Which is the better amp?

[soultrader]

Hi...

Was wandering if anyone knew how to interpret the specs, and tell me which is the better amplifier between the Marantz PM 7200 or the Technics SU-A900MK2...

Try and post specs later on, if you have an opinion otherwise please gi's a shout!

[soultrader]

MODEL PM7200 TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS
Power output (class AB operation)
RMS 8 ohms (20 Hz-20 kHz) .................................................. .................................................. ...... 95 W
DIN 8 ohms .................................................. .................................................. ............................... 105 W
THD at 8 ohms RMS rated output .................................................. .............................................. 0.03%
Damping factor .................................................. .................................................. .............................. 150
Power output (classA operation)
RMS 8 ohms (20 Hz-20 kHz) .................................................. .................................................. ...... 25 W
DIN 8 ohms .................................................. .................................................. ................................. 28 W
THD at 8 ohms RMS rated output .................................................. ............................................. 0.03 %
Damping factor .................................................. .................................................. .............................. 150
IHF dynamic power (class AB operation)
8 ohms .................................................. .................................................. ....................................... 120 W
IHF dynamic power (classA operation)
8 ohms .................................................. .................................................. ......................................... 35 W
Magnetic cartridge input
Input sensitivity impedance .................................................. ....................................... 2.5 mV/47 kOhm
Accuracy of frequency response to IEC RIAA .................................................. ...........................0.5 dB
Signal to noise ratio .................................................. .................................................. .................... 85 dB
Tuner/CD/Aux/Tape inputs
Input sensitivity impedance .................................................. ...................................... 150 mV/40 kOhm
Signal to noise ratio .................................................. .................................................. .................... 88 dB
Frequency response (–1 dB limits, Source Direct) .................................................. ......10 Hz - 50 kHz
Tone characteristic (100 Hz and 10 kHz) .................................................. .................................... ±8 dB
Channel separation (1 kHz/10 kHz, Source direct) .................................................. ......... >80/>70 dB
General
Power Requirements .................................................. .................................................. ....... 120V, 60 Hz
Dimensions
Width .................................................. .................................................. ................................. 440 mm
Height .................................................. .................................................. ................................ 159 mm
Depth .................................................. .................................................. ............................. 374.5 mm
Weight
Unit alone .................................................. .................................................. ........................... 12.3 kg

[istari_knight]

Have owned the Technics but never heard the Marantz (only heard good things about it though!)

The Technics is a "nice" amp best suited to non critical listeners IMO. If its just going to be playing some tunes in the background then great however if you are going to be critically listening to music I would choose the Marantz every time.

I found the Technics would homogenise everything if that makes sense ? Everything sounded the same, good recordings & bad all had the same pleasant but overall lacking sound. Also, from what I've seen the Marantz has much better build quality...

Whats the rest of your system anyway ?

[The Grand Wazoo]

Bugger the specs - interpret the amps with the Mk. I lug 'oles.

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-8qLnRlMyNaA/TzGjJHtoFgI/AAAAAAAAEZk/WP6CtPMo1Pk/s1600/ears_thumb.gif

[Marco]

+1, with knobs on!

Specs, such as those shown, mean almost diddly-squat in the real world... Use yer ears, as what they tell you, does! ;)

Marco.

[hifi_dave]

As above.

Specs mean almost naff all.

[bluenose24]

Bugger the specs - interpret the amps with the Mk. I lug 'oles.

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-8qLnRlMyNaA/TzGjJHtoFgI/AAAAAAAAEZk/WP6CtPMo1Pk/s1600/ears_thumb.gif

Hahahaha +1

Very true one mans treasure is another mans junk :p

[Haselsh1]

My honest opinion for what it is worth...?

I doubt that there will be a huge divide between these two items so if I were you, I would buy the most gorgeous looking and live with it for a very long time. Buy some seriously good speaker cables and interconnects and loads and loads of music.

Stop fretting over nonsense.

All the best to you.

[Haselsh1]

OK so I've just checked them out on the net and the Marantz wins hands down. There you have it. Gorgeous amplifier with a good spec.

[Welder]

Well, actually specifications mean an awful lot. :)
The majority of people who build amplifiers build to a specification.

You just can’t build an amp by listening. You may be able to fine tune it by listening for a particular set of speakers after the basic design is finalised, but I don’t think you’ll find any reputable amplifier designer who will tell you he listened to each and every component he used and chose it for how it sounded. The probability is he chose it for its specifications.

The problem for the buyers of Hi Fi amplifiers is you don’t tend to get the specifications that tell you an awful lot about the amplifiers capability. We tend just to get the basics. Years ago some reviewers had the technical knowledge and equipment to actually test the equipment they got to review. These days unfortunately, any idiot can write equipment reviews and get away with some meaningless bullshit and unfortunately many do.

It is absolutely useless reading a subjective review unless you have identical equipment to that used for the review. What may sound fine in one system may sound terrible in another, often not because there is anything intrinsically wrong with that component, but more often, because there is some specifiable mismatch within the system. This is where specifications can help a lot, but as the OP points out, you need to understand a little about what the specifications mean with regard to the system you intend to use that component in.

I can quite understand those who have little technical expertise and even less interest in learning not being entertained by pages of graphs and numbers, but to dismiss them as meaning very little with regard to how a piece of equipment will work in a system seems somewhat foolhardy. While there may be an art to getting the sound that pleases you, the building and matching of electronic equipment has no basis in magic and your ears are unlikely to tell you for example that the unpleasant noise you hear from your system is in fact crosstalk while some specifications might.

[The Grand Wazoo]

Off you go then John, tell us which is the best amp just by looking at the specs.
If the OP doesn't like it, will you give him his money back?

[Marco]

Hi John,


Well, actually specifications mean an awful lot.
The majority of people who build amplifiers build to a specification.

You just can’t build an amp by listening.


Indeed. However, we've been here before...

The above most certainly applies if you're a builder (or are into DIY), however, for most of us here, as simply end users of equipment and music lovers (and I suspect that Khalid also falls into this category), all that matters is what an amplifier sounds like, that it's well-built, and reliable.

The specs featured, in that respect, are virtually useless, which is why we're all telling him just to use his lugs! :)

I couldn't give a toss how my kit measures, as long as I like the sound it makes. I'll leave the former in the capable hands of the likes of Glenn Croft and Anthony TD, because I trust their professional judgement :cool:

Marco.

[Welder]

Let me just point you at this bit in my post Chris.





The problem for the buyers of Hi Fi amplifiers is you don’t tend to get the specifications that tell you an awful lot about the amplifiers capability. We tend just to get the basics. Years ago some reviewers had the technical knowledge and equipment to actually test the equipment they got to review. These days unfortunately, any idiot can write equipment reviews and get away with some meaningless bullshit and unfortunately many do.


Please, before you jump down my throat, read what i wrote.

As to how any amp will sound to the OP; well obviously i can't have any idea, something I thought by inference I had pointed out in my post. :scratch:

My comments were in response to the the "specifications don't mean much" thread vein. It's obviously nonsense.
Did I write the OP should choose the amp by specifications?

Please guys, lots of people buy audio equipment on specification alone. It may not be the way you choose to do it and its not how I would buy, but that doesn't make them more weird than those who buy on a favorable review, or how something looks, or even those who don't give a toss about either and buy solely on how it sounds in their system.

[soultrader]

Unfortunately I'm not in a position to use my ears, otherwise the matter would've already been settled. Before I forget thanks for the input. I was under the impression the lower the harmonic distortion the better, this would be the same for the damping factor. On these factors alone I started thinking maybe the technics would be a better buy. It's a shame I can't listen to them though. Oh well...

[Marco]

Well, that's fair enough, John, but as you yourself have just written:


The problem for the buyers of Hi Fi amplifiers is you don’t tend to get the specifications that tell you an awful lot about the amplifiers capability.


Indeed!

Therefore, if a newbie is asking for advice on how an amplifier will sound, based on incomplete and superficial technical specs, unlikely to tell him much about an amplifier's capability, why shouldn't we point out that using his ears, and listening to one of the amps in question, would tell him something rather more useful??

Marco.

[Marco]

Hi Khalid,


Unfortunately I'm not in a position to use my ears, otherwise the matter would've already been settled. Before I forget thanks for the input. I was under the impression the lower the harmonic distortion the better, this would be the same for the damping factor. On these factors alone I started thinking maybe the technics would be a better buy. It's a shame I can't listen to them though.

Well, in that case, my advice would be that, unless you've fallen in love with these specific amplifiers, you target something else instead which you can listen to first.

Either that, or perhaps one of our technical guys could give you some idea of how these amplifiers are likely to sound, based on the very basic specs you supplied earlier. Or, better still, perhaps someone who's owned either of the amps in question before, and knows how they sound, could advise you?

Anyway, good luck at coming to a meaningful decision! :cool:

Marco.

[The Grand Wazoo]

John,
I saw what you wrote & I read it very carefully. Twice in fact.
If I gave you the impression that I was jumping down your throat, then I apologise. That was not what was intended.

[Welder]

Absolutely no need to apologise Chris but thank you anyway. :)

My writing style isn't that great I'm afraid and tone is easily misinterpreted.

[Martinh]

I reckon that the Marantz would be a good bet, especially if you are after a smooth weighty sound. It's no longer a current model, so I guess you are looking to buy on eBay or similar? If it doesn't suit you can easily sell it on again.

Do you have your speakers sorted?

I don't know about the Technics amps.

Cheers

[Marco]

Absolutely no need to apologise Chris but thank you anyway.

My writing style isn't that great I'm afraid and tone is easily misinterpreted.

Perhaps you might also answer the question I asked you on post #15?

Ta! :)

Marco.

[aquapiranha]

I remember how good the PM66 KI signature amp sounded, an long long ago I used to sell Technics amps! so, my money is firmly on the Marantz. In fact, if I could afford one, I would pick one up on ebay (the PM66 I mean..)

[NRG]

Unfortunately I'm not in a position to use my ears, otherwise the matter would've already been settled. Before I forget thanks for the input. I was under the impression the lower the harmonic distortion the better, this would be the same for the damping factor. On these factors alone I started thinking maybe the technics would be a better buy. It's a shame I can't listen to them though. Oh well...

As I was reminded of recently the THD+N figure is meaningless without knowing what the distribution of the harmonics are and at what power output and frequency...the only figure that may offer some guidance for you is the power output depending on how sensitive your 'speakers are and what size room you have...

[Welder]

Perhaps you might also answer the question I asked you on post #15?

Ta! :)

Marco.

But he was asking about how to interpret specifications Marco.:scratch:

The answers he got were pretty much unqualified “specifications were useless” and he should listen to the unit.
I don’t agree with “specifications are useless” and if you’re not in a position to listen to those units in your own system, specifications are as good if not better than most reviewers’ opinion, imo.

It just isn’t always possible for everyone to audition units at home, if at all and later it transpires it isn’t possible for him.

Now using your ears is fine if you know what you’re listening for and if you can physically do it. As a blanket cover all answer in this case it seemed rather daft given he had gone to the bother of copying the specs.

If I was going to give direct advice, it would have been buy the one you like the look of because they will probably perform equally in the average system.:eyebrows:

However, what I did instead was to try to point out that specifications can be a very reliable method of picking equipment if you have enough detail and if you know what you’re looking for.

[Marco]

But he was asking about how to interpret specifications Marco.:scratch:


No, John, he was asking how to interpret the particular specifications that he published, which we've all agreed were pretty useless. Yes, some specifications are useful, but the ones given for both amplifiers in question were unlikely to tell us much about how they sounded.


The answers he got were pretty much unqualified “specifications were useless” and he should listen to the unit.


No, again you're twisting things out of context. No-one said that ALL specifications were useless; merely those that were given. Please stick to the facts.


I don’t agree with “specifications are useless” and if you’re not in a position to listen to those units in your own system, specifications are as good if not better than most reviewers’ opinion, imo.


Yes, sometimes, but ONLY if a) the specifications given provide sufficient information as to how an amplifier might sound, and b) one has the required technical knowledge to interpret the information correctly. Only then is it meaningful.

The fact is, John, the vast majority of audio enthusiasts are non-technically minded, therefore providing a long list of technical specifications for a particular product, is in most instances unlikely to be very helpful.

Marco.

[Beobloke]

I'm disappointed in you all.

There is one very obvious item listed in the Marantz specification that Khalid posted which means it is VERY unsuitable for providing decent quality sound, and thus proves that to ignore technical specifications is VERY unwise.

The relevant figure is as follows:

General
Power Requirements .................................................. .................................................. ....... 120V, 60 Hz

:D

[Marco]

:lolsign:

Marco.

[DSJR]

I remember how good the PM66 KI signature amp sounded, an long long ago I used to sell Technics amps! so, my money is firmly on the Marantz. In fact, if I could afford one, I would pick one up on ebay (the PM66 I mean..)

The PM66KI amp was one of the worst sounding amps I've ever had the displeasure to listen to, the early Roksan Kandy being the other memorable disaster from this era (the Caspian was on a different plane of existance in comparison). The PM66KI was loathed by all the serious dealers I spoke to as a product you had to stock for easy money (it always sold "blind" to punters in its box as a dem always resulted in a switch-sale) but you wouldn't own in a month of sundays, such was the power of WTF magazine back then. Sorry, but it was hard as nails with little bass, no "tunes" and a screeching treble, rather like the CD63KI CD player that "everyone" bought with it - ugh!

As proof - comparable amps were the Audio Analogue Puccini, Rega Brio, Luna and Mira and at slightly higher expense, the Audiolab 8000S (bright tone but nothing like as tinny), the rather lovely Myryad MI-120 and hugely undervalued Quad 77 integrated, so bland looking but sweet sounding).

[hifi_dave]

Hi Khalid,



Well, in that case, my advice would be that, unless you've fallen in love with these specific amplifiers, you target something else instead which you can listen to first.


Marco.

I didn't want to confuse the OP but I would suggest hearing the Rega Brio-R along with the amps mentioned. Might not look as impressive but...

[allsorts]

Marantz PM7200 - Best amp I have ever owned; smooth and elegant and that was just the looks! Got it in Hong Kong for a large discount to Oz pricing. Excellent in all respects for my system.After owning an Onkyo AV receiver alleged to play good stereo (roughly same price) the Marantz was a revelation playing stereo music. Really regret having to sell it as they don't appear on -bay over here.

[soultrader]

I'm disappointed in you all.

There is one very obvious item listed in the Marantz specification that Khalid posted which means it is VERY unsuitable for providing decent quality sound, and thus proves that to ignore technical specifications is VERY unwise.

The relevant figure is as follows:

General
Power Requirements .................................................. .................................................. ....... 120V, 60 Hz

:D

Yes, I did notice that too. Wasn't to sure what to make of it. Given we have 240v coming out the walls I took this spec as maybe being indicative of the amp not having good power reserve?

[Marco]

Lol... I guess that ably demonstrates how misleading specifications can be for novices and the (often) futility of providing them! ;)

Marco.

[Tim]

I didn't want to confuse the OP but I would suggest hearing the Rega Brio-R along with the amps mentioned. Might not look as impressive but...
As a very happy owner, I second the above - the Brio-R punches well above its weight, a beautiful sounding amp worth much, much more than it costs.

[kininigin]

The PM66KI amp was one of the worst sounding amps I've ever had the displeasure to listen to, the early Roksan Kandy being the other memorable disaster from this era (the Caspian was on a different plane of existance in comparison). The PM66KI was loathed by all the serious dealers I spoke to as a product you had to stock for easy money (it always sold "blind" to punters in its box as a dem always resulted in a switch-sale) but you wouldn't own in a month of sundays, such was the power of WTF magazine back then. Sorry, but it was hard as nails with little bass, no "tunes" and a screeching treble, rather like the CD63KI CD player that "everyone" bought with it - ugh!


My very first audition of a 'proper' hi fi system,was the two models you mention above.Largely due to the reviews in what no hi-fi,i was young and i'm sticking with that excuse!!

After listening to the marantz system,i wondered if i was listening to a different system.They sounded nothing like they were described.

I went the arcam route instead,which to me at least,sounded way better.

[Effem]

I have actually heard both amps and without any hesitation would buy the PM7200. I owned the aforesaid amp a few years ago in a second system and deeply regretted selling it because it easily matches if not betters my current XTZ Desire. Like my XTZ, it can be switched to Class A operation when it takes on a subtlety and sweetness that is a joy, whereas the Technics is let's say is rather "unsophisticated" by comparison.

At a bakeoff I attended a couple of years ago, one chap was almost ashamed to admit he had brought along a PM7200 given that there was a good amount of expensive ironmongery there. I really did twist his arm to plumb it in and reassured him that his reticence was entirely unfounded. It sounded so sweet and powerful it put more expensive amps to shame, so this chap's face was a picture to behold. One of the other guys there was on his mobile phone immediately scouring ebay for a PM7200 :eyebrows:

[jandl100]

I heard a Marantz 7200 at a bake-off.

Initial impressions of class-A mode were very favourable - it just sounded right!
... I got quite excited and thought I had found a real budget giant killer. I was planning an immediate visit to eBay on my return home.

But after about 5 minutes it became obvious (to me! :)) that it was bereft of the musical life-force, the dynamic expression, that makes music interesting (for me).

Bit like watching paint dry.

Very much like Meridian electronics and other pipe & slipper devices.

In class A/B mode it was a very ordinary and lost what (little) magic it had in class-A.

Just imo & ymmv. :)

Depending on the rest of your system and your musical tastes you may be MUCH better off with a Mini-T t-amp (about £60 new). If that is too low-powered then a TA2022 chip amp might just be perfect.;) Either of those would sonically slaughter a 7200 or, based on its reputation, a Technics, imho.

[munin]

Some useful info in this thread. I am reasonably sure I will buy the Marantz PM 7200ki, and since I will not be able to listen before I buy. I am all over the net to get info. One person here think the thing sounds boring. Nothing sounds boring om my Klipsch Cornwall 111. And the music I listen to sounds great on anything.

[Reffc]

Well, actually specifications mean an awful lot. :)
The majority of people who build amplifiers build to a specification.

You just can’t build an amp by listening. You may be able to fine tune it by listening for a particular set of speakers after the basic design is finalised, but I don’t think you’ll find any reputable amplifier designer who will tell you he listened to each and every component he used and chose it for how it sounded. The probability is he chose it for its specifications.

The problem for the buyers of Hi Fi amplifiers is you don’t tend to get the specifications that tell you an awful lot about the amplifiers capability. We tend just to get the basics. Years ago some reviewers had the technical knowledge and equipment to actually test the equipment they got to review. These days unfortunately, any idiot can write equipment reviews and get away with some meaningless bullshit and unfortunately many do.

It is absolutely useless reading a subjective review unless you have identical equipment to that used for the review. What may sound fine in one system may sound terrible in another, often not because there is anything intrinsically wrong with that component, but more often, because there is some specifiable mismatch within the system. This is where specifications can help a lot, but as the OP points out, you need to understand a little about what the specifications mean with regard to the system you intend to use that component in.

I can quite understand those who have little technical expertise and even less interest in learning not being entertained by pages of graphs and numbers, but to dismiss them as meaning very little with regard to how a piece of equipment will work in a system seems somewhat foolhardy. While there may be an art to getting the sound that pleases you, the building and matching of electronic equipment has no basis in magic and your ears are unlikely to tell you for example that the unpleasant noise you hear from your system is in fact crosstalk while some specifications might.

+1 with bells on. Well put John.