Marantz AMP10 or Parasound?

[TLS Guy]

I already have 2 outlaw 2220 amps. I could get the A51 to cmplete the bed layer, and keep the 2 outlaw 2220, and add 2 more 2220 amps for the atmos heights.
That would be 11 channels.

I think that is a very reasonable plan. That makes use of what you have, which is always a good idea, if it is reliable gear. Unless you have a really huge room, I think 11 channels is sufficient and probably optimal. My system is 9.2 sort of, but the LFE channel is integrated into the main speakers via active crossovers and a mixing circuit. Five of the speakers have active crossovers. I use a total of 18 power amp channels. That is from 7 Quad 909 two channel amps, and 2 Quad 405-2 amps for the ceiling speakers. I have one 909 in reserve and a number of 405-2 laying about. I also have two Quad 909s powering the 3.2 channel great room system and one Quad 909 and a Quad 405-2 powering the family room system. I am not keen on a single power supply powering more then two or three power amp channels at the most.

The Marantz AV 10 is the first AVP that is commensurate with this system. I get more and more impressed with the AV 10 all the time. For one thing it the first AVP that makes the system totally silent at all listening positions with no signal playing.

 

[Nondemo01]

Right. Got that. Parasound sucks.
What would you choose?

Depending on the implementation, Class D amplifiers can exhibit some load dependency at higher frequencies. There has been considerable discussion about this over at ASR, particularly in the Benchmark AHB2 thread.

Some lower-cost Class D amplifiers are essentially Hypex or Purifi modules installed in an aluminum chassis with a selected SMPS, all engineered to meet a particular price point. Will you actually hear the difference? That is debatable. Will differences appear between lower-cost and higher-cost amplifiers on the test bench? Sometimes.

Gene has tested both the NAD M23 and Marantz AMP 10, and each performed exceptionally well. Measurements are not the only consideration, though. Build quality, thermal management, service support, and warranty also matter. Parasound, NAD, and ATI are three companies with extensive experience building robust amplifiers that also achieve near state-of-the-art performance. Other companies may offer more outright performance per dollar, but potentially with compromises elsewhere.

Personally, I place a high value on reliability. ATI, which also serves as the OEM for numerous audio brands, would be my first recommendation and, in most cases, the only one I would seriously consider. Marantz would be second because its equipment generally just works.

My rough breakdown would be:

• Best overall recommendation: ATI
• Reliable and easy to own: Marantz
• State-of-the-art performance: Benchmark AHB2
• Best value with a strong warranty: Monoprice Monolith
• Cost-no-object, brute-force beauty: McIntosh
• Built to drive almost anything: Parasound—or, as Gene put it, it can “drive a fork.”

There are plenty of good choices. The best one depends on whether the priority is measurements, reliability, warranty, value, aesthetics, or sheer power.