My input on my new Marantz 6200

Discussion in 'Archived Threads 2001-2004' started by Doug_Wes, May 19, 2002.

  1. Doug_Wes

    Doug_Wes Auditioning

    Joined:
    May 18, 2002
    Messages:
    14
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Hi (from first-time poster) -

    I'm in the process of upgrading my stereo system to home theater. Over the last month I have hauled home A/V receivers from Yamaha, Denon and HK (can't recall the exact model numbers, but they were all at my price point of $500-$600). I even tried the Outlaw 1050. They all sounded fine to me for movies... but none of them sounded nearly as good for music as my nine year old HK stereo receiver. So they went back to the dealers.

    I was about ready to give up, but a Marantz retailer wanted me to try the SR6200. As soon as I got it connected and fired it up, I knew this was the receiver for me. The sound isn't perfect... for example, the Yamaha had more punch and the HK produced fuller bass... but this is the only A/V receiver I could find within my budget where I can just enjoy music without constantly thinking about the sound quality. The Marantz "Source Direct" feature makes a nice improvement for music reproduction, but even without it, this receiver sounds better to me than the others.

    Since I just found this forum a couple nights ago (and it's great!), I wasn't aware of the possible defects with the current Marantz receivers. So I spent some time last evening checking out my unit. The only problems I noted are the background hiss at high volume settings (not an issue for me since I hardly ever listen that loud) and the muting of the first fraction of a second of audio from DVD's. But all the receivers I tried did this to varying degrees, so I figure it's due mostly to my cheap Apex DVD player. Doesn't really bother me much anyway.

    And hey... I actually like the SR6200's remote! It's not very ergonomic or whatever, but there are plenty of buttons to operate everything on all my components and it learned their codes with no problems.
     
  2. Ned

    Ned Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Feb 20, 2000
    Messages:
    838
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Not surprised you like Marantz for music. I've yet to see anyone not like Marantz (except for that one messed up model).
     
  3. Keith Plucker

    Keith Plucker Screenwriter

    Joined:
    Feb 4, 1999
    Messages:
    1,168
    Likes Received:
    68
    Trophy Points:
    1,610
    Location:
    Sacramento
    Real Name:
    Keith Plucker
    Welcome to the forum Doug!
    Although I have never owned one, Marantz receivers do have reputation of being a very good receiver where music is concerned. You might consider saving some more beans and picking up a 2 or 3 channel amp for your front soundstage for even better sound. A good source of used equipment would be www.audiogon.com or even the Hardware For Sale section here.
    Enjoy your receiver and welcome aboard.
    -Keith
     
  4. John Garcia

    John Garcia Executive Producer

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 1999
    Messages:
    11,571
    Likes Received:
    25
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    NorCal
    Real Name:
    John
    I've listened to some very expensive systems, and even much more powerful Marantz units, and I can't say that the 6200 has any lack of power so far. If one has large, or low sensitivity speakers, I could see adding an amp, but with most small bookshelf speakers, I can't see there being much of a need. I have a decent sized room, at ~12x25x10, and I have no problem filling it with sound.
    The recently shipped units are said to no longer have the quality control issues. These appear to have come in batches, and not all had some or all of the problems. If you purchased from Cambridge Soundworks, they said their stock was completely refreshed with newer units that should not have these problems.
    I am more than pleased with mine. [​IMG] Congrats on your purchase and welcome [​IMG]
     
  5. Doug_Wes

    Doug_Wes Auditioning

    Joined:
    May 18, 2002
    Messages:
    14
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I sometimes listen at pretty high levels... I live on a ranch out in the middle of nowhere so I don't have to worry about neighbors [​IMG]. The Marantz can play VERY loud! But even the 65 watts/channel Outlaw 1050 delivered plenty of volume. My main speakers are home-built so I don't know the exact efficiency... but I selected drivers that were all at least 92 db efficient so the speaker systems are quite sensitive I think.
    However, I might well get the bug someday to add separate amps just to enhance the dynamics and impact of the sound. The Marantz does seem a bit "thin" compared to some of the other stuff I've heard. Although I suspect in the near term what would add most to my listening experience... especially for movies... would be to replace my Yamaha subwoofer. It's a little thing (rated at like 70 watts I think) that I picked up on clearance a while back at Best Buy for $75.
    But overall... I am more than pleased with the SR6200 and my system just the way it is. I was getting soooooo discouraged about HT receivers after listening to all those others. I was beginning to think I was going to have to save up a couple grand for separates in order to get something I really liked.
     
  6. Ferran Mazzanti

    Ferran Mazzanti Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    May 15, 2002
    Messages:
    104
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Hey!
    I'm also quite newbie to this forum, ans feel very muc like you Doug_Wes. I purchased my 6200 'because music matters' [​IMG] and nothing out there compares in this aspect to what I own (ey, that's my opinion). Besides, I like to turn down a little bit bass, so I like the way Marantz handles with it. And yes, appart from the background hiss I also have the 0.2-0.5 sec. lack in the starting tracks of digital inputs, but AFAIK that's common to most receivers...
    And I even get accostumed to the remote! At frst I thought it was ugly, but actually has lots of keys and functionality. The only think I must care about is to net let my little kid to put his hands on it [​IMG]
     
  7. Chris PC

    Chris PC Producer

    Joined:
    May 12, 2001
    Messages:
    3,975
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I scooped a Marantz RC2000 mkII cause I was fed up with not being able to see my remote in the dark. Other than that, I don't like the digital cutoffs, the SOURCE DIRECT=NO SUB and the crossover is kinda lame. Otherwise it seems ok and definitely clean and pleasant sounding music wise [​IMG]
     
  8. Doug_Wes

    Doug_Wes Auditioning

    Joined:
    May 18, 2002
    Messages:
    14
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Hi Ferran and Chris -
    Great to hear from a couple fellow SR6200 owners! Sounds like we agree on pretty much everything... except that infamous remote [​IMG] But hey Ferran... I'm glad to find there is at least one other person in the world that actually likes it!!
    I'm in agreement with you Chris about the subwoofer stuff... the cross-over frequency is too high. I have big main speakers and I wish I could set the frequency at like 60 Hz. A couple of the receivers I tried had this capability... but they didn't sound as good. So I guess we'll just have to live with it.
    Actually, the subwoofer seems to be active in Source Direct for discreet LFE signals. But it would be nice if the bass management worked in source direct so the sub would be active for music, etc. too. However, I think it's the DSP circuitry that does the bass management, and the whole point of the "direct" feature is to bypass all that stuff.
     
  9. Ferran Mazzanti

    Ferran Mazzanti Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    May 15, 2002
    Messages:
    104
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Hi again,
    regarding the remote, it's true that is has lots of keys all of them looking like identical (so it's hard to learn all position by heart), but other remotes which much less keys also have their problems, like having to stroke many keys before you get what you want. Furthermore the 6200 remote is light and learns *lots* of other remotes' functionalities: I have made it to operate the receiver, the DVD, the TV, the VCR and the DSS, without a single problema (plain and easy). SO yes, it does not have all the bells an whistles other remotes may have, but it really does the job and it's easy to operate. Not that bad after all...
    And regarding bass, here I can't help because I certainly dislike subwoofers [​IMG] I don't have one and I'm pretty sure I'll never purchasse any. I prefer to have nice mains capable to handle all frequencies in a natural way...
     
  10. ChrisAG

    ChrisAG Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2001
    Messages:
    503
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Don't get me started on that 6200 remote![​IMG]
    Its only redeeming qualities are
    1) that it's lightweight, and
    2) that it can learn other commands (though the memory seems small, since I could only teach it two components before it quit learning, and it wouldn't let me clear the codes to start over).
    The gripes:
    - unergonomic (wide and blocky construction, identical small buttons)
    - can't use by feel (other than volume and one or two other nearby buttons
    - can't use it in the dark
    - hard to quickly select a button among the clutter of other buttons and command abreviations
    - doesn't tell you what component is selected, so you often must select first before entering a command
    I bought the Marantz RC1200 and haven't looked back. It runs everything, has a backlit LCD screen, glow buttons that can be used by feel, and a narrow profile that is easy to hold.
     
  11. Richard_c

    Richard_c Agent

    Joined:
    May 19, 2000
    Messages:
    45
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I got a RC1200 to replace my SR6200 one as well, went from 7 remotes to 1[​IMG]. The SR6200 so far has been faultless, produces a wonderful sound with movies & music, & bloody marvelous with games (Halo).
     
  12. Chris PC

    Chris PC Producer

    Joined:
    May 12, 2001
    Messages:
    3,975
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Yeah, I bought an RC2000 MKII off someone on HTF actually. Dave from California. So far its great. The only thing I don't like is it is a bit heavy and you can't use the individual track/chapter numbers very easily with one hand, but boy do I love the fact that it lights up! Its so cool to have 320 extra commands to put in. Wow. Each component can have 4 x 8 for 10 = 320. Anyways, enough about the remote. Yeah, I don't understand the source direct myself. I also don't care much for the bass control, as it doesn't seem to add as much bass as I'd like. I'm a bass freak though. I do like the SR6200's DAC's more now that I listen to them. Nice sound. I like listening to music with this receiver [​IMG]
     
  13. Doug_Wes

    Doug_Wes Auditioning

    Joined:
    May 18, 2002
    Messages:
    14
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Well, I can't argue with the complaints about the SR6200's remote. But it suits me... and there's a certain "geek factor" about it that seems to appeal to me [​IMG] I had no problems teaching the remote all the commands I need for my other components... I stored like a 150 of 'em in it (took me 2 1/2 hours one night to program the thing). It won't operate the receiver for my sat. dish... but that's cuz the sat. remote uses RF signals instead of infrared.
    Ferran - I used to feel the same way you do about subwoofers. But when I saw that little Yamaha on clearance at Best Buy, it was so cheap that I picked it up just to see how a sub might work out for me. I was surprised at how much even that inexpensive model adds to the reproduction of music. I can compensate for the low-frequency characteristics of my listening room by moving the sub around and fiddling with the level and cross-over. You can't do that with your main speakers, no matter how good they are. And really, I consider a subwoofer almost a necessity for movies. I do need to upgrade mine though.
    Chris - I know what you mean about not using Source Direct as much after you get "accustomed" to the sound of the SR6200. The same thing is happening with me. On some material, it seems like the sound is actually better without using Source Direct, even though I know the DAC's etc. are adding a certain amount of distortion.
     
  14. Chris PC

    Chris PC Producer

    Joined:
    May 12, 2001
    Messages:
    3,975
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    My biggest problem is that I like bass and in SOURCE DIRECT, there are no bass controls. I have different moods and sometimes I like to listen to music with my front speakers alone and no subwoofer. If I bought external amps and an external crossover, it'd be next to impossible to switch the external crossover in and out like I can with the receivers SOURCE DIRECT mode. If I was to change the Marantz SR6200, I would:

    1)Make the crossover include selectable frequencies between 60,70,80 and 90 hz (you could include 50 hz, 100, 120 and 150 but I wouldn't use them).

    2) Make the bass and treble controls analog (and I'd love a loudness controll too) and make them operable in SOURCE DIRECT

    3) Completely eliminate the muting circuit or otherwise correct the digital cut-offs. I don't care if Marantz wants to hide that tiny bit of background noise. It is barely audible at the volumes I listen anyways. Disable that muting

    or fix the chopping off of the beginning of tracks. It bugs me more now because I am beginning to like the SR6200's DAC's and I feel that I DO want a digital CD player.

    With the above done, the only thing I would add to the receiver is external amplification for the front two channels, or even a 5 or 7 channel amp. Perhap in the future I would upgrade the receiver to a pre-pro if Marantz or NAD or Outlaw was a good way to go. My subwoofer is wall switched, so with the Outlaw, I could use the awesome crossovers, and when I wanted to listen just to my front speakers for whatever reason, I could do that too.

    I am seriously awaiting the new NAD receiver's to see what they have to offer.
     
  15. John Garcia

    John Garcia Executive Producer

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 1999
    Messages:
    11,571
    Likes Received:
    25
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    NorCal
    Real Name:
    John
     
  16. Ferran Mazzanti

    Ferran Mazzanti Stunt Coordinator

    Joined:
    May 15, 2002
    Messages:
    104
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    I agree in some of the points Chris PC comments.

    For exemple, I was astonished when realized that there's no bass/treble management in sound direct mode. My old (Marantz) stereo amp also had a sound direct mode but that didn't bypass these controls... In fact, I stay with the 6200 because I like the way sound direct sounds, and so I don't really need the bass/trebel control at that level, but prior to that I tried a 4200 and a 5200 and found that wth these units I really needed the bass/treble knob to hear music the way I like it (with this I'm sayin the definitely the 4200 and 5200 sound different from the 6200).

    An concerning the use of the receiver's DAC, I can tell you that I own a three years old SOny CD player that has both analog and digital connections. I tried both and, for me, they basically sound identical. I use the digital because that completely removes background hiss, noise, etc... but

    that's the only reason. Do you really appreciate the difference?
     
  17. John Garcia

    John Garcia Executive Producer

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 1999
    Messages:
    11,571
    Likes Received:
    25
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    NorCal
    Real Name:
    John
    I also hear basically no difference between digital or analog with my CD player, however with it being Marantz, it likely has similar, if not the same, DACs. I listened to both quite a bit, and I left it analog. And the last thing to note, that the Chris's have read me post before, I get no audio drop out at the beginning of tracks with the Marantz CD player via coax digital.
     
  18. ChrisAG

    ChrisAG Supporting Actor

    Joined:
    Aug 26, 2001
    Messages:
    503
    Likes Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    0
    If Source Direct had adjustable Bass and Treble, it wouldn't be a true "Source Direct."

    I too would like an adjustable crossover. I read consumer review complaints about this on the previous generation models, yet Marantz kept the same primitive bass management for the current design.

    Slightly off topic here, but has anyone tried 92kHz material (DVD-Audio or SACD) with the Marantz x200 yet?
     
  19. Chris PC

    Chris PC Producer

    Joined:
    May 12, 2001
    Messages:
    3,975
    Likes Received:
    1
    Trophy Points:
    0
    John,
    Thats cool that you have no audio dropout, but I am not apt to choose a new CD player yet for that reason alone. I may get a 200 or 300 disc changer, but one which sounds good too. Right now, I have a Sony CDP-C50 which is a 13 year old 5 disc carousel. The very first 5 disc [​IMG] Works well. The only thing I don't like is the shuffle that repeats songs and the fact that I can't change discs while one is playing. My Panasonic DVD player is an ok CD player in that its just a digital transport, but then I have the drop outs. Same goes for my CLD-79 Pioneer LD player. Both make the CD's seem to sound a little less harsh for some reason. I guess the Marantz DAC's are better than the Sony's 12 year old ones.
    I disagree that loudness is useless. I like lots of bass and really, I only need an extra 6 dB or so at high volume, but at lower volumes, I like more bass. At low volumes, bass seems to be too low. It's actually not too bad, but anyways. I like bass and each room is different, so I want a bass control. As far as source direct and not having tone controls, I disagree. If audio companies can't make an ANALOG tone control without degrading the signal, which would surprise me, then they can add a tone defeat in adition to source direct. Thats how my old amp worked and it was fine that way. I'm about to go and sell my old Technics SU-V40 for $130.00 CAD. I will miss that thing but I am short on cash and it has been sitting around idle. It had CD DIRECT but you could still use bass, treble and loudness if you desired, or defeat them. YOU HAD CONTROL. I usually set it up with the loudness button on and I then trimmed the bass a dB or two from what the loudness added, or I just left the loudness on period. I rarely used the bass control without the loudness. CD's vary too much in volume and with the loudness control, each volume I adjusted to had the right amount of bass. LOTS [​IMG]
     
  20. John Garcia

    John Garcia Executive Producer

    Joined:
    Jun 24, 1999
    Messages:
    11,571
    Likes Received:
    25
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    NorCal
    Real Name:
    John
    Sounds like what you want is an SA or DVD-A player with bass management, then you can use source direct, but still get bass. What sub are you running now? (SVS...hint hint [​IMG] )
    I would also like an adjustable x-over, but I'm OK for now.
    I picked up the Marantz CDP because my old Sony 5 disc CDP was giving me some problems, and I also wanted to be able to change the other CDs while one was playing.
    I have a remote to adjust my sub, which has memory settings for phase, volume and x-over, so I can tailor the bass for what I am listening to. Setting 1 is ref calibrated, 2 is +3 dB, and 3 is +6dB. I always have enough bass. [​IMG] At ref cal, my sub is only at 1/4 of it's volume.
     

Share This Page