New to forum-Marantz falling behind as an A/V choice?

[79_Limited]

Hello all,

I am new to the forum an look forward to future posting.

I am currently just getting started on building my HT a piece at a time. I have a nice finished basement that is mostly at empty at the moment and I am working to change that.

Question.....after some reading I see little mention of the Marantz receivers. In general is Marantz a little behind the times for A/V receivers? I see the Onkyo's, Denon and Yamaha mentioned on a regular basis but rarely Marantz.

I have a old 70's Quadradial Marantz that I use for just music and love the sound.

 

[markw]

What will your decison be based on?

With HT, a lot of a particular brands being in favor today depends on features that may or not be needed more than actual sound potential. Adding features that will never be used may add to the list of goodies but if you don't need them, why should you pay for them?

And, no matter what you buy, it'll be outdated within six months to a year.

 

[fmw]

I'll take a guess. Yamaha and Onkyo are readily available on the internet at discount prices. Marantz (and Denon and Pioneer Elite) is sold primarily through A/V retail stores and, consequently, has higher street prices. The Saul Marantz name alone sold the products a generation ago but apparently isn't working for this young crowd. Denon appears to have the "quality cache" at the moment.

Personally, I view all of those brands as equal in terms of performance. I think Onkyo and Yamaha represent better values at the street prices for which they sell. Since I have no use for a local dealer to choose and supply a receiver, I have an Onkyo. I don't think it is any better. I do think it is a better value in terms of performance for the money spent.

All these boxes are made somewhere other than Japan where the parent companies are located. They all use similar components and, sometimes, are made in the same factories right next to each other. I wouldn't spend a lot of time worrying about the brand. Better to choose the features and performance level you want and shop for a price that works for you.

 

[mouettus]

My local A/V store stopped carrying them because they had too much returns and some problems with the service section. Seems like they have some liability issues nowadays. They used to make good gear. I love the sound though. The nicest after NAD. But I pulled myself an RX-V1800 because I owned another Yamaha before and even if the music side doesn't sound as good, this sucker delivers plenty of features and good power. I'll get a good 2-channel amp for my mains later down the road anyways.

 

[Seth=L]

All these boxes are made somewhere other than Japan where the parent companies are located.

Top end models from many Japanese manufactures are made in Japan. The Onkyo TX-SR805 and up are manufactured in Japan (previous 800 series Onkyos where manufactured in Malaysia. The Integra DTR-8.8 (TX-SR805 equiv.) is manufactured in Japan as are the upper models. Denon models are made in Japan down to the 2000CI series and down to 800 series (big box store models), the remainder are made in China. Pioneer are all made in Malaysia. Marantz are all made in China. This information only refers to most recent models from these companies, not previous ones.

Marantz has fallen behind in respect to video processing features (which are IMO irrelevant and useless in most cases as TVs typically have good quality scalers internally and with so much HD material available scaling is not as big a deal IMO) and they just don't the same bang for buck as the Onkyos and Yamahas do. This includes features and power. The $2100 Marantz 8002 weighs a meager 33 pounds. Granted it has a toroidal power supply, so that cuts the weight down. I have heard they use the bottom of the receiver as a heatsink (copper apparently) which cuts down the weight a little again. This is still a light weight in terms of Class A/B receivers in this price bracket. For comparison the Onkyo TX-NR905 weighs 54 pounds and also uses a toroidal power supply. The case is larger on the Onkyo and has a standard convection style heatsink flanked by two fans. The extra weight from the case and heatsink shouldn't top 5 pounds. The TX-SR905 has a street price of $2000 and is one of the few receivers that has a practical scaler in it. IMO, Marantz is behind the times.

 

[mouettus]

IMO, Marantz is behind the times.

Same as Rotel and NAD, which make quality AUDIO products. Just short on features.

 

[Seth=L]

Same as Rotel and NAD, which make quality AUDIO products. Just short on features.

I am starting to doubt Marantz quality, they are apparently having quality control issues.

 

[mouettus]

I am starting to doubt Marantz quality, they are apparently having quality control issues.

Exactly what I've been told by my a/v reseller. Sad thing. They would've had another guy in their camp right now.

 

[Audioholics]

I am starting to doubt Marantz quality, they are apparently having quality control issues.

Don't be so quick to jump on this bandwagon. I haven't heard anything about quality control issues and we've been in heavy direct contact with the manufacturer of late. Marantz is simply positioning itself as the mid-fi audio-first, video second, solution for D&M. Typically, retail stores are more concerned with issues of margins than returns - unless it becomes epidemic - and to my knowledge this is not the case with Marantz. I more see the issue as difficulty in market positioning and finding their place when Denon is part of the same company.

 

[Rock&Roll Ninja]

A lot of the smaller, higher-end Manf's, such as Marantz/NAD have not been as state-of-the-art in recent years with regards to video hardware (and were running a year or two behind with Dolby & DTS 10-15 years ago).

With video going from S-Video -> Component -> DVI -> HDMI1 ->HDMI 1.2 ->HDMI 1.3 all in the last 10 years, it can be a strain on a small company that has to overhaul product every 18months. If the industry can stay at HDMI 1.3 for more than 3 years you'll see more reviews of Marantz gear as the catch-up and begin to compete with their more mainstream rivals on features as well as quality.

NAD has chosen to bypass video processing alltogether (which makes alot of sense to me, people who can afford NAD gear can afford a decent TV), and I think this route will be taken by other Manf's as time goes on, people will just let the TV do the work. Its cheaper to build and most TVs have non-bypassable upconversion anyway.

 

[79_Limited]

A lot of the smaller, higher-end Manf's, such as Marantz/NAD have not been as state-of-the-art in recent years with regards to video hardware (and were running a year or two behind with Dolby & DTS 10-15 years ago).

With video going from S-Video -> Component -> DVI -> HDMI1 ->HDMI 1.2 ->HDMI 1.3 all in the last 10 years, it can be a strain on a small company that has to overhaul product every 18months. If the industry can stay at HDMI 1.3 for more than 3 years you'll see more reviews of Marantz gear as the catch-up and begin to compete with their more mainstream rivals on features as well as quality.

NAD has chosen to bypass video processing alltogether (which makes alot of sense to me, people who can afford NAD gear can afford a decent TV), and I think this route will be taken by other Manf's as time goes on, people will just let the TV do the work. Its cheaper to build and most TVs have non-bypassable upconversion anyway.

Thanks for the input. I am not so sure that I really need the HDMI inputs on a receiver because my TV already has 2 and does them well.

How does the audio performance for music on a mid-level Marantz compare to say an Onkyo that is more video feature heavy?

My main gripe about about the newer A/V receivers as many of them are missing the phono inputs I need in order to play vinyl. The Marantz have this feature. I know I could just get a preamp but that is just one more thing I will need to hook up.

 

[Rock&Roll Ninja]

Thanks for the input. I am not so sure that I really need the HDMI inputs on a receiver because my TV already has 2 and does them well.

You'll need an AVR to decode the audio. (in the future when players no longer decode)

How does the audio performance for music on a mid-level Marantz compare to say an Onkyo that is more video feature heavy?

Only one way to know for sure.

 

[fmw]

How does the audio performance for music on a mid-level Marantz compare to say an Onkyo that is more video feature heavy?

Probably about the same.

My main gripe about about the newer A/V receivers as many of them are missing the phono inputs I need in order to play vinyl. The Marantz have this feature. I know I could just get a preamp but that is just one more thing I will need to hook up.

If you still play vinyl you need to come to grips with the fact that you are in a very small minority. You might as well bite the bullet and buy an outboard phono preamp. Then you won't have to worry about it again. You can get a model with both MM and MC capabilities and take it along with any preamp or receiver you may use in the future.

 

[bandit]

Emotiva (emotiva.com I think) has some pretty amazing holiday specials right now... Might be worth a look.. I am not sure (as I only recenlty started browsing their site) how good they are with video processing/scaling but it appears at minimum they do the swtching... (I like the pretty blue illumination on their systems) It apears the audio portion of their system are pretty solid along with 5yr warranties...

Anyway have a great day..

Bandit