Question What would be the appropriate upgrade path?

[npxavar]

Duh! Yes! Yamaha! Sorry hahaha mistake due to having a Sony STR-DN1050 upstairs, which I don't use as there is a hum with the turntable on that amp, and it does not sound as good for music... Sorry, drifting here.

I fixed the error in question.

I have my eyes on Marantz PM6007, PM8006 (this one would be stretching the budget), or Cambridge Audio AXR85 or AXR100, which would be closer to my budget. Since I already have all required devices for streaming, I don't think I would need CXA?

Or any other suggestions in that range?

Concerning point 2, you have a point. I but still, I would think some comparative and ranking (price vs feeling maybe?) Anyway, just a thought.

Thanks!

With regards to streaming, avoiding built-in digital modules in mainstream amps is surely the way to go. The operation of the digital circuits inside an amplifier is destructive for both the digital and the analogue side. Unfortunately, no review will openly say that operating an amp from its digital inputs brings a noticeable step down-in quality, especially when you try to play loudly. However, placing the DAC in a metallic cage makes a big difference, such as in the Marantz PM6007. My current amp is a Cambridge Audio CXA80 and it cannot reach the sense of clarity and purity of the Marantz PM6006 I used to own (also uses a metallic cage) when comparing digital inputs.

 

[plastic penguin]

Quick update: My A11 Tribute landed yesterday and I gave it a first workout last night, with vinyl, the CD11 Tribute and my JBL 52L Classics.

So far so good with no issues. The sound is superb, as I remember, and if it continues to behave well it will definitely be a keeper. I'll update again in a couple of days.

Nice one. You've always had a soft spot for Rotel gear.

My fav affordable Rotel amp was the RA-03. They were very flexible with speakers.

 

[matthewpianist]

Nice one. You've always had a soft spot for Rotel gear.

My fav affordable Rotel amp was the RA-03. They were very flexible with speakers.

I have indeed, going right back to a RA920AX I had as a teenager and an RA-01 and RA-04SE later on. The A11 Tribute sounds very much like you'd expect a Rotel to sound.

I always loved the RCD965BX CD player as well, but they're mostly getting tired now, so it's nice to have the CD11 Tribute.

 

[plastic penguin]

I have indeed, going right back to a RA920AX I had as a teenager and an RA-01 and RA-04SE later on. The A11 Tribute sounds very much like you'd expect a Rotel to sound.

I always loved the RCD965BX CD player as well, but they're mostly getting tired now, so it's nice to have the CD11 Tribute.

When I demoed the A65 I compared it to the RA 02 (and a NAD 352). The 02 was a really good amp.

Hope there's no glitches with the Tribute.

 

[matthewpianist]

When I demoed the A65 I compared it to the RA 02 (and a NAD 352). The 02 was a really good amp.

Hope there's no glitches with the Tribute.

The RA-02 was basically an RA-01 plus remote. Very good amps, and when I heard one recently it still stands up.

Funnily enough the RA-01 I had replaced an A65+. I liked the Arcam a lot, but when I auditioned an ex-demo RA-01 with the rest of my system at the time (Arcam CD73T and Quad 77-11L) the Rotel opened things out in terms of dynamics and really got the best out of the CD player and speakers. The CD73T remains one of the best CD players I've ever owned.

So far so good with the Tribute - keeping my fingers crossed.

Now that DTS PlayFi supports gapless playback I'm tempted to sell the Node 2i and go for a T14 to complete the Rotel system.

 

[plastic penguin]

The RA-02 was basically an RA-01 plays remote. Very good amps, and when I heard one recently it still stands up.

Funnily enough the RA-01 I had replaced an A65+. I liked the Arcam a lot, but when I auditioned an ex-demo RA-01 with the rest of my system at the time (Arcam CD73T and Quad 77-11L) the Rotel opened things out in terms of dynamics and really got the best out of the CD player and speakers. The CD73T remains one of the best CD players I've ever owned.

So far so good with the Tribute - keeping my fingers crossed.

Now that DTS PlayFi supports gapless playback I'm tempted to sell the Node 2i and go for a T14 to complete the Rotel system.

Interesting about the 01 opening things up more. It was back in 2004/5 when I demoed them.

That CD73 was a cracker. Would still be using it if it wasn't for mechanical issues. More than happy with the Exposure CD2010 though. Another one of those brands that tends to go under the radar.

 

[matthewpianist]

Interesting about the 01 opening things up more. It was back in 2004/5 when I demoed them.

That CD73 was a cracker. Would still be using it if it wasn't for mechanical issues. More than happy with the Exposure CD2010 though. Another one of those brands that tends to go under the radar.

I agree about the CD73 - the mechanical issues were sadly its Achilles heel, spoiling an otherwise wonderful player.

 

[plastic penguin]

I agree about the CD73 - the mechanical issues were sadly its Achilles heel, spoiling an otherwise wonderful player.

This is why I cautious when comes to older CDPs. After a certain age most brands start showing up problems -- a real gamble.

Luckily so far this old Exposure hasn't missed a beat. The drawer is one of the smoothest and quietest I've heard. For £250 I'm more than pleased.

 

[matthewpianist]

This is why I cautious when comes to older CDPs. After a certain age most brands start showing up problems -- a real gamble.

Luckily so far this old Exposure hasn't missed a beat. The drawer is one of the smoothest and quietest I've heard. For £250 I'm more than pleased.

The hardiest ones I've come across are the older Rotels with the Philips transports. They still sound good too, especially the RCD965BX.

I like Exposure kit very much.

 

[plastic penguin]

The hardiest ones I've come across are the older Rotels with the Philips transports. They still sound good too, especially the RCD965BX.

I like Exposure kit very much.

Yep, the Rotel transport was a little flipsy flopsy. It's a pity as the RCD 975 was fab sounding player. That's typical hi-fi, what some brands give with one hand they take away with the other.

Fingers crossed for the Tribute.

 

[matthewpianist]

Yep, the Rotel transport was a little flipsy flopsy. It's a pity as the RCD 975 was fab sounding player. That's typical hi-fi, what some brands give with one hand they take away with the other.

Fingers crossed for the Tribute.

I meant that it was hardy - the opposite of flimsy floppy. Certainly the Philips CDM4 mech in the '965BX was tough and I used one quite recently which still had faster track access than many newer machines.

 

[plastic penguin]

I meant that it was hardy - the opposite of flimsy floppy. Certainly the Philips CDM4 mech in the '965BX was tough and I used one quite recently which still had faster track access than many newer machines.

When I spoke to Bowers and Wilkins years ago, in not so many words, hinted that the old 9 series CDPs had their Achilles heel.

After a couple of years of usage it became a pig to read the disc, unresponsive etc etc. It was a cracking sounding player which made the issues even worse

 

[mrob]

So, I went to the only store around, and I was able to do A/B comparisons of a Yamaha A-S801 and a Marantz PM7000N. The PM8006 was out of stock, and no PM6007.

The guy told me the 7000 is a notch above the 6007, and a notch below the 8006, even if I consider only the analogue part.

At least I know now I prefer Marantz over Yamaha. The stage and details difference sounded pretty obvious.

Do you guys/gals think it would be a good move to get the 7000? I think my DAC is better, but I could test/ use it. In the end, there is the convenience of a single box which is appealing...

Thoughts?

 

[nads]

I would keep on listening to other makes.

you have not said you like the sound from the Marantz.

i dont Like the Yamaha sound either.

 

[plastic penguin]

So, I went to the only store around, and I was able to do A/B comparisons of a Yamaha A-S801 and a Marantz PM7000N. The PM8006 was out of stock, and no PM6007.

The guy told me the 7000 is a notch above the 6007, and a notch below the 8006, even if I consider only the analogue part.

At least I know now I prefer Marantz over Yamaha. The stage and details difference sounded pretty obvious.

Do you guys/gals think it would be a good move to get the 7000? I think my DAC is better, but I could test/ use it. In the end, there is the convenience of a single box which is appealing...

Thoughts?

My thoughts have always been to buy a amp that has sufficient connectivity. As I believe the PM7000N is a steamer/amp, the question you have ask yourself is: Do I need to stream music?

 

[mrob]

I would keep on listening to other makes.

you have not said you like the sound from the Marantz.

i dont Like the Yamaha sound either.

Ok, me say it: I did like the sound of the Marantz. Unfortunately, the only other amps I can listen there are lamps based and too expensive. I didn't even bother. I will try elsewhere, or at least try to.

My takeaway is the amp does make a huge difference, so I think a safe course of action is try more, as you advise. Thanks!

My thoughts have always been to buy a amp that has sufficient connectivity. As I believe the PM7000N is a steamer/amp, the question you have ask yourself is: Do I need to stream music?

I have local hires music I bought, and usually, while I work on something, I'll stream. I would say it's a 60/40 ratio of streaming/vynils.

But I also have a node, which streams quite well... And a okey DAC which, from what I gather, would be better than most DAC in any amps in this price range.

So I don't want the digital/connectivity be the driving factor.

The guy said the extra watts would be useful at lower volume; I'd probably get some details "earlier" than the 6008?...

 

[plastic penguin]

Ok, me say it: I did like the sound of the Marantz. Unfortunately, the only other amps I can listen there are lamps based and too expensive. I didn't even bother. I will try elsewhere, or at least try to.

My takeaway is the amp does make a huge difference, so I think a safe course of action is try more, as you advise. Thanks!




I have local hires music I bought, and usually, while I work on something, I'll stream. I would say it's a 60/40 ratio of streaming/vynils.

But I also have a node, which streams quite well... And a okey DAC which, from what I gather, would be better than most DAC in any amps in this price range.

So I don't want the digital/connectivity be the driving factor.

The guy said the extra watts would be useful at lower volume; I'd probably get some details "earlier" than the 6008?...

If you think you can fully utilize the streaming section, there's little better all-in-one for that price bracket.

 

[npxavar]

The guy said the extra watts would be useful at lower volume; I'd probably get some details "earlier" than the 6008?...

The 7000N probably has a more logarithmic volume control, meaning the volume reduces gradually even at low volumes. The "extra watts" have nothing to do with it, but a more expensive amplifier will probably combine "extra watts" with a better volume control.

Depending on the nature of the volume control (pot-based vs IC-based) you may indeed get details earlier (with the pot-based).

 

[mrob]

Update! After weighing the pros and cons, as well as all your suggestions/opinions/recommendations and also differents lines of thought, I decided to go with Matthew's original warm recommendation of the Marantz PM6007 for the following reasons:
- I don't need the digital stuff of the PM7000N
- I have a small listening room, so I don't need extra power
- I liked the marantz sound when I listened to it (it was the PM7000N but I expect it is similar according to what I could read)
- upgrading externally (phono stage, other DAC, etc) will be possible
- I couldn find anywhere to compare a Rotel, NAD, or any of the other suggestions except a Denon, which was (to me) closer to a Yamaha in sound than the Marantz

The only "drawback" is there is no preamp out to connect a power amp? But I don't think it would ever be required in my current room, so I can live with that for a while (this was not a factor really anyway).

It should arriver next week, I'm looking forward doing an A/B comparison to my current Yamaha HTR-6160!

Thanks for your help! I'll give my impressions back when I had it for a few days.

Mrob

 

[mrob]

Update: just received & plugged, listened to a first vynil. Well, I did not think my discs were sooo dirty.. heard a lots of crack & pops I don't usually hear. I think it might just be the phono being more sensitive or something (same turntable, removed my CA CP2 phono stage).
But the bass presence.. wow 😳 quite a difference.

Just to be sure it wasn't something related to speakers, I switched to streaming the same album, and no pop / crack, so I 'll clean the disk and try again.

So far, what I notice is I get quite a lot more details at a lower dB than previous amp, which is great!

I was expecting a more obvious sound stage difference, but not so much. There is that nice "smoothness", which I think is the "Marantz sound" that just makes it easier to listen, without attenuation to the actual ... Emotions?

So far, so good, thanks everyone for your suggestions and recommendations!

Mrob

 

[Gray]

Just to be sure it wasn't something related to speakers, I switched to streaming the same album, and no pop / crack

Nothing to do with the speakers 🙂
....just the 'joy' of vinyl.

 

[mrob]

....just the 'joy' of vinyl.

I know - I was just surprised to hear those on that amp, but not with the other amp!

But yes, it is a joy to listen once they are clean! Now I am curious how the older ones (not perfect conditions) will sound 🤠

 

[mrob]

Update 2: sounding better every day 😁 I am wondering if it is a psychological adaptation or whether there's really some sort of break in happening; to be honest, I always was kind of dubious about this whole concept?... Especially when talking about electronics!
Still, here I am, and I must admit it gets better.

More importantly, everything, tightness and bass being the most obvious, is better, punchier and more... Accurate? than with the previous Yamaha AV.

Definitely NOT returning the PM6007 😁

Marantz got a new fanboy ...

 

[npxavar]

I have the following setup:
- Source 1: Bluesound node (2023) - Tidal hifi plus and local 24/192 flacs -> SMSL D300 DAC
- Source 2: Revolver Rebel (upgraded arm & stylus) -> Cambridge audio CP2
- Amp: Yamaha HTR 6160 (using pure direct audio)
- Speakers: Elac B6 2.0
- My room is my office, quite small (11'x9', give or take).

Now that you have upgraded, have you compared the phono stage of the Marantz PM6007 with the Cambridge audio CP2?

 

[mrob]

Now that you have upgraded, have you compared the phono stage of the Marantz PM6007 with the Cambridge audio CP2?

Hi!

I ordered a kind of RCA splitter because the time between switching is too long for me to be accurate. But I didn't receive it yet (lost in mail it seems).

Still, I gave it a shot, and what I think I can hear as a difference is:

- all imperfections seem much more obvious on Marantz ' phono
- stage seems to be a bit more opened on CA CP2

Other than that, it is very difficult to compare. By the time I have switched, it is far too long before I can talk about treble, bass, precision or anything else...

Concerning the extra details (if we consider imperfections details), I would be tempted to say Marantz' phono might be a bit superior... On the other hand, it could very well be a CA CP2 "feature"...

So, all this to say: can't say yet.