Jump to content



Sign up for a free account to remove the pop-up ads

Signing up for an account is fast and free. As a member you can join in the conversation, enter contests and remove the pop-up ads that guests get. Click here to create your free account.

Photo
- - - - -

MARANTZ SR-8300 Oldie but is it a goodie??


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
11 replies to this topic

#1 of 12 OFFLINE   Guy Usher

Guy Usher

    Supporting Actor



  • 780 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 20 2002

Posted April 08 2007 - 10:15 AM

got a question for you Marantz guys. . .

I have a chance to pick up a SR8300 right. . . I intend to buy a new Sony STR-DA3200ES this week from a friend who is a Sony ES dealer. NIB for 560.00 delivered. . .Now comes this old Marantz SR8300 that I can get for that same money.

The Sony has the HDMI plus a few other features that I want. . .The Marantz is an old war wagon that reminds me of my old AV9000 Marantz PrePro. . .

Question is will the Marantz be OK.?? It has componet switching 2/1 with OSD over Componet. . .I can go componet or HDMI to my display or do as I do now and leave the video out of the mix except for one SVideo cabl;e to an unused input so I can access the menu using the displays PIP mode. . .

Talk to me guys. . .Don't hold back. . .

Fears;
1)- Too old no DPLIIx
2)- No HDMI
3)- Only draws450 watts for consumption (how to get 6x130 out of 450??)
4)- RC3000 remote

Pros;
1)- 1999.99 MSRP
2)- Looks
3)- Price
4)- Chipset? ? ?

Like this one only black. . .


HELP? ? ?

Even Monkeys fall from trees.

#2 of 12 OFFLINE   MaxL

MaxL

    Supporting Actor



  • 503 posts
  • Join Date: May 26 2006

Posted April 08 2007 - 12:01 PM

it sounds to me like you've got a pretty good handle on the issues at hand. i went through a similar decision making process last summer, but at a lower price point. i wound up with the sr 8000. the only thing i feel like i'm missing a little is an adjustable crossover. but i am very happy with the sound. image quality for me is not as big an issue. i'm all SD all the time. (also got my first pair of glasses a couple weeks ago, everything looked much smoother/ softer before. oh well...)

i think that's really got to be the deciding factor for you as well, image connectivity/ flexibility vs. sound quality. the sony should by no means be bad in any way sound wise, but i think a majority of listeners would prefer the marantz. if you have the HD gear or will be upgrading to it soon, the sony will obviously do things the marantz cannot. of course you can bypass the receiver altogether video-wise as you mentioned.

i also give the marantz the edge on build quality and probably electronics, chips, etc. but i don't know any of the specifics on these models and the sony ES stuff is very respectable in its own right, as i'm sure you know.

as for the fears you mentioned, i would never worry about surround modes as long as you've got the basics covered. while little if anything is currently recorded in 7.1, i suppose it's coming. but by the time it gets here, DPLIIx will probably be old hat. the HDMI is probably the deciding factor, or half of it (HDMI vs best sound for $$). this thing's got plenty of juice. remotes like surround modes shouldn't be diciding factors IMO, if you don't like it get a third party remote (more $$ of course).

are there return policies/ warranties that come with either of these peices? while both should be good and it's really a matter of priorities, you want to be covered if you wind up with a rare lemon.

of course side by side comparrison would be best, but i don't figure you could get them both in your HT room at the same time. then you would know if the marantz sound quality was worth passing on the HDMI and other newer features.

good luck
HT: Marantz SR8000, PSB Alpha B fronts, Alpha C center, CSW Newton S200 surrounds, Martin Logan Dynamo Sub, Marantz DVD, Sony CRT TV

Stereos include vintage Sony receivers/amps into vintage AR and KEF speakers.

#3 of 12 OFFLINE   Guy Usher

Guy Usher

    Supporting Actor



  • 780 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 20 2002

Posted April 08 2007 - 01:22 PM

The Marantz is priced right but so is the 3200ES Sony I'm looking at. . . I did a hell of a lot of research on that Sony finding one priced right yet had everything I need and intend to use. . .

A big consideration is my wife being able to use it too. . .Our TV is Sony and I think it would be easier for her using just one 'familiar' remote. In reality there is not a nickle's worth of difference except for features in any similiar priced receiver. One might have a slight edge sound wise but for what we watch (DVR and DVDs) I don't think that will make much difference either.

I've already owned Elite 45/56 receivers, HK 240/635, Denon 2806/3806, Pioneer 1014/1015, Yamaha 5890 (or 5980??) and for temp use a 5940 baby. We have had Marantz/Rotel seperates, Anthem, Parasound and Adcom as well.

Speaker systems that I can't even remember half of them but the one constant thing in my experience they all sounded just about the same even this little Yamaha 5940. In my house on my speakers the differences are not worth the differences in price. Reliability, ease of operation . . .features is what it boils down to. . .

The only things that made enough of a difference in sound quality that could justify some of those big cost differences are speaker systems.

Unless we were to play back at referance levels which we do only rarely I can't justify spending over 500-600 bucks for a receiver. I guess talking MSRP it would be in the 1000 dollar spot. . .

The best sounding receivers here were;
1)- Yamaha 5980
2)- HK 635
3)- HK 240
4)- Pioneer Elite VSX56TXi
5-all the rest)- All the rest of them

None were bad. . .All were very good actually. . .

I think I'll sleep on this thing. . .
Even Monkeys fall from trees.

#4 of 12 OFFLINE   Chris PC

Chris PC

    Producer



  • 3,994 posts
  • Join Date: May 12 2001

Posted April 08 2007 - 04:58 PM

Hmmm... well, being somebody who upgraded from an SR 8000 to the SR14EX I am still considering fast tracking my next upgrade to the SR9600 because of the surround modes I crave.. but for now at least, I had to buy as much sound quality as I could afford as audio quality was my first priority.

I'm sure John Garcia may drop in here for a few comments re the 8300, but I have to say....

Dude, that bug in your sig is freaking me out!

- - - - - - - -

Ok, but seriously, the SR 8300 is a well liked receiver. Also, forget about the # of watts per channel and power consumption rating. They'll never add up. First of all, the receiver is rated for average consumption. Your receiver has capacitors that store energy for the Dynamic peaks, so it rarely has to draw huge amount of current from the wall socket for long periods. It can drive all speakers at high volumes/watts continuously though. Most Marantz are pretty robust and powerful, so unless you have very in-efficient speakers, I wouldn't worry about the watts reading on the back.
Going from projector to flatscreen for a while.... :P

#5 of 12 OFFLINE   MaxL

MaxL

    Supporting Actor



  • 503 posts
  • Join Date: May 26 2006

Posted April 08 2007 - 05:11 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Guy Usher
priced right yet had everything I need and intend to use. . .

i think that may be your answer right there.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Guy Usher
A big consideration is my wife being able to use it too. . .Our TV is Sony and I think it would be easier for her using just one 'familiar' remote.

if this is a problem, let a universal learning remote (which i think the marantz may be, not 100% sure) be the solution. it can be given macros to turn on everything and choose all of the proper settings for a given task. all you, or your wife have to do is select a labelled option like "watch dvd" "watch tv" or "listen to cd" by presseing one button. can be a little work to set up, but then simplicity.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Guy Usher
In my house on my speakers the differences are not worth the differences in price. Reliability, ease of operation . . .features is what it boils down to. . .

again, pointing towards sony. while i've had no problems with my marantz or setup/ navigation difficulties, i think sonys tend to be very user friendly. the sony is the more full featured piece.

you've clearly listened to a wide range of receivers, and i agree, in general there's not much in it sound-wise, particularly compared to speakers.

the marantz does have some things going for it - sound, build quality and resale value probably all go in its favor IMO. it has everything you need to have great sound, but it doesn't give you the HDMI or the newer 7.1 dolby standard.

i guess another way to look at it is how long do you see using this before your next upgrade? under 3 years i say go for the sony, the features shouldn't be too outdated. much more than 3 years and the marantz will still appeal on its superior reputation for sound and build for someone looking for the best sound they can find in a budget used piece who isn't concerned about HD switching.

if you want i'll flip a coin for you.....


....tails it is.....


....now was tails the sony or the marantz....
HT: Marantz SR8000, PSB Alpha B fronts, Alpha C center, CSW Newton S200 surrounds, Martin Logan Dynamo Sub, Marantz DVD, Sony CRT TV

Stereos include vintage Sony receivers/amps into vintage AR and KEF speakers.

#6 of 12 OFFLINE   Guy Usher

Guy Usher

    Supporting Actor



  • 780 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 20 2002

Posted April 08 2007 - 09:04 PM

Thanks guys. . .Exactly what I was looking for. . .

Looks like it will boil down to one thing. . .DPLIIx

I do like that SF. . . I do like 7.1 although in reality 5.1 is just fine for the most part.

In my case at even money the Sony may be best. . .If the 8300 was a little cheaper and I'll not ask the man to lower his already good price but if it was a hundred bucks cheaper I'd go that direction. I realise the Marantz may well be the 'better' deal at even money from a pure value stand point however at the end of the day plus from my needs alone the Sony is a better choice. . . I think. . .
Even Monkeys fall from trees.

#7 of 12 OFFLINE   MaxL

MaxL

    Supporting Actor



  • 503 posts
  • Join Date: May 26 2006

Posted April 09 2007 - 02:33 AM

yeah, that's so tough sometimes....
.....passing up a good deal Posted Image....

but as i once pointed out to the white van speaker guys when they pulled up to me in a parking lot - if i'll save $1600 buying those sepakers, i'll save even more if i don't buy them. when a thing isn't what's needed, it looses all of its value, regardless of how good a "deal" it might be.
HT: Marantz SR8000, PSB Alpha B fronts, Alpha C center, CSW Newton S200 surrounds, Martin Logan Dynamo Sub, Marantz DVD, Sony CRT TV

Stereos include vintage Sony receivers/amps into vintage AR and KEF speakers.

#8 of 12 OFFLINE   John Garcia

John Garcia

    Executive Producer



  • 11,550 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 24 1999
  • Real Name:John
  • LocationNorCal

Posted April 09 2007 - 09:56 AM

Does sound quality matter? If so, there is no question which way I'd go Posted Image

The 8300 DOES handle 7.1. The only problem is, for 7.1 you need external amps. It will do 6.1 on it's own (has 6 amps), but you need TWO amps to run 7.1 via the pre-outs if so configured. I am running mine in 5.1 right now with no complaints at all.

For HD-DVD or BluRay, you are OK because you will be ready for any HD formats via analog (8300 has 7.1 inputs) even without HDMI. If you have a PS3 like me, that is a different story...

I will never buy another Sony receiver, period.
HT: Emotiva UMC-200, Emotiva XPA-3, Carnegie Acoustics CSB-1s + CSC-1, GR Research A/V-1s, Epik Empire, Oppo BDP-105, PS4, PS3,URC R-50, APC-H10, Panamax 5100 Bluejeans Cable
System Two: Marantz PM7200, Pioneer FS52s, Panasonic BD79
(stolen) : Marantz SR-8300, GR Research A/V-2s, Sony SCD-222ES SACD, Panasonic BD-65, PS3 60G (250G)

Everybody is a genius, but if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it’ll spend its whole life believing that it is stupid.” – Albert Einstein

 


#9 of 12 OFFLINE   MaxL

MaxL

    Supporting Actor



  • 503 posts
  • Join Date: May 26 2006

Posted April 09 2007 - 04:02 PM

Quote:
Originally Posted by John Garcia
I will never buy another Sony receiver, period.

hmm... can you explain this statement further. i love my marantz. i love my vintage sony stuff too. i know vintage sony is not new sony, even new ES sony, but what is wrong with it? is it an overpriced for what it is thing? sound quality? build quality? customer support? marantz just so good sony can never stack up thing?

to put it in car terms i see this as new low end lexus V6 (sonyES) vs used mid level jaguar V8 (assuming the jag wouldn't be likely to need all that costly maintenance.) the lexus has more bells and whistles, maybe GPS, dvd headrest monitors, remote start, etc... it goes fast, has decent acceleration, handling, whatever. the jag goes faster, accelerates and corners better, looks nicer, has better resale value in the long run... but it won't tell you which exit to take without a mod that will take away from its clean interior, you have to start it with your key in the ignition and the kids get antsy in the back only listening to your cd collection. now you can get either for the same $$. it just makes me think if there was one right answer for everyone, we'd all have the same crap.

now for me the sound was priority one, and i think all here agree the marantz gets the signal from its inputs to the speaker cables in better fashion than the sony. what that means in terms of actual sound difference is all in the ears of the beholder IMO. but depending on things like speakers and room size the sony could be good enough sound wise and if the bells and whistles it has are the ones you want....

i'm living vicariously through you, dammit, choose!
HT: Marantz SR8000, PSB Alpha B fronts, Alpha C center, CSW Newton S200 surrounds, Martin Logan Dynamo Sub, Marantz DVD, Sony CRT TV

Stereos include vintage Sony receivers/amps into vintage AR and KEF speakers.

#10 of 12 OFFLINE   Guy Usher

Guy Usher

    Supporting Actor



  • 780 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 20 2002

Posted April 09 2007 - 11:33 PM

If it was all about SQ I'd go back to seperates and my Rotel/Super One system or my Anthem/Paradigm system or better yet the Parasound /DIY Danes system but now days it is more about versatility, ease of operation and simplicity. Besides there is not a nickle's worth of difference in SQ anyway in my room on my speakers. Rather than spending thousands for just a wee bit of difference I now spend hundreds and put the rest on something that makes me money rather than cost me money.

The 8300 Marantz would do just fine sound wise but maybe if it was a newer model with the features I need it might be different. Matter of fact I'm looking hard at the new Marantz line now. . . Friday is my drop dead date and I will most likely decide as I'm making the call to order one. I'm quite sure either one would work very well providing I can do what I need to dio. . .

Funny. . . This has been a huge shift for me. . .As little as 6 months ago the only thing to consider was SQ period. . .Connectivity was last on the list. I used to get very tired of surfing through post after post on nothing but "My HDMI" works funny looking for posts concerning power or sound quality. . .Now. . .I find myself reading those posts concerning connectivity more than those concerning SQ. . .

I do understand that SQ is a given. . .I feel that in my price range (1000-1200 retail) virtually all of the receivers that I would consider already 'sound good'.
Even Monkeys fall from trees.

#11 of 12 OFFLINE   John Garcia

John Garcia

    Executive Producer



  • 11,550 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 24 1999
  • Real Name:John
  • LocationNorCal

Posted April 10 2007 - 06:05 AM

Sony wants to offer every feature ever on their receivers and it actually got to the point where it was annoying. Literally TOO many things to tweak... It is nice to have some of them, but I don't want to have to spend time to get it to sound right where Marantz sounds good right out of the box Posted Image Your analogy is about right, and I want something specific from a car, so that Lexus just doesn't have what it takes to inspire me to want to own it...I need something wants to be tossed hard around corners, not Driving Miss Daisy. I'll take handling over luxury every time, just like I will take good sound over features.

I do agree at the $1K point, all receivers will give you plenty of power and features. They won't sound exactly the same, but they will all do the job. Speakers make a bigger difference than anything, so any good receiver should be able to make them sing, just that some fit our personal preferences better.
HT: Emotiva UMC-200, Emotiva XPA-3, Carnegie Acoustics CSB-1s + CSC-1, GR Research A/V-1s, Epik Empire, Oppo BDP-105, PS4, PS3,URC R-50, APC-H10, Panamax 5100 Bluejeans Cable
System Two: Marantz PM7200, Pioneer FS52s, Panasonic BD79
(stolen) : Marantz SR-8300, GR Research A/V-2s, Sony SCD-222ES SACD, Panasonic BD-65, PS3 60G (250G)

Everybody is a genius, but if you judge a fish by its ability to climb a tree, it’ll spend its whole life believing that it is stupid.” – Albert Einstein

 


#12 of 12 OFFLINE   Guy Usher

Guy Usher

    Supporting Actor



  • 780 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 20 2002

Posted April 10 2007 - 06:30 AM

My last Sony ES stuff was a separate system. . .ProLogic. . .IIRC the PreAmp was a TA-E1000ES and I used the ES 2 channel 120wpc 515ES or something like that. . .You could bridge it for a 360Watt mono amp. I used one for a Sub bridged and 3 for front and rear and center speakers. From there I went to Acurus then Parasound (2500??) as 5.1 was just hitting. . .AC-3 I think it was called then. Finally I landed on Anthem Pre and amps for a few months until lightening took it all. I replaced everything with Rotel amps (985/981) and a AV9000 Marantz Preamp that I miss today.

Everything was great until 7.1 hit. . .I had to have it so I sold my separates and bought my first Pioneer VSX45TX receiver and the rest is history.

I've been all over the map with receivers until now when all I want is for everything to work right and I don't have to worry about my wife using it. . .

In prior years our 'big' system was used only for movies but now it is used 24/7 for all sound from all sources that are connected to the TV. It was one thing to have 4 or 5 remotes when it was only used once or twice a week but now that it is used for everything it has to be simple.

My wife can do stuff to our equipment that I can not understand. . She is a button pusher. . . She starts pushing buttons before thinking about what she wants to do. . .She can get stuff in such a fix that sometimes it takes me hours to straighten it out. . .There is no correcting her either unless you want to go to bed with no supper. . .So it has to be simple. . .Or else its back to stereo and regular TV. . .
Even Monkeys fall from trees.


Back to Receivers/Separates/Amps



Forum Nav Content I Follow