My Marantz 2270 doesn't sound any better than my modern Denon AVR-X1700H. What am I missing?

[CEC]

Great thought, thank you for your response. The room is actually pretty unusual and undoubtedly plays a role. We live in a mid-century modern home, so the space in question has walls of glass, polished concrete floors, and is open plan. To combat this, there are lots of soft furnishings and a huge shag rug in front of the speakers. There are no noticeable reflections in the space despite the hard surfaces. The rear wall is nearly 35' back. The ceiling is wooden post and beam with the beams creating a sort of baffle every 8ft or so. Think something very much like the attached image, with the speakers located at the TV wall as shown.

Rather than being a reflective mess, I've found that the architecture actually allows the sound to breath a bit more. But I'm not an acoustician, and like you said, maybe the room is overriding the sound in ways that I can't perceive. We won't be doing any conspicuous acoustical treatments as the look of the home is more important to us than its acoustics.

I haven't brought anyone else in on this specific A/B test, but two family members who are audiophiles were both extremely impressed with the Denon/Klipsch sound and were amazed how well the room seemed to work acoustically.

View attachment 2714315

That is a nice-looking floor plan and home.

 

[UncleAng]

Maybe Julian Hirsch was right.

 

[krautmaster]

I like your description of where the listener is sitting in comparing the two amps. Last night, I was listening to the Charlie Haden duets record (I love how double bass sounds on the Heresy IV) and with the Marantz I felt he was in the room 10 feet in front of me, and with the Denon it was like I was putting my ear up to the fingerboard as he played, with the treble being a bit more exaggerated. Different sounds, the Marantz felt a bit more natural. But to reiterate, very minor difference. My comparison is a bit of an exaggeration.

I'm definitely not against restoration of the 2270. It's obviously a pretty valuable and desirable piece, and it doesn't really have much sentimental value. I do worry about selling it to fund a new gear purchase and the regretting letting it go as prices for these things continue to climb. Things that are most important to me sonically right now are soundstage and imaging. I like to feel inside the music in three dimensions. Do you think these elements would be noticeably improved with a restoration?

The 2270 had continuous upgrades to fix little issues here and there, the newer 2275 incorporated all these fixes and is more reliable (and easier to work on). I had a recapped 2275 and it was very nice, but not what I was looking for in SQ: it had the "Three Martini Lunch with Dean Martin" sound Marantz was famous for (fuzzy warm and mellow, hiding all the nuances of recordings and not much sound stage). My Onkyo TX-4500MKII sounds a lot better (I still have one).

 

[Crang]

I have a denon AVR 6100 for my HT system side by side with my 2 channel music system. I have used it countless times for music when my 2 channel system was down for repair or Im being lazy. The Denon is surprisingly good especially the Phono stage. The DAC is equivalent of my Oppo BluRay/SACD player. The selectivity on the tuner and ability to pull in weak signals far outshines my McIntosh MR65. My only gripe is it sounds a bit sterile- but that could be a whole variety of other factors including the different speakers hooked up to it.

The Marantz should sound warmer to be sure. If it doesn't something else is going on. But qualitatively better? Probably not. Personally Id get the 2270 updated and try again. It's a sweet piece. If it doesn't do it for you, you will get your $ back selling it since it came to you for free.