1. Time for some upgrades in server hardware and software to enhance security and take AK to the next level. Please contribute what you can to sales@audiokarma.org at PayPal.com - Thanks from the AK Team
    Dismiss Notice

What is the best sounding Marantz Receiver?

Discussion in 'Marantz Audio' started by lilwing, Apr 18, 2018.

  1. lurp

    lurp Member

    Messages:
    79
    Location:
    Utah
    The little 2015 surprised me after I acquired and re-capped mine last year. Quite musical through small / efficient speakers, but it runs out of oomph before you can really perform much of a meaningful comparison.

    Having owned, at one time or another, many of the TOTL receivers and separates, I'd opine that my sonic preference usually aligns with the penultimate piece in each series. E.g., 2275 > 2325, 4300 > 4400, 2385 > 2500 (2600), etc... For reasons that defy intuition, the 4300 is my daily driver and all-time favorite.
     
    ElCovina likes this.

     

    Please register to disable this ad.

  2. ElCovina

    ElCovina New Member

    Messages:
    19
    Location:
    Los Angeles, CA
    My Model 19 always sounds good to me. Personally, it seems to sound even warmer than the 2270.
     
    Fritz33 likes this.
  3. FrostEOne

    FrostEOne Active Member

    Messages:
    367
    Location:
    Southeastern Iowa
    While not a receiver, my Marantz 10B produces the best sound I've heard from FM.
    [​IMG]
     
    ElCovina likes this.
  4. tranguru

    tranguru Active Member

    Messages:
    202
    Location:
    Brussels
    My vote goes to the 19.

    But how relevant will this kind of discussion still be?
    FM, LW, MW are being phased out in Europe, and I guess that NA will follow. I used to love listening to the BBC in LW - but they stopped LW.

    So I focus more on the preamps & amps and connect them to a Sonos - which is probably the best general purpose digital source around.
     
    ElCovina and vrobec like this.
  5. vrobec

    vrobec New Member

    Messages:
    40
    Location:
    Europe, Hungary and Serbia
    Yes, that's true. The classic radio is dissappearing and people are using internet radios. Soon these Marantz receivers will be important for their amplifier section and not for the tuner.
     
  6. ElCovina

    ElCovina New Member

    Messages:
    19
    Location:
    Los Angeles, CA
    I have a 10B as well, it's my second one. I sold off my first one many years ago. Big mistake. So , a few years ago I picked up another one not in nearly the same condition aesthetically but good electronically. I bought the 10b to use its superior tuning ability to receive a small weak signaled local station playing blues on the weekend (88.1 KKJZ). After trying every antenna known to man or woman-I could not pull the station well. Had 10b checked out --perfect shape. In the years since my first 10B houses have been built around mine , I'm near a medium sized mountain range, etc. etc. I bought a Mc Intosh MR 78. Have 2 now. Brand new day! It blows the 10 B away. As you said FM is going away everywhere especially in the L.A. area. Ironic, because the L.A. FM market used to be the biggest and we still have lots of music making going on in this town. Just another good thing going away.
     

     

    Please register to disable this ad.

  7. Fredrik 1977

    Fredrik 1977 Super Member

    Messages:
    1,196
    Location:
    Sweden!
    i repaired a 2216 for a friend a while back . and was quite blown away when i got to listen to it! it sounded waaay way better then what i anticipated (judging by the internals)

    2216 or 2270 best marantz i´ve played with
     
    vrobec likes this.
  8. vrobec

    vrobec New Member

    Messages:
    40
    Location:
    Europe, Hungary and Serbia
    In one of my earlier reply I wrote about 2216 and 2230 sound. Maybe my ears are cheating me, so I decided to invite my friends for Marantz listening session. After listening a few popular tracks they agreed the 2216 has more open and extended treble comparing to 2230.
    The 2230 is stronger and dinamicaly better in bass, but not goes as high as 2216. The recievers are in their original state, and later I will refresh them.

    Should I switch the 2230 for another Marantz 22xx receiver, or the old, original capacitors affects the high frequencies (I know the power supply capacitors affects the low frequencies)?
    If someone has both receivers please compare them, and let us know the opinions. :)
     
    Last edited: Jul 2, 2018
  9. reddog48

    reddog48 Active Member

    Messages:
    262
    Location:
    Dallas, TX
    2265B - driving an AR-10pi - best sound I have ever heard. Alas - the entire rig was stolen from me. Great sadness.

    Heard a wonderful sound in - of all places - a dentist's office. Lo and behold it was a 2265B driving some JBL two ways. Just warm, golden toned, and sublimely musical.
     
    rob Brandt likes this.
  10. rob Brandt

    rob Brandt Active Member

    Messages:
    205
    If the 2325 has the amp of the 250, then technically it has the best sound. The 250/240 were the finest SS amps Marantz ever made--though some would argue the 500. The 250M does not have the same fine midrange as the 250.
     
    ElCovina likes this.
  11. rob Brandt

    rob Brandt Active Member

    Messages:
    205
    That happened to me in college--my very first marantz--a 4060 integrated amp I ran in stereo with four L100's. Worked my ass off so I could buy it the end of my junior year of hs. Built the speaker cabs in woodshop using solid ash. Order the drivers and crossover through Midwest speaker. That was 40 years ago......
     
    ElCovina likes this.

     

    Please register to disable this ad.

  12. James 1850

    James 1850 New Member

    Messages:
    3
    I like the Marantz 2600. It's clean sounding preamp and precise tone controls are tops. Wish I still owned it.
     
    rob Brandt likes this.
  13. rob Brandt

    rob Brandt Active Member

    Messages:
    205
    On another forum I was informed that only cheap gear has tone controls and loudness buttons. At the time preamps began showing up without them, we all knew it was just a means of cheapening production. amazing what people will believe.
     
  14. KR7600

    KR7600 Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    611
    I currently own a model 19,a 2230,2-2275’s,a 2285b,a 2385 and a 2500. I also have a 7c runnning a mc2500. I prefer the 2275, it seems to have a special quality about it.
     
  15. keitht

    keitht Active Member

    Messages:
    161
    The best sounding one is the one you're trying to buy right now.
    Next week it will be a different one. This is why we own too many.
    Welcome to the habit of collecting.
     
  16. rob Brandt

    rob Brandt Active Member

    Messages:
    205
    Yep--"Marantz, we sound better".

    Which is the truth. Back when I was a kid and my ears were pristine I could listen to the Marantz and Mac gear side by side at a high end store in my neighborhood. even back then the Mac people claimed it was better--even though the Marantz specs were better and the Marantz gear sounded better. The problem for them was, was that Marantz really was the most expensive hardware in the world at the time. So, I always considered Mac to be Marantz wanna be's. Marantz designed and patented the designs that produced a tube like sound without the hassle of tubes--and they are a hassle. I can remember as a kid in grade school being sent to the corner drug store to buy a new tube when an old one had burned out. They had whole racks of them and tube testers to boot. Housewives, like my mother, used to just pop a new one in the TV or the console stereo.
     

     

    Please register to disable this ad.

  17. Porkbuns

    Porkbuns New Member

    Messages:
    25
    2325 and the 19 are my favorites.
     
    ElCovina likes this.
  18. JH Magnecord

    JH Magnecord Member

    Messages:
    91
    The notion of "house sound", to me, goes out the window when: one factors in overhauling 45 year-old componentry with new/better parts of stricter tolerances far above what would have been sourced for something mass-produced on a specified budget (the reason a conglomerate -like Superscope- felt the bottom line need to export manufacture of a once "boutique" electronics firm to an Asian supplier to begin with...Saul, Sid Smith, Dick Sequerra, Bongiorno didn't stay on to work for "Standard Radio": Standard Radio couldn't have afforded their designs:bowdown:).
    Whether a 2230, 2275, 1060, or 4240 (out of all Superscope-era "Marantz" I've used, I liked the 1060 integrated the most and had it set up the longest: 5 years); replacing just the preamp resistors, for example, with 1% metal films will turn it into something in an entirely different league than it ever could've been even new (let-alone: ditching the electrolytic crossovers and substituting metal polypropylenes).
    The achillies heel one learns of in many a receiver/amp, unfortunately, and realizes one is stuck with is: the power supply and voltage rails. If they're claiming to have sufficient-enough wattage -one would think?- to be able to drive, say, a formidable acoustic suspension speaker of similar vintage...yet start showing obvious signs of trouble (ex: dial lights dimming on musical peaks, clipping, high order harmonic distortion, fuse blowing or outright fire) then: SOMETHING is definitely skinflint "under the hood".
    By the time I'd found -and rebuilt- a Quadradial 4240, I'd also found a pair of the legendary A.R. 3a speakers (I'd been using A.R. 2ax's before -successfully- with the 1060 as well as with the 4240, in 40w x 2 mode)...but, short of (still) longing-for a pair of either A.R. 11's or LST's, the 3a's were of undeniable -and historical- stature above and beyond the 2ax's:angel: and begged to be used in all their restored glory. Much to my disappointment, though: the 4240 couldn't even cough-up full power to run them MODERATELY...it was restricted to 17 x 4 mode to save itself from spontaneously combusting (which, of course, can't handle any speaker -seriously:crazy:?- other than those intended for 10-watt tube amps...forcing one, then, to pair a BPC EQ with them sporting the notorious "smiley face":thumbsdown: to even pretend to offer a semblance of full-bodied sound).
    Later in 2011: I got -and rebuilt- a Sansui 4000 and gave away the 4240 to a friend who'd gotten displaced by Hurricane Irene. [The flaw, by the way, in Sansui's "house sound" is: the Hitachi 2sc458 rotting AF transistors their preamp sections are loaded with...get them outta there and, again, the component becomes better than it ever was at the factory]. The Sansui, however (with a physically smaller-looking power transformer than the Marantz 4240 and only 12,000 combined uF of power filtering vs the 4240's 20,000), was able to run a pair of 81db-(in)efficient A.R. 3a's at a suitable enough level without fear of imploding (then, I realized: the fact that Sansui had started out as a power transformer building specialist -while the Tushinsky brothers were hocking "widescreen 3D" prior to getting into audio on the backs of distributing SONY- probably had a little to do with this revelatory paradigm:eek2:).
    I've since moved onto TANDBERG (which has two bridge rectifiers and a preamp section double the layout size of what one would find in a typical, '70s receiver outsourced to Japan) and: it can make 4-ohm speakers shake the house all day long with only 45 watts per channel:rockon:.
     
    Last edited: Jul 28, 2018
    ElCovina likes this.
  19. Steven Tate

    Steven Tate AK Subscriber Subscriber

    Messages:
    2,956
    Location:
    N. Richland Hills, TX

    Having bought a 2230 and a 2245 new in the early 70’s, and being in my early 20’s and driving them hard, I never found them NOT up to the task in their youth. More powerful receivers would, I’m sure, have been able to do things these mid-power receivers couldn’t, but I couldn’t tolerate the volume it took to make them clip, and I never saw lights flickering when playing rock music loud. I think the power supplies, as designed, were completely up to the task of driving these units hard. I believe most of the symptoms you refer to are the result of tired components. I do believe your focus on the power supply is spot on, as that is always where I start with my rebuilds, and it always has the most noticeable effect on sound. The power supply and filter caps are job one, because I want all of the smooth, clean power I can get for the rest of the unit.:thumbsup:
     
    ElCovina, rob Brandt and onemug like this.
  20. rob Brandt

    rob Brandt Active Member

    Messages:
    205
    This--

    I have never seen my 250 lights flicker in any way nor get more than the warmth should have driving a set of Marantz Imperial 9's (5 times the speaker that your AR's are) nor do they stumble when driving a more modern pair of JBL studio series towers. The volume created running the 9's without any distortion is so great it can easily hit the 120db threshold. They can be heard a block away. The JBLs can also be hear at least 1/2 city block away and I live in a to story stucco house built in 1928--2500 sq. ft. What's more, the 250's were hand made in American and were not mass produced.

    I bought my first Marantz in 1976 at age 16--a 4060. It had no problem what so ever driving a set of JBL L100's. Nor did have a problem when I hooked up a second set of them to it 1977. I think, sir, you botched your rebuild.

    "Marantz--We Sound Better"
     

Share This Page