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
Well-known member
- Apr 28, 2008
- 6,558
- 3,164
- 36,570
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
Well-known member
- Feb 18, 2022
- 900
- 1,159
- 6,770
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
Well-known member
- Apr 28, 2008
- 6,558
- 3,164
- 36,570
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
Well-known member
- Feb 18, 2022
- 900
- 1,159
- 6,770
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.
Last edited:
plastic penguin
Well-known member
- Apr 28, 2008
- 6,558
- 3,164
- 36,570
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
Well-known member
- Feb 18, 2022
- 900
- 1,159
- 6,770
I agree about the CD73 - the mechanical issues were sadly its Achilles heel, spoiling an otherwise wonderful player.
plastic penguin
Well-known member
- Apr 28, 2008
- 6,558
- 3,164
- 36,570
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
Well-known member
- Feb 18, 2022
- 900
- 1,159
- 6,770
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
Well-known member
- Apr 28, 2008
- 6,558
- 3,164
- 36,570
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
Well-known member
- Feb 18, 2022
- 900
- 1,159
- 6,770
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
Well-known member
- Apr 28, 2008
- 6,558
- 3,164
- 36,570
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
- Mar 7, 2023
- 39
- 16
- 45
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?
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?
plastic penguin
Well-known member
- Apr 28, 2008
- 6,558
- 3,164
- 36,570
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?
- Mar 7, 2023
- 39
- 16
- 45
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?...
plastic penguin
Well-known member
- Apr 28, 2008
- 6,558
- 3,164
- 36,570
If you think you can fully utilize the streaming section, there's little better all-in-one for that price bracket.
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).
- Mar 7, 2023
- 39
- 16
- 45
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
- 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
- Mar 7, 2023
- 39
- 16
- 45
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
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
- Mar 7, 2023
- 39
- 16
- 45
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 🤠
- Mar 7, 2023
- 39
- 16
- 45
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 ...
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 ...
Now that you have upgraded, have you compared the phono stage of the Marantz PM6007 with the Cambridge audio CP2?
- Mar 7, 2023
- 39
- 16
- 45
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.
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram