Any Explanation?

VXR8

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 :eek: .

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 .

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 !

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.

ben62670

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

VXR8

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.

ben62670

VXR8 wrote: »

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.

F1nut

Any Explanation?

Transformer/power supply is the answer.

WilliamM2

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/receivers/yamaha-rx-v2700-receiver-review/rx-v2700-measurements-and-analysis

VXR8

WilliamM2 wrote: »

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/receivers/yamaha-rx-v2700-receiver-review/rx-v2700-measurements-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.

WilliamM2

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.

danger boy

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

WilliamM2

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.

F1nut

It kicks butt too and brings the 10s to life as well!

I take that to mean it sounds better than the Yammie.

PolkThug

The volume knob control on the Marantz is not linear.

mhardy6647

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 :-)

VXR8

F1nut wrote: »

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

VXR8

danger boy wrote: »

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

danger boy

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

VXR8

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.

F1nut

VXR8 wrote: »

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?

mhardy6647

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'.

HBombToo

mhardy6647 wrote: »

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

treitz3

F1nut wrote:

Bass, treble and balance......what are they?

Knobs of sin.:D