Denon or Marantz

[Xenogear]

Which brand of stereo receiver would normally give a warmer, smoother sound? Thanks

 

[markw]

They'er both good. I'd be more concerned with your speakers for delivering those attributes you describe.

 

[PENG]

Which brand of stereo receiver would normally give a warmer, smoother sound? Thanks

I read about several times around here, that Marantz is warmer, Yamaha is brighter, and Denon is neutral. To some, there is no such difference between late models of these makes, but others swear by it. Some also say that models that use MOSFET in the output stages in general produce a warmer sound whereas those that use bi-polar produce a more accurate (perhaps perceived as brighter) sound. I am not 100% sure but I think Marantz and Denon receivers use bi-polar and Pioneer Elite receiver uses MOSFET. Your question is about stereo receiver, so those claims I mentioned may or may not apply.

At the end you have to find out for yourself how much difference, if at all, you can hear. Published specifications alone does not seem to support why there should be audible differences.

 

[Xenogear]

thanks

Ok, thanks for the response. My speakers are a pair of bookshelf Uni-Q KEFs. Can a receiver do a good job on 4 ohms?

 

[mattburk]

take the marantz, better overall for music.

 

[AMG_Roadster]

About a year and a half ago Marantz had some serious quality control issues. A friend went through 3 receivers before he finally gave up on them. Appeared to be an issue with the power supply.

 

[Herr D]

Never had any problems with Marantz. They give a warm full sound so they're excellent for music unless you're a bit of a freak (like me) and want complete neutral transmission of sound, in which case I'd go for Denon or Onkyo (I love my Onkyo)

 

[outsider]

I recently did some listening at a shop that sells both Denon and Marantz. The speakers used were Paradigm Monitors.
The Marantz receivers (7500 & 8500) definitely have a warmer sound while the Denon receivers (2806 & 3805) were more neutral.
Overall they both had good sound, but I felt that the Marantz was the more musical of the two.

 

[mtrycrafts]

... Some also say that models that use MOSFET in the output stages in general produce a warmer sound whereas those that use bi-polar produce a more accurate (perhaps perceived as brighter) sound. .

This was one area that David Rich examined with no support

David Rich and Peter Aczel, 'Topological Analysis of Consumer Audio Electronics: Another Approach to Show that Modern Audio Electronics are Acoustically Transparent,' 99 AES Convention, 1995, Print #4053.

 

[johsti]

I believe they are both built in the same factory, and owned by the same company, D&M Holdings. I'm not saying that makes them sound the same or even similar, but as far as QC goes, you would think they would be similar.

http://www.dm-holdings.com/eng/index.html

 

[j_garcia]

They are not built in the same factory. While they are owned by the same holding company, they are still entirely separate companies that do not operate in conjunction with each other.

ALL major manufacturers have had QC issues at one time or another, especially when introducing new models, so you take pretty much the same risk no matter what manufacturer you choose.

I've owned many Marantz receivers and I have had an issue with one integrated amp, but it was quickly taken care of by the dealer who sold it to me.