Three Generations of Marantz flagship integrated amps measured (updated PM-10 test!)
One of the biggest challenges with amplifier testing is shipping the gear without damage. We've already seen how the JBL SA600 from 1965 pretty much has an amplifier section that performs similarly to the JBL SDR-35 with processing in 2022. But what about Marantz? Have they improved their technology over time?
On deck for today's review?
Marantz PM-90
1991 - all analog flagship, second only to the PM-95. Last Marantz product BEFORE the introduction of HDAMs. Exact model tested here. ~$3500 in 2022 dollars.
Marantz PM-11s2
2008 - all analog flagship. Integrated amp version of SM-11s1 (tested at Stereophile). Last D+M Flagship during the economic boom right before the Great Recession. HDAM SA3. ~$6500 in 2022 dollars.
Marantz PM-10
2017 - all analog, fully balanced flagship. Marantz's introduction of the HypeX NC500OEM running BTL with a SMPS600 per channel (so 4 NC500's + 2 SMPS600's in the box). The last D+M Flagship before Sound United acquisition. Last Ken Ishiwata flagship. $9000 in 2022 dollars (though BNIB "open box" deals are easily found at ~$5500).
Test setup
E1DA Cosmos ADC, Grade A, tested in single channel stereo mode for amplifiers
@pkane's Multitone software
Panasonic UB9000 as source, 1 kHz test tone
Vishay Dale 4.48 ohm 1% NH250 non-inductive resistor
Limitations of the testing:
1. Ideally, I should have a 4 ohm load instead of a 4.48 ohm load, but c'est la vie. The key is comparing between the three units. Resistors are expensive!
2. The UB9000 only outputs 2V from its balanced connections. It's the only balanced DAC I have right now.
3. I have shown that different interconnect cables can result in differences in SINAD even if the differences are inaudible. This can be as much as 3 dB in SINAD. I didn't spend any time focusing on cables.
4. I might get better results if I was testing both amplifier channels simultaneously. Wasn't sure if the 48V minijack benefits from the same summing.
UPDATE: I retested the PM-10 through the XLR inputs allowing for proper grounding.
First the UB9000 in E1DA Cosmos ADC mono-summed mode compared to Amir's testing. The E1DA Cosmos ADC does a very nice job of testing line level products.
First the PM-90
- My setup is about ~9 dB worse than Amir's APx555 setup and super fancy
- Note the clean noise spectrum above 20 kHz
- My AC power is just as noisy as Amir's. This wasn't been re-built and maybe an upgraded power supply would help
- This *sounds* wonderful. On my test, it's really clear how the majority of the harmonic distortion is the even, not odd distortion.
If I turn up the volume ~6 dB higher, the numbers improve slightly
Next up, the PM-11s2.
Looks like it'd be a golfing panther! At -94.1 dB SINAD, it's clearly going to be in the blue range if it were tested on the APx555! Would it break 100 dB? Who knows?
What if I turn up the volume a bit?
Are you not impressed? If there's still another 6 dB on the table with a better resistive load or even a better DAC feeding the amp, you're now looking at one of the very best measuring Class AB amplifiers, period. With all of the Marantz "Sound Master" tuning, convenience of a remote control, and well documented service manuals!
If the PM-11s2 is that good, what about the PM-10?
Well, this is where the story gets complicated. The PM-10 was built after the Great Recession and the rise of headphone hi-fi. Interviews with the design team talk about environmental regulations/certain parts no longer being available, and Marantz Japan making sure everyone knew the switch to Class D was Marantz Europe's request. The measurements clearly show the consequences for Marantz and switching to class D with noise above 20 kHz and more noise from the power supply.
Old Inaccurate Tests
Is the PM-10 a complete failure? Not quite. If we look a little deeper it becomes pretty clear that PM-10 does have lower THD, but it's the noise that hurts the PM-10 the most.
With an improvement in the power supply, the next generation of the PM-10 could be pretty spectacular.
UPDATE: With ASR membership guidance, I re-tested using the XLR inputs and attached the ground to the PM-10's grounding lug.
What about subjective comparisons?
These tests only measure 1 kHz output and real-world content may be different. The PM-10 essentially can output 600 watts into 8 ohms as compared to the ~120W or so of the PM-11s2. So, for more dynamic music, it's also a big difference to have the extra power on tap.
Subjectively, all three units sound great. I genuinely do think the PM-90 has subjective warmth with vocals and that may be the high 2nd order harmonics and it's a great deal at the used $1K price they go for. The PM-10 and PM-11s2 sound similar but I do believe that I get more subjective bass with the PM-10. That might be the power supply harmonics adding some extra energy in the bass region or improved damping factor. I also do think the PM-10 is better than the PM-11s2 at placing instruments in the space between phantom center and the left and right channel. Not sure if this is purely sighted bias, or if the cleaner signals above 1 khz make it like a cleaner version of the PM-11s2 with a truck idling down the street at -100 dB adding some lower frequency noise.
UPDATE: Whew. The PM-10 sounded better, and thankfully with proper grounding of the test gear, it also measures better.
Conclusion
Overall, I think Marantz has done a pretty good job with their flagship integrated amplifiers. There is clear progression in technology over the time.
The PM-10 improves over the PM-11s2 in the realm of harmonic distortion in the midrange/treble but slips on the power supply performance. It is more power efficient and a little bit of power supply noise for a lot more watts is a reasonable trade off. At MSRP and discounted pricing, you still have to be willing to vote-with-your-wallet and spend the extra money for Made in Japan and for a 5 year warranty with a solid service manual. When the NCx500OEM is used as a drop-in replacement, and a cleaner power supply is used, things could be very interesting.
UPDATE: With the revised testing, and proper grounding, we can see just how good the PM-10 actually is. It's better than the PM-11s2, now with the advantage of up to 600W on tap (even though it's conservatively rated at 200W into 8) and the more power efficient Class D architecture. I am much more comfortable stating that Marantz has shown clear progression/advancement with time.
My comments about pricing still apply. At MSRP or discounted pricing, it's still expensive. That said, you are getting a very good performance out of the unit -- remember that we're testing this as a full integrated amp with features like tone controls, multiple inputs, a phono unit. You still have to be willing to "vote-with-your-wallet" and spend the extra money for Made in Japan, the 5 year warranty you hope to never use, and the solid service manual hoping that it'll be usable when you pass it onto the next generation.
Still, the PM-11s2 is a real testament to what was achieved by Marantz as the peak of their Class AB lineup. It essentially provides identical performance to the PM-10 at lower power. In fact, when I get a chance, it would be interesting to see how the PM-11s2 performs when properly grounded. Cutting down that smaller ground loop is defintely going to improve the numbers a bit.
EDIT #2: Here are some extended measurements for the PM-10 going all the way up to 360 W of power. These are done under different test conditions as the above so this 5W SINAD is worse due to the E1DA sensitivity.
5W
50W
200W
360W
One of the biggest challenges with amplifier testing is shipping the gear without damage. We've already seen how the JBL SA600 from 1965 pretty much has an amplifier section that performs similarly to the JBL SDR-35 with processing in 2022. But what about Marantz? Have they improved their technology over time?
On deck for today's review?
Marantz PM-90
1991 - all analog flagship, second only to the PM-95. Last Marantz product BEFORE the introduction of HDAMs. Exact model tested here. ~$3500 in 2022 dollars.
Marantz PM-11s2
2008 - all analog flagship. Integrated amp version of SM-11s1 (tested at Stereophile). Last D+M Flagship during the economic boom right before the Great Recession. HDAM SA3. ~$6500 in 2022 dollars.
Marantz PM-10
2017 - all analog, fully balanced flagship. Marantz's introduction of the HypeX NC500OEM running BTL with a SMPS600 per channel (so 4 NC500's + 2 SMPS600's in the box). The last D+M Flagship before Sound United acquisition. Last Ken Ishiwata flagship. $9000 in 2022 dollars (though BNIB "open box" deals are easily found at ~$5500).
Test setup
E1DA Cosmos ADC, Grade A, tested in single channel stereo mode for amplifiers
@pkane's Multitone software
Panasonic UB9000 as source, 1 kHz test tone
Vishay Dale 4.48 ohm 1% NH250 non-inductive resistor
Limitations of the testing:
1. Ideally, I should have a 4 ohm load instead of a 4.48 ohm load, but c'est la vie. The key is comparing between the three units. Resistors are expensive!
2. The UB9000 only outputs 2V from its balanced connections. It's the only balanced DAC I have right now.
3. I have shown that different interconnect cables can result in differences in SINAD even if the differences are inaudible. This can be as much as 3 dB in SINAD. I didn't spend any time focusing on cables.
4. I might get better results if I was testing both amplifier channels simultaneously. Wasn't sure if the 48V minijack benefits from the same summing.
UPDATE: I retested the PM-10 through the XLR inputs allowing for proper grounding.
First the UB9000 in E1DA Cosmos ADC mono-summed mode compared to Amir's testing. The E1DA Cosmos ADC does a very nice job of testing line level products.
First the PM-90
- My setup is about ~9 dB worse than Amir's APx555 setup and super fancy
- Note the clean noise spectrum above 20 kHz
- My AC power is just as noisy as Amir's. This wasn't been re-built and maybe an upgraded power supply would help
- This *sounds* wonderful. On my test, it's really clear how the majority of the harmonic distortion is the even, not odd distortion.
If I turn up the volume ~6 dB higher, the numbers improve slightly
Next up, the PM-11s2.
Looks like it'd be a golfing panther! At -94.1 dB SINAD, it's clearly going to be in the blue range if it were tested on the APx555! Would it break 100 dB? Who knows?
What if I turn up the volume a bit?
Are you not impressed? If there's still another 6 dB on the table with a better resistive load or even a better DAC feeding the amp, you're now looking at one of the very best measuring Class AB amplifiers, period. With all of the Marantz "Sound Master" tuning, convenience of a remote control, and well documented service manuals!
If the PM-11s2 is that good, what about the PM-10?
Well, this is where the story gets complicated. The PM-10 was built after the Great Recession and the rise of headphone hi-fi. Interviews with the design team talk about environmental regulations/certain parts no longer being available, and Marantz Japan making sure everyone knew the switch to Class D was Marantz Europe's request. The measurements clearly show the consequences for Marantz and switching to class D with noise above 20 kHz and more noise from the power supply.
Old Inaccurate Tests
UPDATE: With ASR membership guidance, I re-tested using the XLR inputs and attached the ground to the PM-10's grounding lug.
What about subjective comparisons?
These tests only measure 1 kHz output and real-world content may be different. The PM-10 essentially can output 600 watts into 8 ohms as compared to the ~120W or so of the PM-11s2. So, for more dynamic music, it's also a big difference to have the extra power on tap.
Subjectively, all three units sound great. I genuinely do think the PM-90 has subjective warmth with vocals and that may be the high 2nd order harmonics and it's a great deal at the used $1K price they go for. The PM-10 and PM-11s2 sound similar but I do believe that I get more subjective bass with the PM-10. That might be the power supply harmonics adding some extra energy in the bass region or improved damping factor. I also do think the PM-10 is better than the PM-11s2 at placing instruments in the space between phantom center and the left and right channel. Not sure if this is purely sighted bias, or if the cleaner signals above 1 khz make it like a cleaner version of the PM-11s2 with a truck idling down the street at -100 dB adding some lower frequency noise.
UPDATE: Whew. The PM-10 sounded better, and thankfully with proper grounding of the test gear, it also measures better.
Conclusion
Overall, I think Marantz has done a pretty good job with their flagship integrated amplifiers. There is clear progression in technology over the time.
UPDATE: With the revised testing, and proper grounding, we can see just how good the PM-10 actually is. It's better than the PM-11s2, now with the advantage of up to 600W on tap (even though it's conservatively rated at 200W into 8) and the more power efficient Class D architecture. I am much more comfortable stating that Marantz has shown clear progression/advancement with time.
My comments about pricing still apply. At MSRP or discounted pricing, it's still expensive. That said, you are getting a very good performance out of the unit -- remember that we're testing this as a full integrated amp with features like tone controls, multiple inputs, a phono unit. You still have to be willing to "vote-with-your-wallet" and spend the extra money for Made in Japan, the 5 year warranty you hope to never use, and the solid service manual hoping that it'll be usable when you pass it onto the next generation.
Still, the PM-11s2 is a real testament to what was achieved by Marantz as the peak of their Class AB lineup. It essentially provides identical performance to the PM-10 at lower power. In fact, when I get a chance, it would be interesting to see how the PM-11s2 performs when properly grounded. Cutting down that smaller ground loop is defintely going to improve the numbers a bit.
EDIT #2: Here are some extended measurements for the PM-10 going all the way up to 360 W of power. These are done under different test conditions as the above so this 5W SINAD is worse due to the E1DA sensitivity.
5W
50W
200W
360W
Last edited:
