening position is off to the side and my my downfiring subwoofer Outlaw LFM EX is surrounded from 3 sides (2 walls and the TV stand cabinet).

 

[jostenmeat]

The satellites may benefit with up to 8x the filter resolution with XT.

http://www.audyssey.com/technology/multeq-solutions.html

 

[mannoiaj]

What speakers do you have? How could there be so many recommendations for a receiver without knowing what speakers this dude is running? I call BS.

 

[musta9]

What speakers do you have? How could there be so many recommendations for a receiver without knowing what speakers this dude is running? I call BS.

sorry didn't mention that. I have def tech mythos ones for the fronts and an eight for the center, Ihave outlaw lfm Ex subwoofer. I have a pair of HTD in wall speakers HD-w80 for the surrounds.

Thanks for any input

 

[musta9]

How much are you willing to spend? Maybe you can still get in on this deal. http://forums.audioholics.com/forums/showthread.php?t=59425

Thanks alot Avrat for the suggestion. So would you get the Denon 4310 at $1400 over the Marantz 8002 at $1000?

I am starting to drift towards the Marantz because of what I have read about the sound quality and that picture quality should really be left the the source (oppo 980) and the monitor (pioneer KRP-600M). Also I donot know how to make use of high tech functions like internet radio and streaming. I guess what I am trying to find out is the sound quality equal and will it be just as well balanced for my room with the Marantz as it would be withthe Denon 4310.

 

[gqmagic]

Thanks alot Avrat for the suggestion. So would you get the Denon 4310 at $1400 over the Marantz 8002 at $1000?

I am starting to drift towards the Marantz because of what I have read about the sound quality and that picture quality should really be left the the source (oppo 980) and the monitor (pioneer KRP-600M). Also I donot know how to make use of high tech functions like internet radio and streaming. I guess what I am trying to find out is the sound quality equal and will it be just as well balanced for my room with the Marantz as it would be withthe Denon 4310.

If you are relying on others recommendation instead of going and listening yourself, to me you're making a big and maybe expensive mistake.

Are you actually going and listening somewhere? Preferably a smaller high end shop and not Best Buy.

Recommendations should be used as a starting point to know what to listen to.

 

[AVRat]

I think for your usage, the Marantz 8002 is probably the better option. I've always liked Marantz gear, but for some reason never bought any.

 

[jostenmeat]

There is no substitute for listening with ones own ears, I don't care how many spec sheets or lab data one reads.

If you are relying on others recommendation instead of going and listening yourself, to me you're making a big and maybe expensive mistake.

Are you actually going and listening somewhere? Preferably a smaller high end shop and not Best Buy.

Recommendations should be used as a starting point to know what to listen to.

Did you seriously get a number of receivers together, on the same speakers, same source, same room, to compare? You level matched them too, right? I assume it wasn't blinded, because my jaw would drop if a high end store set that up for you, on receivers of all things (not super pricey separates).

If you did the above, which receivers did you compare under such circumstances?

If you didn't do exactly the above (same room, same source, same speakers, level matched), then your comparisons "by ear" are meaningless.

 

[gqmagic]

Did you seriously get a number of receivers together, on the same speakers, same source, same room, to compare? You level matched them too, right? I assume it wasn't blinded, because my jaw would drop if a high end store set that up for you, on receivers of all things (not super pricey separates).

If you did the above, which receivers did you compare under such circumstances?

If you didn't do exactly the above (same room, same source, same speakers, level matched), then your comparisons "by ear" are meaningless.

I used a less scientific method, I bought what sounded best to me

Level matching and all that BS is great for some I guess, but at the end of the day it matters how it sounds to your ears.

Thats why I buy the top of or next to the top of the line even if its a generation or 2 back. I let the engineers do their thing and I use my ears.

 

[musta9]

If you are relying on others recommendation instead of going and listening yourself, to me you're making a big and maybe expensive mistake.

Are you actually going and listening somewhere? Preferably a smaller high end shop and not Best Buy.

Recommendations should be used as a starting point to know what to listen to.

Sadly I am in a small town were that is not an option even the best buy option is not feasible since best buy here doesn't carry any of those. I went to the next big town over (which isn't that big anyways) and there high end stores didn't carry Marantz. I listened to the Denon - honestly I wasn't blown away could be the room.

 

[PENG]

Sadly I am in a small town were that is not an option even the best buy option is not feasible since best buy here doesn't carry any of those. I went to the next big town over (which isn't that big anyways) and there high end stores didn't carry Marantz. I listened to the Denon - honestly I wasn't blown away could be the room.

Just for heads up, most people I know in this hobby started out looking for that "blown away" kind of sound without paying attention to the things that jostenmeat talked about in his post. The fact is (yes, scientifically speaking, based on verifiable facts and figures), any reputable manufacturers of class A/B amps know how to make their upper middle level products sound good with inaudible distortion levels when operated within their design limits. The main things you need to consider are the power and features you need, aside from the brand's reputation in terms of reliability and customer service.

Most talks about one brand sounding better than the others are hearsays originated from the old days when it was likely true that manufacturers such as Marantz and Harman Kardon were recognized for their focus on sound quality, more so than their competitors. That being said, I do agree we have to go with our ears. However, if your ears tell you a product does not sound right in the dealer's place, before drawing your conclusion you should try to find out if there are reasons other than simply because it is not a Marantz. Feelings and senses are only reliable to a limited point. As an example, one's sense of "warm" could mean another's "a little hot", so why not get the facts by taking measurements with a thermometer if we need a reliable comparison of temperatures of something? The same should go for the talks of the "warm" sounding thing.

If anything other than sound quality do not mean much for you then for peace of mind you may as well just go with hearsays, get the best Marantz model you can afford and be done with it. One last point, if you decide on doing more auditioning, you should go and listen to some "live" music/concerts so your memory is fresh about what kind of sound is the right sound. However, it may even be possible that you do not prefer the "live" sound, but that will be another topic.

 

[musta9]

If you can't find a Denon then this may be your next best bet. http://www.accessories4less.com/make-a-store/item/MARSR8002/Marantz/SR8002-receiver-THX-125w-x-7ch-HDMI-home-theater-surround/1.html

Hi AVRat thanks alot for your help in this process. Do you think that the refurbished model through accessories4less for $1000 is worth the price difference for a new model of the marantz 8002 for about $1350 on ebay? I am going to call Marantz and try and get some more information on their factory refurbished but I would appreciate your input.

 

[musta9]

OK so I guess the one through ebay will not have warranty because they are not authorized dealers of Marantz so now I am back to this hopefully final choice of a factory refurbished Marantz 8002 for $1000 with a 1 year warranty vs. a new Denon 4810 for $1300? My main concern is that the Marantz is refurbished - I am not sure how reliable that is and is it gonna fail on me a year later? Sorry if the questions sound dumb - I am really trying to make a final descision.

 

[PENG]

OK so I guess the one through ebay will not have warranty because they are not authorized dealers of Marantz so now I am back to this hopefully final choice of a factory refurbished Marantz 8002 for $1000 with a 1 year warranty vs. a new Denon 4810 for $1300? My main concern is that the Marantz is refurbished - I am not sure how reliable that is and is it gonna fail on me a year later? Sorry if the questions sound dumb - I am really trying to make a final descision.

Only $1,300 for a new Denon AVR-4810? I thought even the 4310 cost that much!

By the way, there is a review out for the AVR-4310 in case you haven't not read it yet. The same person also reviewed the SR-8002.

http://hometheatermag.com/receivers/denon_avr-4310ci_av_receiver/index4.html

http://www.hometheatermag.com/receivers/508mar8002/index2.html

By the way, I wouldn't worry about the Marantz being refurbished if it was done by Marantz and warranted by them.

 

[lsiberian]

Is there any benefit to pairing up a Pioneer Elite receiver with a Pioneer Elite display? I have a Pioneer Elite VSX-82TXS, and its manual (don't have it handy) does make mention of some control capabilities you may take advantage of if you have all Pioneer Elite gear.

I dunno if this is true or not, but it may be worth investigating.

Not sure if this has been answered yet. Yes there is a benefit in that your remote for you receiver would likely operate the tv out of the box. Even if it didn't it would be easy to program for your tv.

 

[lsiberian]

I used a less scientific method, I bought what sounded best to me

Level matching and all that BS is great for some I guess, but at the end of the day it matters how it sounds to your ears.

Thats why I buy the top of or next to the top of the line even if its a generation or 2 back. I let the engineers do their thing and I use my ears.

lol. You are a funny one.

Level matching isn't BS if you are trying to determine amplifier coloration. However it is inaccurate if the level on one receiver is audibly lower than the level on the other in comparison with it's maximum output. The best thing to base receivers purchases off of are reliability, aesthetics and features.

Just don't overpay receiver features upgrade every 3 to 4 years it seems. So consider that in your purchase.

 

[musta9]

Only $1,300 for a new Denon AVR-4810? I thought even the 4310 cost that much!

By the way, there is a review out for the AVR-4310 in case you haven't not read it yet. The same person also reviewed the SR-8002.

http://hometheatermag.com/receivers/denon_avr-4310ci_av_receiver/index4.html

http://www.hometheatermag.com/receivers/508mar8002/index2.html

By the way, I wouldn't worry about the Marantz being refurbished if it was done by Marantz and warranted by them.

Sorry I meant the 4310. Thanks for pointing out these reviews. I am pretty new at this so I don't really understant alot about these levels but they seem pretty similar.

I am almost decided for the Marantz I can get the 7002 new for $1000 with warranty or the 8002 for $1500 new with warranty or refurbished for $1000. Is there a noticeable sound quality difference between the 7002 and the 8002?