• The move to the new server is done. There are some software and database maintenance updates in process. This has us passing the hat around to help out. We appreciate any donations. Seriously, even a dollar helps. The payment page may be found here - https://www.audiokarma.org/support.html

I can only have one..

Gussell

Gussell

Active Member
What would you do?
I just recently acquired some gear in which I need to thin out. I need to choose between two receivers. I can't keep both. One is a Marantz 2226b and the other is a Pioneer SX-950. I own two sets of speakers and will keep both. One set is a pair of Klipsch KG 4.5's and the other is a set of EPI 100V. I don't know how the EPI's sound yet since I need to re-foam them. I plan on keeping both sets of speakers set up to be used for which ever style of music I will be listening to, assuming they have their own distinct voice. (which I'm thinking they will) The Klipsch pack a wallop, but I'm thinking they lack well rounded versatility.
At this point both receivers deliver smoothly in my opinion and seem very close, although I haven't done extensive testing between the two. I've only ran a Magnavox CDB650 with some Allman Bros and RUSH, etc..
I guess the Klipsch are pretty efficient as it seems that both the 26 wpc Marantz and 85wpc Pioneer produce almost the same volume levels. Not sure if the EPI's will be as efficient with the Marantz.
Any thoughts/opinions on what receiver to keep and why would be great.
 
Last edited:
Register to hide this ad
Listen to each one seperately. With the lights off.
Take in their beauty and sound. Then decide.

I vote you keep the Marantz. Should hold value better and has that beautiful blue glow you just don't get with a 950.

Good luck on your decision.
 
I would keep the sx950 its 85 wpc and it brings more money than the marantz which is only 26wpc and if you find more power hungry speakers you have the watts to make them sing I have had kg 4's keep the klipsch but remember what I like you may not like.epi 100v never had them so I can't comment on them I love Marantz but the only B model I ever liked was the 2285b the lower models didn't seem as good when they had a B behind it jmo.
 
Last edited:
herbd2 said:
Listen to each one seperately. With the lights off.
Take in their beauty and sound. Then decide.

I vote you keep the Marantz. Should hold value better and has that beautiful blue glow you just don't get with a 950.

Good luck on your decision.
Click to expand...
The cool blue glow is really the only thing at this point that makes me question which one to give up.

strat10 said:
I would keep the sx950 its 85 wpc and it brings more money than the marantz which is only 26wpc I have had kg 4's keep the klipsch but remember what I like you may not like.epi 100v never had them I don't know that speaker I love Marantz but the only B model I ever liked was the 2285b the lower models didn't seem as good when they had a B behind it jmo.
Click to expand...
Thanks! I am hoping that once I get the EPI's refoamed I will be able to use both sets of speakers. The KG 4.5's are new to me as well and they really do pack a punch.
 
From a purely Pioneer fan here, keep the Marantz. If you decide later than your decision was wrong, it will be a LOT easier to replace the SX-950 than it will the 2226. The Pioneers are still in the marketplace in large numbers, are easy to work on, have great parts availability, and a following and support that will ensure that they will still be out there for a long time to come.

There just weren't as many Marantz made, and fewer still come up for sale. When they do appear in the market, they seem to command a higher price for their power ranges compared to other brands. The 2226 can be had for about the same money as a SX-950 at less than 1/3 the wattage.
 
Watthour said:
From a purely Pioneer fan here, keep the Marantz. If you decide later than your decision was wrong, it will be a LOT easier to replace the SX-950 than it will the 2226. The Pioneers are still in the marketplace in large numbers, are easy to work on, have great parts availability, and a following and support that will ensure that they will still be out there for a long time to come.

There just weren't as many Marantz made, and fewer still come up for sale. When they do appear in the market, they seem to command a higher price for their power ranges compared to other brands. The 2226 can be had for about the same money as a SX-950 at less than 1/3 the wattage.
Click to expand...

Not to be rude but explain that to me about the Marantz bringing more money than the Pioneer I just checked the completed listings on ebay and the pioneer is running around a 100.00 or more than the Marantz 2226b...
 
Last edited:
Pioneer is by very slight margins.... my favorite looks wise,has a very deserved reputation for premium build and easy to find parts for,most common to find of all brands it seems (and still has rising prices because of the brands attributes), and is better than cash when you trade or sell.
I have an SX-850 that may not even be my favorite receiver in some ways, but it is so "in the hunt" for all it's superior positives, it sees a lot of use and will always be with me.
Wattage doesn't necessarily make a receiver....but the difference between 26w and 85w,"that" will make a lot of speakers. (I like Marantz better in higher watts easily....but not in lower wattages if one was to be "the only".)

Pick what sounds best for you and settle in....for me it definitely would be the SX-950.
 
The 45-55 WPC receivers in better brands fetch more money than the 20 WPC and under class do. The Pioneer is increasing in value. The Marantz brand is technically higher end but the low WPC rating holds this unit's value down. I would give the SX 950 the practical edge. I do like both makes in this era. If the Marantz had equal or close power rating, the Marantz would be my keeper assuming both in nice condition.
 
Was Marantz really considered higher end then Pioneer in those days? Now for sure but I question whether they were back then.
 
strat10 said:
Not to be rude but explain that to me about the Marantz bringing more money than the Pioneer I just checked the completed listings on ebay and the pioneer is running around a 100.00 or more than the Marantz 2226b...
Click to expand...

That's not at all rude, and is a perfectly valid observation and response. I don't want to violate the rules regarding cost estimating and the $ & ¢ forum, but the 2226B is a sub-30W unit listing around 200-350, and there may be 3-4 of them available on auction sites. There are as many SX-950s and 980s listing for the same or just a little more (I got my working 950 for less than a buck-fiddy). While my number-wagging may have been a bit off the daily bidding results, my main point was that the Pioneer can probably be replaced more readily for the same kind of price range, especially in the future. I'm guessing there were easily 10 times as many 950s sold as the little Marantz, and at least another 10 times the 980s sold.

Ultimately, the OP alone will have to weigh his assessment of the value of each and decide, and that isn't always completely fiduciary, rational, logical, or even explicable. If it were mine, I'd just find another spot in the rack (or another rack) but that was not offered as an option.
 
I'd sell the Marantz. I've had a couple, and while I liked them, they were worth enough that the cash in hand was preferable.

It seems like right now Marantz amps have really gone up in value, and I'd capitalize on that trend. If that 2226b is clean and works well you might get $250-$300 out of it, which are the prices I've been seeing on craiglist lately. That's a lot of dough for a 26 wpc amp.

Meanwhile the SX-950 is a pretty damn well engineered amp.

BTW, the similar volumes can have a lot of factors to include the way the volume pot is tapered. It's likely that your Marantz increases at a different rate than the Pioneer, making them seem like they make the same power (i.e. both volume knobs at half way, but the Marantz is generating more wpc than the Pioneer at that setting). But in reality the Pioneer will have much more clean headroom.
 
I wouldn't count on higher rates for the Marantz in the future. Here in Europe prices went down since the beginning of this year for around 35/40% (except some bigger models). Which is ok because prices for the Marantz stuff are hyped. People pay for the design, nothing else. Neither are Marantz receivers better than their competitors nor do the have a better quality. Trust your ears and not your eyes. By the way, I don't want to start a new discussion about Marantz against the rest of the world... :-))
Having some smaller Marantz (2015, 2220, 2225, 2238, 2238B, 2245, 2052) and some of the SX-line, I can compare it as often as I like. I collected those Marantz for being the base of new acquirements on Sansui and Luxman :-).
 
Last edited:
Last week I did a rather large comparison of my lower wattage receivers (in a fairly fast swap out) using same TT/cartridge,speaks,and record. (It was all brought about because of the new to me TT/cartridge acquisition and being stuck home.)

In the end it was glaring how Pioneer and Sansui compared well to their bigger siblings once over the 50w range. A just found Pioneer SX-750s' strengths took me by surprise and while I already new how well a Sansui 4000 suited me (and wasn't a surprise) the ballyhooed 50w dividing line proved itself with what I was swapping in and out and it was apparent wattage was not the only thing delivering,but better engineering too.

Big difference between thin versus detailed/bloated versus breath.....pushing the more sparkling details ahead of it with the volume knob.
 
I just wanted to say thanks to everyone for your comments and or opinions. It was exactly what I was looking for as it gave me insight that I would have not had if I never asked.
:thmbsp:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom