Anybody own the Marantz 8300 yet? (1 Viewer)

[Yee-Ming]

One more thing: I for one still remember the admittedly small but still present snafu for the x200 series of receivers by Marantz. (Noise level, dropouts? I don't even remember what the problem was! )

I believe the biggest outstanding problem is the slow "start" in decoding the digital output, i.e. when you first play a disc, Marantz receivers are rather slow in identifying and then decoding the information, resulting in "dropped" audio. so each time you change menus, any audio accompanying it is cut-off at the beginning as the receiver is slow to start decoding the sound.

this happens again when the audio stream is interrupted during layer changes, which is even more annoying than cut-off menu audio (which I can just about live with).

it was suggested that different players might give better results in terms of overcoming this limitation. so does the Marantz player help at all in this?

 

[Brian Fitterman]

The 8300 *is* based on the DV-47a. But it is also Marantz's first foray into universal players.

The 8300 uses the 47a's transport. This has been confirmed by Marantz. The video section might use some of the same parts as the Pioneer, but the Audio section is completely redone. It may be Marantz's first foray into a "universal player" but they have what are to be considered the BEST 2 channel SACD player, and one of the Best each of a DVD-A and SACD-Multi player. The 2 channel one sold for $7K, and each of the multi channel players cost over $2,800 each. I am not sure of the price. In other words, it is not their first time doing this. I have been looking at their Reference players for some time now, I just did not want to spend $5K on two players that would need a 6 way switch to use with my Preamp.

Marantz is the equivalent to Denon in Europe. They have been around for many years, and have a great reputation. They just are not that big here in the US. This is why Denon and Marantz are merging. They share the same philosophy in many areas and can benefit from one another.

Yee-Ming, I cannot tell you if it helps as I do not have a Marantz receiver. Sorry.

 

[Kevin C Brown]

The Marantz x200 receiver issue was a noise problem. S&V even spotted it during their lab testing.

Hmmm... The Yamaha RX-V1300 receiver, which is the next generation of the RX-V1200, is cheaper. But it has 24/192 DACs vs 24/96's, more power, etc. But it is cheaper. It can happen.

I like Marantz. I want them to do a successor to the AV9000 pre/pro.

But if they didn't change any of the video with the 8300, then it still must have the chroma bug. Along with incomplete bass management, that's difficult to accept for a $1500 player...

 

[Brian Fitterman]

But if they didn't change any of the video with the 8300, then it still must have the chroma bug. Along with incomplete bass management, that's difficult to accept for a $1500 player...

I am not sure if they did or not. The Marantz rep says they did, but I suspect otherwise. But have you ever seen the chroma bug? Its the most over talked about insignificant thing that gets more attention since DTS first came out on LD. (as stated above too)

I will give you the Bass Managment issue. But in my case the AVM-20 can do it. It has 96/24 Analog to Digital converters so it should not effect the music that much. As a matter of fact, with all the processing that it does (timing, bass mngmt, etc..) I think it sounds better with it engaged. (benefits outwiegh the losses IMO)

Multi channel DSD bass managment still has not been addressed by Sony..No standard yet. So I am not sure how these players that claim they are doing it, really do it. Is it done in Digital domain or Analog domain? DVD-A is easy, after decoding MLP you get PCM which any standard chipset can handle, but not DSD. John, do you have any input on this?

$1500 is alot to pay for ANY piece of equipment. But the sound of this unit is as good as any SACD I have heard (including the 777XES) as well as any DVD-A player. Throw in the good progress video (even if its not the top in that category, its still very good), and very good build quality, I thought it was worth it. Others may not.

 

[WarrenCo]

I think I am going to buy the 8300 soon. I guess the only way to know if I will really like it is to get it in my system and see/listen.

 

[Brian Fitterman]

A very good review of the Pioneer 47A is in this months Perfect Vision. If the Marantz 8300 does indeed have the same video section as the 47A, then I thought he was right on with the video compared to the Sony 9000ES. The Marantz is sharper, but there was something about the colors the sony produced. They seemed a bit more lifelike. He went on to say that most might like the Pioneer picture quality better becuase of this sharpness.

He absolutly trashed the audio quality of the machine. I guess this is why Marantz choose to make it better.

 

[Scott Pierson]

The same review is also in Widescreen Review. Why are two audio/video journals buying the same review from one writer? Aren't there exclusivity rights? I always feel a little gypped when this happens, like both magazines kind of cheated me.

 

[Kevin C Brown]

WSR seemed to like the both the audio and video quality (Similarly to S&V and SGHT). Especially for the price. WSR had 2 reviews, one video, one audio, in 2 subsequent issues. One of the same people wrote the Perfect Vision review?

 

[Brian Fitterman]

S&V Likes everything...I can't stand that magazine. The only reason why I subscribe is becuase its so cheap and I had 3 years on my Audio magazine that was transfered to S&V.

One of the reasons why I like Perfect Vision is they do not seem afraid to tell it like it is. WSR used to be that way as well, but they seemed to have backed off a bit on their reviews.

 

[KeithH]

Brian, I agree with you wholeheartedly. I only read Sound & Vision on the newsstand once in a blue moon. That magazine is too much of a love fest.

 

[Kevin C Brown]

Geez, not another "bash S&V" thread...

S&V actually measures components for audio & video performance. I like that.

S&V also purposefully publishes "Low Points" in terms of where they think a component could be improved. I like that.

But you are entitled to your opinion just as I am.

 

[Brian Fitterman]

Yes they do list low points, but they are mostly in the are of ease of use, low power, too big, and such like that. They really never give a "strong" opinion in the area of sound/video quality, or compare it to others in the same price point or level. They will say a $1000 dvd player has very good video. Well duh, it better for $1000.

When they got rid of Michael Riggs (the former editor of Audio magazine) they went down hill from there.

I am mostly into equipment reviews and I just don't think they have it there. But they do have some interesting side articals every once and a while. I will give them that.

 

[Scott Pierson]

Kevin--
My mistake...For some reason I thought Shane Buettner wrote both reviews. I guess because they were so similar. Perry Sun wrote the WSR audio review. SB wrote the Pervect Vision review.:b

 

[Kevin C Brown]

For kicks, I wracked my brain in terms of the really useful stuff I've gotten from S&V over the past few years:
1) Yamaha RX-V800 or maybe it was the 1000 receiver. Measurements showed that you had to run the sub output a little less than 0 dB or else you could overload it. The next generation (1000 was after the 800, and the 1200 was after the 1000) did *not* have the problem.
2) Outlaw's ICBM. S&V pointed out that because it doesn't have adjustable volume pots on the outputs, it is practically useless as a bass management tool after a receiver-as-a-pre/pro or pre/pro before the amps. Only really useful in between a player and the pre/pro. (Unless you can live with all of your speakers set to the same exact level.)
3) Outlaw 950. S&V showed that the noise measurements were greater than a $300 Panasonic receiver reviewed in the same issue. Jived with what users found, and hence Outlaw stopped shipping to fix the "hiss" problem.
4) Marantz x200 series of receivers. The poopy really hit the fan when S&V published their measured results for noise. I think this what actually got Marantz to fix the problem.
5) Incomplete bass management on the Pioneer DV-47A, and actually most currently available DVD-A players. S&V measurements also show that most current DVD-A and SACD players only hit 18 bit resolution for dynamic range, due to the noise floor. So much for 24 bit resolution!
6) Incomplete bass management on the Sherwood R963 receiver (or something). Whatever the flagship Newcastle receiver is.
7) An older review noted noise problems with the Rotel RSP-985 pre/pro. Low and behold, when the 1066 came out, it had a noise problem too. (Not yet tested by S&V.) Rotel recalled the units and fixed them all. Problem with a ground inside the chassis if I remember correctly. They also reviewed the 1065 receiver and there was some issue there too.
8) They did a 3 receiver comparison review I think it was Jan of 2002. Sony against 2 of Pioneer, Onkyo, or Denon (I can't remember the other 2). They showed that the Sony was the most comparativley underpowered of the 3. I had dug up another data point from Hi Fi Entertainment Choice (or someone) who reviewed the TA-N9000ES power amp a few years back. Also underpowered, to the point it didn't even meet Sony's specs. They also had 3 fail during testing. Point is, Sony doesn't do power amps very well.
9) S&V was 1st mag I remember to correctly note that most center channel speakers are designed incorrectly. The typical woofer, tweeter, woofer arrangement across the front results in terrible constructive/destructive interference as you move laterally across the front of the speaker's soundstage. Really an issue for people sitting off to the side. One alternative is a co-axial driver setup, or woofer-tweeter-woofer where one of the woofers is a passive radiator and/or setup with a different crossover freq than the other.
1) They also do some of the best sub reviews out there, mostly due to Tom Nousaine.
That's what S&V has done for me over the past few years.
It's just another home theater mag. I have my complaints with them too. I think they should review *slightly* more expensive components than they do. I think they focus too much on multi-channel audio to the detriment of their stereo coverage. But that's why I also read SGHT, HTM, WSR, Stereophile, the Audio Critic, the Audio Perfectionist, and for a little while, the Sensible Sound. And perusal of audioreview.com and ecoustics.com and Secrets at hometheaterhifi.com. And HTF of course!

 

[KeithH]

Kevin, solid points. As I said, my issue with Sound & Vision is that they like everything they review. However, some good things come from their reviews since they do measurements. David Ranada is a real aspect to the magazine in my opinion. Ranada was the first in the audio press to raise the issue of a lack of bass management on all first-generation DVD-Audio players. His article got everyone talking about this issue, and it is still a serious subject of discussion with both DVD-Audio and SACD players.

 

[Brian Fitterman]

I guess some of your examples show why I do not like that mag. It may sound sound bad, but most of the stuff they review I would NEVER buy. Not to sound like a snob, but I want reviews of the higher end stuff. They are aimed at the lower to lower/mid range.

They do have once and a while a high end piece from a larger company like Denon, Pioneer, Sony etc... But for the most part I want to see the stuff that is hard for me to find at a local store. I can hear the Denon 5803 anytime I want. I do not need them telling me what it can and cannot do.

As far as them leading the way for base managment, they were hardly the only ones talking about it.

Also, I happened to talk to the VP of Marantz America (at a customer appreiation sale at my local store - all their product lines had reps there) right after that x200 article. At no point in time did they ever ask for a new sample when they measured the power measurments so low. They just went right to publication. That is not being very thorough. They must have known it was a bad unit. This DVD player is the only Marantz piece I have so its not like I am playing favorites here. I have just been following them for a while and I know the kind of quality they have.

Again, they can measure to their hearts content, but unless they tell me how it sounds, and compare it to other similar products, the review is just specs.

As for #9, a little company named THX has been saying that for YEARS. Just look at the designs of all the THX center channels.

 

[WarrenCo]

I went ahead and bought the 8300 today. When I unpacked it I noticed that the remote was a cool light goldish color with the buttons pretty nicely laid out.

I connected the wires and put on the live Zeppelin tune "I can't quit you babe" from the remastered 4 disc CD set. It sounded great.

Then I put on Dave Brubeck's "Take Five" on SACD. It sounded kind of "bright" and a little harsh to me. Also, I was only hearing it in stereo. I did some playing around in the menu's and found a setting for SACD to select stereo or 5.1. (Kind of dumb IMO to bury that choice in a menu and not with a hard button on the remote and unit itself. There is an option according to the manual that allows you to select up to 5 different menu choices for one touch access though which I imagine could be used for this purpose.)

I also set my speaker sizes, distances, and levels. (When setting levels there is no test tone for the sub for some reason.)

I then listened to parts of a few songs from "Take 5" in surround and also found them to sound kind of bright and harsh.

Next I put on The Eagles "Hotel California" a DVD -Audio disc I know pretty well and listened to the title track as well as "New Kid in Town" in surround. I thought it sounded a bit more detailed than my Panasonic RP-91, but again kind of bright and harsh. I went back and forth a couple of times and felt the same each time.

I did not check the video.

Bottom Line

CD playback I liked a lot

SACD playback I was dissapointed

DVD-Audio playback I was dissapointed

I have waited a long time for a good universal player and I had hoped this was it. Unfortunaelty for me it is not. I will return it tommarow.

Please do not read words as any kind of gospel. (not that you would, but I feel better writing it anyway). This is just how it sounds to me on my system.

Please note that it seems that I prefer more nuetral or warm sounding gear. When I went to the Hifi Show in NYC the last 2 years I heard many systems (mostly stereo) that were supposed to be very, very high end (like several hundred thousand dollars) that I thought sounded brittle and harsh to me as well.

I guess I need to demo the Pioneer 47A or find some more patience.

 

[Brian Fitterman]

WarrenCo, I am quite surprised that you did not like the audio of this player. You are the first.
Just one question, is there a SACD player you like better? Also what kind of speakers do you use? I just sounds like you are looking for a particular type of sound.
Have you tried tube amps with a turntable? From what you say it sounds like you would most certainly prefer their sound to solid state and digital source. You would certainly not be alone in that category. There are many people who do not like the sound of digital technology. I have not yet demoed a good analog system like that, I am afraid too and that I will like it too much and spend more money switching over and then spend the rest of my life looking for vinyl . Believe me I have seen it happen.

 

[WarrenCo]

Brian,
I heard a demo of not yet releasd Janis Joplin stuff in Sony's demo room at the Home THeatre Expo in NYC a couple of months ago and thought it sounded fantastic. The Stones also sounded good.(unfortunately only 2 channel for the Stones). So a guess the answer is yes to the question have I heard an SACD player I liked better. I don't know which one it was though. I am guessing the 9000.
You are right about my liking the sound of tube amps and vinyl. At the Hifi show in NYC the best sounding system to my ears was a vinyl set up in 2001. 2002 it was the Sony demo.
I am thrilled with the sound of my system though. I just want to add SACD.
Here is my current set-upisplay : Pioneer Elite 610 (58" widescreen, HD ready)
Satellite Reciever : Dish 6000 w Over the Air Module (High Def)
DVD : Pansonic RP-91 (Prog Scan / DVD - Audio)
VCR : Sony (stereo) and Magnavox
Antenna : Channel master (4297?) with amp and rotor
PreAmp: Integra Research RDC-7
Amp (Mains): Sunfire Signature Series 2 channel (1650 watts 4 into ohms)
Amp (Surrounds): Sunfire Signature Series 5 channel (850 watts 4 into ohms)
SPEAKERS
Mains : Aerial Acoustic 10T's (RoseWalnut)
Center : Aerial Acoustic CC5 (Black) w black stand
Side : Aerial Acoustic 10T's (Black)
Rear : Aerial Acoustic SR3's (White) w white stand
Subwoofer : Rel Stadium III (Black)
Cd changer : Yamaha lower end model (would like to replace with SACD/DVD-Audio changer or mega changer)
Cassettee Deck : Yamaha mid level dual Cassette Deck
Video Games : Playstation 2 and X box
Equipment Racks : 2 Sanus 6 shelf (maple)
Seating : 2 Cinema Tech Seating Valentino model in tan
1 1 and 1/2 chair w/ ottoman from Macy's in Green

 

[Brian Fitterman]

That certainly is a very nice setup you have. Thats too bad you did not like the 8300. Marantz is dropping their top of the line reference SACD player. They have a matching Reference DVD-A player as well. My guess is that soon or later they will make a combo player.

Sooner or later sony has got to make a DVD-A player. I would love to see my old 777ES with multi channel for both DVD-A and SACD.

I did some more listening with the CD. This time I tried using the digital out to my AVM-20...much better. It is a very solid transport. I got so used to listening to CD's with my SCD-777ES (this or the SCD-1, or X777ES is most likly the unit you were listening to in NY) using the Analog outputs for CD I forgot to try the Digital output. But I really like the combo for CD's now. As stated above I do like it for SACD and DVD-A as well.