|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
71.81.87.182
In Reply to: RE: Processor Choices. Mcintosh NAD posted by Broadcast Storm on November 22, 2015 at 14:10:30
Whi is the Marantz ruled out, the 8801 is excellent. I still use a 8003 and have no issues.
This is just my experience and opinion, FWIW. When looking for processors in the past I compared a Mac to an Anthem AVM20, then about half the price, the Anthem was better. The Mac set up sounded sort of wooley by comparison. I've heard NAD processors, they sounded good but I've had no hands on experience.
To get features, service & the performance I'd urge you to look at the Marantz for great bang for the buck. There's a new 11.2 unit that replaces the 8801 but I forgot the model number.
If wanting to spend Mac level money you may want to consider the Classe or Anthem D1. However, the "high end" products struggle to keep up and offer the cutting edge features like Marantz. Marantz are large enough to have the funds and resources to keep up while offering a high quality product.
Follow Ups:
Good advice.
I have a friend using a Marantz 8801 to run his Tyler Acoustics speakers. It performs very well. I think my NAD Master has it beat on 2 channel performance.
I had the Anthem avm50. It was so full of bugs I gave up on it and sent to Anthem for them to keep. Its sound quality was slightly inferior to my NAD 163 but significantly inferior to my NAD Master M15.
Classe is a good suggestion too but the price tag is quite a bit higher than the others we are talking about here.
The upgrade chip for the nad M17 is going to be $600. Its either that or the HDfury device.
Mcintosh.... Mcintosh. Beautiful. Smooth. Marantz remote......... Marantz internals.......
My understanding is that McIntosh's former owners, D&M Holdings (now D+M Group), had Marantz and McIntosh share operational firmware only. But McIntosh's internals were solely McIntosh and, as usual, designed and manufactured in Binghamton, New York.
In mid-2014 McIntosh became part of Fine Sounds, owners of Audio Research, Wadia, Sumiko, and Sonus Faber.
The personality of the sound is still Mcintosh. I guess that is all that matters.
Im just wondering if I can live with the Marantz remote. Will it instill the feeling of "counterfeit" within me?. IDK.
It would not matter to me what firmware or remote is used. The design and construction plus inside and outside components are all McIntosh. If you go McIntosh you will have to somehow live with the brand's smooth, clean, and natural (unhyped) sound.It is possible that Marantz is using McIntosh's remote.
I use a universal remote with my McIntosh integrated amp. The remote provides control for all the other components in my music room. I haven't seen my McIntosh remote in a long time.
Edits: 11/24/15 11/24/15
Two channel is a different beast. So try not to equate x.1 with 2 channel stereo. It's like trying to do the reverse - not built for it.
After 30+ years of farting around with audio I keep hearing the same thing over and over again when it comes to McIntosh - LOOKS.
If you want looks go with the Mac. If you want something that sounds good go with the Marantz.
NAD is also a taste type brand. I vacillate between love and lukewarm. I like their amps and sources (limited exposure) but I'm not crazy about their preamps. But in fairness I like McIntosh's preamps and don't like their amps.
Good to know,wasn't aware of the Anthem QC issues.
Post a Followup:
FAQ |
Post a Message! |
Forgot Password? |
|
||||||||||||||
|
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: