Marantz vs. Pioneer

[VRDUB]

Hello, thinking of getting a universal player, and I'm not sure which is best. I've heard good things about both (Marantz 6400, Pioneer 45A), but not sure if the Marantz is worth the extrea $150. If anyone has been able to compare the two units, please let me know what you think. :confused:

[VRDUB]

anyone?

[recoveryone]

Didn't really know that Marantz was making DVD players, but who isn't these days. I have the Pioneer 45a and it plays everything I put in it without a flaw, and the built in Dacs are great. The only drawback is the bass management for the SCAD and Super DVD audio disk. For Mp3's works awesome and gives names of songs and artist if D/L with song. If hooked up with a progresive supported TV the picture is super clean and film like. Marantz has always made top quality stuff in the past, but I'm not sure they are really making the DVD players themselves (outsourcing and putting their name on it). Not uncommon in the electronics game. So to play $150 more for the Marantz name is up to you. Pioneer is one of the leaders in VCD field since back in the 80's with Laser disk so I would consider the track record of each company in that area.

[VRDUB]

Thanks Recoveryone, computer has been down so I haven't had a chance to reply. But I did purchase both these units and I can't believe the difference between them. I'll start off by saying the bass output of the Marantz dv6400 makes my mains (Paradigm mon. 7's) sound much bigger. In 2 channel, I don't even need to turn on my sub as I did before, and with the Pioneer dv45a.

The Pioneer sounds smoother, but not as detailed, as the Marantz brings out everything in the recording.

The video is about the same for both units.
I haven't given hi-res music a listen as I don't have any SACD or DVD-A discs yet.

Build quality goes to Pioneer on this one. Tray and rear inputs seem stronger.

I haven't made up my mind yet on which one I'll keep, but 2ch CD being important to me the Marantz might stay.

Now my question is, using dipoles for the surrounds, will I get the full benefit of hi-res music?

[cjtalbot]

Now my question is, using dipoles for the surrounds, will I get the full benefit of hi-res music?

Great question - I'll kick this back up as I'm interested in the answer as well.

Next - If you ever get a SACD or a DVD-A please post up on which player does a better job. I've used both and found the multi-channel output on the Marantz to be better, but I'd love to hear some other opinions.

Thanks,

C

[N. Abstentia]

I have the Marantz 6400 and it's a killer unit. The lack of bass management on the Pioneer makes it useless for SACD and DVD-A, plus the Marantz has better DAC's for 2 channel playback. These two advantages are the main reasons I went with Marantz over anything else.

[Slosh]

I have the Marantz 6400 and it's a killer unit. The lack of bass management on the Pioneer makes it useless for SACD and DVD-A, plus the Marantz has better DAC's for 2 channel playback. These two advantages are the main reasons I went with Marantz over anything else.The Elite does have bass management and it works for every format. It has delay for every format except SACD, but that's only because the Sony DSD chip used doesn't have delay adjustment. Some people have reported that the bass management doesn't always work properly with every format and others say it works just fine. I wouldn't know since my pre/pro has analog domain bass management at its 5.1 input so it was never an issue for me.

FWIW I believe the Marantz (and Onkyo) universal players are based on Pioneer transports and that's a good thing since I've had my 45A since Sept. '02 with zero problems. :) They may use different DACs than the Pioneer but probably the real difference is in their analog output circuitry.

[VRDUB]

Thanks guys, I don't think I'll pick up any SACD's/DVD-A's before I have to return the unit, but I do keep hearing that the Marantz does have better DAC's as N. Abstentia mentioned. Although I keep thinking I am doing something wrong with the set up of the Elite unit, 'cause I didn't think that the difference would be that big in regards to the bass output to the mains.
Also at the same time the Marantz does sound brighter. Does anyone find it brighter sounding or could it just be my room?

Oh, does a "burn in" period really make a difference? Or is that an "open a can of worms" question? The reason I ask is 'cause I can't tell if they sound better now or when I first hooked them up 2 weeks ago.

[Slosh]

The Marantz has a three year warranty vs. two years for the Elite and since you prefer it's sound it seems to me that it'd be worth the extra money to you. I know the Pioneer uses three stereo Burr Brown 192/24 DACs. Not sure what the Marantz has but I do have a Marantz AV receiver in my daughter's bedroom and its DACs are really excellent so it's no shock that their universal players would sound very good as well. At the time I purchased my DV-45A it was the only under $500 (street price . . . msrp was $700) universal player (well, there was an Apex for much less but I wouldn't buy one with your money :D ) but I've been happy enough with it to not even consider upgrading. No bass problems in my system.

As far as burn in, I personally believe it's real but I don't do anything special. Just play it as normal and gradually (eventually?) it'll improve. Some of this no doubt is simply you getting used to its sound but I've had phono carts, amps, CD players (and of course speakers), etc. that were bright and edgy or had boomy bass that completely lost that slop over time.