Don't Laugh, It's Paid For

willyrover said:
I think the bigger question is WHY manufacturers decided to do this?

A buyer would find out soon enough that they were NOT separates. Then live with the "illusion" of separates? I don't get it.
Click to expand...

It has nothing to do with audio quality....and all to do with impressing the Women you invite over.....:yes:
 
stereofanboy said:
A lot of all in ones have horizontal indentations to make them look like separate pieces. The name appearing on each "separate piece" just strengthens the illusion.

I passed on an ugly Marantz all in one a neighbor offered a few months ago. I hope it wasn't this model!
Click to expand...

Believe it or not, the trickery extends to separate model numbers for the top and bottom "sections". The tuner is called ST170AV and the preamp/integrated is called PM170AV while on the back panel, the complete unit is identified as TA170AV. ALL GOOD FUN!
 
I bought one new in '87 as part of a complete Marantz package (TT, cassette, receiver, big speakers) for $400 and kept it until last year. It got very little play over 22 years, and never sounded as good as my HK570i over my JBL 4311's, but it could get seriously loud. It had the worst front face of any big receiver I ever saw. Sold it for $75 to a local guy trying to adequately drive some big Polks he had - no dice, unfortunately.
 
Hokieman said:
I bought one new in '87 as part of a complete Marantz package (TT, cassette, receiver, big speakers) for $400 and kept it until last year. It got very little play over 22 years, and never sounded as good as my HK570i over my JBL 4311's, but it could get seriously loud. It had the worst front face of any big receiver I ever saw. Sold it for $75 to a local guy trying to adequately drive some big Polks he had - no dice, unfortunately.
Click to expand...

No shame losing to ordinary HK receivers and amps. They really are GIANT killers and will humble much higher line iron than the TA170AV.
 
Hey SoCal,

I know this thread is super old but I have a question. Matter of fact this is my first post here at AK. Back in October of 2008 you didn't speak highly of this unit but here in 2010 you praise it as sounding as good as a 2500. What changed that made such a drastic difference in your opinion? I'm challenging myself to acquire some equipment spending as little as possible and have a nice sounding setup.

Thanks,

Wes
 
To add to this "super old" post....

Yes I laughed....then I saw this on YouTube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rt7QOhCuifk

Here is the blurb about it by the video poster,"Uploaded on Jan 11, 2010
It probably comes as a surprise that at one time, in 1987, the Marantz TA170AV claimed to be the most powerful stereo receiver on the planet at 165 RMS watts per channel. Given that it's so plasticy, it is difficult that believe that the TA170AV is anything more than a cheap toy. But, what is the truth about the claim? Find out as former Marantz head of product development, Tom Ishimoto, puts it to the test............"

Rather cool after all
 
I have seen that video. Pretty impressive however I've heard 10w amps that put monster amps to shame. Like the old saying goes .....Power is nothing without control. I was hoping SoCal Sam could shed some light on what changed his opinion. Considering their pretty cheap I guess it wouldn't hurt to give it a go regardless. Just have to put a bag over her. She's not quite a looker.
 
2010 >> 2015! The internet remembers EVERYTHING!!

The video is the actual bench test cited here. This unit was A/B'ed with my 2500 using a Sony CDP-X55ES, RCA switch (for hot swapping), and two pairs of Yamaha NS-1000M's. The Yamaha speakers do not flatter fools, they will expose poor performing equipment. The tech shall remain unidentified but those of us local are super fortunate to enjoy his service.
 
So that isn't former Marantz head of product development Tom Ishimoto, as stated in the YouTube blurb?
 
I can tell you that the video is by former member vintagestereo who is perhaps the most knowledgeable solid state receiver enthusiast ever. He collected TOTL receivers only.
 
one of my favorite receivers. I have one at work one in the garage and one in my basement. Pretty much anywhere I listen and don't have to explain appearance to anyone I put one of these. Got the first 2 for less than 50 bucks a piece. By the time I got the third I was hooked so I paid 110. In my opinion this is a true gem .


I actually made my way here because I just popped one open to swap the filter caps. I would love to hear what was done to the phono stage to meet today's standards?
 
Last edited:
TA200AV - I too am a fan of these Marantz all in ones. I bought one thru AMEX in the late 80’s. It is gold and is a TA200AV setup. 200 solid watts per channel at 8 ohms. I was able to buy it back from the guy I sold it to this past year as he hasn’t used it in years. It still rocks out. I used to run it with 4 floor standing speakers with good ole 15 inch woofers back in the day, at a net 5 ohm load per channel after factoring speaker wiring runs. The thing would make the house lights dim slightly under full load with hard hitting bass. ( old house with old 15 amp circuit wiring but a cool effect) Now I run it on some much better speakers in a house with good electric and it runs circles around my Sony AVR. Anyone else out there have a TA200av? I have never seen another. Seems that google hasn’t either. I just looked and my serial # is 88u010000
 
Last edited:
I’d like to add that the 200 watt TA200AV uses an 8 amp fuse, not a 7 amp like the 170. Also the power transformer is a different part # as are the power transistors as compared to the Ta170av.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

V
Top 10 Marantz Receiver
2 3
Replies
55
Views
7K
vintagestereo
V
V
Marantz SR-9000G Mystery Receiver
2
Replies
26
Views
7K
Skywatcher
S
Back
Top Bottom