Marantz Cinema 50 AVR Review

[ban25]

The more important thing in this X3800H/Cinema 50 pairing is what the measurements have found so far - OP found Cinema 50 was 4dB better than X3800H, and even X3700H, at 5W SINAD. Could be a better DAC or HDAM doing some magic.

Or it's just measurement variation between two different test benches and reviewers...

 

[peng]

I think the biggest change between the C40 and 8015 is the toroidal transformer. The 8015 was the only AVR along with the Rotel to offer it that I know of. They used to be pretty common 10-15 years ago.

It is not just going from EI to toroidal, the 8015 has a significantly larger power supply, going by the power consumption figure (as you pointed out) it is reasonable to say the VA rating of the 8015's transformer would be roughly 780/680 = approximately 15% larger. Again, this is a very rough estimate because the relationship between power consumption (measured under the same conditions) is dependent on efficiency as well. The 8015 also has more storage capacitance, 2X22,000 uf, 80 V versus the C40's 2X15,000 uf, 71 V. So the difference in current capacity and voltage rating are also significantly higher, not a lot but significant enough you may "hear" the difference if and when you push the output limit, and/or drive lower impedance loads. Also, the amp section is very different, to start it has two more channels, and we know from the older versions such as the Denon AVR-X8500H, X6500H, the SR8015 has the same power amplifiers that are different than the Denon 3000 and 4000 series that are the same as the Marantz 6000 and 7000 series.

The C30 is not out yet, so of course Marantz would say all they could to entice you to buy the C40, thinking that is is close to the SR8015, but when the C30 is out, you will be nicely surprise what they are going to tell you why the C30 is so much better. I may be wrong, but I have been around too long to think otherwise, so just sit tight and come back to discuss in a few months lol..

Now, I am not saying the C40 is not good, in fact I think the C40 appears to be a very nice unit, just that one should not assume it is something that it isn't. Even the C50, imo, is an exceptional AVR overall. If I wasn't disappointed in Marantz (and Denon)'s switch to a lower quality DAC that really spoiled my mood (not sound quality), I would most likely have either waited for the AV10, or just grab a C50 and used it as prepro. That's just me, and I am 99% sure the C50 and X3800H will sound as good as many separates in a controlled blind test. I am not surprised you like the "sound" of the C50, because from all indication, that thing really has no "sound" signature except under some specific conditions (mostly due to the high frequency drop off if the slow roll off dac filter is used) during which it may sound a little different to sensitive ears. The C40 is expected to have the better HDAMs but to me that's 99.9% marketing hype that will not translate into better sound quality than the C50 or even models that don't have HDAMs.

By the way, toridal transformers, as pointed out many time on various forums, articles, don't usually help in better sound quality. My $299 200 W power amp has one too, and many expensive separates, such as Luxman's, some McIntosh amps also used EI core transformer. It has more to do with the individual transformer's construction, though in general, all else being equal, there are pros and cons of both types.

Here's one such article that touched on the subject, I like the title in the introduction "The High-End Mythology of the Toroidal Power Transformer"

SoundStage! Max dB - The High-End Mythology of the Toroidal Power Transformer (07/1998)

Denon has gone back and forth with the EI vs Toroidal over the years, and it seems that they have settled on the E-I version since the AVR-X7200W through A1H, as Gene commented on the possible rationale, but I don't want to quote him as I don't remember exactly what he said in that video comparing the Denon and Marantz flagship AVRs.

 

[peng]

I don't, but neither does anyone outside of Denon at the moment hence I am calling it (X4800H clearly above Cinema 50 in audio quality) speculative for now. I didn't hear Denon marketing folks touting like Marantz did. Marantz also completely changed the model numbers and that indicates they believe Cinema series is more than just an annual evolution.

Who's speculating "X4800H clearly above Cinema 50 in audio quality", can you please link the source so I can read the whole thing to avoid taking it out of context? I fully agree with you that any such claim (if in fact stating that without qualitifications/caveats) would be sX4800H clearly above Cinema 50 in audio qualitypeculative and meaningless if based on actual subjective measurements).

All will be revealed as soon as Amir gets an X4800H (and Cinema 50) to test

What exactly will be revealed, you mean Amir will do a tear down of both to compare what's inside and/or read the service manuals? If not, how is Amir going to tell us whether the X4800H should be compared to the C50 or C40.

You already have published specs and manuals for you to compare the two, and you don't seem to want to accept that there are no compelling reasons to suggest the C50 should be compared to the X4800H, but there are enough reasons to compare the C40 to the X4800H, in the same way we compare the SR7015 to the AVR-X4700H.

I can see that ban25 also tried to tell you the same.

Cinema 50 is at 680W and X3800H at 660W - so clearly in the middle. Maybe this is how D+M wants to rank their AVRs --> Cinema 40 > X4800H > Cinema 50 > X3800H. I mentioned the power and HDMI/Zone being the difference - audibly there will be miniscule difference 110W vs 125W but it is an upgrade nonetheless.

The more important thing in this X3800H/Cinema 50 pairing is what the measurements have found so far - OP found Cinema 50 was 4dB better than X3800H, and even X3700H, at 5W SINAD. Could be a better DAC or HDAM doing some magic.

Again, see ban25's comment on the measurements you are comparing, but you also missed Amir, and thinblue's own comments on why the difference, speculative at the moment but they do make logical sense.

Marantz Cinema 50 AVR Review

And if you don't want to spend so much money, maybe a RZ50 with Dirac included could be your choice

www.audiosciencereview.com

If you take the time to read those follow up posts you will understand why there were some minor difference. Regardless, when comparing such results measured by two different persons, on different test benches using different instruments, you can really say a few dB difference in one or two tests can tell you more than it does, as ban25 said "Or it's just measurement variation between two different test benches and reviewers..."

 

[peng]

Yeah but it's still a bit surprising how close the 6000, 7000 and 8000 series are in terms of power.

The 7011's measurements are:

2 channels driven continuously into 8-ohm loads:
0.1% distortion at 138.7 watts

5 channels driven continuously into 8-ohm loads:
0.1% distortion at 104.9 watts

7 channels driven continuously into 8-ohm loads:
0.1% distortion at 75.1 watts

The 8002's measurements are:

2 channels driven continuously into 8-ohm loads:
0.1% distortion at 174.1 watts

5 channels driven continuously into 8-ohm loads:
0.1% distortion at 119.0 watts

7 channels driven continuously into 8-ohm loads:
0.1% distortion at 109.1 watts

The 7011 (which is probably a good representation of the power of the Cinema 40) is actually a decent match against the 8002 up to 5 channels and only drops in 7 channels. Of course, the 8000 has a toroidal transformer and is one of 2 AVRs that still include one (Rotel is the other one).

Are there any measurements of power usage during a dynamic movie with and without a sub to see if these values have any meaning?

If you are comparing Marantz models, I agree it is reasonable to use the power consumption specifications as guideline to estimate their power output ratings, but then they also give you the power output specs anyway so there isn't much point other than you may speculate their efficiencies.

If comparing with other brands such as Yamaha's then you really cannot do an apples to apples comparison.

Take a look of the 47 lbs Yamaha A8A's power consumption specs and you will know what I am trying to say:

Do you know from the specs the conditions under which the 600 W "Power consumption" was obtained? I don't! And note that it says 1370 W all ch driven 10%, OMG!!

 

[techsamurai]

I don't, but neither does anyone outside of Denon at the moment hence I am calling it (X4800H clearly above Cinema 50 in audio quality) speculative for now. I didn't hear Denon marketing folks touting like Marantz did. Marantz also completely changed the model numbers and that indicates they believe Cinema series is more than just an annual evolution. All will be revealed as soon as Amir gets an X4800H (and Cinema 50) to test


Cinema 50 is at 680W and X3800H at 660W - so clearly in the middle. Maybe this is how D+M wants to rank their AVRs --> Cinema 40 > X4800H > Cinema 50 > X3800H. I mentioned the power and HDMI/Zone being the difference - audibly there will be miniscule difference 110W vs 125W but it is an upgrade nonetheless.

The more important thing in this X3800H/Cinema 50 pairing is what the measurements have found so far - OP found Cinema 50 was 4dB better than X3800H, and even X3700H, at 5W SINAD. Could be a better DAC or HDAM doing some magic.

Does this review have 2, 5, and 7 channel measurements for the Cinema 50? The only measurements I can find of the 6000 series are Gene's from 2010 for the 6004 which had 650 watts. I think the 6004's numbers wouldn't be that far off the Cinema 50. Generally speaking, the 6004 has 60% of the power that the 8015 produces.

Marantz SR6004 7.1CH AV Receiver Review

Check out the Marantz SR6004 if you're looking for a midpriced AV receiver that is easy to use, has respectable power reserves & audio performance and sports Dolby TrueHD, DTS-HD and PLIIz upmixing.

www.audioholics.com

Marantz SR8015 11CH 8K DTS:X Pro AV Receiver Review

The Marantz SR8015 11.2CH Atmos/DTS:X Pro HDMI 2.1 AV receiver is built on a very solid platform with benchmark measured performance. Is this the best AVR for 2020? Read our review to find out.

www.audioholics.com

But the real question is does that matter? I don't know the answer to that as I don't know what power loads are on my AVR when watching a movie. And a sub probably changes that completely. Do we know what the loads are one the lower 2 octaves (or more) are crossed over to the sub?

I can tell from my experience with multiple 8002s that I ran in with 5 channels (2 extra bi-amp so 7 channels) for 12 years with games and movies in full range. The 8002 handled it like a champ, never feeling that it needed an extra watt. Would the 6000 series have done the same? I don't know the answer to that. I think with a sub, it would have.

 

[GXAlan]

@peng, pure speculation but I wonder how much crosstalk you get between the different setups. The power supplies and isolation between different sections is one of the differences between the 3800H and 4800H. Back when Sound and Vision did measurements, the mid tier X3400H had crosstalk of -80 dB while the X7200WA and separates like Yamaha CX-A5100 were to -94 dB at 1 kHz. That might generate real world audible differences if you assume that once you have more channels running and anticipate worse crosstalk at higher frequencies.

 

[GXAlan]

If comparing with other brands such as Yamaha's then you really cannot do an apples to apples comparison.

Take a look of the 47 lbs Yamaha A8A's power consumption specs and you will know what I am trying to say:

Do you know from the specs the conditions under which the 600 W "Power consumption" was obtained? I don't! And note that it says 1370 W all ch driven 10%, OMG!!

For the benefit of discussion, here is how the A8A actually measures At audiovision.de

versus thr SR5014 which is rated at 650W consumption

 

[GXAlan]

I don't know what power loads are on my AVR when watching a movie.

The magic of this site is that it encourages you to try! Go ahead and get a multimeter, attach it to your speakers in parallel and then look at AC volts. You can then do the math with “nominal” impedence to get a rough estimate of power.

Room size and speaker efficiency play a big role. In my medium room (15 feet distance to front speakers, rears right behind the sofa) and high efficiency speakers (92 dB/W for L, R, FH; 89 dB for C), i probably never exceed 50W. That gives me 95 dB at the center speaker alone. But for a burst at 105 dB, I actually need 400 watts!

My MX-A5000 actually does that. “80W all channels driven” and burst single channel in the 400W range. I rarely listen at reference level to protect my ears.

Yamaha AVENTAGE CX-A5000 AV Processor and MX-A5000 Amplifier Review

Review: The Yamaha AVENTAGE CX-A5000 Processor and MX-A5000 11-channel amplifier are for you if you have ever wanted reasonably-priced separates but didn't want to sacrifice features or performance.

www.audioholics.com

In contrast, if I used Magnepan MG-3’s as my speakers, even my 600W PM-10 theoretically only gets to 100 dB. (Probably will hit limits of the speaker first)

 

[peng]

Does this review have 2, 5, and 7 channel measurements for the Cinema 50? The only measurements I can find of the 6000 series are Gene's from 2010 for the 6004 which had 650 watts. I think the 6004's numbers wouldn't be that far off the Cinema 50. Generally speaking, the 6004 has 60% of the power that the 8015 produces.

Marantz SR6004 7.1CH AV Receiver Review

Check out the Marantz SR6004 if you're looking for a midpriced AV receiver that is easy to use, has respectable power reserves & audio performance and sports Dolby TrueHD, DTS-HD and PLIIz upmixing.

www.audioholics.com

Marantz SR8015 11CH 8K DTS:X Pro AV Receiver Review

The Marantz SR8015 11.2CH Atmos/DTS:X Pro HDMI 2.1 AV receiver is built on a very solid platform with benchmark measured performance. Is this the best AVR for 2020? Read our review to find out.

www.audioholics.com

But the real question is does that matter? I don't know the answer to that as I don't know what power loads are on my AVR when watching a movie. And a sub probably changes that completely. Do we know what the loads are one the lower 2 octaves (or more) are crossed over to the sub?

I can tell from my experience with multiple 8002s that I ran in with 5 channels (2 extra bi-amp so 7 channels) for 12 years with games and movies in full range. The 8002 handled it like a champ, never feeling that it needed an extra watt. Would the 6000 series have done the same? I don't know the answer to that. I think with a sub, it would have.

Agreed in general, and that's why I said they didn't mean a whole lot, though still mean something as always..

You seem interested in the details, for you I Google Gene on Audioholics and he did not disappoint.

I hope you will read the whole article, it is very informative:

Receiver Power Consumption Rating vs Output Power Is Not Watt You Think!

Ever wonder how your favorite manufacturer rates power consumption on their AV receivers and how it relates to maximum available output power to your speakers? The answer may surprise you so read on.

www.audioholics.com

If not, at least the following:

What does the back panel power consumption rating mean?​

• Unless it says "max power" don't assume it's a max power rating with all channels driven.
• ·According to Sound United, they follow IEC 62368-1 electrical safety standard for rating power, specifically Annex B for operating conditions and Annex E for test conditions.
• Amplifier to be tested at 1/8th unclipped de-rated power @ 1kHz & rated load impedance.
• Sound United follows IEC 62368-1, the electrical safety standard for audio, video and similar equipment for their AV receivers.
• Follow operating condition under Annex B: Normal operating condition tests, abnormal operating condition tests and single fault condition tests, and the amplifier output conditions defined under Annex E: Test conditions for equipment containing audio amplifiers.
• Measured input current/power under normal operating conditions shall NOT exceed the rated current/power by > 10%. Note: ACD testing is NOT considered a "normal operating" condition.

He also mentioned that the older models the numbers were derived using a different standard.

This lengthy conversion started from you post #168 when you asked:

Aren't they supposed to update it (as in required by law)? If not, then these measurements could be false. They haven't updated their max power consumption either.

I didn't want to answer that directly because I didn't think there's a straight forward answer. So I tried to emphasize the consumption figures didn't mean too much and as such it would not be right to say the measurements could be false, or not. Now you know it depends on how it is measured, i.e. as you said, what's the load conditions.

Same for the THD thing, D+M can give you a number, such as 0.08% for the 6000/3000 Marantz/Denon series, and 0.05% for the 7000/8000/4000,6000,7000,8000 Marantz/Denon series, but that's just one number under one condition. So it really cannot be false as such right?

Audio devices are not considered to be a health and safety related devices that required them to be regulated by the authorities. Unfortunately, without manufacturers following the same standards (let alone the availability of appropriately adequate standards) the consumers won't be able to take the manufacturers specifications serious enough. Fortunately, we do have some detailed measurements such as the ones Gene and Amir have been providing us with their objective reviews.

 

[peng]

For the benefit of discussion, here is how the A8A actually measures At audiovision.de

View attachment 257749

versus thr SR5014 which is rated at 650W consumption
View attachment 257750

Yes, they measured several Marantz SR6000 series too including the SR6014,6015, and more.

The measurements by audiovision.de further support my point on the power consumption specs!!

 

[techsamurai]

The C30 is not out yet, so of course Marantz would say all they could to entice you to buy the C40, thinking that is is close to the SR8015, but when the C30 is out, you will be nicely surprise what they are going to tell you why the C30 is so much better. I may be wrong, but I have been around too long to think otherwise, so just sit tight and come back to discuss in a few months lol..

We may not see a C30 for many years - in fact, the 8000s seem to go in pairs. The 8001, then the 8002 - then nothing for a decade or so, then the 8012 and 8015 and big gaps between models. But I could be wrong - they certainly left room for it in the numbering.

 

[techsamurai]

If you are comparing Marantz models, I agree it is reasonable to use the power consumption specifications as guideline to estimate their power output ratings, but then they also give you the power output specs anyway so there isn't much point other than you may speculate their efficiencies.

If comparing with other brands such as Yamaha's then you really cannot do an apples to apples comparison.

Take a look of the 47 lbs Yamaha A8A's power consumption specs and you will know what I am trying to say:

Do you know from the specs the conditions under which the 600 W "Power consumption" was obtained? I don't! And note that it says 1370 W all ch driven 10%, OMG!!

L:

For the benefit of discussion, here is how the A8A actually measures At audiovision.de



versus thr SR5014 which is rated at 650W consumption

Are these 0.1% or 1%? I'm guessing they are 1% but I could be wrong.

If they are 0.1% then the A8A is probably around as powerful as the 8015 +-10%. If it's 1% THD it's probably 10-15% under. They are 4 and 6 ohm so it makes it hard to compare to 8 ohms but we can extrapolate.

 

[techsamurai]

Yeah but it's still a bit surprising how close the 6000, 7000 and 8000 series are in terms of power.

I'm retracting this, there is at least a 40-50% difference between the 6000 and 8000 depending on number of channels driven.

By the way, toridal transformers, as pointed out many time on various forums, articles, don't usually help in better sound quality. My $299 200 W power amp has one too, and many expensive separates, such as Luxman's, some McIntosh amps also used EI core transformer. It has more to do with the individual transformer's construction, though in general, all else being equal, there are pros and cons of both types.

Here's one such article that touched on the subject, I like the title in the introduction "The High-End Mythology of the Toroidal Power Transformer"

SoundStage! Max dB - The High-End Mythology of the Toroidal Power Transformer (07/1998)

Denon has gone back and forth with the EI vs Toroidal over the years, and it seems that they have settled on the E-I version since the AVR-X7200W through A1H, as Gene commented on the possible rationale, but I don't want to quote him as I don't remember exactly what he said in that video comparing the Denon and Marantz flagship AVRs.

Yeah, I always think of Luxman and Denon when I think EI - not sure why Luxman because it's a shock and Denon because they can't make their minds up - one day they love Toroidals, the next it's all EI.

But then again, you look at 2 stereo high-end amps (there was 1 article/video of the insides of 20 of them in a price range) and they all had toroidal amps - in fact, one had 2 of them (monoblock) from France. It pretty much kills EI in a high-end discussion as every manufacturer opts for a toroidal amp.

 

[peng]

We may not see a C30 for many years - in fact, the 8000s seem to go in pairs. The 8001, then the 8002 - then nothing for a decade or so, then the 8012 and 8015 and big gaps between models. But I could be wrong - they certainly left room for it in the numbering.

We may never see it too, as they may want no longer want to compete with the Denon A1H right for the flagship AVR just like Denon did not compete with Marantz on the AV Pre/processor. The use of the TI DAC complicates matter for a lot of potential buys too, who are still not happy with that choice. It is one thing to spend $2 to $3K on the lower models and be happy with the TI chip, but it is tough to justify $4K on the 2022 SR8015 that we know will take a SINAD hit of >10 dB because of the substituted DAC. If there is a C30, lots of people especially ASR members will probably expect them to use a better chip.

 

[techsamurai]

I hope you will read the whole article, it is very informative:

Receiver Power Consumption Rating vs Output Power Is Not Watt You Think!

Ever wonder how your favorite manufacturer rates power consumption on their AV receivers and how it relates to maximum available output power to your speakers? The answer may surprise you so read on.

www.audioholics.com

Interesting, so the unit will exceed that power consumption greatly when tested. The 8015 was hitting 1300 watts with 7 channels at 100 watts.

It doesn't answer the question of how much power an AVR needs to drive 5-7 channels with and without a sub. It's speaker dependent but let's use a worst case scenario like the notorious B&W 702 S2 for the left and right.

 

[peng]

Interesting, so the unit will exceed that power consumption greatly when tested. The 8015 was hitting 1300 watts with 7 channels at 100 watts.

Yes, because those tests were done for short duration only, "continuous" often meant using continuous sine wave for the test, not literally continuous.

It doesn't answer the question of how much power an AVR needs to drive 5-7 channels with and without a sub. It's speaker dependent but let's use a worst case scenario like the notorious B&W 702 S2 for the left and right.

No it doesn't because you must know that already that how much power you actually need depends on many factor, including but not limited to the following:

- distance
- listening habit, such as how loud, genres of the music, room acoustic characteristics
- speaker's sensitivity, impedance and phase angle vs frequency characteristics.

Using spl calculator can give you the ball park very quickly if you drop the B&W's specified 90 dB/2.83V/m to say 86 dB, to allow for the worse case scenario. For example, if you enter the data properly, it will show that you can get about 95-96 dB spl. That is quite loud but nowhere near reference level (105 dB peak). That's when you listening habit become important. If you want to listen to reference level from 10 ft, you will need more than 600 WPC.

Peak SPL Calculator

For the B&W 702 S2 though, you luck out, thanks to Stereophile:

Base on those graphs, with or without a sub won't make much of a difference unless you set crossover very high to around 100 to 150 Hz that I don't think you want to do.
Setting it to 80 Hz will still leave the tough part of impedance below 4 ohm and some tough phase angles.

Or you cut all the craps, forget about any calculations, and just go with B&W's website info on recommended amplifier power:

702 S2 Tower Speakers | Bowers & Wilkins

The 702 S2 tower speakers feature three dedicated Aerofoil bass drivers, a Continuum cone, and a solid body tweeter for goosebump-inducing audio.

www.bowerswilkins.com

Recommended amplifier power

30W - 300W into 8Ω on unclipped programme

That means, forget about AVRs, go with the Cinema 50, or the AVR-X3800H and use them as preamp/processor, pair with buckeye's Hypex NC502MP based power amps. Then you know for sure you have enough "power" for the 702 S2.

 

[techsamurai]

Yes, because those tests were done for short duration only, "continuous" often meant using continuous sine wave for the test, not literally continuous.



No it doesn't because you must know that already that how much power you actually need depends on many factor, including but not limited to the following:

- distance
- listening habit, such as how loud, genres of the music, room acoustic characteristics
- speaker's sensitivity, impedance and phase angle vs frequency characteristics.

Using spl calculator can give you the ball park very quickly if you drop the B&W's specified 90 dB/2.83V/m to say 86 dB, to allow for the worse case scenario. For example, if you enter the data properly, it will show that you can get about 95-96 dB spl. That is quite loud but nowhere near reference level (105 dB peak). That's when you listening habit become important. If you want to listen to reference level from 10 ft, you will need more than 600 WPC.

Peak SPL Calculator

For the B&W 702 S2 though, you luck out, thanks to Stereophile:

Base on those graphs, with or without a sub won't make much of a difference unless you set crossover very high to around 100 to 150 Hz that I don't think you want to do.
Setting it to 80 Hz will still leave the tough part of impedance below 4 ohm and some tough phase angles.

Or you cut all the craps, forget about any calculations, and just go with B&W's website info on recommended amplifier power:

702 S2 Tower Speakers | Bowers & Wilkins

The 702 S2 tower speakers feature three dedicated Aerofoil bass drivers, a Continuum cone, and a solid body tweeter for goosebump-inducing audio.

www.bowerswilkins.com

Recommended amplifier power

30W - 300W into 8Ω on unclipped programme

That means, forget about AVRs, go with the Cinema 50, or the AVR-X3800H and use them as preamp/processor, pair with buckeye's Hypex NC502MP based power amps. Then you know for sure you have enough "power" for the 702 S2.

Thank you, this is very well explained! I only auditioned the 702 S2 as I own the older 703 and the audition was hilarious - it lasted 5 minutes and we went through a wall of expensive AVRs. I thought the speaker was broken (but how could both be broken) - then I read Andrew Robinson's review where he had to switch to M8xi to get the 702 Signature to avoid sounding like the worst speaker ever.

I have the old 703s which exhibit similar behavior at the low end but not to the extent of the 702s and they are rated for 200w. Surprisingly, the Marantz SR8002 does a great job of driving them especially in bi-amp. Even without a sub in full range, I've never heard it distort or pop or anything like that. I added a sub last year and it's overall better. I can't imagine the sound being better and nothing I've auditioned was clearly better that I said "I need this!".

Does room size play a role? My systems are all in living rooms.

Do you know if bi-amping affects the required wattage? I don't think it would but electrical currents work in mysterious ways

The Buckeye looks really nice!

 

[peng]

Thank you, this is very well explained! I only auditioned the 702 S2 as I own the older 703 and the audition was hilarious - it lasted 5 minutes and we went through a wall of expensive AVRs. I thought the speaker was broken (but how could both be broken) - then I read Andrew Robinson's review where he had to switch to M8xi to get the 702 Signature to avoid sounding like the worst speaker ever.

I have the old 703s which exhibit similar behavior at the low end but not to the extent of the 702s and they are rated for 200w. Surprisingly, the Marantz SR8002 does a great job of driving them especially in bi-amp. Even without a sub in full range, I've never heard it distort or pop or anything like that. I added a sub last year and it's overall better. I can't imagine the sound being better and nothing I've auditioned was clearly better that I said "I need this!".

Does room size play a role? My systems are all in living rooms.

Do you know if bi-amping affects the required wattage? I don't think it would but electrical currents work in mysterious ways

The Buckeye looks really nice!

I have no idea why the SR8002 would make much different. I downloaded the SM and found nothing remarkable about its power supply and output devices. The transformer size if decent, probably a little smaller than the SR8015's and about the same VA size as the C50's. My old Denon 3805 and 4308 has higher current rating.

It is also class AB and weighs only 33 lbs. Storage caps are 2X22,000 uf that is very good but rated only 63 V but it should do a little better with 4 ohm loads than the likes of the Cinema 50. Output devices are the typical 15 A rated transistors, similar to those used in the D+M and Yamaha AVRs.

You can take a look for yourself if you are interested:

Free Audio Service Manuals - Free download Marantz SR 8002 Service Manual

Read or download Marantz SR 8002 Service Manual PDF with 203 pages. No login, no charge and no limit.

www.audioservicemanuals.com

Room size play a role for sure because it is more difficult for small speakers such as the 702 S2 to fill a large room. SPL from you sitting position is still more dependent on distance from the speakers.

In some cases (but not always) bi-amp can provide the speakers with a little more clean power as the tweeter/mid and the woofers are fed by two amps instead of one. For example, if you bi-amp the 702 S2, then one amp will be dedicated to drive the tweeter and the midrange driver and the other amp will only have to drive the bass drivers. That's assuming you are running 2 channels stereo, otherwise it will help very little because you are still relying on the same one power supply of the AVR, that typically isn't as strong as those used for separate power amps, all else being equal. How much it helps will also depend on the music contents too.

 

[techsamurai]

I have no idea why the SR8002 would make much different. I downloaded the SM and found nothing remarkable about its power supply and output devices. The transformer size if decent, probably a little smaller than the SR8015's and about the same VA size as the C50's. My old Denon 3805 and 4308 has higher current rating.

It is also class AB and weighs only 33 lbs. Storage caps are 2X22,000 uf that is very good but rated only 63 V but it should do a little better with 4 ohm loads than the likes of the Cinema 50. Output devices are the typical 15 A rated transistors, similar to those used in the D+M and Yamaha AVRs.

You can take a look for yourself if you are interested:

Free Audio Service Manuals - Free download Marantz SR 8002 Service Manual

Read or download Marantz SR 8002 Service Manual PDF with 203 pages. No login, no charge and no limit.

www.audioservicemanuals.com

Room size play a role for sure because it is more difficult for small speakers such as the 702 S2 to fill a large room. SPL from you sitting position is still more dependent on distance from the speakers.

In some cases (but not always) bi-amp can provide the speakers with a little more clean power as the tweeter/mid and the woofers are fed by two amps instead of one. For example, if you bi-amp the 702 S2, then one amp will be dedicated to drive the tweeter and the midrange driver and the other amp will only have to drive the bass drivers. That's assuming you are running 2 channels stereo, otherwise it will help very little because you are still relying on the same one power supply of the AVR, that typically isn't as strong as those used for separate power amps, all else being equal. How much it helps will also depend on the music contents too.

Thanks for the link!

I know it's lighter but the 8002 benches higher than the 8015 - soundandvision still has the bench results. Audioholics used to have the review - it's been removed since then but it was higher than the 8015.

Here are the 8002 (Sound & Vision):

2 channels 8-ohm loads:
0.1% distortion at 174.1 watts
1% distortion at 187.4 watts

2 channels 4-ohm:
0.1% distortion at 231.9 watts
1% distortion at 271.5 watts

Here are the 8015 (Audioholics 1khz sweeps)

2 channels 8-ohm loads:
0.1% distortion at 151 watts
1% distortion at 167 watts

2 channels 4-ohm:
0.1% distortion at 229 watts
1% distortion at 251 watts

It's close but if it's Continuous for the 8002 vs 1khz sweeps for the 8015 then the difference is a bit higher. It's not massive but it's anywhere from 5%-20%.

 

[techsamurai]

Room size play a role for sure because it is more difficult for small speakers such as the 702 S2 to fill a large room. SPL from you sitting position is still more dependent on distance from the speakers.

In some cases (but not always) bi-amp can provide the speakers with a little more clean power as the tweeter/mid and the woofers are fed by two amps instead of one. For example, if you bi-amp the 702 S2, then one amp will be dedicated to drive the tweeter and the midrange driver and the other amp will only have to drive the bass drivers. That's assuming you are running 2 channels stereo, otherwise it will help very little because you are still relying on the same one power supply of the AVR, that typically isn't as strong as those used for separate power amps, all else being equal. How much it helps will also depend on the music contents too.

The 702 S2 is a full tower - it's smaller than the Wharfedale Elysian 4 if that's what you mean

Yeah, bi-amping is complicated - technically we all bi-amp when we add a subwoofer and in my case, I'm tri-amping.

KEF explains it best on their website in this article. My point is that if I'm listening to music and my AVR is only generating 50-100 watts, I can easily dedicate another channel to generate 100-200 watts and bi-amp. I have nothing to lose and now the Left and Right receive their own totally different feed without having to rely on those awful "cheezy" interconnectors that Danny screams about.

Bi-Amp'ing Basics Article By Jack Sharkey KEF Direct

Bi-Amp'ing Basics Article By Jack Sharkey KEF Direct

www.enjoythemusic.com