Cyrus One amp vs Marantz Signature - Help!

[admin_exported]

Hi there,

I've never posted before and I've been out the hi-fi loop for probably a decade so please bear with me...

I've currently got a Cyrus One amp running an Arcam CD63 CD player and some Monitor Audio BR1 speakers (soon to be upgraded hopefully).

As attached as I am to my Cyrus it has its limitations, and Iknow someone who has no use for his immaculate Marantz Signiture (PM66SE I think...) amp or CD player. It's not currently rigged up, so I was initially wondering whether the Signature setup would actually feel like an upgrade from the Cyrus?

I'm not sure if you need to know music styles but it airs on the side of stuff like Cinematic Orchestra and the ambient side of drum and bass (I'm getting a bit long in the tooth for that these days).

Any help would be greatfull appreciated.

Many thanks!

 

[Anonymous]

I started with a Cyrus One a and don't miss it a jot, a real hard and thin sound to my ears only my smooth sounding Rogers LS4a made it listenable. I'd put money on the Marantz being an upgrade if not a better match for your MA speakers. If you can compare them A-B then why not?

 

[matthewpiano]

I would suggest seeing if you could borrow the units from your friend so that you can try them in your own home first.

My inclination is that you might well find the Marantz combination more enjoyable overall, but only your own ears can tell you in the end.

What particular limitations do you want to overcome by changing the Cyrus amp?

 

[MajorFubar]

Firstly welcome to the forum!

This is a question with my name on it because I own both a Cyrus 1, a Cyrus 2 and a PM66KI (lucky me) 🙂

The first initial difference you will notice between your 1 and a 66KI is that the 66 will sound less clinical.

I love the 1 and 2 to bits but sometimes with some digital sources their upfront delivery can be a bit much.

I would say the 66 also has the edge on midband detail and spaciousness. You'll find orchestras and bands sound like they're playing with quite a bit more space around them and less confined to your speakers.

You may also find, if you like to crank up the volume, that the 66 has more power on tap for crescendos and peaks in the music, so it can go louder more cleanly, if you get what I mean.

It will sound different to the Cyrus, very much so. I'd say try it and if you don't fall in love with it you can always go back.

 

[Anonymous]

Wow, you lot post quickly!! Thanks very much for your replies.

I suppose I was wondering whether it was worth comparing the two systems but from your replies it seems definitely worth the trial.

Matthew Piano, in terms of the Cyrus’ limitations… I tried a my bro’s quad 33/405 amp a while ago and even on my set up it was such a more open sound – seemed to pick out bits of music I’d not really heard properly before. Obviously not expecting the Marantz to that but I guess some improvement over the Cyrus would be welcomed.

Spectre, I feel guilty speaking ill of my Cyrus in case she hears me… My whole set up is a bit budgety so I’ve always given it the benefit of doubt, but I hear you…

Major Fubar, nice one, can’t believe you’ve got the whole set up!!! The specifics have helped a loads.

Like I say, I guess I was wondering whether it was worth carting it to my gaff given that on the surface they seem similar sort of range (give or take). But you all say it’s worth a go so I’ll crack on and have a listen. Thanks again!!

 

[Anonymous]

I couldn't put my finger on what was wrong with the Cyrus until I changed to another (then Audio Analogue) brand. It then became glaringly obvious just what it's limitations were and how its interpretation of what good sound should be differed from my own. With the fluid and dynamic Audio Analogue in place I kind of felt robbed of years of musical pleasure and also the fact I'd bought a Cyrus 2 to try address those issues and it still left me wanting. Happily I've had good partnering equipment since I said goodbye to the Missions.

My acid test would be to crank volume up on both amps with your speakers then see which one starts to make your ears bleed, then you'll have a winner/ loser.

 

[Anonymous]

I'm picking it up tomorrow for the acid test....

Cheers

 

[MajorFubar]

Let us know what you think 🙂

 

[Anonymous]

Forum topics move on quickly so I'm not sure if anyone'll see this. However...

Tried the KI signature and it seemed to knock the spots off my little Cyrus in most areas. Never heard some of my music sound like that in terms of soundstaging and clarity.

So there I was, thinking that the Marantz was cruising to victory when I decided to put some vocal stuff on and… well each to his own but I just felt the KI Sig was a bit thin. The missus likes Adele. The one thing she says about Adele’s music is that she bosses it. But with the KI sig her vocals seemed thin, in the background, as if she was a backing singer on her own album. So I stuck the Cyrus back on and there was Adele again, soulfully singing away.

I then tried the Cinematic Orchestra’s ‘All that you give’, which is a laid back jazzy piece of electronica. The way the Marantz catches the harp on the intro was jaw dropping. A couple of minutes in, Fontella Bass starts with her deep, soulful rasping tones… but honestly, but the Marantz seemed to reduce her to a minor part. I’d need floorstanders to compensate. Back on the Cyrus, the overall sound was technically poorer but at least Fontella was back.

So yeah, I found the Marantz to be a way technically superior than the Cyrus and it provided the space that Major Fubar said it would. But I’ve got to have soul, and if there’s one thing the Cyrus offers in buckets, in its clumpy way, is a lovely soft soulful sound. It just seemed to catch the essence of the music that I listen to in a way that I prefer.

But many thanks again for your comments. I almost wasn’t going to bother but through it I’ve learned loads. Much appreciated and all the best!

 

[Anonymous]

I couldn't put my finger on what was wrong with the Cyrus until I changed to another (then Audio Analogue) brand. It then became glaringly obvious just what it's limitations were and how its interpretation of what good sound should be differed from my own.

I never realised how much difference an amp could make until I replaced my Cyrus One with a couple of beefy MOSFET mono-blocks. The difference was stunning, and not in a good way for the Cyrus.

Cheapy-cheap amps simply aren't worth it, particularly when the same money can buy so much more..

 

[Anonymous]

Forum topics move on quickly so I'm not sure if anyone'll see this. However...

Tried the KI signature and it seemed to knock the spots off my little Cyrus in most areas. Never heard some of my music sound like that in terms of soundstaging and clarity.

So there I was, thinking that the Marantz was cruising to victory when I decided to put some vocal stuff on and… well each to his own but I just felt the KI Sig was a bit thin. The missus likes Adele. The one thing she says about Adele’s music is that she bosses it. But with the KI sig her vocals seemed thin, in the background, as if she was a backing singer on her own album. So I stuck the Cyrus back on and there was Adele again, soulfully singing away.

I then tried the Cinematic Orchestra’s ‘All that you give’, which is a laid back jazzy piece of electronica. The way the Marantz catches the harp on the intro was jaw dropping. A couple of minutes in, Fontella Bass starts with her deep, soulful rasping tones… but honestly, but the Marantz seemed to reduce her to a minor part. I’d need floorstanders to compensate. Back on the Cyrus, the overall sound was technically poorer but at least Fontella was back.

So yeah, I found the Marantz to be a way technically superior than the Cyrus and it provided the space that Major Fubar said it would. But I’ve got to have soul, and if there’s one thing the Cyrus offers in buckets, in its clumpy way, is a lovely soft soulful sound. It just seemed to catch the essence of the music that I listen to in a way that I prefer.

But many thanks again for your comments. I almost wasn’t going to bother but through it I’ve learned loads. Much appreciated and all the best!

Interesting Jamie, I know and love the Cinematic Orchestra track your talking of, its a personal favorite and Fontella's voice is amazing. Never heard it through my Cyrus, only my current amp but I think I'd have the opposite reaction about it having soul (I always found the Cyrus cold and thin) but then I've never heard the Marantz either. Seems it was a useful exercise if only to keep the presentation you like and are used to, thanks for letting us know.

 

[Mr Morph]

My mate had a Cyrus 1 hooked up to Sony CDP-710. The 710 had a weird quality of exaggerating vocal performances. His system did have that hard tone associated with many so called ‘hi-fi’ amps, but his source conspired with it to make vocals far more prominent than on more balanced players, erasing a lot of the background detail. So although it wasn’t the most refined performance, it appealed to him, probably due to its forwardness in this area.

Although the one thing most people forget when they do comparisons between amps is to move the speakers to compensate for the increase of soundstage width and depth. This is why you can get great results as regards clarity, but the strength of the central image fades. I read a post the other day, I think by ‘Matthewpiano’ where he said ‘I believe if most of us had paid better attention to the set-up of our equipment, a lot of us wouldn’t have missed what we have all been looking for’. There’s so much truth in that statement!

 

[MajorFubar]

A very interesting reply Jamie and I do see where you're coming from.

I think one of the key differences you're identifying is that the Cyrus 1 (& 2) certainly do inject a bit of much needed zing into the midrange when bridged between players and/or speakers which are a bit laid back. This can encourage vocals from 'laid back' speakers or CDPs to sound more upfront and exciting. With speakers and CDPs which are already a touch impetuous, the same amp can make the sound tiring, so it's all about balance. That's not a criticism of your player or speakers by the way, just an acceptance that on this occasion the amp didn't suit the other components in your set-up.

Tell you what I have found though, and I dare say I'm treading here into what some would consider to be HiFi voodooism, but I found my PM66KI sounds much more rounded and full when supported on a wooden shelf rather than on a glass one. Not sure what you had it mounted on.

 

[Anonymous]

Hi, me again...

Right, firstly I am a mere amateur with rubbish ears. Morph, I never even thought of moving the speakers to compensate for the different sound. If you saw my setup at home you might laugh, or perhaps cry depending on how bad your day’s been. Might have been a good idea but the initial difference was so striking I thought it was done. There may be exaggeration of vocals, it certainly seemed to ring a bell when you mentioned that as it’s sounded different with other separates.

For example I used to run the Cyrus with MS25i speakers and a £100 Technics CD player and it sounded cold and thin. So Spectre, I hear you. For reasons unknown to me my Arcam CD62 and tiny BR1s seem to make it far richer and (honestly) more soulful with the Cinematics. It was similar on Ma Fleur. What wound me up was, the Cyrus also sounded two-dimensional.

I do wonder whether it’s just an unlucky combo with the signature as Major Fubar says. I love the voodoo magic idea; I ran it on glass but I think I am far too untrained to be able to pick up the difference. I think overall it was the set-up.

So here is where I’m up to: I saw a Quad 77 integrated amp on a well known auction site the other day. I’ve heard the Quad 33/405 combo on my speakers and CD player before and I liked it. I haven’t got the space (or funds) for that ball-park so I thought I’d gamble and go for the 77. Very dodgy strategy and they seem to have had mixed reviews but I’ve had it delivered tonight and… very nice indeedy!!

I am but a novice but at first glance it’s coped with my music admirably. The sound is soft, yet it deals with more layered electronic stuff with ease. Seems a touch conservative and tightly controlled but I guess that would be Quad all over? If/when I’m richer I might get try better speakers to open out the sound a bit.

I can’t thank you guys enough for your input. And it’s amazing the tips you can pick up. I know there’s a lot of love for KI Signatures out there so I hope I haven’t offended anyone. If I have, you need to know two things:

1) I know nowt about this stuff, I’m purely going on a gut feeling; and

2) I’ve just gone for a Quad. Very soft, laid back and safe. Maybe my raving days are over…

Thanks again.

 

[MajorFubar]

Well I for one am not offended 🙂 And i'm glad you've made an upgrade which works right to your ears.

Also there's absolutely no need to critisize your 'untrained' hearing or lack of 'magic ears': contrary to misconception, there's no such thing. Basically if what your hearing sounds right to you and it's making you want to rifle through all your CDs again and enjoy each one anew, then the upgrade has done its job.

Happy listening

 

[Mr Morph]

Believe me Jamie, I have better things to do than laugh at people’s systems. The only thing I really laugh about in hi-fi are the manufacturers ridiculous claims and hype. I started with a system very similar to yours, and there’s nothing wrong with it at all. But as you go through your hi-fi journey you’ll find that the more components you listen to, the more experience you’ll gain. Nobody has the right to tell you what’s right and wrong, because you are the only one who has to listen to your system. It is important to realise however that any change to a system (CD, DAC, Amp, etc) will generally have a ‘knock on effect’ to the other components, and in turn to how the room reacts to it.

The most dramatic demonstration of stereo I ever heard came from a Marantz CD75DX player. It projected its sound right under my nose just like having 3D ghosts in the room right next to you. Because of this annoyingly distracting performance it was a totally incapable of bringing all those holophonic images together to make something called MUSIC! However if you wanted something to impress the neighbours with, as a demonstration of what stereo was capable of, it was certainly the player to have. No matter what I tried, I couldn’t get that player to work correctly in my room… and it got sold very quickly!!! On the surface it would appear to have been a waste of money, but I learnt so much about sound staging from that one player alone.

Note to MajorFubar: The siggy sits on a Mission Isoplat, which is basically a Medite slab with viscose-elastic feet. Just stops any vibration feeding back into the system.

 

[Anonymous]

So you have a Quad very nice, please let us know what you think of it and how it compares to the Cyrus what you feel it strengths weaknesses are etc. Always nice to hear someone else's opinion other than a professional reviewer and to me the Cyrus is a known quantity the Quad is not.

 

[Anonymous]

Well it’s early days with the 77 so we shall have to see. It seemed good value for money, I expect due to them not being as popular as other Quads.

First impressions are that it’s very easy to listen to. This, I guess, is what I was after all along and I don’t have the same niggles about clumpy sound that I had. I remember one review saying the 77 sounded as if it was being played behind a curtain, which I can relate to in an amused kind of way - it is quite reserved and very laid back, it’s essence (dare I say it) being similar to the Cyrus (at least on my set up), but the quad being much more refined and with a clearer soundstaging. Sort of E5 Jag if you like. It hasn’t got the Marantz’s zing (I’d say that was more Subaru Imprezia Turbo) but you can’t have everything. But that’s all I can say for now before I start digging a hole for myself.

It’s addictive this lark. I’m looking at speakers now despite having no funds. I blame you all entirely. However I’d like to say thanks again as you lot really are a supportive bunch and you give marvellous advice.

All the best!

p.s. Spectre, couldn’t help noticing you had a pair of ES12’s. You like? How do find the Cinematics (Orchestra) on them? Actually don’t even answer that. I don’t feel ready for these added complications in my life.

 

[MajorFubar]

It’s addictive this lark. I’m looking at speakers now despite having no funds. I blame you all entirely.

lol!! I can certainly relate to that. Bought myself a new pair of speakers early this year and then upgradeitis bit me big style and within two months I'd spent as much again, changing the CDP and amp that I was more than happy with before I bought the new speakers.

 

[Anonymous]

I picked up my Epos on an auction site for 150 pounds, and I was the only bidder. Compared to a modern speaker they are still fairly sharp sounding, female voices really project well although the midrange is not as detailed as my Spendor's. Usually I listen to them late at night when I don't want to be overwhelmed by detail. Because I use small standmounts the Epos need a little adjustment, with the Cinematics bass seems much larger than I'm used to, but they also sound less compressed in terms of dynamics. All in all one of my few auction site bargains.