Is Marantz dead?

[Miker 1102]

The one thing you can see off the bat is that Marantz is not marked up in the US the way it is in Europe. That shows me that the "sound" is meaningless..like the hdam thing. I think people like the design and it means something to them is my best answer.

 

[Galliardist]

The one thing you can see off the bat is that Marantz is not marked up in the US the way it is in Europe. That shows me that the "sound" is meaningless..like the hdam thing. I think people like the design and it means something to them is my best answer.

Or it may just mean that sales taxes, distribution costs, and the localised power supplies they use in Europe add more to the price. When Sounds United took over distribution in Australia prices for some of their products dropped quite a bit.

 

[EWL5]

Or it may just mean that sales taxes, distribution costs, and the localised power supplies they use in Europe add more to the price. When Sounds United took over distribution in Australia prices for some of their products dropped quite a bit.

I think the price differential is actually smaller in Europe compared to US!

 

[peng]

Or it may just mean that sales taxes, distribution costs, and the localised power supplies they use in Europe add more to the price. When Sounds United took over distribution in Australia prices for some of their products dropped quite a bit.

It has nothing to do with taxes etc., as we have been referring to list prices and actual street prices posted by European and Asia (specifically Singapore in a couple cases) members. Looks like it has mainly to do with marketing, wherever the data show they have more people buy into the sound quality difference myth, they would naturally marked up the price more, accordingly. Distribution cost though, could be a factor naturally, but it would understandably be minor.

 

[Ageve]

The force is strong w/this presentation ("these are not the droids you're looking for)!

"We have specially sculpted reconstruction filters that a customer can switch between in AV-10. So there's like a slow roll-off and a fast roll-off. Basically the slow roll-off is you know, typically a little more fluid, a little more, you know, organic, and yeah… "analog" sounding you know, shall we say?

The fast roll-off is maybe gonna be a touch more forward, a touch more aggressive, and yeah maybe a little more exciting."



From the user manual:

The "Marantz sound" = broken DAC implementation.

SR-7013, preout:

Distortion:

Foldover:

The same signals resampled to 96 kHz before playback:

 

[peng]

As I mentioned many times before, the HDAM sound effects are bs, because if it works, it would defy logic, and the slow roll off filter is only audible if digital inputs are used, for contents with <48 kHz sample rates, not audible at higher rate such as 88.2, 96, 192 kHz. All measurable! People will hear they heard those claimed sound, there is nothing one camp can convince the other. Even PHDs like Dr. Toole and Dr. Olive won't be able to convince the believers, if they tried lol..

Edited typos

 

[Ageve]

and the slow roll off filter is only audible if digital inputs are used, for contents with >48 kHz sample rates, such as 88.2, 96, 192 kHz.

It's the opposite. It's (potentially) only audible when using a sample rate of 48 kHz or lower. The ultrasonic noise won't be audible of course, but the roll-off starting at ~10 kHz might be (-2.5 dB @ 20 kHz):

This is how much ultrasonic noise the Marantz filter (or lack thereof) generates on music content, at 44.1 kHz:

The same recording, but resampled to 96 kHz before playback:

Ignore the peak. It was caused by yet another problem with the SR-7013 (preout clipping at volume >81.5, just like SR-7015).

Having said that, the current Cinema 40 and 70 receivers are better than previous models, even though they lack the filter setting, so they can't be using the same filter as AV-10 (filter 1 is just as bad as SR-7013).

Marantz AV10 AV Processor Review

This is a review and detailed measurements of the Marantz AV10 Audio/Video Processor (AVP). It is on kind loan from a member and costs US $7000. My picture doesn't do justice to the nice look of the unit. It is a massive step up from past Marantz AV products. I am still not a fan of the port...

www.audiosciencereview.com

Marantz Cinema 40 AVR Review

This is a review and detailed measurements of the Marantz Cinema 40 9.4 channel AV Receiver (AVR). It is on kind loan from a member and costs US $3,500. As is typical in this class, you get a very large box. At least the look is unique and to my liking. The port hole display while limiting...

www.audiosciencereview.com

 

[Oddball]

It is indeed an interesting choice to include filter options only for C30 and AV-10. I don't find that to be such high-end option, nor as AV-10 owner would feel worse if C70 had the same option. As I noted previously, Marantz plays primarily on aesthetics (AV-10 excluded) and they do have a market for that.

How smart is to have D&M as opposed to DM is hard to tell as one would need to see their numbers. Time will tell if consolidation is a way to go or they can justify two separate lines that are kissing cousins.

 

[peng]

It's the opposite. It's (potentially) only audible when using a sample rate of 48 kHz or lower. The ultrasonic noise won't be audible of course, but the roll-off starting at ~10 kHz might be (-2.5 dB @ 20 kHz):

View attachment 382987


This is how much ultrasonic noise the Marantz filter (or lack thereof) generates on music content, at 44.1 kHz:

View attachment 382990

The same recording, but resampled to 96 kHz before playback:

Ignore the peak. It was caused by yet another problem with the SR-7013 (preout clipping at volume >81.5, just like SR-7015).

View attachment 382991



Having said that, the current Cinema 40 and 70 receivers are better than previous models, even though they lack the filter setting, so they can't be using the same filter as AV-10 (filter 1 is just as bad as SR-7013).

View attachment 382977

Marantz AV10 AV Processor Review

This is a review and detailed measurements of the Marantz AV10 Audio/Video Processor (AVP). It is on kind loan from a member and costs US $7000. My picture doesn't do justice to the nice look of the unit. It is a massive step up from past Marantz AV products. I am still not a fan of the port...

www.audiosciencereview.com

View attachment 382978

Marantz Cinema 40 AVR Review

This is a review and detailed measurements of the Marantz Cinema 40 9.4 channel AV Receiver (AVR). It is on kind loan from a member and costs US $3,500. As is typical in this class, you get a very large box. At least the look is unique and to my liking. The port hole display while limiting...

www.audiosciencereview.com

Sorry, I had a typo, now I noticed I meant <48 kHz not > 48 kHz, will edit lightning fast lol..

 

[mhardy6647]

You also get a nice porthole w/extremely small font!

Who uses the front of a processor in 2024 when you have an on screen HD guide? Baffles me every time someone mentions the porthole. What are you doing bro? Are you really trying to look across the room to see what’s displayed on the AVR? Is this 1980 or 2024?

I presume that all y'all know that the porthole hearkens back to one of (Saul Marantz-era) marantz's most iconic products.

The marantz 9 mono power amplifier. Push-pull parallel EL34 outputs. Gorgeous aesthetics.
The (borrowed) image above may well be the 1990s "reboots" rather than originals -- but it's actually hard to find a good, high-res photo of the originals.
Personally, I'd be just as happy to have a marantz 8 -- but, at least aesthetically, the 9 was the sine qua non.

Speaking of marantz and their 1960s aesthetic sway -- the famous (and, in some respects, infamous) marantz model 10B FM mpx stereo tuner cast a long shadow and had massive influence on at least the aesthetics of a generation of FM tuners in the US and Japan.

TRIO/Kenwood

(domestic market 700T, image from https://audio-heritage.jp/TRIO-KENWOOD/tuner/700t.html)

Phase Linear (Bob Carver-era)

 

[Galliardist]

It has nothing to do with taxes etc., as we have been referring to list prices and actual street prices posted by European and Asia (specifically Singapore in a couple cases) members. Looks like it has mainly to do with marketing, wherever the data show they have more people buy into the sound quality difference myth, they would naturally marked up the price more, accordingly. Distribution cost though, could be a factor naturally, but it would understandably be minor.

Interesting take. I doubt that most Europeans don’t pay tax on goods in practice. I also doubt that pricing has much to do with the philosophical stance of customers. Price to myth ratio would also suggest since Australia has highest prices we have the most gullible buyers, yet it serms we also have a higher per capita ASR membership!

I guess a dive into advertised prices is in order?

 

[peng]

It is indeed an interesting choice to include filter options only for C30 and AV-10. I don't find that to be such high-end option, nor as AV-10 owner would feel worse if C70 had the same option. As I noted previously, Marantz plays primarily on aesthetics (AV-10 excluded) and they do have a market for that.

How smart is to have D&M as opposed to DM is hard to tell as one would need to see their numbers. Time will tell if consolidation is a way to go or they can justify two separate lines that are kissing cousins.

My preference would be for them to eventually consolidate their marketing teams too, and eventually settle into something like the following strategy:

a) Continue to go with both brands, so people have choices on the style and physical features.
b) Re-introduce Denon AVP, could go with a lower priced model based on the AVR-X6800H.

That way, people can pick their pick based on their personal preference based on styles, physical features only, without having to worry about which "sound signature" they may or may not prefer, and to be brutally truthful, avoid using misleading marketing hype, or some may feel those borderline on perpetuating myths even "lies".

It will (imo) be a win win, as D+M/Masimo could lower their cost too, when they don't have to keep putting in the useless HDAMs, while implementing the two filter options for both D and M lines. Further consolidations naturally also mean more potential for cost reduction.

 

[peng]

I guess a dive into advertised prices is in order?

You can just visit the Marantz.fr first for reference.

Marantz™ Amplis tuner audio/vidéo

Marantz

www.marantz.com

Cinema 40:
2.800,00 €

Récepteurs AV de la série X | Denon FR

Denon

www.denon.com

AVR-X4800H:
2.600,00 €

Difference in list price 200,00 € only.

Then visit the US websites:

CINEMA 40 - Reference 9.4 Channel AV Receiver with 125W, 8K and 7 HDMI Inputs | Marantz - US

Reference 9.4 Channel AV Receiver with 125W, 8K and 7 HDMI Inputs

www.marantz.com

Cinema 40:
$3,500

AVR-X4800H | Home Theater Receiver

The Denon AVR-X4800H is a 9.4 Ch. 125W AV receiver for breathtaking home theater with Dolby Atmos, 8K Ultra HD, DTS:X, and HEOS® Built-in streaming.

www.denon.com

AVR-X4800H:
$2,499

List price difference: a whopping $1,001 difference

So I think 200,00 € difference likely represents the fair value.

I know at one point (not sure about now) the difference in Singapore was 0, posted by one member. Wonder what the difference would be in Australia?

 

[Oddball]

My preference would be for them to eventually consolidate their marketing teams too, and eventually settle into something like the following strategy:

a) Continue to go with both brands, so people have choices on the style and physical features.
b) Re-introduce Denon AVP, could go with a lower priced model based on the AVR-X6800H.

That way, people can pick their pick based on their personal preference based on styles, physical features only, without having to worry about which "sound signature" they may or may not prefer, and to be brutally truthful, avoid using misleading marketing hype, or some may feel those borderline on perpetuating myths even "lies".

It will (imo) be a win win, as D+M/Masimo could lower their cost too, when they don't have to keep putting in the useless HDAMs, while implementing the two filter options for both D and M lines. Further consolidations naturally also mean more potential for cost reduction.

I could definitely live with that.

But on purely consulting side I would imagine that they would be recommended full consolidation as objectively few reasons to keep them separate. DenonMarantz, or the other way around, would also sound pretty powerful and would represent even a stronger brand that is easier (cheaper) to maintain and develop.

They would need to mix and match their products in the way that gives them best coverage at lowest cost and satisfies the consumer needs. Not sure what is the best way to do that, but there probably is one.

If you have any ideas and access to $1BN financing, we could connect separately and brainstorm . After all, they are up for sale.

 

[JeffS7444]

As a kid, I used to think Superscope/Marantz receivers with their horizontal tuning flywheels seemed cool, but that's as close to "warm and fuzzy" as I ever got with the brand. Didn't become aware of Marantz's previous incarnation as a USA brand until later in life.

Visually, the innards of the Denon and Marantz AVRs look pretty much the same to me. I think they periodically update the HDMI/digital boards, and freshen up the looks with new front panels from time to time, while keeping the rest pretty much the same year after year. Which isn't necessarily a bad thing.

Subjectively, my NR1608 sounds perfectly OK, and it feels like a "polished" product.

Front panel and knobs are all plastic, and you won't mistake the feel of rotary encoders and dome switches for the weighted, clicky controls of a 1970s receiver, but said controls are useful, and IMO, it's a good-looking thing.

AM/FM tuner is adequate, but lacks HDradio, and reception is no match for state of the art designs. But then again, I'm not aware of any current receiver being a standout in that regard.

 

[JeffS7444]

One caveat, and it may be more of an Audyssey thing rather than a D/M thing: Default target response has a midrange dip, which IMO makes movie dialog harder to follow - dunno why they did this? But target response can be edited with the aid of Andoid/IOS app, which sells for $20 IIRC.

 

[peng]

As a kid, I used to think Superscope/Marantz receivers with their horizontal tuning flywheels seemed cool, but that's as close to "warm and fuzzy" as I ever got with the brand. Didn't become aware of Marantz's previous incarnation as a USA brand until later in life.

Visually, the innards of the Denon and Marantz AVRs look pretty much the same to me. I think they periodically update the HDMI/digital boards, and freshen up the looks with new front panels from time to time, while keeping the rest pretty much the same year after year. Which isn't necessarily a bad thing.

Subjectively, my NR1608 sounds perfectly OK, and it feels like a "polished" product.

Front panel and knobs are all plastic, and you won't mistake the feel of rotary encoders and dome switches for the weighted, clicky controls of a 1970s receiver, but said controls are useful, and IMO, it's a good-looking thing.

AM/FM tuner is adequate, but lacks HDradio, and reception is no match for state of the art designs. But then again, I'm not aware of any current receiver being a standout in that regard.

I actually like the HDAMs, and I dislike their implementation scheme only because logically speaking they simply cannot make the claimed difference.

FYI, the NR series never have HDAMs in them.

 

[EWL5]

One caveat, and it may be more of an Audyssey thing rather than a D/M thing: Default target response has a midrange dip, which IMO makes movie dialog harder to follow - dunno why they did this? But target response can be edited with the aid of Andoid/IOS app, which sells for $20 IIRC.

I call it the $20 Audyssey tax as it's near impossible to enjoy your audio 100% unless your speakers happen to exhibit the same MRC!

 

[JeffS7444]

I actually like the HDAMs, and I dislike their implementation scheme only because logically speaking they simply cannot make the claimed difference.

FYI, the NR series never have HDAMs in them.

I don't recall implying that they did. In fact, this is the first time I've heard of "HDAM". Sounds to me like they're swapping capacitors and resistors, easy stuff that costs very little, but can be resold as a premium product. NR-series use discrete amplifier modules, and I reckon that I could implement my own version of HDAM, but what a pain in the butt to disassemble the AVR again, and for what, designer capacitors in pretty metallic colors which no one is ever going to see. But I loved the creative product names they came up with for those parts, like "Heart of Muse" and "Black Gate" (cough, I may have purchased a few of them in a previous life).

 

[peng]

I could definitely live with that.

But on purely consulting side I would imagine that they would be recommended full consolidation as objectively few reasons to keep them separate. DenonMarantz, or the other way around, would also sound pretty powerful and would represent even a stronger brand that is easier (cheaper) to maintain and develop.

They would need to mix and match their products in the way that gives them best coverage at lowest cost and satisfies the consumer needs. Not sure what is the best way to do that, but there probably is one.

If you have any ideas and access to $1BN financing, we could connect separately and brainstorm . After all, they are up for sale.

I want both to exist, just being sentimental I guess.