eBay auction: Marantz 2600 ending this Sunday

[gyusher]

4,000.00. . .Check out the buyer. . .just bought a SX-1980 and a Sansui 9000 along with a very nice pair of Heresies. . .

On a mission. . .

 

[SoCal Sam]

These are just way overpriced for what they are. I just don't understand the obsession over them. Other than the oscilloscope, the circuitry was very conventional and the power supply was on the weak side, so that it could barely support the o'scope. The tuning section wasn't all that great. This is one case where a great set of vintage seperates could easily be obtained for same price and would easily outperform a 2600.

Chris:

Agreed on the overpriced part, it has got to be the thrill of owning the King of the Hill of Marantz's. This year, I obtained two 2500's plus a parts machine for just over half of what this 2600 sold for.

To consistently bash the 2500/2600 as unreliable is IMO a disservice to those getting into vintage Marantz and to current owners. While I cannot dispute your years of experience, I can say that owning any piece of vintage gear is a risk simply because it is used and it is old. Caution should be the order of the day for any vintage buy. Discussing the reliability issues such as the 2500/2600 toroid or the power supply in the SX-1280/1980 should factor in to one's buy decision. However, your statements regarding the 2500/2600 are often conclusatory and have the effect of discouraging exuberant buyers. Speaking of exuberance, is there any logic to fixing your 12.0D? Or your SX-1010? IMO, no, but I've got to say that I enjoy watching what you do. Like owning a 2500/2600, isn't this the point of collecting and enjoying vintage?

I am not quite sure why you go out of your way to bash the 2500/2600 but I do know you would like to have one. And when you get one, I think you will enjoy them as much as I do.

Sam.

 

[KR7600]

Getting something at 50-75% more than what you planned on paying may stink in the wallet, but it does not take into account that you get what you want if you have the funds to pay. Why people may want something based on appearence is human nature. A Ferrari 250 GTO is a lot slower than a new Z06 Corvette but people are willing to pay millions for one, a new Z06 can be purchased at any Chevy dealer for $70,000. I will take the 250 GTO, but if I were rich I would have both. Sometimes when you want it bad, you will pay anything.

 

[bond]

These are just way overpriced for what they are. I just don't understand the obsession over them. Other than the oscilloscope, the circuitry was very conventional and the power supply was on the weak side, so that it could barely support the o'scope. The tuning section wasn't all that great. This is one case where a great set of vintage seperates could easily be obtained for same price and would easily outperform a 2600.

The single most audible performance parameter in a Stereo FM tuner is its ability to reach reasonable background noise levels in Stereo as quickly as possible (quieting curve). The 2500/2600's were rated at 25 microvolts to achieve 50 db quieting in Stereo. Stereo Review tested 24 Microvolts, thus confirming this performance. This places the 2500/2600 tuner among the top 99% of all tuners during its era in this regard. Show me a representative list of late 70's tuners that places this 25 Microvolt 50 db quieting (the most audible of specs) as "not all that great" - don't be fooled by max quieting figures with an RF generator hard wired to the antenna inputs - no one I know listens this way, thus rarely if ever achieving the max theoretical quieting, instead they are constantly battling the quieting curve in Stereo trying to make their favorite station listenable. Listeners rarely complain about how they have a 72-75 db noise floor vs one 10 db better, but give them a 6 db less aggressive quieting curve and the station now is not listenable.

As well, one of the most highly regarded tuners by collectors, the 2130, has many of same key specs as the 2500/2600 tuners (image rejection, spurious), with incremental improvements (max quieting and selectivity) brought on by the selectable IF bandwidth and SAW filters, but the basic performance parameters in the same league 95% of the time - compare the specs.

Bond

 

[SoCal Sam]

Getting something at 50-75% more than what you planned on paying may stink in the wallet, but it does not take into account that you get what you want if you have the funds to pay. Why people may want something based on appearence is human nature. A Ferrari 250 GTO is a lot slower than a new Z06 Corvette but people are willing to pay millions for one, a new Z06 can be purchased at any Chevy dealer for $70,000. I will take the 250 GTO, but if I were rich I would have both. Sometimes when you want it bad, you will pay anything.

Well said. I could wait for the deal of a lifetime 2600 but then I will wait for a long time and perhaps never get the chance to enjoy one. If you've got more money than time, it is better to enjoy than to go without.

 

[markdi]

I would rather have a ariel atom 2

 

[Clarence]

Mark I'll handle the detail....

 

[markdi]

too kool

 

[gyusher]

There is a lot to be said for wanting one just because everyone else wants one and what better indicator of just how desirable this guy is than a 4 thousand dollar price tag.

I think we can all agree that any 30+ year old amp is not worth 4 grand but owning a classic Marantz that you lusted after when you couldn't afford to buy it new provides lots of incentive to buy it today now that you are successful.

Personally we thought the big receivers over 100wpc were a joke and they were built for Yuppies or audiophile wannabees. . . In those days seperates were the rage and no self respecting audiophile would own a receiver, Integrated maybe for a small room. Seperates gave you the flexibility to have the control you thought you wanted and since stereo was king and you had a good amp then the upgrade bug was much cheaper just buying a Tuner, TT, Tape Deck etc.

Today I want that big Marantz but not because it might be the holy grail but because the rest of you guys want it too. Besides they are kinda cool. . .

 

[Shinkukan]

Sniping software, however, somehow makes me feel shifty...

I wonder if you'd feel different if it were named something more accurate and representative like 'Sealed Bid' or 'Timed Bid'? Ebay's current system of 'Proxy Bidding' ALWAYS benefits Ebay and the sellers, but seldom benefits the buyers. (It only benefits a buyer when there is little or no interest in the item you're bidding on). For this reason, I suggested to Ebay 7 years ago that they migrate toward a 'sealed bid' system. They ignored my suggestion for very good reason. The sellers, not the buyers, pay the fees/commissions. BOTH proxy bidding and sniping result in higher revenue for two of the three winners in each auction (EB & Seller).

Don't call me cynical. Call me pragmatic, prudent, or punctual. No, don't call me punctual.

 

[Shinkukan]

Personally, from a sales perspective, I think FEEBAY is shooting themselves in the foot. In any real (live) auction, when people are bidding, the auctioneer does not just end the auction seconds after a bid is made. If FEEBAY had some type of a timer at the end of an auction it would eliminate any type of sniping. For example, if a bid is made on an item in the last minute then sevaral minutes are automatically added to the auction time. With only more money to be taken from people and put in their pockets, I am surprised they have not made this happen.

This was part of a suggestion I made to them 7 years ago. I can guess why they didn't listen. If you knew the auction would be extended another 3-5 minutes after the last bid, you might be less likely to snipe at all, hence lower revenue for EB. At least, if I saw 4-6 bids or more on an item I wanted, I might walk away muttering, "Too popular, I'll wait for one that's a little more under the radar."