Marantz 2285B

[vintagestereo]

I've heard many people say that the Marantz 2285B is possibly the best of the "classic" Marantz receivers. I've seen them selling routinely for over $400.00 on E-Bay, which is an awful lot for an 85 wpc unit. I've also read that it doesn't have the reliability problems of the bigger units (2330B, 2385, 2500 & 2600) and offers much the same performance levels, watt for watt. Anyone know more about this?

 

[Don C]

Mine has been 100% reliable.

 

[glen65]

I know Marantz has had trouble in the past
with some of their earlier 22xx receivers.
Things like underrated caps and transistors also
they had some trouble with some of their pushbutton
switches. These are all things that eventually came
out as service bulletins. As far as their larger units
being less reliable I can't say Ive really run into that
complaint myself. However on these larger receivers
you usually get more complexity and many times
you get more heat. Couple this with the age of these
vintage receivers and it stands to reason that you have
a greater chance of failure. Its like anything else and
not limited to Marantz.

 

[mr marantz]

400,- for a 2285 is alot of money but...... people pay it!!

Why is that you think?

I own alot of Marantz gear and have also the the bigger and biggest receiver;

Like 2265,2270 and the beast 2600.

We are talking about gear wich is almost 30 year's old ehhh

I would say it's the most reliable gear ever made!!!

 

[VintageNut]

I have 3 of the 2285B, all purchased a while back at what now is considered bargain prices. The only problem I had was that one recently needed a power capacitor. At least I think it needed one, because it had a very small physical leak of the electrolytic fluid out of the bottom vent. Some people leave power caps in even when they leak, I don't because it will rust metal it leaks on. Each of the 2 power caps in the 2285B are a dual cap design, 2 caps in 1 can, since it is a dual power supply design. Impossible to find, so I replaced it with one out of a parts unit. So far so good. I think there is a guy that will rebuild any power capacitor, and in this case, maybe the best option. With these units apprioaching 30 years old, the Marantz receivers with dual power caps, like the 2330B, 2285B, this will be an increasingly common problem, at least, I think it will be. I think the unit sounds great, but compared to my Pioneer SX-980, I don't think it has a superior sound. I think the SX-980 has a beefier construction, such as the frame is more substantial than the 2285B, and the SX-980 has wood as a standard feature. Changing the panel lights in the 2285B is a much bigger pain than the Pioneer SX series. Maybe a superior 4 ohm capablity with the Marantz.

 

[skibjr]

Avoid the Toroid!

I've been an eBay surfer for about five years now, and an audio tech for a lot longer, so I'd say you're probably safe as long as you stick with the Marantz 2330B and below. Any of the bigger boys (2385, 2500, and 2600) jump from the good old-fashioned "E-core" power transformer to a more efficient, but less reliable toroidal transformer. Now if you have a leaky cap in one of these big guys, it sucks, but it's not the end of the world - you can still buy just about any size or configuration 'lytic at www.mouser.com for under thirty bucks. However, if you just spent three grand on a pristine 2600 and the primary winding of your toroidal PT shorts out, well, that's a pretty expensive puff of smoke. (check out the attached shot of a 2600 off of eBay, with the dead PT sitting on top - ouch!). I've never seen this happen with an E-core in over thirty years of working with this stuff...

 

[vintagestereo]

I've been an eBay surfer for about five years now, and an audio tech for a lot longer, so I'd say you're probably safe as long as you stick with the Marantz 2330B and below. Any of the bigger boys (2385, 2500, and 2600) jump from the good old-fashioned "E-core" power transformer to a more efficient, but less reliable toroidal transformer. Now if you have a leaky cap in one of these big guys, it sucks, but it's not the end of the world - you can still buy just about any size or configuration 'lytic at www.mouser.com for under thirty bucks. However, if you just spent three grand on a pristine 2600 and the primary winding of your toroidal PT shorts out, well, that's a pretty expensive puff of smoke. (check out the attached shot of a 2600 off of eBay, with the dead PT sitting on top - ouch!). I've never seen this happen with an E-core in over thirty years of working with this stuff...

skibjr -- Your post pretty much supports what I had read elsewhere. I've always wanted one of the big boys....but not at the risk of having the big Toroid go shortly after purchase. Where would I ever find another one, since it's the heart of these beasts and most of the other breakdowns CAN be repaired. So, I guess I'll stick with my 2285B for now.

 

[VintageNut]

skibjr, have you seen a dual power capacitor, with 3 terminals on the bottom, at mouser? I have not. The 2285B uses a dual power cap, and I'm pretty sure the 2330B does too. If you have a source for the dual caps, I would love to see it. It seems the Pioneer toroidal transformer was a better design, I don't think I have heard of any of the SX-1050 or SX-1250 owners having problems with their transformers.

 

[catrafter]

I've been an eBay surfer for about five years now, and an audio tech for a lot longer, so I'd say you're probably safe as long as you stick with the Marantz 2330B and below. Any of the bigger boys (2385, 2500, and 2600) jump from the good old-fashioned "E-core" power transformer to a more efficient, but less reliable toroidal transformer. Now if you have a leaky cap in one of these big guys, it sucks, but it's not the end of the world - you can still buy just about any size or configuration 'lytic at www.mouser.com for under thirty bucks. However, if you just spent three grand on a pristine 2600 and the primary winding of your toroidal PT shorts out, well, that's a pretty expensive puff of smoke. (check out the attached shot of a 2600 off of eBay, with the dead PT sitting on top - ouch!). I've never seen this happen with an E-core in over thirty years of working with this stuff...

Could these guys make one for a reasonable price? http://www.toroid.com/

Tom

 

[glen65]

Originally Posted by VintageNut
It seems the Pioneer toroidal transformer was a better design, I don't think I have heard of any of the SX-1050 or SX-1250 owners having problems with their transformers.

Most all of the power supply trouble ive had with Pioneer was with the
power supply board and not the transformer.

 

[asynchronousman]

Could these guys make one for a reasonable price? http://www.toroid.com/

Tom

I have a 2238 that will thump y'all into next month, I mean wikked sounding bass like the kids put in their rides, and it seems to be beefier than the Dairy Queen Brazier store. (s***kicking )

 

[skibjr]

skibjr, have you seen a dual power capacitor, with 3 terminals on the bottom, at mouser? I have not. The 2285B uses a dual power cap, and I'm pretty sure the 2330B does too. If you have a source for the dual caps, I would love to see it. It seems the Pioneer toroidal transformer was a better design, I don't think I have heard of any of the SX-1050 or SX-1250 owners having problems with their transformers.

VintageNut, my apologies, sure enough - I couldn't find any big dual section 'lytics on Mouser either (or anywhere else, for that matter!). I noticed that http://www.iso-components.com/ specializes in locating hard-to-find or obsolete parts - perhaps you might have some luck there - though I shudder when I think about what they'd probably charge. Fortunately, the only big filter cans I've had to replace have been single-section...so far.......

I remember checking the 'Net for replacement toroidal transformers when I was thinking about bidding on that 2600, and though I don't remember the specifics, anything even close to a new replacement was running about a G-note. I did see an auction where a guy (in the UK, I think) was selling a 2600 with a custom-wound E-core transformer that he said was far superior to the original toroid (which took a dump, of course), and offered to provide info to anyone interested in having a similar transformer built for their Marantz. I think I still have ihis email address somewhere , if anyone's interested...

 

[sydsfloyd67]

I have a 2238 that will thump y'all into next month, I mean wikked sounding bass like the kids put in their rides, and it seems to be beefier than the Dairy Queen Brazier store. (s***kicking )

In the same vein, depending on speaker efficiency of course, the 85 watts might be more than you want or need given the 'complexity' and signal path increase. It is often described as the low power Marantz that are of particular interest (perhaps in contrast to Pioneer). There the 2235 would be the most refined (lowest THD), but it is a later model relative to the very popular pre 1977 2220B (considered relatively smooth or warm sounding).

I'm sort of intruiged by the possibility that there are threshold years for certain sound and sound quality (in all gear). Anyone have a feeling for that in the Marantz reciever (I have the 4270, and a 2220b I'm working on)?
-sf

 

[asynchronousman]

SF, this set I'm listening to is solid and extremely clean and quiet in AUX with a 18 yo CDP even. I am more than impressed.

 

[skibjr]

In the same vein, depending on speaker efficiency of course, the 85 watts might be more than you want or need given the 'complexity' and signal path increase. It is often described as the low power Marantz that are of particular interest (perhaps in contrast to Pioneer). There the 2235 would be the most refined (lowest THD), but it is a later model relative to the very popular pre 1977 2220B (considered relatively smooth or warm sounding).

I'm sort of intruiged by the possibility that there are threshold years for certain sound and sound quality (in all gear). Anyone have a feeling for that in the Marantz reciever (I have the 4270, and a 2220b I'm working on)?
-sf

Y'know - funny you mention that - I always thought people who said they could discern subtle nuances in sound between comparable audio products were either deluding themselves, or just full of...ahem...baloney. However, when I was a kid, I actually sold Marantz and Pioneer audio from the late '70's to the early '80's, and I could swear that the higher-powered models just had a harsher, more "mechanical" sound. I'm probably betraying a "tin ear" here, but the sweetest, smoothest, most natural-sounding receiver (at what I call a 'normal' listening level - about a 2-3 watt output) I've ever had was a little 20 wpc HK 330i! Depending on the music you listen to and your personal listening habits, it's probably safe to say, "wattage ain't everything"!

But to your question, it seems that everyone who's owned a Marantz 2270 seems to love it. For example, check out http://www.audioreview.com/Receivers/Marantz/PRD_118646_1593crx.aspx I don't know of many other makes/models that seem to have such a dedicated following...

 

[asynchronousman]

That 330 has no enemies either, I'll assure you :thmbsp:

 

[sydsfloyd67]

I don't think its too outlandish, people are into absolutely minimal one-way push pull ampifiers and 112 db efficiency speakers around here. The first watt may be the sweetest somehow.

You hear the peference sporadically but consistently from big listeners in solid state too, preference for a Sansui 517 over the 717 pair, delight in the Marantz 2015 and 2020b and 1060 amplifier, I even saw someone indicating they liked the Pioneer SX-780 most.

(I actually had the SX-780 and SX-880 -45 and 65 watts- together, and the 880 did seem to be somehow dark and ponderous where you were missing the middle somehow, as the volume jumped so quickly, and the speakers were not ready for it- and those were 4 ohm vintage Infinty Rsb.)

I'm sure we will have disagreement related to componenet matching, and this could be about the fact that not too many speakers may have been designed for the big rigs that came out late in the 70s. However, I'd like to try to understand theoretically why low watt designs per se might allow a more 'engaging' experience for many listeners.

-sf

Y'know - funny you mention that - I always thought people who said they could discern subtle nuances in sound between comparable audio products were either deluding themselves, or just full of...ahem...baloney. However, when I was a kid, I actually sold Marantz and Pioneer audio from the late '70's to the early '80's, and I could swear that the higher-powered models just had a harsher, more "mechanical" sound. I'm probably betraying a "tin ear" here, but the sweetest, smoothest, most natural-sounding receiver (at what I call a 'normal' listening level - about a 2-3 watt output) I've ever had was a little 20 wpc HK 330i! Depending on the music you listen to and your personal listening habits, it's probably safe to say, "wattage ain't everything"!

But to your question, it seems that everyone who's owned a Marantz 2270 seems to love it. For example, check out http://www.audioreview.com/Receivers/Marantz/PRD_118646_1593crx.aspx I don't know of many other makes/models that seem to have such a dedicated following...

 

[VintageNut]

Some comparisons of receivers are done with units out of spec. When you compare 30 year old electronics they need to be performing up to spec. I bet some of these items have high DC going to the speakers or other problems. It's like trying to compare old sport cars without looking to see the condition of the drivetrain.

 

[EchoWars]

^
|
|
What he said.

RE: The transformer. You can buy a transformer with secondary windings in increments of about 5V (35V, 40V, 45, etc...) from a lot of places. I'd think this could be done for a fraction of the $1000 quoted.

The only problem is that the stock TF likely has other low-current windings, which either means a custom job, or multiple transformers to get the job done.

 

[asynchronousman]

As a good aside , how do you remove the rings from the shafts on the 2238 (the brass ones that seal up the face)? I've only got one left and I need to remove it without bungling the faceplate (it's not mine remember).