There is a "Line Out" and also a "HT Bypass" ("Power Amp In"). It is also 75 lbs! (if my calculations are right)
-
WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!
Marantz Model 10 integrated amplifier
Very nice
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.
- 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
Major Contributor
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!
restorer-john
Grand Contributor
For a top of the line integrated Marantz in 2024, it's not crazy. High, yes, but not crazy. 35 years ago, the TOTL Marantz PM-95 I have here was AUD$6000 RRP list price at the time.
Keith_W
Major Contributor
According to the Australian Inflation Calculator, an item worth AUD$6000 in 1989 would be worth $15,100 in 2023 dollars. This Marantz is AUD$35k. Eye wateringly expensive IMO.
Galliardist
Major Contributor
The Audio Tailor website lists the price at $25000. Looking at audio price inflation rather than general, as a high end product it’s not so far out of line.
It’s a great deal more than I paid for my MA-10, and more than the US price at current exchange rates, though.
I agree that it’s not overpriced for what it is, but it really is a “do I need this” product when we know the sound quality is no better than considerably lesser items.
An integrated amp with this power and build quality from an established manufacturer that still practices quality control, with an established dealer network - show me that much lower price.
Now show me the price of the product I probably need for good sound from a typical speaker, and tell me why I even need an integrated amp in the current real world market.
Two different standards of judgement…
restorer-john
Grand Contributor
In 1989, there was no home cinema to speak of. AVRs were sporting Dolby Surround, DD 5.1 wasn't even on the horizon. Neither was DVD. We had VHS HiFi, laser discs and within a year or so, Dolby Pro-Logic. I went to the release of a 42" Plasma TV in about 1999/2000 that cost AUD$25,000. Yes, it was the first we could get. They sold two into stores that night.
2 channel ruled and "home theatres" were in their infancy and mostly as an addition to a proper stereo system.
The market for 2 channel today is a tiny fraction of what it was and those same economies of manufacturing scale for a TOTL 2 channel traditional integrated amplifier just aren't there. Personally, I think it's a lot of money, but not unreasonable in the scheme of things- if it has a very long life.
The amplifier I mentioned (PM-95) and its predecessor (PM-94) are in my collection. The PM-94 was AUD$3500 in 1983/4 IIRC. Eye wateringly expensive back then, but considering they both are statement pieces for their era (Marantz) and they are still 100% functional 35-40 years later, means they were actually good value with the benefit of hindsight.
I don't believe the Model 10 will last that long. But it will give its owners probably 15-20 years if they look after it, keep the interior clean and jump on any issues as they occur.
Yes the purifi modules are able to do that. Class D advantage. Very low noise and distortions.
For me it is not the 1ET9040BA as mentioned above but the
It is a great module. I have it for the surround (befor for the front) and now the 1ET9040BA for front. Fantastic power and reserves for both but the 1ET9040BA makes another step forward. No noise. I have it in an audiophonics. https://www.audiophonics.fr/fr/ampl...udiophonics-lpa-m750et-1et9040ba-p-19338.html Texas Instrument OPA1656IDR. And the well known hypex SMPS Hypex SMPS1200A180. The different bass lines are clearly better heard.
boXem, March, Apollon, Buckeye integrate this modules in their products. Apollon is also producing with the ET9040BA in mono bloc or in an power stereo amplifier with to choose weiss OPA.
The 14.000€ Model 10 is exagerated for me even if we have a better isolation EMI etc.. 3 X the price of the audiophonics on monobloc with a preamplifier of good quality.
It's hard to do better than the Hypex SMPS1200A180...and OPA1656IDR. I will have an ear on the 10.
For me it is not the 1ET9040BA as mentioned above but the
| 1ET7040SA | 950W @ 2Ω 500W @ 4Ω 250W @ 8Ω | 70V /40A |
It is a great module. I have it for the surround (befor for the front) and now the 1ET9040BA for front. Fantastic power and reserves for both but the 1ET9040BA makes another step forward. No noise. I have it in an audiophonics. https://www.audiophonics.fr/fr/ampl...udiophonics-lpa-m750et-1et9040ba-p-19338.html Texas Instrument OPA1656IDR. And the well known hypex SMPS Hypex SMPS1200A180. The different bass lines are clearly better heard.
boXem, March, Apollon, Buckeye integrate this modules in their products. Apollon is also producing with the ET9040BA in mono bloc or in an power stereo amplifier with to choose weiss OPA.
The 14.000€ Model 10 is exagerated for me even if we have a better isolation EMI etc.. 3 X the price of the audiophonics on monobloc with a preamplifier of good quality.
It's hard to do better than the Hypex SMPS1200A180...and OPA1656IDR. I will have an ear on the 10.
Galliardist
Major Contributor
The Model 10 uses bridged modules with modifications in use by Marantz with Purifi as partners or consultants to the design. The picture we have appears to be pre-production. The modules are not used in the standard way and we will need to see what is in use and how: the PM-10 outputs several times its quoted output into 8 and 4 Ohms in standard testing, so I assume the Model 10 specs are very conservative also.
None of the amplifiers you quote are equivalents, most will be power amps only with a more prosaic level of construction. Of course they will sound the same in a blind test (assuming no fiddling by Marantz, and my PM-10 is identical to a couple of other amps I've tested against when all in their performance envelope). Marantz are not competing on sound quality alone but on quality, a bit of audiophile woo, and seveal "luxury" features. And just maybe a fair bit more power in reality.
They did not outperform the Purifi modules. They outperform the entire amp, which includes a HDAM module based preamp section.
No, it is the 9040, got it confirmed from Purifi. However, this is licensed and, as you can easily see, the module is literaly part of a larger PCB, it is not separated. Furthermore, and this is fotr @Galliardist, in this case Marantz is not bridging it, because it is already a bridged design.
Yes I use a TEAC UD-701 as a preamp. Enough gain for the Audiphonocs. This is for a stereo listening connection in XLR. For HC I use the RCA input with the switch on RCA. Perfect sound.
So they use an amplifier module that is capable of more power and restrain it?
Or are just being more honest about how it measures, at all frequencies.
yes. They have said that the performance of the PM-10 was for 1kHz and the Model 10 is 20-20 kHz.
With the PM-10, they took four NC500OEM modules and ran it for 200W into 8, using SMPS600’s
Besides honesty in measurements, there is also a different margin of safety in terms of thermals when it comes to a company like Marantz
Galliardist
Major Contributor
Thet explains two visible modules! Thanks. I knew the amp was bridged but haven't really got to looking at the different Purifi modules to pick up that that module was where the bridging happened.
They've done that with all their Hypex based designs as can be seen by the ratings into lower impedance. In fact the model 30 puts out considerably more power into 1 ohm than the PM-10. (The main problem with all the one module per channel unbalanced Marantz amps seems to be noise, though still probably inaudible).
Bruno Putzeys was involved in the PM-10 design so would have carried any knowledge gained into the Purifi modules. That's the Philips connection showing up again. With the Model 10 they should have had a lot more development time, as well.
restorer-john
Grand Contributor
You don't know that and neither do I. Nothing has been tested yet and I cannot locate an SM-1000 review to compare. Maybe you can?
Purchasers of the Model 10 won't really care about the internal amplifier "modules" in isolation, they care about the rated performance of the entire product- from input to output.
Marantz is selling an integrated amplifier here. "Integrated" means input selection, control, volume, preamplification, power amplification and output switching. A Purifi module is NOT that. It is merely a component. A bit like comparing the specs of a D/A chip with the advertised specs of the completed product.
The fact being Marantz themselves don't seem to know the difference when they advertise it as the most powerful highest performing amplifier they've ever made...
Their claim:
It may well turn out to be extremely powerful. It will no doubt exceed its rated specifications. But will it be the most powerful Marantz ever? Consider the SM-1000 ran +/-100V main rails and had 16 output devices per channel, twin 800VA transformers (1 for each channel) and 4 x 20,000UF 125V main caps. The Purfi can swing a maximum of 90V. The maximum module voltage is supposedly +/-48V. Do the maths on peak power and tell me which one wins- the SM-1000 by a mile. It all comes down to regulation and device losses. The Purifi wins on losses, but loses on available swing in the first place.
Purifi's own spec sheet says the 9040 will do 750W@4R@1% which is ~55VRMS (+/-77.8Vpk). It hits the wall hard at 400W@8R. Maybe throw a few more volts at it for the Marantz Model 10 SMPS, I dunno- maybe they did.
I don't have an SM-1000 (wish I did) but bear in mind it's conservatively rated at 400wpc@8R. Into 4R it will be close and the 9040 would win with 2R. The new Model 10 will likely outperform the SM-1000 example I used with inherent THD.
Attachments
Galliardist
Major Contributor
Depends on what you mean by "outperforms". They claim new HDAM modules. The main problem with those modules is usually noise. The PM-10 suffered less from that, so the Model 10 may also be less affected by use of those modules if the circuitry is similar.
I guess we wait for the first review with measurements. That will be a few months away, unless some rich member gets one to Amir - or one of our other reviewers - first!
Similar threads
