Audio Asylum Thread Printer
Get a view of an entire thread on one page
|For Sale Ads|
In Reply to: RE: marantz SA-10 posted by hiredfox on February 16, 2017 at 11:18:54
You go through many spinners- hiredfox.
A Sony ES has its own "sound" much like, yet, different from a Marantz.
The Sony was intended to be the basis of a high end mch system that was subsequently abandoned through competing interest for funds.
The Marantz SA11-S3 came after the SA7-S1 and was hyped as being 'better'... it wasn't!
It is true that over the 18 year lifespan of SACD quite a few disc spinners have come and gone in my system, mostly Sony, Marantz & Esoteric. Not all have been bought new.
Many do like that SA11-S3.
Yes indeed and it is a good player but voicing does not really suit classical music strings and brass sounds a bit too bright and edgy whilst timing is nothing to write home about.
hopefully more reviews are on the horizon...
Apologies to all, this is not one of my most visited sites so not always up to speed with this sort of thread. Normally you can find me on HRAudio.net where music buffs can waffle aimlessly over the merits or otherwise of new SACD releases. Of course the hardware helps.
I've had my SA10-S1 up and running for almost two months now. I cannot commit to writing a review of the machine because of the time involved, in any case there are far more qualified scribes than me to do that sort of thing.
What I will say unequivocally is that this is the best SACD player that Marantz has ever produced and not by a small margin. In fact this is the best SACD player I have ever used or heard anywhere since the format began FULL STOP.
This machine is more transparent, more neutral, more detailed, more dynamic and more capable of reproducing recorded music than anything that has gone before and far better than vinyl for taking you into live performance. The soundstage is simply indescribable, the whole playback system becomes not only invisible but irrelevant as the back wall of your room lights up in the mantle of the orchestra stage. Every note, every phrase, every nuance of the music is revealed, every instrument is in place and rock solid, nothing is missed you can hear it all and you can follow two, three, four tunes at once from the various sections. The bass is deep, solid and in scale and the noise floor is so low that you can hear so Loooww down! The dynamic range can deafen you on some uncompressed recordings.
This machine gives you goose bumps, neck hair erections and a shed load of tears as the sweetness and accuracy of instrument timbres turns your emotions to jelly. Yep it is that good.
Is there a downside? There is never gain without pain. It is so revealing that it challenges the recording engineers art. Poor balance, spotlighting, compression, the use of reverb and so on can grate and native DSD recordings sound so much better and more realistic than PCM recordings, which you might have anticipated as this machine operates in the DSD mode throughout.
A few of my SACD are already on Amazon & e Bay because they cannot cut the mustard.
I just wish that the industry had found out how to close these particular stable doors a few years earlier.
I don't know Frank (the reviewer) but if he hears things differently to me it would be surprising.
How is its on Redbook?
My relatively new Marantz SA14 is not bad on CD's but much better on SACD's. In fact some SACD's sound almost as good as my vinyl setup, and some may be better in some respects. But of course we have many more CD's than SACD's, so I don't think it would be sensible to consider upgrading just for SACD playback.
Whilst I have not heard the SA-10, I suspect it will be far better with CD than SACD for the simple reason that SACD sounds best in mch, whilst the new Marantz like the previous SA7-S1 is stereo only and was easily out performed by a cheap BD player that also plays mch SACD's, which was one of the reasons I sold my Marantz SA7-S1.
It makes no sense to upgrade for SACD with a STEREO only SACD player
"It makes no sense to upgrade for SACD with a STEREO only SACD player"
You keep saying that. But many of us, including me, only have a stereo system, not a multichannel system. I love my old speakers, and it would be completely impossible, for many reasons, to build them into a multichannel system.
Perhaps I could say more. I have many versions of Modern Cool (big PB fan), including vinyl, CD, and SACD. Although it is not the case for all of her recordings, I ranks these as follows:
vinyl > SACD > > > CD.
There is also a multichannel version of Modern Cool available, (Blu-ray?), which in fact won a grammy. I never heard at home, but did ask to hear at a local high end store. Although the sound was good, it made me feel as if I were in the center of the band, instead of the audience. So I don't think it is really realistic in that sense. So I'm not convinced I need/want multichannel.
Maybe you are saying something different; that SACD multi-channel has better intrinsic sonic quality that stereo?
Its very easy to build a multi-channel system. I have two floorstanding TL speakers for front L & R , centre channel speaker under the TV , rear small B & W M1 stand mounted speakers ,Sony AVR , Sony sacd player,& Sony BD player this setup also doubles for HT.I use the pre-outs of the AVR into my stereo amplifier to power front speakers, the AVR powers only centre & rear speakers. Contrary to some so-called experts for mch you need 5 equal size floor standers & one or two subs, this is totally impractical for most and
unnecessary . You can use a cheap small Marantz AVR NR 1607 which has pre-outs.I listen to mostly Classical and a mch setup gives me Concert Hall realism not obtainable with Stereo. Most mch SACD's are not recorded inaccurately with listener in middle of orchestra.
Hope it was of some help. Of course there will be naysayers but in hi-fi it has always paid to be truly open minded. Some will be beyond help in that respect clinging to entrenched old beliefs as indeed do we all.
The SA10-S1 is only part of the story in high end playback, the rest of the chain must be good enough to support its performance. I doubt the PM10 will be but that's how Marantz project it and how Andrew Everard reviewed it, even then he gave it close on 90 points whatever that means.
£6k/$7k is not small change but many will say how can it be better than the latest dCS set costing mega bucks but as we all know it is not the size of the dog in the fight that matters. As I have reported (conversations in the industry) before had dCS produced the (sic) SA10-S1 at this quality of design and build it would no doubt have cost £25/30k+.
This is not the first time Marantz have pulled off this trick but that's what a large committed organisation can do. I honestly believe Marantz are on the side of the consumer in bringing their devices to market at affordable prices.
Last night having just returned from vacation I must admit to some trepidation as the SA10-S1 was fire up for the first time in two weeks, expecting perhaps to be disappointed after the initial euphoria had waned. There was no need to have been concerned I was there in the DZZ Studio in Moscow 'watching' Jurowski's Shostakovich 1 (Pentatone).
Thanks! for sharing-
An update- hiredfox?
I read the decent review in HiFi News. I would have liked to seen more musical numbers cited.
I look forward to your review.
Very nice! hiredfox
Which Esoteric spinner(s) did you own? I was impressed w/ the DV-60.
Post a Followup:
Post a Message!
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: