gearhound
Lunatic Member
Hello people!!
As much as Marantz gets all the kudos it rightly deserves, I'd like to give a wink & a nod to Marantz's Superscope line.
Sold as a lower cost alternative to the Marantz line, the low cost/low powered Superscope receivers are pretty good in their own right.
Most fly WAY under the radar.
Superscope receivers share much from the more costly Marantz line, and some (R-2220, R-2240, & R-2270) are almost dead-ringers for their Marantz counterparts.
I have a little 20wpc Superscope R-340 receiver (pink dial lights and all) driving a pair of KLH 17 speakers.
The sound is very warm and fat (like a tube amp) with good imaging.
While the KLH 17's would probably like to see some more power, the little Superscope does an admirable job just the same.
While they don't have the glamor of the Marantz line, they more than hold their own against the competition!
Steve :thmbsp:
As much as Marantz gets all the kudos it rightly deserves, I'd like to give a wink & a nod to Marantz's Superscope line.
Sold as a lower cost alternative to the Marantz line, the low cost/low powered Superscope receivers are pretty good in their own right.
Most fly WAY under the radar.
Superscope receivers share much from the more costly Marantz line, and some (R-2220, R-2240, & R-2270) are almost dead-ringers for their Marantz counterparts.
I have a little 20wpc Superscope R-340 receiver (pink dial lights and all) driving a pair of KLH 17 speakers.
The sound is very warm and fat (like a tube amp) with good imaging.
While the KLH 17's would probably like to see some more power, the little Superscope does an admirable job just the same.
While they don't have the glamor of the Marantz line, they more than hold their own against the competition!
Steve :thmbsp:



