Best for Stereo: Marantz SR8500 (home theater) or PM7000 (stereo)

[Al ears]

I have the impression that you did not read my previous comment about the importance of the influence of the room on the sound, and about the means of correcting these shortcomings

Are you saying everyone with a hifi system requires a room correction facility of some type?
If so you might wonder how brilliant hifi setups worked in the past by simply choosing good components and selecting and positioning the right speakers for the room.
It's how it used to be done and is obviously lost on some people.
You need software to, so called, sort your system that's fine, I will use my experience and ears.....
Software may have its place but ultimately its no panacea, you cannot make a silk purse out of a sows ear, as the saying goes.

 

[landco]

Are you saying everyone with a hifi system requires a room correction facility of some type?
If so you might wonder how brilliant hifi setups worked in the past by simply choosing good components and selecting and positioning the right speakers for the room.

In many cases, using room correction improves the sound. In the past era, as today, there were sound correction systems, for example, Technics SH-8075 and 8000. Good sound does not appear out of nowhere (not counting random successful room + acoustic combinations) you need to work with the room to achieve the best results, and the parametric equalizer is an affordable and effective tool.

 

[plastic penguin]

This is a big mistake.

Well, it isn't if
A) You do your homework
B) You have a home demo

I didn't home demo the Dalis but I did Amphion Argon 1s, which I had for a fortnight. So I took the Argons into Richer Sounds and demoed them against the Dalis, which I shop demoed twice.

 

[manicm]

In many cases, using room correction improves the sound. In the past era, as today, there were sound correction systems, for example, Technics SH-8075 and 8000. Good sound does not appear out of nowhere (not counting random successful room + acoustic combinations) you need to work with the room to achieve the best results, and the parametric equalizer is an affordable and effective tool.

Parametric equalisers were almost always awful. Room correction software works to a point, but is not always a panacea. Common sense is often the answer. For starters, get speakers that are suited to the room.

 

[landco]

Parametric equalisers were almost always awful. Room correction software works to a point, but is not always a panacea. Common sense is often the answer. For starters, get speakers that are suited to the room.

Your answer shows your technical incompetence. I don't even know if I should explain anything to you

 

[Scritch]

Thanks a lot everyone for your insights.

If I were buying new, seems likely a stereo amp would generally be the better feature/cost ratio.

Since I'm buying used (and in Costa Rica), I'm extremely limited on the specific models available.

Currently the two best options I've got are the SR8500 (7ch) and a PM7000 (2ch), which once delivered have a comparable cost.

Summarizing what I'm reading here: Seems like the main reason not to buy the 7ch would be to avoid paying for features I won't use, though in this particular moment that factor is out.

And once spending enough I didn't hear anyone say that the 2ch would sound better, other than alluding to the likelihood that at a given price point (while new) likely the 2ch would have allocated it's build budget more relevantly for my listening goals.

So I guess last remaining aspect, perhaps worthy of it's own post, is whether or not the toroidal transformer in the SR8500 makes a meaningful difference on stereo listening quality.

Thank you!

 

[manicm]

Your answer shows your technical incompetence. I don't even know if I should explain anything to you

I mistook parametric for graphic

 

[GSV Ethics Gradient]

Your answer shows your technical incompetence. I don't even know if I should explain anything to you

Accept that other have differing views - and please read forum rules about belittling comments.

 

[nopiano]

Crumbs! Nobody has mentioned the two Marantz receivers the OP has specified. Just a load of disagreement about facilities, sound and amplifier class in stereo and AV devices. Not very much help for a very clear question!

I don’t know the Marantz AV models, but I’m going to look up the SR8500 because if it is indeed a top model it might well be an excellent buy, regardless of the unused facilities it might include.

 

[nopiano]

Ok, so it was quite easy to find. Marantz has good archives and the 8500 dates from 2006. I don’t know a lot about AV, but even I know that DVD and S-Video are ‘vintage’ by todays standards.

https://www.marantz.com/-/media/files/documentmaster/marantzna/us/2006marantzcatalogv2.pdf

Several reasons why I’d pass on this imposing looking device however:-

1. It’s 15+ years old at least.
2. Much of the socketry is useless and it lacks any HDMI or USB connectivity.
3. The speaker connection on the amp warns to use 6 ohm or above. This suggests weak current delivery (all mouth and no trousers!) and limited compatibility with many modern speakers that readily dip below 4 ohms.
4. No phono capability, though there’s no evidence it’s required by the OP.
5. Likely well used and expensive to repair, some components are likely out of spec and so impossible to recommend unless available for £/$200 or less.
6. A toroidal transformer is of no consequence here, to respond to the OP’s specific point. (The 7000n has one too)

The recent PM7000n (the n suffix wasn’t mentioned, but I assume that’s the one), is far more modest. But it has all the modern connectivity, a built in DAC of contemporary performance, sub output, phono stage and 80 watts into 4 ohms.

An easy choice for me, with the above rationale. Other opinions are available!

Marantz PM7000N review

What Hi-Fi? Awards 2021 winner. An entertaining just-add-speakers stereo streaming system

www.whathifi.com

 

[nopiano]

I’m now guessing it isn’t the n model after all! Let’s find the older PM 7000 …

Oh dear, it’s even older, c.2001. However, my wariness about older amplifiers is less inflamed by a basic stereo design. On the face of it, this might be easier to repair, though I’ve no particular knowledge here. There’s obviously much less to go wrong than a 7-channel AV design.

For a similar $200 or so it might be worth a punt. That’s the best I can say. I’d choose on condition and any warranty that might be offered if it’s from a trader. Try to check either for unwanted buzzes, crackling and hum before handing over any money. However, it doesn’t seem to have a sub out, so if you need that, forget it.

https://www.marantz.com/-/media/files/documentmaster/marantzna/us/pm7000_u_en_ug_v00.pdf

 

[landco]

So I guess last remaining aspect, perhaps worthy of it's own post, is whether or not the toroidal transformer in the SR8500 makes a meaningful difference on stereo listening quality.

In audio equipment from first-tier brands (Denon, Marantz, Yamaha, Technics), the power supply does not have any negative effect on the output signal. However, in the case of a defective product, you may come across a transformer that hums on its own.

 

[abacus]

In audio equipment from first-tier brands (Denon, Marantz, Yamaha, Technics), the power supply does not have any negative effect on the output signal. However, in the case of a defective product, you may come across a transformer that hums on its own.

The most important part of any amp is the power supply, as if this is underpowered or of poor design than no matter what you do after it, you will still have a poor-quality amp.

Bill

 

[Al ears]

Current delivery is the key factor. Most home theatre speaker packages are not tricky loads.
I would like to see an AV Receiver try to drive something that is...
They simply are not designed to do this.
I have had 20wpc tube amps that would drive my speakers much better than my Sony AV amp ever could.

 

[Scritch]

Ok, so it was quite easy to find. Marantz has good archives and the 8500 dates from 2006. I don’t know a lot about AV, but even I know that DVD and S-Video are ‘vintage’ by todays standards.

https://www.marantz.com/-/media/files/documentmaster/marantzna/us/2006marantzcatalogv2.pdf

Several reasons why I’d pass on this imposing looking device however:-

1. It’s 15+ years old at least.
2. Much of the socketry is useless and it lacks any HDMI or USB connectivity.
3. The speaker connection on the amp warns to use 6 ohm or above. This suggests weak current delivery (all mouth and no trousers!) and limited compatibility with many modern speakers that readily dip below 4 ohms.
4. No phono capability, though there’s no evidence it’s required by the OP.
5. Likely well used and expensive to repair, some components are likely out of spec and so impossible to recommend unless available for £/$200 or less.
6. A toroidal transformer is of no consequence here, to respond to the OP’s specific point. (The 7000n has one too)

The recent PM7000n (the n suffix wasn’t mentioned, but I assume that’s the one), is far more modest. But it has all the modern connectivity, a built in DAC of contemporary performance, sub output, phono stage and 80 watts into 4 ohms.

An easy choice for me, with the above rationale. Other opinions are available!

Marantz PM7000N review

What Hi-Fi? Awards 2021 winner. An entertaining just-add-speakers stereo streaming system

www.whathifi.com

Thanks very much for those insights, very much appreciated.

To your points, seems like all used Marantz amps in my price range are older. Though the SR8500 I found seems to be original owner and in great condition.

About point #3, I'm not familiar enough with impedance to understand how that suggestion to stay at 6 ohms or higher would effect my situation. I'm assuming that compared to my current Marantz NR1501 that the SR8500 would have about double the power to the speakers.

Regarding repairs, likely at this price point (about $200), and being in Costa Rica, I'll be able to use the amp until it breaks, and then probably wouldn't be able to repair most options.

Thanks again for you help!

-Eric

 

[nopiano]

Thanks very much for those insights, very much appreciated.

To your points, seems like all used Marantz amps in my price range are older. Though the SR8500 I found seems to be original owner and in great condition.

About point #3, I'm not familiar enough with impedance to understand how that suggestion to stay at 6 ohms or higher would effect my situation. I'm assuming that compared to my current Marantz NR1501 that the SR8500 would have about double the power to the speakers.

Regarding repairs, likely at this price point (about $200), and being in Costa Rica, I'll be able to use the amp until it breaks, and then probably wouldn't be able to repair most options.

Thanks again for you help!

-Eric

You’re welcome, Eric, and a belated welcome to the forum!

Whichever one looks better cared for makes sense when they are getting on a bit.

BTW, I still have a Marantz PM52SE amp from about 1993. I used it for a few years when seconded to a London job. Several years later I gave to my dad. When he died a couple of years ago it still worked, albeit the volume crackled a bit. It just needs a service, though that might cost as much as I originally paid!

Don’t worry about speaker impedance. I was trying to deduce how good the amp was from the limited spec I could find. But it’s clearly beefier than what you have. Good luck!