Marantz test results

Discussion in 'Archived Threads 2001-2004' started by ChrisDixon, Dec 14, 2001.

  1. ChrisDixon

    ChrisDixon Second Unit

    Joined:
    Nov 20, 2001
    Messages:
    306
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ok... go easy. It's my first (and rather rambling) post, and it takes a while to get to the point.
    Last June, I purchased a Marantz SR-7000 from a B&M store that assured me that it was the latest model and not on the way out. Of course, on this very forum, I found out that it was being replaced just a month or two later. I think I paid $699 for it. At the time, I was really annoyed, thinking that I would have waited for the 7200 or at least tried for more off the price. Then, I started reading of all the problems and of course the scathing magazine review of the 7200. My first reaction was, "maybe it was a good thing that I got the older/proven model". I did a fair amount of research on the SR-7000, and most of the reviews and opinions were very positive.
    When I brought it home, I loved the sound (especially 2 channel music which is even more important to me than movies), but I was suprised at how much I had to turn the volume compared to the Nakamichi AV-400 that it was replacing (also 100 wpc ProLogic). With the Nak's analog volume dial, I never turned it up more than 1/4 of the way. With the Marantz, I listen to two channel at about -20 give or take. This is well past half way (-80 to +15). I guess it doesn't matter, because it doesn't clip and sounds great, but it started me wondering about the true, measured wpc for the SR-7000 in 2 channel as well as 5.1. I found one post from a guy that said he measured the wpc and was surprised to see it measure just *over* a hundred with 5.1 driven. Another review said it was somewhere around 85 with 5.1 driven. Finally, to the point of this message: does anyone know a review or credible source that has actual lab measurements for the SR-7000? Any comments on the SR-7000 vs. 7200? I'm not as interested in the new formats... the amp section is most important to me, as long as I have DTS and DD. Thanks in advance, and thanks for having me. You've all given me upgraditis, the urge to tweak constantly, and that sense of "one more thing" that I never had when I was blissfully ignorant. Then again, thanks for nothing! [​IMG]
    Chris
     
  2. Lewis Besze

    Lewis Besze Producer

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 1999
    Messages:
    3,134
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Look for this thread:S&V Tests the Marantz SR 7200!
     
  3. Chris PC

    Chris PC Producer

    Joined:
    May 12, 2001
    Messages:
    3,975
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I like my 6200 and one of the only problems I have is that when a CD or DVD player is connected to the receiver via digital and I play a CD, the beginning of some tracks that start right at 0:00, are cut off. The x200 Marantz receivers aren't the only ones that have this problem. I tried an Onkyo and it did the exact same thing. So far, only NAD receivers don't seem to have this problem.

    Does the SR 7000 cutoff the beginning of any of the tracks you listen to on CD's that are played back using a CD or DVD player that is connected to the receiver via a digial cable?
     
  4. Jeff D.

    Jeff D. Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Jul 10, 1999
    Messages:
    521
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    First off, do not bring the SR-7200 review and debate into a discussion of the SR-7000. They are two completely different machines and any comparisons (other than qualitative comparisons) are completely misleading. So don't even try it.
    Next up: the volume control. Paying any attention to where the volume control is physically set is of no use and tells you nothing about the power performance of any given unit.
    I had an old NAD 304 integrated that was rated at 35 watts per channel. The volume control at about 10 o'clock was maxing things and you would certainly get no further than 12 o'clock before the amp ran out of steam. My Marantz SR-8000 which is a 105wpc receiver, on the other hand, requires me to turn it to about -10 dB on its volume control for similar levels. It simply comes down to different volume control designs, plain and simple.
    Now, if we think about it, the Marantz is the better control. A lot of people go up to anything like the NAD and think "Wow, cool, look how loud it goes!". What they don't realize is, there is not much use in anything past 11 or 12 o'clock on these dials. The amp will run out of steam at the point. So just because it gets louder at an earlier point on its volume control tells you nothing.
    The Marantz is the better design because it is giving you a finer range in its control. The maximum setting of the volume control is really about the maximum of the amps capability - makes much more sense, non? Why waste range on a volume control? The Marantz can offer better precision for setting volume levels because its control's range is much greater.
    Now, to actual power ratings. The 100w rating of the SR-7000 was not an "all five channels driven" rating. The power output of the SR-7000 fell to about 80-85 watts with all five driven. The model next up to it - the SR-8000, boasted a 5-watt increase in its specs (105 watts per channel), but the important thing to note was that the power supply was much better and it generally held that 105 watts with all five channels driven. There is nothing wrong with the SR-7000's rating.
    Now, I've already stated that comparing the problems of the SR-7200 receiver to the SR-7000 is a moot point, because there is no connection. The SR-7000 was a solid product with NO large-scale problems documented. The slight dip in power rating is irrelevant, and MANY other receivers from other manufacturers do the same thing. Don't let anyone tell you otherwise. Dips in power with "all five channels driven" is NOT a problem unique to Marantz.
    Comparing the two, I'd say the SR-7000 would be the better product. I don't quite know why, but I found the previous series to have a slight edge sonically over the current series. Not a night and day difference, but it is noticeable nonetheless.
    ----
    Jeff
     
  5. Jon_B

    Jon_B Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Nov 27, 2000
    Messages:
    1,025
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I agree with what Jeff has to say on this one. [​IMG]
    Jon
     
  6. Lewis Besze

    Lewis Besze Producer

    Joined:
    Jul 28, 1999
    Messages:
    3,134
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
     
  7. Dalton

    Dalton Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2001
    Messages:
    1,198
    Likes Received:
    5
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Rhode Island
    Real Name:
    Dalton
     

Share This Page