Marantz SA-10 Review (SACD Player & DAC)

[Count Dacula]

No, the difference is like eating the exact same Soylent meal in private or a fancy restaurant.

 

[GXAlan]

No, the difference is like eating the exact same Soylent meal in private or a fancy restaurant.

Okay… so which scenario do you prefer?

 

[Galliardist]

The reason someone would select a product like this is purely aesthetics. Sure the face is a pretty one, with the green light, but specifically and importantly, it matches the owner's other Marantz components.

I would guess a large portion of people who own this, also own other Marantz gear. We all knew that in the back of our heads, so I'll just say it. Not a bad plan aesthetically, but isn't it really a function of Marantz being easily identified by normies as premium+? So the function isn't premium SQ, but the look of premium SQ and financial expense..

Driving that home, so I can kick the door open into a different kind of analysis, the psych kind. So many cognitive biases coming into play, I want to pick out one of the more interesting ones.

List of cognitive biases - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

So how about...

Association fallacy - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

So if their (old) Marantz receiver or tubey amp is known "good" (subjectively and perceptually) then their CDP/DAC must be good too!

We've all fallen into this trap, but here it's visible from far away. Giving up on the notion of "matching" brand of components is essential, and is literally the hallmark of a true audiophile. Also need to forsake the old for the new, and not let irrational emotions get in the way. A lot of people don't ever adapt and get stuck in one mode for a long time, even their whole lives. So now we have ASR currently giving a much-needed jolt to these situations.

It's a fine distinction from the dozen other cognitive biases in-play, but it makes for some insight.

OK, you got me. I just ran into the other room to look for the green light that I'd never seen before. The SA-10 doesn't have a green light.

I don't fit any of the stuff you just wrote about owners of the SA-10. I bought based on things like ergonomics: yes, looks to an extent: and great measurements for a disc player.
Yes, measurements. This product would probably have been recommended if Amir hadn't worried about the price and, and maybe because of previous reaction over the TuneTots review. It's transparent. Fact.

I've owned one Marantz component previously, a cheap tuner with very different looks. I have never had one of their old receivers, never owned a tube amp (though I've heard plenty enough to know that tubey is not a thing, anyway). In fact the SA-10 has what was unique and modern software to match non-standard electronics when it was launched. The matching PM-10 has bridged Hypex modules and custom filters. It was launched in 2016, around the same time as the first NAD amps with Hypex modules. Forsake the old for the new, really?

And I don't see why I have to have different brands of equipment, if two products from the same brand measure sufficiently well, look good, and match electrically. I have the above mentioneed PM-10 as well. It also measures excellently, and I was relieved when I blind tested against my previous amp and it wasn't worse.

These things are expensive, but they do actually work and work well. Maybe associating them with old receivers and tube products is your own fallacy.

Actually, the mark of the "true audiophile" is getting facts wrong, believing lots of nonsense and worrying about the wrong things. Does the cap fit?

 

[GXAlan]

The matching PM-10 has bridged Hypex modules and custom filters. It was launched in 2016, around the same time as the first NAD amps with Hypex modules. Forsake the old for the new, really?
…
It also measures excellently,

Hypex NCx500 Class D Amplifier Review

Marantz PM-10 Comparison (bridged NC500OEM with Marantz buffer+preamp) Source = -111 dB SINAD Panasonic UB9000 Instrument = E1DA Cosmos ADC; Grade A Edit: I just left this in the 43V input mode. If I matched the input sensitivity of the E1DA to the actual output, you get higher SINAD numbers...

audiosciencereview.com

5W SINAD of 100 dB full integrated amp (not just power amp) when fed by a UB9000 as a test tone generator (which only has a SINAD of 111 dB)

… in 2016.
… made in Japan
… with reliable warranty and service manual availability

 

[Count Dacula]

OK, you got me. I just ran into the other room to look for the green light that I'd never seen before. The SA-10 doesn't have a green light.

I don't fit any of the stuff you just wrote about owners of the SA-10. I bought based on things like ergonomics: yes, looks to an extent: and great measurements for a disc player.
Yes, measurements. This product would probably have been recommended if Amir hadn't worried about the price and, and maybe because of previous reaction over the TuneTots review. It's transparent. Fact.

I've owned one Marantz component previously, a cheap tuner with very different looks. I have never had one of their old receivers, never owned a tube amp (though I've heard plenty enough to know that tubey is not a thing, anyway). In fact the SA-10 has what was unique and modern software to match non-standard electronics when it was launched. The matching PM-10 has bridged Hypex modules and custom filters. It was launched in 2016, around the same time as the first NAD amps with Hypex modules. Forsake the old for the new, really?

And I don't see why I have to have different brands of equipment, if two products from the same brand measure sufficiently well, look good, and match electrically. I have the above mentioneed PM-10 as well. It also measures excellently, and I was relieved when I blind tested against my previous amp and it wasn't worse.

These things are expensive, but they do actually work and work well. Maybe associating them with old receivers and tube products is your own fallacy.

Actually, the mark of the "true audiophile" is getting facts wrong, believing lots of nonsense and worrying about the wrong things. Does the cap fit?

I think it's hilarious, because I didn't care enough to even look at the color of the light, but you seem to care an awful lot.

To whit: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunk_cost

Sunk costs often influence people's decisions,[7][14] with people believing that investments (i.e., sunk costs) justify further expenditures.[16] People demonstrate "a greater tendency to continue an endeavor once an investment in money, effort, or time has been made".[17][18] This is the sunk cost fallacy, and such behavior may be described as "throwing good money after bad",[19][14] while refusing to succumb to what may be described a
"cutting one's losses".

If you really want to know what I think.

Choice-supportive bias - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

post-purchase rationalization is the tendency to retroactively ascribe positive attributes to an option one has selected and/or to demote the forgone options.[1] It is part of cognitive science, and is a distinct cognitive bias that occurs once a decision is made. For example, if a person chooses option A instead of option B, they are likely to ignore or downplay the faults of option A while amplifying or ascribing new negative faults to option B.

What is remembered about a decision can be as important as the decision itself, especially in determining how much regret or satisfaction one experiences.[2] Research indicates that the process of making and remembering choices yields memories that tend to be distorted in predictable ways.[2]

...in a clinical sense.

 

[Galliardist]

I think it's hilarious, because I didn't care enough to even look at the color of the light, but you seem to care an awful lot.

To whit: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sunk_cost


If you really want to know what I think.

Choice-supportive bias - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

...in a clinical sense.

So, because I didn’t have some of the irrational reasons for buying this product that you assigned to me, you need to drag out some more human failings.

I can admit to choice supported bias. It’s not a clinical condition as far as I can see. When discussing disc players here, I’ve recommended other cheaper players that are objectively as good in terms of sound. And I get that this product is not good value for money sound wise, and that my choice has a subjective component to it. Plus, my wife wanted a disk player, without complex controls, or I would probably not have considered a disc player this time round, in fact.

I just object to the things you ascribed as the “only reasons” for buying tbe SA-10 because they didn’t apply to me. And it is plenty good enough objectively.

Out of interest… do you have clinical qualifications?

 

[franci]

Ze zijn om praktische redenen irrelevant. Zie mijn bericht hier.

 

[VintageFlanker]

@franci please use English on this forum. (Also, if you can avoid misquote another member).

Welcome, tho.

 

[franci]

Marantz is nog zo'n merk dat eigenlijk dood had moeten blijven.

zielig

 

[VintageFlanker]

OK...

 

[Descartes]

This is a review and detailed measurements of the Marantz SACD player and USB balanced DAC. It is on kind loan from a member and costs US $7,499.
View attachment 192234
The industrial design is good although usability is poor with super tiny fonts for various settings (e.g. filter number top left). Disc tray opens and closed buttery smooth -- a requirement for highend transports. The remote control is shiny silver which is odd and is plastic on the back. Back panel shows the connectivity:

View attachment 192236

Nice to see support for USB audio as so many of these products live in the past without. The SA-10 is incredibly heavy at 40 pounds. It weighs more than their Audio Video Receivers with many channels of amplification! I guess it gives comfort to owners that they have bought something of quality.

Marantz SA-10 DAC Measurements
Inclusion of USB eases my testing as I can drive the unit with all my standard tests. Let's start with our dashboard using RCA out:
View attachment 192237

And now balanced XLR:
View attachment 192238

I must say I was relieved that it did not measure poorly. SINAD of 105 dB lands it in the competent category:
View attachment 192239

But of course way, way below what we can get out of even budget desktop DACs. Distortion is at -112 dB which makes it inaudible but again, is not competitive. Note that I played with various optimizations such as Digital Off but none made any difference.

SNR is not great for a device in this price category:
View attachment 192240

That's about 17 bits of dynamic range. State of the art DACs reach up to 22 bits.

Multitone does well due to reduced levels it drives the DAC at:
View attachment 192241

Linearity is good enough but again, we expect more:
View attachment 192242

Jitter performance was disappointing:
View attachment 192243

The jitter components can easily be identified by frequency and sources found and eliminated. See how it was independent of which input is used so it means that the jitter is internally generated.

IMD test shows the impact of higher than desired noise level:

View attachment 192244

Company really believes in these super slow filters that allow a bunch of ultrasonic images to be there:
View attachment 192245

Even the faster filter 2 takes its time to do its thing. This directly impacts our wideband THD+N measurements as we take into account everything up to 90 kHz:
View attachment 192249

A $99 board that came out around the same time it did (dashed blue) outperforms it handily.

Marantz SA-10 SACD Playback Measurements
I do not have any SACD test discs. Only a few were created and are not easy to find. So I just played some music and grabbed the spectrum:
View attachment 192252

Notice the classic DSD stream ultrasonic noise. Some attempt is made to filter part of it above the peak of 100 kHz but by then the damage is done. There is as much noise energy at 100 kHz than we have at 3 kHz in music!

BTW, the first SACD disc I tried to play, Dvorak Symphony No 7 in D minor by Ivan Fischer would not play. The unit just said "no disc." Not sure what is up with that.

EDIT:
Marantz SA-10 CD Playback
Here is playback of 16 bit CD:
View attachment 192514

91 dB is the limit for dithered 16 bit content so player can't do better than that. That said, there is a spray of harmonic distortion that is unfortunate.

To see how the encoding works, here is a wideband view:
View attachment 192515

Looks like noise shaping combined with some of filter centered around 30 to 40 kHz.

Conclusions
The Marantz SA-10 measured performance is good enough to not embarrass the brand. But it is not remotely optimized enough to compete with DACs at 5 to 10% of its cost. Of course those DACs don't play physical discs so if you have a good sized library of SACDs, the SA-10 remains an option. But at such high cost? Very hard to justify based on my measurements.

Needless to say, I personally have no use for this device. My DSD content is downloaded and I just don't play my SACD discs. We would need to test lower cost SACD players to see where SA-10 lands.

I let you decide if this is a product worth recommendation.

Edit: video review posted:

-----------
As always, questions, comments, recommendations, etc. are welcome.

Any donations are much appreciated using: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/how-to-support-audio-science-review.8150/

Too expensive for such mediocre performance especially compared to OPPO UDP-205! If only OPPO would be willing to launch some new players!

 

[stvnharr]

Sorry, but you are way out of touch. Oppo went out of business in 2018.

 

[Mart68]

They are still in business, they just stopped making disc players in 2018.

 

[stvnharr]

Yes, the phone core business is still quite strong. The audio section of Oppo was discontinued, as mentioned. And it is not coming back.

 

[Descartes]

Yes, the phone core business is still quite strong. The audio section of Oppo was discontinued, as mentioned. And it is not coming back.

Sadly