Yamaha vs. Marantz sound??
- Thread starter mike0565
- Start date
Annihilism
New Member
I can only agree with most people in this thread.
So far I've listened to 2 Marantz amplifers; the Marantz PM7200 and the Philips FA890 (this one is made by Marantz, it just has the Philips logo on it). In my experience Marantz pairs really well with a couple of Tannoy speakers, especially bookshelves. Whereas the Yamaha made my Tannoy M20's and J30's sound really lifeless the Marantz's I've head really make them come alive.
On the other hand if you want to go for detail (wich is more my thing) go for a Yamaha. The Marantz's I've had sounded really fuzzy and had too much mid when trying to drive either my Infinity Delta 70's or Philips FB825's. The FB825 sound especially good on a Yamaha (M series amplifiers), really detailed and rich sound compared to the Marantz.
My conclusion was this, if you want warm sound go for a Marantz and pair it with a couple of nice bookshelves or speakers that shine in the mid and bass area. If you go for a Yamaha go with a speaker with a speaker that lets you hear alot of detail, like something with a ribbon tweeter (Strangely enough i found most Philips speakers pair better with a Yammy than a Philips or Marantz, go figure).
So far I've listened to 2 Marantz amplifers; the Marantz PM7200 and the Philips FA890 (this one is made by Marantz, it just has the Philips logo on it). In my experience Marantz pairs really well with a couple of Tannoy speakers, especially bookshelves. Whereas the Yamaha made my Tannoy M20's and J30's sound really lifeless the Marantz's I've head really make them come alive.
On the other hand if you want to go for detail (wich is more my thing) go for a Yamaha. The Marantz's I've had sounded really fuzzy and had too much mid when trying to drive either my Infinity Delta 70's or Philips FB825's. The FB825 sound especially good on a Yamaha (M series amplifiers), really detailed and rich sound compared to the Marantz.
My conclusion was this, if you want warm sound go for a Marantz and pair it with a couple of nice bookshelves or speakers that shine in the mid and bass area. If you go for a Yamaha go with a speaker with a speaker that lets you hear alot of detail, like something with a ribbon tweeter (Strangely enough i found most Philips speakers pair better with a Yammy than a Philips or Marantz, go figure).
That's total hogwash!!! ...and nothing but generalities.
Marantz Model 500, 8B, 9, 7C, 7T, 10B, 20, 20B, 18, 19...
All supurb and will best virtually anything close to their price range.
You better go BIG TIME state of the art, AND be willing to cough up the BIG BUCKS to beat any of these.
JAY!
P.S.
I'd call you a very nasty name, but the Admin would not like it. So, I leave it to your very vivid imagination!
Last edited:
Saint Johnny
Bon Ton Roule
Hmmm, you do realize as was pointed out more than once, upstream. That the company that Saul Marantz founded in 1954/55, and built most, if not all of the listed above models. Was sold by Saul in 1967, IIRC. And most if not all the original engineering staff was gone by the early 1970s.
And was in no way the same company that built the 22xx receivers of the 1970s.
Indeed. I addressed the post as written, and stand by it.
Saul did not design the 500, 18, 19, 7T. And yet they are excellent.
As are the 2245/2270, and so many others...
Yes, they are not Mark Levinson, or Pass Audio, or...
So???? Who here owns a Mark Levinson???
Oh, yes. That would be me. And yet I don't feel the need to be needlessly condescending of another manufacturer, especially an excellent one like Marantz.:nono:
By the way, I also love the Yamaha B-2 and CT-7000.
In the end, be it Yamaha, Marantz, McIntosh or Luxman, etc. they make good, better, and "Best", within brand.
To generalize about the 'SOUND' of a manufacturer will only get you into trouble. It is a moving target; and, depending on the condition of the specific piece being compared, your conclusions may likely be compromised.
"If it sounds good to you", may be one guideline when making a purchase. It does not, however, address accuracy, musicality or fidelity to the original source.
One may find it beneficial to keep this in mind as tastes may change over time... even mine and yours, too.
Last edited:
aaquaa
Active Member
This was exciting to read... and all this talk got my curiosity going.
I plugged the old CR-1020 and the 2285B in and gave each a listen with a pair of JBL 4312A's, HPM-100's, Summit Supersoftline's (I'd be surprised if anyone heard of them in the US) and some big DIY party jobs with Jamo drivers.
Maybe it's the "B" singing but the 2285B is almost, if not equally, detailed as the Yammy.
Both can handle the aforementioned speakers and make them sing.
Both have great FM reception - but hey, I live downtown.
Lookswise the 2285B wins hands down because she's Blk... But I'm sure some will prefer the CR-1020.
The CR-1020 is more "faithful" to the tune than the 2285B and the trebles are more accented... While being a relatively dynamic receiver in her own right, the 2285B is mellower in comparison. Pink Floyd sounds awesome on both!
They're my girls both of them; I can't choose one over the other for good!
I plugged the old CR-1020 and the 2285B in and gave each a listen with a pair of JBL 4312A's, HPM-100's, Summit Supersoftline's (I'd be surprised if anyone heard of them in the US) and some big DIY party jobs with Jamo drivers.
Maybe it's the "B" singing but the 2285B is almost, if not equally, detailed as the Yammy.
Both can handle the aforementioned speakers and make them sing.
Both have great FM reception - but hey, I live downtown.
Lookswise the 2285B wins hands down because she's Blk... But I'm sure some will prefer the CR-1020.
The CR-1020 is more "faithful" to the tune than the 2285B and the trebles are more accented... While being a relatively dynamic receiver in her own right, the 2285B is mellower in comparison. Pink Floyd sounds awesome on both!
They're my girls both of them; I can't choose one over the other for good!
KentTeffeteller
Gimpus Stereophilus!
Yamaha is voiced to sound much like thier Pianos. On the trebly, detailed side of the spectrum. Slightly lean side of neutral. Sometimes, I like this approach. Marantz tends to be voiced on the warm side of neutral, more musical oriented than detail extremes. Most of the time, easy and non-fatiguing to listen to than the opposite. You pay your money and take your choice. I like both approaches depending on mood.
Well, is it the original Mark Levinson, Madrigal Mark Levinson, or Harman Group Mark Levinson?
There is so much change over in ownership, engineering, and leadership at these companies that there's absolutely no point whatsoever in trying to argue who made the best stuff. From model to model in the same company there can be more variation than between another model by a different company. My Pioneer SX-838 sounded more like a Sansui than it did the SX-3800 I had at the same time, which sounded more like a Yamaha CR-1020 than the Yamaha A-1 did. The A-1 sounds more like my Levinson, actually...to go full circle
merrylander
AK Member
Let me think back, I kept hearing about Marantz so I bought a 2238. It was later replaced with a Yamaha CR-620, it in turn replaced with a CR-820. I currently run a CR800, CR-2020, CR-2040 and a CR-3020, The two martini sound IMHO is that anything sounds good after two of my martinis.
I think the OP should listen to both because one person's "warm" is another's "bloated".
I had a 2238b marantz and have had a few yamahas..finally settling on the 2040 and I think the difference is how they handle bass...so you can either view one as lean or one as bloated...but the bottom line for me is that with both set flat, the marantz has much stronger bass which I liked initially at first but for me it seems exaggerated, it might seem just right to others. IMO the upper level yamahas put more money into noise reduction circuitry in the tuner sections and some add the MC phono preamp that really sounds great so they have amenities that are more audiophile-ish.
Another consideration is speaker synergy if you're set on your speakers...
I had a 2238b marantz and have had a few yamahas..finally settling on the 2040 and I think the difference is how they handle bass...so you can either view one as lean or one as bloated...but the bottom line for me is that with both set flat, the marantz has much stronger bass which I liked initially at first but for me it seems exaggerated, it might seem just right to others. IMO the upper level yamahas put more money into noise reduction circuitry in the tuner sections and some add the MC phono preamp that really sounds great so they have amenities that are more audiophile-ish.
Another consideration is speaker synergy if you're set on your speakers...
SoCal Sam
Lunatic Member
Yamaha receivers sound lean because of significant rounding and tilting introduced during reproduction. This is not true of the pro stuff and some of the seps. I haven't seen a Marantz receiver on a scope so I can't comment objectively. However, subjectively, sag and compression are much less.
IMO, IMO! I've owned dozens of both including all of the Monsters.
IMO, IMO! I've owned dozens of both including all of the Monsters.
Yep, the Marantz house sound is the "two martini' sound - warm and cozy. Had a 4300 reciever and a 125 tuner.
The Yamaha house sound, at least based on my experience with the CR-1020, is "the expresso sound"- clear and distinct to irritation at times.
Got a new-to-me T-2 tuner in the shop getting checked out, relamped, and aligned. Wonder how that's going to sound?
The Yamaha house sound, at least based on my experience with the CR-1020, is "the expresso sound"- clear and distinct to irritation at times.
Got a new-to-me T-2 tuner in the shop getting checked out, relamped, and aligned. Wonder how that's going to sound?
I'm sorry, I haven't heard any of the gear you've mentioned other than Yamaha and Marantz, so I'll confine my remarks to those brands.
I used to have a CR-1020 and a M-4/C-4 combo. They were both nice and had similar sound though I found the separates cleaner and more enjoyable. I sometimes regret selling them but their departure allowed me to get a B-2x, which is very nice, especially in class A.
I also used to own a 2238b and still have a 2270, now recapped, which was my first vintage receiver. It never fails to make me happy when I turn it on.
I honestly don't think I could describe the sound of either Marantz or the Yamaha with anything other than already beaten to death phrasing, so I will say just that they are quite different from each other and that hearing both is highly worthwhile. Oh, and I listened to them through L710s as well.
I find it hard to imagine anyone regretting getting a CR-1020 or a 2270, if they're working properly. I will agree with an earlier poster that the 1020 tuner is less noisy than the 2270, although this difference narrowed perceptively following the Marantz recap.
Last edited:
Sam, very interesting comments. Can you elaborate? What do you mean by significant rounding and tilting introduced during reproduction?
I have a Luxman L-430 that sounded warmer than my Yamaha CR-1020.
Then I got the Yamaha C-4 & M2 combo and that sounds warmer than all of them.
But then again it could be just the source, the speakers, the interconnects etc etc.
I heard a Marantz connected to the BA 200's I bought and it sounded a little on the flabby side compared to the Yamaha or Luxman. So it's horses for courses IMO.
Then I got the Yamaha C-4 & M2 combo and that sounds warmer than all of them.
But then again it could be just the source, the speakers, the interconnects etc etc.
I heard a Marantz connected to the BA 200's I bought and it sounded a little on the flabby side compared to the Yamaha or Luxman. So it's horses for courses IMO.
