Marantz Cinema 70s AVR Review

[Thomas_A]

Erin recently measured a slimline A/V Processor, McIntosh MX100. It had 107db SINAD. Looks like a champ, just missing Dirac and no 8k.

I wonder how their larger processors will fair.

McIntosh MX100 A/V Processor Review

McIntosh MX100 A/V Processor Review

www.erinsaudiocorner.com

Vs. the Marantz with a max SINAD at 97. You "win" 10 dB and loose $4500.

 

[jaakkopetteri]

Vs. the Marantz with a max SINAD at 97. You "win" 10 dB and loose $4500.

You also win XT32. Someone ping me if the MX100 ever comes on sale with a 70% discount

 

[Thomas_A]

Did not. If you look at amp measurements you see that distortion is the problem, not noise:

Third harmonic is already at -70 dB which would set SINAD to 70 by itself. Add the others and you get the 68/69 SINAD. Changing volumes would only change noise.

On that front, I have standardized at THX's 29 dB gain so don't want to mix and match there.

You note high noise floor at 8 ohm, the bump on the curve is not there as with 4 ohm (bump is distortion increase only?). So how is 8 ohm doing, distortion-wise? I read just below -70 dB THD+N at 5 W and -78 dB at 57 W.

 

[Thomas_A]

Personally I would vote this unit as an excellent AV preprocessor. THD+N at -94 dB (2V) and dipping to -97 dB (1.5V) and you can get it for €698.

 

[ocinn]

Wow.

It was before I was born, but marantz used to be the leader of ultra high performance tube amplification.

Shame to see their principles dissolve.

NAD has managed to escape the corporate curse of profit margins, and are still making great stuff. Unfortunately marantz has proven time and time again in recent years that they have succumbed (and I totally get it, baby boomers and earlier gen X buy marantz for the prestige of the brand they knew and loved at it’s peak)

 

[Tangband]

Personally I would vote this unit as an excellent AV preprocessor. THD+N at -94 dB (2V) and dipping to -97 dB (1.5V) and you can get it for €698.

Canton smart connect 5.1 might be a better buy for the same money. If the digital filter used has better attenuation.
As you know, Swedish soundtechnical society has shown that a good attenuation of the digital filtering is the most crucial thing in a dac for being without coloration in the listening tests. More important than high SINAD numbers.

 

[jaakkopetteri]

Canton smart connect 5.1 might be a better buy for the same money. If the digital filter used has better attenuation

I can find it regularly for sale for half the price of the 70s and even then it's hardly worth it due the loud pops and noises, poor UI, random bugs and questionable audio quality - I'll have to try measuring it with my Focusrite. No room correction either, the 70s at least allows custom filters with MultEQ-X.

If I understand correctly, the attenuation isn't really an audible problem

 

[TonyJZX]

Wow.

It was before I was born, but marantz used to be the leader of ultra high performance tube amplification.

Shame to see their principles dissolve.

well marantz have a storied history of being bounced around from owner to owner and them not being able to full capitalise on Saul's surname...

and their sort of heavily Japanese history is a part of the problem:

Cinema 70s AV Receiver | Marantz

The Marantz Cinema 70s is a 7.2 channel 150W AV receiver with a slim, discreet design featuring Dolby Atmos, DTS:X, 8K Ultra HD, and HEOS® Built-in streaming.

www.marantz.com

check out the flowery prose and the stern serious Japanese gentleman there

and in this end, is it even worth the bucket to piss in (so to speak)

i think deep down we all knew this was coming since it gets so much dna from the NR1500,1600,1700 series which has decades of subpar performance.

 

[peng]

Personally I would vote this unit as an excellent AV preprocessor. THD+N at -94 dB (2V) and dipping to -97 dB (1.5V) and you can get it for €698.

If they remove the HDAMs, all their Cinema models should achieve the same or better SINAD, and prices should drop $50-$100. Amir should try to convince them, it's good for sale, especially they have now virtually admitted the intended sound by their sound master is actually the dac filter choices, not the HDAMS that should be transparent anyway the fact that they are just op amps (but discrete), and are functionally buffers only.

 

[peng]

It is an expensive AVR that is outside of return window so I will have to get permission from owner with respect to chance of damage.

Thanks, how about if you test for up to half it's rated output? That way at least we know how it would behave in terms of stability.

Perhaps do it with ECO on, to further safeguard the owner's interest.

 

[peng]

Be advised, the recently released Denon AVR-X1800H AVR has preamplifier outputs for the Front L/R channels. The predecessor X1700H did not - unless one counts 'Zone 2'.

Denon AVR-X1800H

7.2-channel home theatre receiver with Dolby Atmos®, Bluetooth®, Apple AirPlay® 2, and Amazon Alexa compatibility

www.crutchfield.ca

Great, I hope it goes on sale, then I will solve my DLBC implementation problem!!

Thanks for the info, hopefully the info is accurate.

Just double checked Denon website, the info is accurate, thanks again for the good news. That's a Cinema 70 killer for those who don't need the slim's form factor.

 

[beagleman]

I will sound like a broken record here,,,,,,,,,,,

But........

I would find it far more informative to have a somewhat in depth listening session first, to SEE it all these "Faults" could be heard, without prior knowledge of the mediocre measurements/
Then see if the measurement correlate with the listening impressions. In other words, to the measurements matter in "reality" or are we talking an academic exercise?

I get it measures mediocre and for the cost not great value, but again, I have owned mediocre measuring AVRs, that in actual real use, sounded very good/great, and had zero impact on my listening, even WHEN listening to find/hear the weaknesses or mediocre measuring parameters.

I get why many want to see good measurements, I really do, but the audibility thing keeps coming up.

 

[Thomas_A]

Canton smart connect 5.1 might be a better buy for the same money. If the digital filter used has better attenuation.
As you know, Swedish soundtechnical society has shown that a good attenuation of the digital filtering is the most crucial thing in a dac for being without coloration in the listening tests. More important than high SINAD numbers.

I think the slow filter of the previous ones, almost 3 dB down at 20 kHz is worse than the level of attenuation.

 

[Thomas_A]

If they remove the HDAMs, all their Cinema models should achieve the same or better SINAD, and prices should drop $50-$100. Amir should try to convince them, it's good for sale, especially they have now virtually admitted the intended sound by their sound master is actually the dac filter choices, not the HDAMS that should be transparent anyway the fact that they are just op amps (but discrete), and are functionally buffers only.

Well the only thing they can’t do change the form factor. If my unit breaks down I no longer will have a setup. These are my limits WAF and all

 

[peng]

Well the only thing they can’t do change the form factor. If my unit breaks down I no longer will have a setup. These are my limits WAF and all
View attachment 333972

Looks like the C70 was designed for those limited by WAF.

 

[Thomas_A]

Looks like the C70 was designed for those limited by WAF.

I can squeeze in two class D stereo amps instead of the Rotel and get lower THD for the sub and mains. I can live with with -70 dB THD+N on the surrounds and front heights.

 

[Haskil]

I will sound like a broken record here,,,,,,,,,,,

But........

I would find it far more informative to have a somewhat in depth listening session first, to SEE it all these "Faults" could be heard, without prior knowledge of the mediocre measurements/
Then see if the measurement correlate with the listening impressions. In other words, to the measurements matter in "reality" or are we talking an academic exercise?

I get it measures mediocre and for the cost not great value, but again, I have owned mediocre measuring AVRs, that in actual real use, sounded very good/great, and had zero impact on my listening, even WHEN listening to find/hear the weaknesses or mediocre measuring parameters.

I get why many want to see good measurements, I really do, but the audibility thing keeps coming up.

What is expected of a home theater receiver of this retail price is that all its measurements conform to what is expected of a device in its class. It being understood that its sound quality will only be compromised if speakers whose impedance is 4 ohms and have a sensitivity low enough to put the amplifier into protection during multi-channel use for which it is nevertheless planned.

The audibility of the measurements is a non-issue here: the only problem here is that for the same price, this device should have better performance.

The fact remains that whoever buys it will be able to choose it for its very pretty aesthetic, its low height and we advise them to look carefully because they will be able to find it for much less than advertised in stores... But they should be careful to the impedance of its speakers, their sensitivity and the sound level required when watching a film or music in multichannel.

 

[Deleted member 48726]

I will sound like a broken record here,,,,,,,,,,,

But........

I would find it far more informative to have a somewhat in depth listening session first, to SEE it all these "Faults" could be heard, without prior knowledge of the mediocre measurements/
Then see if the measurement correlate with the listening impressions. In other words, to the measurements matter in "reality" or are we talking an academic exercise?

I get it measures mediocre and for the cost not great value, but again, I have owned mediocre measuring AVRs, that in actual real use, sounded very good/great, and had zero impact on my listening, even WHEN listening to find/hear the weaknesses or mediocre measuring parameters.

I get why many want to see good measurements, I really do, but the audibility thing keeps coming up.

A tier index IR to audibility would say more. Alongside the measurements. In time I have found the designations into the categories not to represent the actual experience with the products tested. The arguments for them would be that they are given for engineering excellence but I do miss the parallel tier to actual audibility of the score IRL applications. But that isn't easy to do because of the billions of different setups that people have. One would then have to make up his own mind whether or not the reviewed product is good enough.

 

[Power Pop 23]

If they remove the HDAMs, all their Cinema models should achieve the same or better SINAD, and prices should drop $50-$100. Amir should try to convince them, it's good for sale, especially they have now virtually admitted the intended sound by their sound master is actually the dac filter choices, not the HDAMS that should be transparent anyway the fact that they are just op amps (but discrete), and are functionally buffers only.

It appears Sounds United uses 'HDAM's as a point of differentiation for Marantz 'siblings' of Denon products. Imagine instead engineers at Sounds United being allowed to choose the bill of materials to achieve slightly lower measured noise and distortion than the Denon siblings as the rationale to justify the higher list prices of Marantz gear.

 

[Ismapics]

How does the 70s compare to a 70's Receiver?