|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
12.149.50.2
There are so many classic Marantz receivers. I was interested to get inmates' opinions on the most musical of the bunch? I am a tube sound lover but tube maintenance hater and, from what I understand, the ss Marantz receivers tend to cross that bridge nicely. Thanks!
Follow Ups:
toppingh,I've owned a Marantz 2235 since 1971 and a 2275 since 1985. from '71 to '85, the 2235 was my main system electronics- used originally with a Technics SL-D2 TT and Larger Advents. I've listened quite a bit to the 2270 and 2230 as well as some time with 2216.
Though I use Audio Research systems in my office and home main system, I feel the Marantz 22XX receivers are excellent. Marantz took their tuners seriously and the tuner and phono stages are far better than one would expect. I tried awhile running the pre- out of the 2275 to my Audio Research D115 tube amplifier (6550's 105W) and the results were embarassingly good! My main criticism of the 22XX sound in my experience is a slightly tubby and less transparent bass, but overall these receivers are excellent and I think a solid basis for an office or second system. And reliable- neither of my 22XX receivers have ever had any repair.
One observation over the last 35 years with these is that I seem to prefer the sound of the lower power models the 2235 is sweeter and smoother than the 2275 and the 2216 and 2230 are smoother also than the 2270. Has anyone else had this perception?
I heartedly recommend the early-mid 70's 22XX Marantzs. When my hearing goes wonky, I'll be selling the Audio Research SP10 and go back to my audio roots -the 2235 !
Cheers,
as
No you re not wonky. It is common with some of the manufacturers that the lower powered units are better sounding. The 2230 s based on the 1060 amp which is 1 of the best of the Marantz integrated amps and good enough to se as a preamp.The higher powered amps had fewer components to chose from and hence less options for voicing. Also, with simpler circuits and shorter pathways generally there is less to intrude into and affect the sound. I have genrally found that once a receiver hits the 45 watt range or so, the overall sound quality starts to be compromised when compared to separates. The higher powered units may provide more impact in the bass, have more headrood, etc. but when compared on the same speakers that have sufficient efficiency for the smaller receiver, the smaller mas the advantage.
Also, SS amps have a rise in noise and distortion at low levels. With the higher powered amps this increase moves into the average listening power levels and hence has a disadvantage over lower powered amps where the average listening level would more likely be above the listeing power level.
But I prefer small (max 60wpc +/- a bit) solid state amps of all types.
PyreAudio,Well, good to know it's not my imagination that the lower powered Maratnz 22XX receivers can seem a bit nicer. When I tried the 2275 with a separate amplifier, I was curious if I was isolating the preamp would reveal the power section to have a little hardness, but this wasn't conclusive. I also wondered if part of this effect was that as the power inccreases, the number of controls seem to increase expotentially and since these controls when dirty is one of the few ways these receivers give trouble, that all the controls might additively degrade the sound.
This effect of the lower power unit being more attractive extends to other gear: I think the McIntosh MC30 a nicer sound than MC275, and the Audio Research D70 is smoother and more transparent than the D115 (which is what I use) even though the D115 is almost exactly like a D60 but with 8- 6550 outputs rather than the 4 of a D70.
Since there are so many good speakers that will run well on 35-40W - I ran the 2235 easily with Vandersteeen 2C, and I'm using Infiniti 360 speakers now with 93dB effeciency, the lower power of a lot of vintage gear is not a problem. Perhaps, our friends with SET amplifiers and their 8W monoblocks with $1,700 NOS WE 300Bs know something we don't!
Cheers,
I got a Model 18 a few months ago and find it very musical. I went after this particular model because I listen to FM alot and it has their Model 20 tuner inside.I'd recommend anyone with a vintage Marantz receiver, looking for a nice speaker to go with it, to try out the Epos line. The els-3 at 300 and M-5 at 600 were a perfect match for me. I bought the M-5.
I use a 2250B in the summer when it is just too hot for tubes. My 2250B is very nice sounding, crisp yet warm and powerfull. Access to some of the internal components is more difficult than with any of my tube units though.
I've been very happy with this unit as well. However, I've never thought of the 2250B as being particularly "warm" sounding. I'm using mine with a pair of Fried A/3 speakers.
To some extent it will depend on the speakers you have. The earlier models (2230, for example) have capacitively coupled outputs, which will generally work better with 60's and very early 70's model speakers. particularly those that were designed in the tube era. The later model receivers are direct coupled, and those will tend to work better with later models of speakers. Speakers designed in the SS era.I look at the capacitively coupled amps as sort of a transition model between tubes and direct coupled SS.
For example, the 2230 works very nicely with the AR 4x. The 4x is at it's best with tube amps, but with direct coupled SS amps those speakers sound thin in the bass and dull and lifeless in the mids and highs.
in this?I picked one up locally and haven't been thrilled with the sound thru my KLH 17's - it doesn't sound crisp enough, even with treble all the way up. Frankly, my Scott 222B blows it away in everything except total bass and sheer volume.
Almost certainly. But before you get some new speakers, add a 0.5 ohm resistor in series with the KLH 17's. Get a non-inductive 5 or 10 watt resistor. Several guys have tried that with good success and it made a big difference with mine.
n/t
...2220B and 2215 are also musical units at an even smaller power level. Marantz watts are very differnt than typical wpc ratings today. A 2220B at 20 wpc will do fine for many systems.Here's a great link to the various Marantz models:
I've got a 2225, and while it's fairly low in my system pecking order, I do enjoy it when I listen to it. It definetly has a "moodier" sound than my H/K 330c or my Sherwood 7100A, but sound quality-wise, it excells on FM broadcasts.
--
simul justus et peccator
The Tuner is GREAT!I rebuilt the power supply of my unit and also replaced most of the electolytic caps in the signal path. It was a lot of work but the unit functions as new now and I do not have to worry about it breaking or catching fire!
It is a very musical unit and it sounds a lot "bigger" than it's relatively low power would suggest.
--
Al G
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors: