NAD 7155 vs Marantz sr4021

[Riccardo77]

Scored an NAD 7155 for 35 bucks yesterday. My first NAD. Seems lightly used. Wow what sound. I have it in the place that was occupied by my Marantz sr4021. The NAD phono stage and the Marantz are pretty much a tie. Both receivers sound superb and some of the best of my collection.

Considering the NAD 7155 is so highly regarded here I gotta say the Marantz is pretty darn good too. Both are as good as my Nakamichi av-1 and sound better than my luxman r-113. The other very impressive amp is the Rotel rx-855 with the twin power transformers. Has anyone else had recent experience with the NAD? I hear the reliability of these units is not always that great. What do I need to change to keep the receiver going? Right now it is completely functional. It does run hotter than my other amps. The rotel is ice cold after hours of playing.

 

[KentTeffeteller]

NAD is far superior to any Marantz SR anything in that model line. Even the cheapest NAD. Keep the NAD. they're usually maintainable and repairable, LeeStereo is very knowledgeable on NAD equipment in terms of amplifiers and preamplifiers. These are excellent more modern gear. And well made and engineered.

 

[Riccardo77]

Interesting. Maybe it's the speakers? I'm using Kef q150. Both receivers (Marantz and NAD) sound quite similar with these speakers. The rotel sounds the most forward on the midrange and has the tightest bass but has the best stereo separation likely because of the two transformers.

 

[KentTeffeteller]

Interesting. Maybe it's the speakers? I'm using Kef q150. Both receivers (Marantz and NAD) sound quite similar with these speakers. The rotel sounds the most forward on the midrange and has the tightest bass but has the best stereo separation likely because of the two transformers.

KEF usually is not efficient. And they demand quality amplifiers, preamplifiers or integrated amplifiers to drive without damage. Marantz SR anything is NEITHER. They're IC heavy, cost cut, built to sell to a price point, NOT REAL Marantz Japan even. Let alone Marantz USA built in Woodside, New York, or Sun Valley, California. As Marantz was until 1968, then Japanese built by Standard Radio up to 1979. History. Up to 1964, Marantz only built one kind of equipment, the best and without regard to price point, meaning a power amplifier at cheapest, and a 7 tube preamplifier, was $800 at cheapest. And could cost $1300 if highest end power amplifiers used (Model 9 tube monoblocks, two required for Stereo) and the Model 7 tube preamplifier. Meaning priced like McIntosh always was then and now. Price includes no turntable, no loudspeakers, no open reel tape deck either. Add even more money for suitable equipment, meaning $300-$400 for high end manual turntable, separate tonearm, high end MM cartridge, open reel deck suitable for this class of system $600-$1000. In 1964 money. Which was new Buick/Oldsmobile/Cadillac/Lincoln Continental prices for a new car of this level, or two Mercedes Benz sedans in 1964 Dollars.

 

[Riccardo77]

KEF usually is not efficient. And they demand quality amplifiers, preamplifiers or integrated amplifiers to drive without damage. Marantz SR anything is NEITHER. They're IC heavy, cost cut, built to sell to a price point, NOT REAL Marantz Japan even. Let alone Marantz USA built in Woodside, New York, or Sun Valley, California. As Marantz was until 1968, then Japanese built by Standard Radio up to 1979. History. Up to 1964, Marantz only built one kind of equipment, the best and without regard to price point, meaning a power amplifier at cheapest, and a 7 tube preamplifier, was $800 at cheapest. And could cost $1300 if highest end power amplifiers used (Model 9 tube monoblocks, two required for Stereo) and the Model 7 tube preamplifier. Meaning priced like McIntosh always was then and now. Price includes no turntable, no loudspeakers, no open reel tape deck either. Add even more money for suitable equipment, meaning $300-$400 for high end manual turntable, separate tonearm, high end MM cartridge, open reel deck suitable for this class of system $600-$1000. In 1964 money. Which was new Buick/Oldsmobile/Cadillac/Lincoln Continental prices for a new car of this level, or two Mercedes Benz sedans in 1964 Dollars.

Thanks for all of this useful info and I am sure you are right.. Just a question. The marantz sr4021 says it has discrete amplifiers. Does that mean it still uses ICs? I have no idea. Only stating what my ears hear and the NAD and marantz 2 channel (non AV) sound very similar but Rotel sounds very different on the same speakers. Luxman r-113 has a more bloated bass on these speakers. Overall Iike the NAD 7155 And marantz sr4021 sound the best. The phono stage on both sounds very nice.