Flummoxed newbie with a 771

[DMcB123]

There are some issues with this 771 but they're not what this post is about. This is just something that probably demonstrates my limited understanding.

I have this 771, having put a single bid on it that nobody outdid. Unexpected, but ok. I get it and I really like it, aside from the phono stage giving me a headache due to buzzing. It can drive 3 sets of speakers (I use 4 speakers), has 2 AUX stages, and is quite loud pretty early into the volume spin- 2 is enough to scatter my children.

I know this line (XX1) is outstripped by many other Sansuis but as my first vintage receiver, I’m impressed.

Well it turns out that a new colleague is heavy into this world and evidently he is raining amps. He offers to let me use a Marantz 2245 seemingly indefinitely. His setup I believe is McIntosh driving JBL L 100s. But I’m stoked to try this Marantz, though I’m ignorant of the model.

Here’s what I notice off the bat- fewer speaker ports, one less AUX (which impacts our using both a CD player and connecting our projector for viewing pleasure), and it doesn’t seem so loud so soon. Beyond those things, I dunno, it’s maybe too crisp? They both have performance issues so they are not “like new” and therefore I don’t have extensive time listening to vinyl on either (vinyl being my motivation for pursuing this hobby). The buzz of the 771 versus the inability of the Marantz to drive all 4 speakers unless it’s set to mono..

But online you can’t even compare these two. The Marantz is significantly more valuable and any comparisons I can find of a Sansui 771 with a Marantz is a lower grade Marantz.

My limitations therefore seem to include an inability to appreciate the superiority of the Marantz 2245 compared to a Sansui 771. Based just on features the Sansui is more attractive. Power-wise we are talking 32 watts per channel versus 45 watts per channel, so perhaps there’s an explanation. But it really feels like the 771 gets louder?

If there’s a question here, and I'm not necessarily looking for an answer, it would be only to solicit impressions of either or both of these pieces. But I also appreciate the vagueness built into this hobby and the impetus it places on us to just listen awhile.

Thanks if you read this far!

 

[Robisme]

The 2245 goes for more $$ because it has the Marantz name on it. Even though it was made by someone else.

I have had a 221, 661, 771, and 881. Also have had 2230, 2245, 2270, and many others.

Don't feel bad if you prefer the Sansui, I do.

Rob

 

[Sansuiman]

The difference in perceived volume at a given posiiton of the volume control is partly a function of the design of the volume control itself. In simplified terms, the response or the volume control is not usually linear from minimum to maximum.

This was often employed as a bit of trickery by front loading the larger part of the power output at the lower end of the volume control to make one unit appear loudner than another by way of presenting a more powerful sound at a certain position of the control than a competitor's nearest comparable model. The trade off is you don't get as much increase in perceived power output when you get over 60 or 70% of maximum volume setting.

Marantz made some very nice stuff, and despite my own bias for Sansui I'll not discount their sound or build quality. There's not much disputing that Marantz valuations are generally higher than Sansui. This can be ascribed to numerous factors, but really is mostly a matter of perception/popularity. The market has priced most Marantz gear higher than comparable Sansui models, so you will see a disparity there irrespective of the class of receiver you are comparing between the two brands. That just means Sansui is a better deal (heh).

You'll find there aren't many receivers with a 2nd auxiliary input, that was never a terribly common feature and most receivers feature only one, plus a couple of tape monitor loops.
Support for three speaker systems is a little more common, but usually limited to models at the top of the range for a given series.

The 771 was one model under its top of the line sibling (881) where the 2245 was more a midrange model in the Marantz receiver line. Given that, I'd expect a few extra baubles on the 771. Compare the Sansui 8080 to the 9090 to see another example of this as well, the higher models in a series always got more features (in addition to more power) as part of the basic marketing plan.

Even if both were in as-new condition, there will be a discernable difference in the sound. Marantz is known for a certain sonic signature, and Sansui has it's own, so it really amounts to deciding which sound appeals to you most.

 

[DMcB123]

The difference in perceived volume at a given posiiton of the volume control is partly a function of the design of the volume control itself. In simplified terms, the response or the volume control is not usually linear from minimum to maximum.

This was often employed as a bit of trickery by front loading the larger part of the power output at the lower end of the volume control to make one unit appear loudner than another by way of presenting a more powerful sound at a certain position of the control than a competitor's nearest comparable model. The trade off is you don't get as much increase in perceived power output when you get over 60 or 70% of maximum volume setting.

Marantz made some very nice stuff, and despite my own bias for Sansui I'll not discount their sound or build quality. There's not much disputing that Marantz valuations are generally higher than Sansui. This can be ascribed to numerous factors, but really is mostly a matter of perception/popularity. The market has priced most Marantz gear higher than comparable Sansui models, so you will see a disparity there irrespective of the class of receiver you are comparing between the two brands. That just means Sansui is a better deal (heh).

You'll find there aren't many receivers with a 2nd auxiliary input, that was never a terribly common feature and most receivers feature only one, plus a couple of tape monitor loops.
Support for three speaker systems is a little more common, but usually limited to models at the top of the range for a given series.

The 771 was one model under its top of the line sibling (881) where the 2245 was more a midrange model in the Marantz receiver line. Given that, I'd expect a few extra baubles on the 771. Compare the Sansui 8080 to the 9090 to see another example of this as well, the higher models in a series always got more features (in addition to more power) as part of the basic marketing plan.

Even if both were in as-new condition, there will be a discernable difference in the sound. Marantz is known for a certain sonic signature, and Sansui has it's own, so it really amounts to deciding which sound appeals to you most.

Thanks for these great insights. The features of each related to their proximities to the top of the line models is obvious now that you mention it. Interesting about the 2245 is that it has a Mid adjuster, in conjunction with Treble and Bass. That's new to me, and my three-way speakers (Design Acoustic PS10s) also have an adjustment knob for the midrange.

Your last sentence is where I find the interest, where listening is the final word. To me the Sansui sounds larger and broader somehow. Perhaps the lows are too low but the Marantz in comparison feels less assertive or something. I'll continue listening along but as of now I'm leaning towards having the Sansui serviced over the Marantz- although I am fearful of the buzz from the phono stage of the 771, because that issue is nonexistent with the Marantz and I thought the problem was with the turntable.