Marantz Model 10 integrated amplifier

[GXAlan]

'm not a fan of sticking complete third party, entire amplifier modules in a flagship TOTL product, but it's been done before and is regularly done across practically every industry.

I mean where do you draw the line? An amplifier module, an SMPS power supply, a circuit design or technique, a particular IC or even buying a microcontroller from a rival company to use in your product? How is it different to the CD player era where various manufacturers used complete IC sets from Sony, D/A converters from Burr Brown, Philips, Toshiba? They didn't have the expertise or investment to make their own.

They do seem to suggest it is an in house SMPS and the preamp is a continued evolution of the pre-Denon-merger SC-7S1.

Because when you talk about amplifiers, aren’t they using transistors from Sanken? McIntosh is using transistors from OnSemi…. Where do you draw the line?

There was a huge difference in protection circuitry on the PM-10 and off the shelf HypeX SMPS and HypeX NC500. Ralph from Atmasphere has acknowledged that Purifi and HypeX have patents that are hard to work around. So from the get go, this is probably a Purifi design that has added protection circuits.

The biggest problem in my opinion is the price.

WHAT IS INTERESTING is that Marantz may be the only major audio player who is simultaneously shipping HypeX, ICEpower, and Purifi. That sort of experience may result in the development of their own Class D modules, the same way Pioneer went a few rounds with ICE before going with their own design.

I cannot think of anyone else shipping HypeX (Model 30), ICEpower (Amp 10) and Purifi (Model 10) simultaneously, can you? And on all three cases they are combining off the shelf modules with added stuff around it.

 

[Galliardist]

The SM-1000 I used as an example of a way more powerful Marantz (genuine Marantz US designed) amplifier, with lower advertised distortion than this new Model 10.

I'm not a fan of sticking complete third party, entire amplifier modules in a flagship TOTL product, but it's been done before and is regularly done across practically every industry.

I mean where do you draw the line? An amplifier module, an SMPS power supply, a circuit design or technique, a particular IC or even buying a microcontroller from a rival company to use in your product? How is it different to the CD player era where various manufacturers used complete IC sets from Sony, D/A converters from Burr Brown, Philips, Toshiba? They didn't have the expertise or investment to make their own.

But I agree with you also in some ways. Marantz has again outsourced the very thing they were famous for- their amplification, and that does nothing for their legacy going forward.

The problem with Marantz is that they have several different legacies, depending on where you look. I doubt the big receivers will ever be back, but I almost see the current HT amps as their successors as feature packed equipment. The tube amps are probably gone now, but the 75th anniversary is coming up and I'm not sure they will want to miss the opportunity of another one off special model for that date if there's also money in it. The high end transistor amps have pretty much been killed off.

But the Model 10 sits firmly in another part of the Marantz legacy and the one we all tend to ignore. It's no more than the continuation of the Philips-Marantz digital line. European and ex-Philips people were heavily involved in the last round of Reference Series stereo components and I presume the same will apply here. This part of Marantz' history is seen as the ugly daughter, despite being important in the development of CD and putting digital audio in the home.

However, having said that I do see this new amp as much as a continuation of the difficulties of Marantz' past and present, as anything else.

The previous PM-10, from what I've read, was a marriage with Hypex born of desperation. The Japanese wing of the company placed a demand to replace the previous pre-power design with a specifically sized, powerful one box amp, to be brought out in a short period of time. I very much doubt that Ken Ishiwata and company would have used Class D then without that forced imperative. And remember, the PM-10 is still comparatively limited into 2 Ohms and less, power-wise.

Continuing...

 

[Galliardist]

Interesting, didn't know there were 40 year old amplifiers that outperform Purifi modules in terms of THD performance. Do you have some measurements for these amplifiers?

It's likely the Purifi modules in this case are held back by the preamp section, and the specs may turn out to be conservative. The SM-1000 is a power amp, of course. We do need to compare like with like across all measurements before jumping to conclusions.

I wonder what the SM-1000 achieved in practice. I believe that the Model 10 will beat the PM-10 and the PM-10 was rated at 200W into 8, which is half of the rated SM-1000, but third party measurements put it north of 600W
View attachment 389307

So the Model 10 may follow that same “280 horsepower” polite Japanese underrating of performance. There may also be the rated power for a given bandwidth…

Here's one of the problems though. Note the 175W into 1 Ohm. This seems to scare off other parts of Sound United, and indeed people involved in the design. When the latest big B&W was released in Europe, the launch used the previous Class AB reference amp pair instead. That dramatic drop in power was almost certainly the reason why. The Model 10, to justify itself, has to improve on that score.

The Model 10 is trapped in all of these different traditions, including now a decade with five Hypex based models that all had some of that drop into low impedance speakers. On the most basic measurements the Model 30 is more capable with hard to drive speakers. So, the Model 10 has to get around that issue at a minimum, as far as I can see. It's stuck with the porthole, which seems to have been an attempt by the marketing department and designers to try and unify some of that history, at the expense though of the receivers that I suspect are the real love of the Marantz traditionalists. And it's stuck with the woo.

Continuing...

 

[Galliardist]

I have to ask, has all this cladding in copper actually been proved to be beneficial? My Philips CD960/Marantz CD94 based CD player (there was a common donor chassis) has copper boxes covering almost everything, this in addition to the heavy milled top cover and solid bottom equivalent. Had to justify its original £2800 price I suppose

View attachment 389396

This is the big one if you want to tie Marantz to audiophoolery. You can find a real life answer to this question by perusing reviews with measurements of two pairings of amp and SACD player, and find out more Marantz history in the process.

The KI-Ruby was the last of the special Ishiwata models. The PM-12 and SA-12 were similar models produced for the Japanese market, basically because the Japanese board would not allow KI models to be sold on the Japanese market at that time. They didn't like the idea of a star performer. They only tolerated him because he solved the problem of what to do with some CD players that didn't sell and they couldn't get rid of him later without damaging their presence in Europe, according to some versions of the story.

So the Ruby pairing have the copper linings and the PM-12SE don't. Read on:

Marantz SA-12SE/PM-12SE SACD Player/Amplifier Lab Report

Lab Report Employing the same Ncore NC500 Class D amp module as the PM-KI Ruby [HFN Jan '19], the PM-12SE shares a very similar but marginally superior performance, offering slightly higher power, lower distortion (0.0008% vs. 0.0015% re. 1kHz/10W) and an improved A-wtd S/N ratio (80.7dB vs...

www.hifinews.com

I'm not saying this is the last word, but I don't believe HiFi News test in conditions too dissimilar to an average home in terms of things like wi-fi presence in their lab, and their measuring system is computer based, so some RFI and such to be rejected is present when they test. Maybe in seriously bad conditions the copper might help, but we can put it in the "prove it" basket for certain.

The copper is probably there this time because it was there last time. Like HDAM, the Sound Master tuning, and the "Marantz sound" business, I suspect that the Model 10 is trapped in its past.

 

[DSJR]

This is the big one if you want to tie Marantz to audiophoolery. You can find a real life answer to this question by perusing reviews with measurements of two pairings of amp and SACD player, and find out more Marantz history in the process.

The KI-Ruby was the last of the special Ishiwata models. The PM-12 and SA-12 were similar models produced for the Japanese market, basically because the Japanese board would not allow KI models to be sold on the Japanese market at that time. They didn't like the idea of a star performer. They only tolerated him because he solved the problem of what to do with some CD players that didn't sell and they couldn't get rid of him later without damaging their presence in Europe, according to some versions of the story.

So the Ruby pairing have the copper linings and the PM-12SE don't. Read on:

Marantz SA-12SE/PM-12SE SACD Player/Amplifier Lab Report

Lab Report Employing the same Ncore NC500 Class D amp module as the PM-KI Ruby [HFN Jan '19], the PM-12SE shares a very similar but marginally superior performance, offering slightly higher power, lower distortion (0.0008% vs. 0.0015% re. 1kHz/10W) and an improved A-wtd S/N ratio (80.7dB vs...

www.hifinews.com

I'm not saying this is the last word, but I don't believe HiFi News test in conditions too dissimilar to an average home in terms of things like wi-fi presence in their lab, and their measuring system is computer based, so some RFI and such to be rejected is present when they test. Maybe in seriously bad conditions the copper might help, but we can put it in the "prove it" basket for certain.

The copper is probably there this time because it was there last time. Like HDAM, the Sound Master tuning, and the "Marantz sound" business, I suspect that the Model 10 is trapped in its past.

Ki put his promotional name to some right clunkers in the past - the low cost PM66Se and the popular but not nice CD63KI Sig expecially come to mind. The amp 'sound' could consistently strip paint at ten paces (heard in many systems and dem rooms in comparison with others - I wonder what the mechanism was which caused this, but of course it was never properly tested by impartial and unbiased reviewers - and the CD player had a measurable jittery mechanism I gather and again, a scrappy 'deeeeetailed' kind of presentation which I remember in comparison with its peers, drastically needed toning down a bit as per the original nice sounding CD63 model - YES I KNOW, all in my subjective past thirty odd years ago, but I did enough dems of the sodding things with a good bit of competition...

I was told KI was an enigmatic figurehead for marketing purposes more than anything else and as you suggest above, the copper cladding seems to be part of the marketing spiel from this company (some HDAM modules have been taken to task for making things worse I gather). My own CD player as with other TDA1541 based players, seemed to benefit from additional mains filtering and the RCA audio cables from a ferrite or two. Placebo or not and now living in a 'cleaner' mains environment, I still use them to no disadvantage...

 

[restorer-john]

and their measuring system is computer based

Yep, likely a Pentium 100 processor, 80mB hardrive and 2MB of ram running Windows XP by the look of it. Those Miller Audio Research plots and graphs are just hideous. Time to buy an AP.

 

[restorer-john]

Maybe in seriously bad conditions the copper might help, but we can put it in the "prove it" basket for certain.

I have the incredibly rare Marantz CD12LE transport and DA12LE D/A converter here. They are both full of copper shields, multiple transformers and hang-the-expense build quality. Hand selected TDA-1541S1 etc.

Maybe I should test the D/A converter with and without its various copper shields...

Marantz CD-12 on thevintageknob.org

vintage Marantz 1987 reference CD player and converter, aka Philips LHH1000

www.thevintageknob.org

Review Marantz CD12 LE - Ken Kessel - DutchAudioClassics.nl

DutchAudioClassics.nl - Photos and information of classic Marantz & Philips cd-players

www.dutchaudioclassics.nl

 

[GXAlan]

It's likely the Purifi modules in this case are held back by the preamp section, and the specs may turn out to be conservative.

Look at the Marantz AV10. I would be shocked if the Model 10 has a preamp that is worse than the AMP10.

Here's one of the problems though. Note the 175W into 1 Ohm. This seems to scare off other parts of Sound United, and indeed people involved in the design. When the latest big B&W was released in Europe, the launch used the previous Class AB reference amp pair instead. That dramatic drop in power was almost certainly the reason why. The Model 10, to justify itself, has to improve on that score.

It does depend. At the U.S. launch it was the Model 30 and Classe Delta.

@restorer-john

The Japanese press has now posted their info and they usually are better with details

“The MODEL 10 is equipped with a uniquely designed "Dual Mono Symmetric Class D Power Amplifier" that was jointly developed with the Denmark-based "PURIFI". Everything from power amplifiers to switching power supply circuits (SMPS) board design and high-quality parts selection are all newly done, and by creating them at our own Shirakawa factory, we realize our own sound tuning.


"In the specification of PM-10, the notation part of the rated output of "400W (4Ω, 1kHz)" is the output value under the condition that it is only "1kHz", but in the specification notation of analog amplifiers, it is usually "20Hz - 20k It is displayed to guarantee the audible band "Hz". By clearing various factors including the power supply part so that it can be guaranteed even with switching amplifiers, MODEL 10 was able to realize the notation of "500W (4Ω, 20Hz - 20kHz)" in MODEL 10," Mr. Ogata said.



volume control IC "MUSES72323“

ƒ}ƒ‰ƒ“ƒcA gˆê➑̂ŃnƒCƒGƒ“ƒhh‚ÌœW‹‰ƒvƒŠƒƒCƒ“uMODEL 10vBVClass DƒAƒ“ƒv“‹Ú - PHILE WEB

ƒ}ƒ‰ƒ“ƒcA gˆê➑̂ŃnƒCƒGƒ“ƒhh‚ÌœW‹‰ƒvƒŠƒƒCƒ“uMODEL 10vBVClass DƒAƒ“ƒv“‹Ú

www.phileweb.com

 

[GXAlan]

There are lights inside the case to show off the circuit boards.

 

[boXem]

Busbar based connection system is very nice.

 

[Galliardist]

View attachment 389616

There are lights inside the case to show off the circuit boards.

They might sell to the gaming computer crowd then. That's how you appeal to a younger audience these days?.. oh, that's a different thread.

Glad to see them making more use of the porthole display with this model, although the basic version probably is more in line with the case styling of the PM-10

 

[GXAlan]

They might sell to the gaming computer crowd then. That's how you appeal to a younger audience these days?.. oh, that's a different thread.

Glad to see them making more use of the porthole display with this model, although the basic version probably is more in line with the case styling of the PM-10

They are embracing audio jewelry. The older generation products had blue side lighting.

At some point, that’s the goal, right? Target the kids who are now at their first job and are getting their first bonus? The old perspective of “buying your first Rolex” is never about performance but prestige.

I've sold all three at this point, but it would have been neat to have a stack of 4.

3 Generations of Marantz flagship integrated amps measured

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...

www.audiosciencereview.com

I do wonder if it's a step back in the remote control though. The prior generation was a lovely aluminum design, but it wasn't backlit. This looks more like an AVR remote and feels less special, even if it’s more usable.

Thing biggest lost opportunity is that Marantz didn’t add Dirac to any of their sources or offer a premium room EQ unit for anyone who wants to keep the same look.

 

[Steven Holt]

I'm not big on Audio Jewelry, but my God this is beautiful, inside and out. The topology is leaving me speechless.

 

[Doodski]

I have the incredibly rare Marantz CD12LE transport and DA12LE D/A converter here. They are both full of copper shields, multiple transformers and hang-the-expense build quality. Hand selected TDA-1541S1 etc.

Maybe I should test the D/A converter with and without its various copper shields...

View attachment 389590

Marantz CD-12 on thevintageknob.org

vintage Marantz 1987 reference CD player and converter, aka Philips LHH1000

www.thevintageknob.org

Review Marantz CD12 LE - Ken Kessel - DutchAudioClassics.nl

DutchAudioClassics.nl - Photos and information of classic Marantz & Philips cd-players

www.dutchaudioclassics.nl

Testing without the copper shields would be a very interesting test.

 

[JoetheLion]

Simply gorgeous. Astonishing industrial design.

I would buy 3 Cambridge Audio Edge A for the money, they look even cooler. Connect one and put two next to it for the looks.

 

[restorer-john]

Busbar based connection system is very nice.

It's very interesting when you look hard at that picture.

Clearly pre-production, but likely very close, if not the final design. Retained the Purifi connector footprints but bypassed them and introduced arguably the lowest impedance 'feed' they could, along with local decoupling additional capacitance all on their own board, albeit within the "look' of the original. The outputs (+/-) are routed in parallel right to the speaker terminals with their own buss-bars. Whole module is screw in replaceable in the field if it blows up. Board looks gorgeous and I take it all back- it's not drop-in at all, but clearly a tight corroboration with Purifi to build the way Marantz wants, but stay within all the protections and IP limitations of a licensed design.

One of the output MOSFETs is not soldered, so it's a display piece for sure. Still the same package mounting, but using ~6mm angle extrusion underneath and attached to the heatsink- not ideal but better than most.

 

[da Choge]

I didn’t see if there is a preout which would be great for subwoofers.

There is a "Line Out" and also a "HT Bypass" ("Power Amp In"). It is also 75 lbs! (if my calculations are right)

 

[ObjectiveSubjectivist]

Very nice

 

[Salt]

Aside the price
- the specs (on their site) are respectable
- phono-preamp is integrated
- headphone-amp is integrated
- the design is a 'Must Have' for all male human beings that are into audio...

What is missing? At this price tag a streaming interface (at least) and DA/AD conversion, including PEQ, should be standard, instead of propagation of another (not cheap) gear.

One more aspect why shy fy progresses because customers' needs are addressed just in time.

 

[Galliardist]

Aside the price
- the specs (on their site) are respectable
- phono-preamp is integrated
- headphone-amp is integrated
- the design is a 'Must Have' for all male human beings that are into audio...

What is missing? At this price tag a streaming interface (at least) and DA/AD conversion, including PEQ, should be standard, instead of propagation of another (not cheap) gear.

One more aspect why shy fy progresses because customers' needs are addressed just in time.

As I argued above, this model is a prisoner of Marantz' history. And it has to appeal to at least some of their traditional and relatively conservative customers, to get upgrade and replacement purchases. The class D is enough for them to have to swallow, before selling a high end amplifier that isn't "pure" with the "Marantz sound" intact. So that's what you get.

Mind you, they did manage tone controls this time!