NAD or Marantz? What Receiver Should I get?.. [Archive] - Audio & Video Forums


View Full Version : NAD or Marantz? What Receiver Should I get?..

12-07-2005, 11:08 PM
Hi Folks,

I just got a brand new pair of VR-M50 Boston Acoustics and am going to upgrade my receiver. half the time I use the receiver for movies, the other half to listen to electronica and classical music.

I have a very tough choice on deciding which receiver to purchase. I am looking at the following two: Marantz SR5600 Dolby Digital which goes for around $600 and also looking at NAD T743 Dolby Digital receiver that also goes for $600.

The Marantz advertises more power (80w*7) while the NAD advertises continous power (5 * 50W). I am having a very hard time making a decision and would love to hear what you suggest I look at and why I should pick one over the other. I live in a condo so I don't need a mega power source plus I will be purchasing a self powered sub-woofer in a month. Any other questions to help break the tie or any suggestions?...


12-08-2005, 03:14 AM
only you can answer your question man..make use of your OWN ears to judge which among these 2 sounds better to YOU. you are so lucky you only have 2 to choose from. my advice is that you try listening to each through the same pair of speakers and the same test CDs/DVDs of your choice.

12-08-2005, 05:21 AM
I've owned 2 Marantz a/v receivers and they make very nice stuff. I've also owned several pieces of NAD electronics (amps and integrateds), including 2 that are over 20 years old and still work excellently.

IMO, NAD is a whole 'nuther ballgame of receiver at this price point. You're going to sacrifice 2 more channels of amplification, the processing that goes with it, and probably some inputs/outputs. But if the NAD has enough inputs/ outputs for you, it is a far superior piece of equipment in terms of sound quality.

As for wattage, it's much closer than you think. NAD is very conservative with their power ratings. In 2-channel stereo that unit will do at least 70 watt/channel. The Marantz does 90. We're talking less than 1 dB of music volume here...Those NADs come with big power supply units, there's a reason the NAD, despite giving up 2 channels of amplification, is a bigger, heavier unit.

12-08-2005, 05:59 AM
Hi, welcome to AR,

You're in luck. Both of these are good units. You'll be happy with either one.
Kex has nailed what the differences are. Pick what means the most to you.

12-08-2005, 05:12 PM
I own an older NAD, the T742, and also have listened a bit to a (friend's) Marantz, 4600 I think. Hard to imagine you'd be disappointed with either. Go and listen to each if at all possible and also if possible with BAs. Your ears will show you the way.

BTW, I don't need a lot of power either. Not in a townhouse but just don't have the same desire to crank it anymore. When it was time for me to get a sub I went with a HSU STF-2 Tough to beat for the price.

12-08-2005, 09:55 PM
Another important thing about the NAD. Is it will drive 4ohm loads all day long without flinching.