Marantz pm6004

[plastic penguin]

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, and your's is as valid as anyones (and hi-fi probably divides opinion more than politics!)

Okay, the Marantz doesn't suit you. I have the CD6003/PM6003 combo (boxed at the moment), and have had probably 18-months of immense listening pleasure from it, usually hooked up to a pair of Dali Lektor 1's. Suited perfectly for my listening tastes and environment; nicely detailed, slight tad on the warm side, and very musical( to my ears, of course). Wouldn't suit everybody, but it's me that's listening to it and gaining the enjoyment. If NAD does it for you that's fine, it's just that the Marantz (to my ears!) does it better. Chill.

Think he's suffering from 'Jumpus pramus' syndrome. Would'nt take it personally, Sizzers.

http://www.whathifi.com/forum/hi-fi/nad-c375bee-matter-of-taste-or-faulty-amp-or

 

[Sizzers]

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, and your's is as valid as anyones (and hi-fi probably divides opinion more than politics!)

Okay, the Marantz doesn't suit you. I have the CD6003/PM6003 combo (boxed at the moment), and have had probably 18-months of immense listening pleasure from it, usually hooked up to a pair of Dali Lektor 1's. Suited perfectly for my listening tastes and environment; nicely detailed, slight tad on the warm side, and very musical( to my ears, of course). Wouldn't suit everybody, but it's me that's listening to it and gaining the enjoyment. If NAD does it for you that's fine, it's just that the Marantz (to my ears!) does it better. Chill.

Think he's suffering from 'Jumpus pramus' syndrome. Would'nt take it personally, Sizzers.

http://www.whathifi.com/forum/hi-fi/nad-c375bee-matter-of-taste-or-faulty-amp-or

lol

I wasn't taking it personally PP, it just p***** me off when people start trashing other peoples likes/preferences etc.

 

[Ryan92]

Everyone is entitled to their opinion, and your's is as valid as anyones (and hi-fi probably divides opinion more than politics!)

Okay, the Marantz doesn't suit you. I have the CD6003/PM6003 combo (boxed at the moment), and have had probably 18-months of immense listening pleasure from it, usually hooked up to a pair of Dali Lektor 1's. Suited perfectly for my listening tastes and environment; nicely detailed, slight tad on the warm side, and very musical( to my ears, of course). Wouldn't suit everybody, but it's me that's listening to it and gaining the enjoyment. If NAD does it for you that's fine, it's just that the Marantz (to my ears!) does it better. Chill.

Think he's suffering from 'Jumpus pramus' syndrome. Would'nt take it personally, Sizzers.

http://www.whathifi.com/forum/hi-fi/nad-c375bee-matter-of-taste-or-faulty-amp-or

Think he's on the payroll?

 

[Anonymous]

Don't be so upset guys, to be fan is nice, but the reality can be hard sometimes Noise and distortion are not subjective matters :shame:

Soon (next year?) the new PM6005 will be out !!! is going to be great and a huge step ahead of the PM6004 Just hold you breaths for a while! ray: ray: ray:

Sizzer, sorry to ***you off, but I still have a valid point. Actually valid pointS :rant:

 

[Anonymous]

PM 6004 + Dali Zensor 1 would be a nice set up nothing wrong with that.

You have to spend a lot more to better that

Maybe PMC Db1i second hand + Naim 5i or Roksan K2 second hand would be nice too. :dance:

 

[Johnno2]

Well, the PM 6003 was a great amp - correct? And now the Pm 6004 is *even* better? Heh, the old one was perfect, but Marantz managed somehow to improve on top of that. Does that seem like logic? )

The *only* way to listen to the Marantz is with "Source Direct" switched "on" because otherwise the noise is just annoying. The "Loundess" non-sense, even the presence of such non-sense already speaks tons about what Marantz think about its own amp. And I agree with them, toothless, no bass, no dynamic and involvment. To me failing to recognise the amp is only useful is end of the discussion because if you are OK with PSSSSSSSSSSSSSSTTTTTTSSSSSS then I guess it will be pointless to continue. Good for playing fairy tales, not for audiophile to brag about )

As commonly recognized, NAD boasting 45 Wpc will have more like 60-70 Wpc. And Marantz with 45 Wpc makes it to 15-20 Wpc real power. So there you go comparing 60 Wpc to 20 Wpc - not a good start for the Marantz. On the strong side the Marantz has good details in the mids and this would be awesome had there be no noise so that you can actually plug good speakers to it. Unfortunately this is not the case. One can even make a good point that for the price the high and low register is quite in the norm and it would be matter of personal taste and like. That's OK with me too, I actually like the resolution and the idea to have crisp mid-range sound. There's a little bit too much distortion too, but I could cope with it too.

However, when it comes to articulation and macro-dynamics the Marantz is dead in the water, it just wipes out all of the advantages, it doesn't kick, it doesn't bite, it doesn't involve you are listening to a remote music, it you want the Marantz never gets personal enough.

Very good amp for a 5-year old. Not an audiophile gear we are talking about.

Have you had a good listen to the PM6004, if so I think you heard a faulty one or was using a crap source, IMO its the best souding budget amp I have heard to date, infact I have just flogged a NAD c352 because this Marantz pleases my ears more than my old NAD, fuller midrange and a liquid treble, THe NAD was good but this adds something else cant put my finger on it, maybe its the timing. THe fact that you mention noise makes me feel you have experienced a faulty unit , no noise with mine with tone bypass on or not, even at high volumes , That toroidal trasformer is very good .

 

[Anonymous]

Johnno2, this always is a possibility... and maybe it would be better if that was the case. The probability of this is low I think, how many fault Marantz units have you had?

But yes, I cannot exclude it.

PS - source is not a pbm, tried with Marantz and the high-end Sony XA5400es for which I wrote a review in this forum.

http://www.whathifi.com/forum/hi-fi/sony-scd-xa5400es-cd-player

 

[Johnno2]

I think something is wrong somewhere if there is noise, the PM6004 generates almost zero hum and hiss compared to many amps, perhaps you expect to much, it is a budget amp, but better than average for the money

I did have a faulty Marantz amp a few years ago,a PM57 that cut off randomly , that amp had a harshness about the treble that I didnt like

 

[matthewpiano]

Don't be so upset guys, to be fan is nice, but the reality can be hard sometimes Noise and distortion are not subjective matters :shame:

Soon (next year?) the new PM6005 will be out !!! is going to be great and a huge step ahead of the PM6004 Just hold you breaths for a while! ray: ray: ray:

Sizzer, sorry to ***you off, but I still have a valid point. Actually valid pointS :rant:

The PM6003 and PM6004 do not routinely suffer from excess noise or distortion. If yours does then it is either faulty or something else is wrong with your system.

As for all this rubbish about these amps being for 5 year olds and the ranting about Marantz's product replacement cycle, it is, quite frankly, ridiculous.

I've owned a PM6003 and several NADs and I'm familiar with the PM6004. Both are capable of staggering performance for the price paid, depending on how you match them with speakers and source equipment. If you prefer the NAD, great - sell your Marantz and buy the amp you'll enjoy listening to - but there is absolutely no need to create a world of fantasy in which the basic quality of the two amps are wildly different because it just isn't.

 

[Anonymous]

The PM6003 and PM6004 do not routinely suffer from excess noise or distortion.

When you look at a photograph can you say if the camera lens is distorting? Because it takes few years experience before you begin to see lens distortion directly. Same with sound. Can you hear the distortion in *any* speaker and system? Because only at this point you can make proper judgment which hi-fi systems distorts *more* relative the others.

But wait, speaking about Marantz - you have heard about this "special Marantz sound" - right? It's a home grown non-sense to distort and color all amplifiers to add "warmth" and "fullness" to the sound. Basically creating a brand for distortion and sound color. There's even a button - Loudness which makes it OK to distort to no limit in the name of the ... missing bass ))

So the sound is warm and full and colored when there's no distortion. Nope, none :shifty:

:cheers:

 

[matthewpiano]

If you are talking about distortion in this sense, NAD are every bit as guilty.

You clearly have something against budget Marantz gear but to the point where it seems you have a mission to denigrate them. I've owned pretty much every budget amplifier currently on the market (inc. PM6003, Yamaha A-S500, NAD C326BEE, Rotel RA-04SE, CA 650A) and they all colour the sound in different ways. If nothing but absolute neutrality will do for you, then you are looking in the wrong places because neither NAD, Marantz or any of these budget amps is going to provide it.

 

[Johnno2]

ALL amps with tone controls will colour the sound if they are switched into circuit and turned up, my NAD C352 coloured the sound even more than my marantz by adding a very woolly sounding bass because it works at 100hz,

As long as you avoid the loudness button the Marantz tone works at 50hz rather than 100hz and has a more subtle increase.

Sometimes adding this colour gives a pleasing sound , thats why i originally bought a NAD amp beacuse they colour the sound how I like it, why should we have to listen to 'thin harsh recordings in the name of 'purity'
As for distortion the THD of the marantz is quoted as 0.0008% which is impressively low

 

[Anonymous]

NAD C352 coloured the sound even more than my marantz by adding a very woolly sounding bass

Hahaha, true. I had the C350. Woolly, yes, don't know why wooly but it is very good word for describing it. I can agree on that and I think I know exactly what you mean by it.

The last two comments make too much sense I am not prepared to argue with normals So I agree on one of the two

1) either my daughter's PM6004 is faulty 2) my expectations are out of order for the price range

inclined to think 2) is what happens

Thank you for the chat guys, have a good weekend!

 

[Anonymous]

Thanks for all the replies..some intresting thoughts here..so ive got the marantz pm6004..just the speakers to go,ive narrowed it down to 3 but still open to suggestions, B&W 685s,Kef Q 300 and Monitor audios RX1s ( i heard them paired with the marantz yesterday),sounded good just wondering what everyone else thinks, These speakers will be wall mounted..thanks.

 

[Blackdawn]

hi,

You might want front ported if they are to be wall mounted as if they are wall mounted with rear ports they may have no room to breath. I would be looking at maybe the Dali Lektors or the B&W's 685 may be a good choice

 

[Anonymous]

http://www.ebay.de/itm/Klipsch-Reference-RB61-RB-61-Black-Paar-400-Watt-95dB-/230777952824?pt=DE_Lautsprecher_Martin&hash=item35bb701a38

Klipsch Reference RB61 price for pair

EUR 295,00

GBP 240

This will get the best out the PM6003.

The midrange is good to match the Marantz, the bass is not deep enough, but only compared to other Klipsch and still the best bass you can get, the great dynamic and liveliness of Klipsch is there. The HF beats everything in the range below 500 GBP by far there the RB61 wins it all hands down.

You should have taken the NAD amp, but who wants to listen hope you get it right this time :roll:

 

[GCE]

Only my impressions about some amps with my old B&W and B&W 684 spk in store (rock and Jazz):
Yam AS 500: very open sound , great horizontal image stage, but with too present high freq., for me; bass good only with loudness in, not very ergonomic remote and front commands; very, very easy to mark with fingers on the front (incredible!);
Nad 316: good bass, but not at low volume; a little bit confuse and dry medium-high freq.; very ergonomic and nice.
Marantz 6004: more liquid and natural medium freq.; bass enough, but you can add something at very low volume (f.e. in the night) with his well designed loudness, not possible with Nad;
built like a tank in Japan, with golden input/output, smart and nice remote, that I found can drive my 20 years old CD Philips too! Down you can read a good review, but in french...

MARANTZ - PM 6004

I have to say that this PM 6004 can safely replace my 20y old 306+34 Quad with more exciting sound and power in bass freq.: the Quad, with flat position tone, was boring and poor sounding, althoug with silk highs!

I'd like to hear other impressions about Nad 326 and Marantz 6004 differences, even a little

more technical than babytalks-ish :rofl: / - thanks.