Free Shipping on All Orders 1-866-764-1801

Vist our Online Store
+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 21 of 21
  1. #1

    Member Sales Rating: (0)

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Sydney AUSTRALIA
    Posts
    257

    Default Any Explanation?

    Hello all,

    Funny how things work out? About 23 years ago, I purchased a new Marantz 2 channel SR320 receiver. I upgraded after a couple of years, so sold the Marantz to a friend of a friend. I was at my friends house the other night and what was there? The Marantz SR320 .

    As I have been concentrating on HT of recent years, I thought it would be nice to see what a 2 channel receiver that I once owned, sounded like over the RTi10s. I asked my friend if I could borrow it back to try it. Hooked it up today and was literally astounded at the difference in SQ :D .

    The explanation I am asking is how a 35 watt a channel receiver (if that) from 1984, where the volume control goes up to 10 on the dial, but when placed between 2-3 on the volume control (about 1/4 volume), has so much more volume than what the Yammie 2700 has at 140 watts a channel? It kicks butt too and brings the 10s to life as well :D !

    To get similar volume on the Yammie 2700, I need to have the volume at about -25db on the volume control, which appears up above half volume - volume goes up to +16db. Any explanation would be appreciated, as I will now see if I can get this Marantz receiver back (as it was given back to my mate and he isn't using it).

    Thanks in advance.
    Regards - Gaz from the land of Oz

    Main
    Denon AVR-4520
    Emotiva MPS-2 7 Channel Amp (driving all LSi's)
    Emotiva XPA-2 (driving RTiA9s)
    Cambridge Audio Azur 851C / 850E / 752-BD
    Polk Audio Cherry LSi9s - LSiC - Cherry LSi7s - PSW505 - RTiA9s
    Panasonic TH-P60UT50A 60' 3D Plasma
    Foxtel Digital HD+
    Belkin - Pure AV PF40

    Bedroom
    Denon AVR-3808
    Denon DVD-3930
    Polk Audio SurroundBAR - PSW250
    Fujitsu P42HHS10W/P42HHS10A 42' HD Plasma - HD STB

  2. #2

    Member Sales Rating: (43)

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    15,931

    Default

    My 88 JVC sounded better than my Yami. I still have respect for that old receiver, and will not part with it. It was the second best receiver they had put out that year. BTW it does not like 4ohms.

    Ben
    Please. Please contact me a ben62670 @ yahoo.com. Make sure to include who you are, and you are from Polk so I don't delete your email. Also I am now physically unable to work on any projects. If you need help let these guys know. There are many people who will help if you let them know where you are.
    Thanks
    Ben

  3. #3

    Member Sales Rating: (0)

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Sydney AUSTRALIA
    Posts
    257

    Default

    It was the second best receiver they had put out that year. BTW it does not like 4ohms.

    Ben


    Thanks Ben - are you referring to your JVC or the Marantz re the above?

    Thanks in advance.
    Regards - Gaz from the land of Oz

    Main
    Denon AVR-4520
    Emotiva MPS-2 7 Channel Amp (driving all LSi's)
    Emotiva XPA-2 (driving RTiA9s)
    Cambridge Audio Azur 851C / 850E / 752-BD
    Polk Audio Cherry LSi9s - LSiC - Cherry LSi7s - PSW505 - RTiA9s
    Panasonic TH-P60UT50A 60' 3D Plasma
    Foxtel Digital HD+
    Belkin - Pure AV PF40

    Bedroom
    Denon AVR-3808
    Denon DVD-3930
    Polk Audio SurroundBAR - PSW250
    Fujitsu P42HHS10W/P42HHS10A 42' HD Plasma - HD STB

  4. #4

    Member Sales Rating: (43)

    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    CT
    Posts
    15,931

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by VXR8 View Post
    It was the second best receiver they had put out that year. BTW it does not like 4ohms.

    Ben


    Thanks Ben - are you referring to your JVC or the Marantz re the above?

    Thanks in advance.
    My JVC;)
    Back in those days we didn't have subwoofers, and my system had a 12" woofer, and a 12"PR. The neighbors used to complain about the bass from across the street, and more than 200 feet away.
    Please. Please contact me a ben62670 @ yahoo.com. Make sure to include who you are, and you are from Polk so I don't delete your email. Also I am now physically unable to work on any projects. If you need help let these guys know. There are many people who will help if you let them know where you are.
    Thanks
    Ben

  5. #5

    Member Sales Rating: (13)

    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    The Mars Hotel
    Posts
    31,263

    Default

    Any Explanation?
    Transformer/power supply is the answer.
    'Political Correctness'.........defined

    "A doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical minority and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end."

  6. #6

    Member Sales Rating: (6)

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    4,426

    Default

    To get similar volume on the Yammie 2700, I need to have the volume at about -25db on the volume control, which appears up above half volume
    Are you saying the Yamaha is not as loud over all, or just wondering about the position of the volume control?

    The Yamaha is capable of over 100 watts a channel with only two channels driven, 90 with four channels driven:

    http://www.audioholics.com/reviews/r...s-and-analysis

  7. #7

    Member Sales Rating: (0)

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Sydney AUSTRALIA
    Posts
    257

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by WilliamM2 View Post
    Are you saying the Yamaha is not as loud over all, or just wondering about the position of the volume control?

    The Yamaha is capable of over 100 watts a channel with only two channels driven, 90 with four channels driven:

    http://www.audioholics.com/reviews/r...s-and-analysis
    Thanks for the responses F1 and WilliamM2.

    As per your question above, the Yamaha appears to take longer to get to a similar volume level. I don't doubt it would be louder if pushed (I am referring to 2 channel only in this comparo), but there is an endless amount of turns on the volume knob to achieve a similar level, as oppossed to just incremental changes on the older Marantz.

    The Marantz may well and truly go into distortion if it was around half volume, whereas the Yamaha appears to be at that level via the on screen volume display at a similar level, when the Marantz is only showing a quarter of maximum volume. Neither unit have been pushed to those extremes, but I believe the Yamaha should come into it's own after a certain volume level.
    Last edited by VXR8; 06-27-2007 at 09:05 AM.
    Regards - Gaz from the land of Oz

    Main
    Denon AVR-4520
    Emotiva MPS-2 7 Channel Amp (driving all LSi's)
    Emotiva XPA-2 (driving RTiA9s)
    Cambridge Audio Azur 851C / 850E / 752-BD
    Polk Audio Cherry LSi9s - LSiC - Cherry LSi7s - PSW505 - RTiA9s
    Panasonic TH-P60UT50A 60' 3D Plasma
    Foxtel Digital HD+
    Belkin - Pure AV PF40

    Bedroom
    Denon AVR-3808
    Denon DVD-3930
    Polk Audio SurroundBAR - PSW250
    Fujitsu P42HHS10W/P42HHS10A 42' HD Plasma - HD STB

  8. #8

    Member Sales Rating: (6)

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    4,426

    Default

    That seems normal for most new recievers. Most of the gain is at the top of the scale. Rather than turn the knob 10 rotations, just use the remote.

  9. #9

    Member Sales Rating: (11)

    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Location
    Spokane, Washington
    Posts
    15,835

    Default

    i'm sure your older Marantz had better build quality to it as well.. sounds better and plays louder then current receivers i'm sure of that. ;) ask your friend to give it back to you, damn it!! :)

    I'm currently enjoying the sounds of a Luxman R-3055 with it's 65wpc, and the thing he hella loud too. It makes CD's sound not so harsh as they do in my newer rigs. The Lux was built between 1976 and 1979. it's and oldie

  10. #10

    Member Sales Rating: (6)

    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    4,426

    Default

    i'm sure your older Marantz had better build quality to it as well.. sounds better and plays louder then current receivers i'm sure of that.
    You are sure? In 1980 Marantz was aquired by Philips. The Marantz designs of that period are not highly regarded, and the build quality was questionable.

    He didn't say it sounded better than the Yamaha, and he did say he was sure Yamaha would be louder, just have to turn the dial farther.

  11. #11

    Member Sales Rating: (13)

    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    The Mars Hotel
    Posts
    31,263

    Default

    It kicks butt too and brings the 10s to life as well!
    I take that to mean it sounds better than the Yammie.
    'Political Correctness'.........defined

    "A doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical minority and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end."

  12. #12

    Member Sales Rating: (2)

    Join Date
    Sep 2003
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    7,522

    Default

    The volume knob control on the Marantz is not linear.

  13. #13

    Member Sales Rating: (2)

    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    New England
    Posts
    8,305

    Default

    None were; since the sensitivity of the ear to SPL is logarithmic, a logarithmic or "audio" taper was and is used on (EDIT: virtually all) volume control potentiometers.

    The volume control pot is an attenuator. Full gain of the circuit is wide open on the pot, anything else is turned down. The amount of power delivered to the output is a function of the waveform being amplified, and the overall gain "dialed in".

    The setting of the volume control is irrelevant.

    EDIT^2: The SR320 is not a "real" Marantz. This is a "real" Marantz.




    This isn't a real Marantz, either... but it's closer :-)

    Last edited by mhardy6647; 06-27-2007 at 03:50 PM.
    all the best,
    mrh

  14. #14

    Member Sales Rating: (0)

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Sydney AUSTRALIA
    Posts
    257

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by F1nut View Post
    I take that to mean it sounds better than the Yammie.
    Yes F1, the Marantz does have a "warmer" sound than the Yammie. We are comparing apples with oranges though. Today's equipment appears to have too many settings and adjustments, whereas the KISS principle of the Marantz wins it for me - just plain old bass, treble and balance ;)
    Regards - Gaz from the land of Oz

    Main
    Denon AVR-4520
    Emotiva MPS-2 7 Channel Amp (driving all LSi's)
    Emotiva XPA-2 (driving RTiA9s)
    Cambridge Audio Azur 851C / 850E / 752-BD
    Polk Audio Cherry LSi9s - LSiC - Cherry LSi7s - PSW505 - RTiA9s
    Panasonic TH-P60UT50A 60' 3D Plasma
    Foxtel Digital HD+
    Belkin - Pure AV PF40

    Bedroom
    Denon AVR-3808
    Denon DVD-3930
    Polk Audio SurroundBAR - PSW250
    Fujitsu P42HHS10W/P42HHS10A 42' HD Plasma - HD STB

  15. #15

    Member Sales Rating: (0)

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Sydney AUSTRALIA
    Posts
    257

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by danger boy View Post
    i'm sure your older Marantz had better build quality to it as well.. sounds better and plays louder then current receivers i'm sure of that. ;) ask your friend to give it back to you, damn it!! :)

    I'm currently enjoying the sounds of a Luxman R-3055 with it's 65wpc, and the thing he hella loud too. It makes CD's sound not so harsh as they do in my newer rigs. The Lux was built between 1976 and 1979. it's and oldie
    Hey Danger Boy,

    Not sure about the better build quality, as WilliamM2 states it was acquired by Philips back in those days. Having said that, I thought Philips was one of the better bread and butter variety of brands in the 1980s - and hell, it still works 100%, so it can't be that bad :D
    Regards - Gaz from the land of Oz

    Main
    Denon AVR-4520
    Emotiva MPS-2 7 Channel Amp (driving all LSi's)
    Emotiva XPA-2 (driving RTiA9s)
    Cambridge Audio Azur 851C / 850E / 752-BD
    Polk Audio Cherry LSi9s - LSiC - Cherry LSi7s - PSW505 - RTiA9s
    Panasonic TH-P60UT50A 60' 3D Plasma
    Foxtel Digital HD+
    Belkin - Pure AV PF40

    Bedroom
    Denon AVR-3808
    Denon DVD-3930
    Polk Audio SurroundBAR - PSW250
    Fujitsu P42HHS10W/P42HHS10A 42' HD Plasma - HD STB

  16. #16

    Member Sales Rating: (11)

    Join Date
    Jul 2001
    Location
    Spokane, Washington
    Posts
    15,835

    Default

    what were oscilliscope's used for in receivers back then?

  17. #17

    Member Sales Rating: (0)

    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Sydney AUSTRALIA
    Posts
    257

    Default

    Thanks for the info mrh - nice Marantz equipment. I like the 2600! I think the Marantz of today is still a good choice for DVD players (DV-9600) and their AVRs.

    A pair of Marantz 9 monoblocks recently went on eBay Oz for $3550 AUD, started at 0.01c, so the brand is still in demand. I am purchasing my Rotel RMB1095 for $1000 AUD less ($2599 AUD), and I'll have 3 additional channels at 200 watts a channel to play with! Thanks all again for the responses to date.
    Regards - Gaz from the land of Oz

    Main
    Denon AVR-4520
    Emotiva MPS-2 7 Channel Amp (driving all LSi's)
    Emotiva XPA-2 (driving RTiA9s)
    Cambridge Audio Azur 851C / 850E / 752-BD
    Polk Audio Cherry LSi9s - LSiC - Cherry LSi7s - PSW505 - RTiA9s
    Panasonic TH-P60UT50A 60' 3D Plasma
    Foxtel Digital HD+
    Belkin - Pure AV PF40

    Bedroom
    Denon AVR-3808
    Denon DVD-3930
    Polk Audio SurroundBAR - PSW250
    Fujitsu P42HHS10W/P42HHS10A 42' HD Plasma - HD STB

  18. #18

    Member Sales Rating: (13)

    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    The Mars Hotel
    Posts
    31,263

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by VXR8 View Post
    Yes F1, the Marantz does have a "warmer" sound than the Yammie. We are comparing apples with oranges though. Today's equipment appears to have too many settings and adjustments, whereas the KISS principle of the Marantz wins it for me - just plain old bass, treble and balance ;)
    It's not only that, as I stated earlier, they used better iron and beefer power supplies back then.

    Bass, treble and balance......what are they? :D
    'Political Correctness'.........defined

    "A doctrine fostered by a delusional, illogical minority and rabidly promoted by an unscrupulous mainstream media, which holds forth the proposition that it is entirely possible to pick up a turd by the clean end."

  19. #19

    Member Sales Rating: (2)

    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    New England
    Posts
    8,305

    Default

    The scope was used primarily for FM tuning. The 2600 and its high-power kin of the late 1970's was a tour de force styling-wise (it WAS the 1970's, after all), but the power-supply was a bit under-spec'd (I have heard) and those surviving are generally in need of work or basket cases.

    The 8B's are absolutely terrific, though. I restored the one in the photo for someone locally... ever since I've really wanted one. Not cheap, tho'.
    all the best,
    mrh

  20. #20

    Member Sales Rating: (1)

    Join Date
    May 2002
    Location
    Funny Farm"no doubt there"
    Posts
    5,329

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mhardy6647 View Post

    The 8B's are absolutely terrific, though. I restored the one in the photo for someone locally... ever since I've really wanted one. Not cheap, tho'.
    Your right!!! Terrific sounding amp. After I bought my 8 from Russman my upgade addiction was cured.

    I use it every day:D

    HBomb
    ***WAREMTAE***

  21. #21

    Member Sales Rating: (26)

    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Location
    The tube lair in Charlotte, NC
    Posts
    11,323

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by F1nut
    Bass, treble and balance......what are they? :D
    Knobs of sin.:D
    In search of accurate reproduction of music. Real sound is my reference and while perfection may not be attainable? If I chase it, I might just catch excellence.

    The best way to enjoy digital music reproduction is to never listen to good analogue reproduction.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

     

Similar Threads

  1. Some tube terminology explanation please?
    By Midnite Mick in forum Electronics
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 05-22-2007, 10:19 PM
  2. Explanation of this crossover meaning?
    By Drumingman in forum DIY, Mods & Tweaks
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 02-17-2006, 09:02 PM
  3. Explanation Please...CD VS DVD Players
    By AsSiMiLaTeD in forum Electronics
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: 02-21-2004, 12:00 AM
  4. Explanation
    By George Grand in forum The Clubhouse
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 09-17-2001, 10:47 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts