• If you ever spot Spam (either in the forums, or received via forum direct message) please use the Report button at the bottom of each post to make sure a Moderator can handle it quickly. Thanks for your help in keeping things running smoothly!

An audition

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the What HiFi community: the world's leading independent guide to buying and owning hi-fi and home entertainment products.

chebby

Well-known member
Jun 2, 2008
1,232
4
19,195
Vladimir said:
I wish Marantz could address the fit and finish of their units. They feel cheap and plasticky in real life. I could live with the design but the fit and finish really needs work. When I had the Marantz stack next to the Yamaha stack in the showroom I was stunned how much better the Yamahas were. Like battle ships compared to portable toilets.

And I wasn't alone in this impression. My friend, also an audiophile, was with me and had the same reaction of disappointment. Like looking at the photos of food at McDonalds and then getting the actual food on your tray. :doh:

Soundwise they are OK, nothing to lose sleep over. Marantz is always kinda borring and sweet. There is power but you never feel like its there. I kinda liked my old 90's PM-80 mkII better, not to mention the built like a tank PM-84 or PM-94.

Saul Marantz must be turning in his grave.
My guess is that you've just caught up on the OP's earlier reference to his preference for the Marantz PM8005 over the Kandy :)
 

Covenanter

New member
Jul 20, 2012
63
0
0
chebby said:
Vladimir said:
I wish Marantz could address the fit and finish of their units. They feel cheap and plasticky in real life. I could live with the design but the fit and finish really needs work. When I had the Marantz stack next to the Yamaha stack in the showroom I was stunned how much better the Yamahas were. Like battle ships compared to portable toilets.

And I wasn't alone in this impression. My friend, also an audiophile, was with me and had the same reaction of disappointment. Like looking at the photos of food at McDonalds and then getting the actual food on your tray. :doh:

Soundwise they are OK, nothing to lose sleep over. Marantz is always kinda borring and sweet. There is power but you never feel like its there. I kinda liked my old 90's PM-80 mkII better, not to mention the built like a tank PM-84 or PM-94.

Saul Marantz must be turning in his grave.
My guess is that you've just caught up on the OP's earlier reference to his preference for the Marantz PM8005 over the Kandy :)
:rofl:
 

Vladimir

New member
Dec 26, 2013
220
4
0
chebby said:
My guess is that you've just caught up on the OP's earlier reference to his preference for the Marantz PM8005 over the Kandy :)
I'm sharing my experience from my auditions few months ago. I am a Marantz fan more than a Yamaha fan but that doesn't cloud mu judgement.

I'm an audiophile since I was 12 y/o.
 

GCE

New member
Jan 31, 2011
10
0
0
Yam as 500 in direct comparison with Marantz pm 6004 shows more dry, although more diffuse

and detailed high frequencies, similar bass punch, but more fatiguing listening overall, for me.

I tested this AS 500 for a week at home , but then I changed with Marantz PM 6004 .

Yam AS 500 is a very complete amp, but doesn't meet my preferences for a warm sound

with my B&W; is a beautifull vintage looking amp, with a lot of features,

but no good vol, tone, inputs, ecc, knobs ( no ergonomic)

and a delicate front plate for fingerprints when you touch;

btw 8005 is very well built and way more ergonomic...

here some reviews and pictures of

a portable toilets >>> http://www.evmag.fr/site.php?page=audio415

http://www.whathifi.com/images_audio/Marantz-PM8005/marantz-PM8005-intern.jpg

a beautiful amp >>> http://www.roksan.co.uk/assets/2brochure-a-lite.pdf

 

Vladimir

New member
Dec 26, 2013
220
4
0
Roksan Kandy K2 series is not beautiful. It's art deco odd and only an eccentric would like it. The Marantz is aimed to the general consumer and is more appealing than the Kandy, no doubt about that. Unless you are me.

As for the innards, I see no wires flying arround in the Kandy, on a single PCB, which means more efficient design with no afterthoughts. Clean and pedant, for a MOSFET amp that is quite an achievment. The Marantz just looks messy.
 

Cypher

New member
Jun 8, 2007
156
0
0
Who cares for what's inside the amp ? As long as it works and the amp sounds good that's all that matters.
 

Esra

Well-known member
Feb 20, 2011
59
18
18,545
Cypher said:
Who cares for what's inside the amp ? As long as it works and the amp sounds good that's all that matters.
Well I would rather have a proper na engine in my car than a maxed out downsized turbocharged 4 cylinder with even or maybe better performance than a inline six or v8.
 

CnoEvil

New member
Aug 21, 2009
556
8
0
Freddy58 said:
Chris, would it be fair to say that the 700's were more 'open' (generally) than the 500's?
Chris will no doubt answer for himself, but I didn't find them more "open". The R700s had more scale, impact and authority, which gives music that requires these attributes, more realism....better balanced if you will, as more of the frequency range of the music is covered.

With classical music for example, it portrays a full blown orchestra with more authenticity....they are big speakers, which require a larger room than the R500s.
 

Freddy58

Well-known member
Jan 24, 2014
25
1
10,545
CnoEvil said:
Freddy58 said:
Chris, would it be fair to say that the 700's were more 'open' (generally) than the 500's?
Chris will no doubt answer for himself, but I didn't find them more "open". The R700s had more scale, impact and authority, which gives music that requires these attributes, more realism....better balanced if you will, as more of the frequency range of the music is covered.

With classical music for example, it portrays a full blown orchestra with more authenticity....they are big speakers, which require a larger room than the R500s.
That's one of my concerns, the size. My listening room is aound 14ft x 12ft, probably a bit too small?

Trouble is, I saw them in piano gloss black, they're gorgeous!
 

CnoEvil

New member
Aug 21, 2009
556
8
0
Freddy58 said:
CnoEvil said:
Freddy58 said:
Chris, would it be fair to say that the 700's were more 'open' (generally) than the 500's?
Chris will no doubt answer for himself, but I didn't find them more "open". The R700s had more scale, impact and authority, which gives music that requires these attributes, more realism....better balanced if you will, as more of the frequency range of the music is covered.

With classical music for example, it portrays a full blown orchestra with more authenticity....they are big speakers, which require a larger room than the R500s.
That's one of my concerns, the size. My listening room is aound 14ft x 12ft, probably a bit too small?
I suspect you should be alright provided you can give them room to breathe......can you get a home dem?
 

Freddy58

Well-known member
Jan 24, 2014
25
1
10,545
CnoEvil said:
Freddy58 said:
CnoEvil said:
Freddy58 said:
Chris, would it be fair to say that the 700's were more 'open' (generally) than the 500's?
Chris will no doubt answer for himself, but I didn't find them more "open". The R700s had more scale, impact and authority, which gives music that requires these attributes, more realism....better balanced if you will, as more of the frequency range of the music is covered.

With classical music for example, it portrays a full blown orchestra with more authenticity....they are big speakers, which require a larger room than the R500s.
That's one of my concerns, the size. My listening room is aound 14ft x 12ft, probably a bit too small?
I suspect you should be alright provided you can give them room to breathe......can you get a home dem?
Probably, yes. The thing is, as I said in my thread, I currently have the MA GX100's and KEF R300's on home demo. I'm finding that the MA's are quite bright sounding, but detail and bass are very good, whereas the KEF's are much more mellow, but in some ways easier to listen to. I tried the R500's in the shop, and they were similar to the R300's, but with greater scale, imo. A bit brighter/more open would have been perfect, hence my question.
 

CnoEvil

New member
Aug 21, 2009
556
8
0
Freddy58 said:
Probably, yes. The thing is, as I said in my thread, I currently have the MA GX100's and KEF R300's on home demo. I'm finding that the MA's are quite bright sounding, but detail and bass are very good, whereas the KEF's are much more mellow, but in some ways easier to listen to. I tried the R500's in the shop, and they were similar to the R300's, but with greater scale, imo. A bit brighter/more open would have been perfect, hence my question.
We all hear things slightly differently, and that combined with describing what you are hearing to someone else, means that you can't take it as gospel.

Do your dem and let us know how it goes.
 

Freddy58

Well-known member
Jan 24, 2014
25
1
10,545
CnoEvil said:
We all hear things slightly differently, and that combined with describing what you are hearing to someone else, means that you can't take it as gospel.

Do your dem and let us know how it goes.
I'll probably try a comparison in the shop, and take it from there. Thanks for your input
 

CnoEvil

New member
Aug 21, 2009
556
8
0
Freddy58 said:
CnoEvil said:
We all hear things slightly differently, and that combined with describing what you are hearing to someone else, means that you can't take it as gospel.

Do your dem and let us know how it goes.
I'll probably try a comparison in the shop, and take it from there. Thanks for your input
No problem......it will be interesting to see if Chris has a similar perspective.
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

TRENDING THREADS

Latest posts