Receiver Upgrade - Denon vs. Onkyo vs. Marantz [Archive] - Audio & Video Forums

PDA

View Full Version : Receiver Upgrade - Denon vs. Onkyo vs. Marantz



nemesj
04-05-2006, 11:02 AM
I'm looking to upgrade my 10 year old Onkyo surround receiver and was hoping someone could provide insight into what receiver would pair well with my Paradigm Studio 60's v1 and Studio CC. My use is about 60% music / 40% HT. I was considering one of the three models:

Denon AVR-3805
Onkyo TX-SR803
Marantz SR-7500

Any thoughts on these three receivers? And what about the manufacturers does any one have a better reputation than the others? Thanks.

GMichael
04-05-2006, 11:37 AM
I'm looking to upgrade my 10 year old Onkyo surround receiver and was hoping someone could provide insight into what receiver would pair well with my Paradigm Studio 60's v1 and Studio CC. My use is about 60% music / 40% HT. I was considering one of the three models:

Denon AVR-3805
Onkyo TX-SR803
Marantz SR-7500

Any thoughts on these three receivers? And what about the manufacturers does any one have a better reputation than the others? Thanks.

Denon, Onkyo & Yamaha have a little better reliability. Marantz, HK, & NAD have a little better sound for music.

Best part is that you'll most likely be very happy with any of them.

Happy shopping...

nightflier
04-05-2006, 01:41 PM
In that price range I would also add the Outlaw 1070. It's a step up from these IMO. But between these three I would put them in this order for your needs:

1. Marantz
2. Denon
3. Onkyo

The features on the Marantz seem to be the most comprehensive, and if you'll be pairing this with a good player, the order would be the same for the player (CD, DVD, or universal).

accastil
04-05-2006, 03:02 PM
you may want to add an equivalent harman kardon receiver model. this would kick the butt out of the 3 in your choice.

emorphien
04-05-2006, 03:32 PM
Denon, Onkyo & Yamaha have a little better reliability. Marantz, HK, & NAD have a little better sound for music.

Best part is that you'll most likely be very happy with any of them.

Happy shopping...
Agreed. You really won't go wrong with any of those 6 brands mentioned (don't know how the Outlaw surround receiver is). I've had an H/K for several years with no problems and the sound is great for music and it's never failed me for home theater either.

Yamaha used to have a reputation for having a fairly bright sound, I don't know if that's the case now. H/K is warmer, and is very modest with their power ratings, NAD even moreso.

LMB
04-05-2006, 08:48 PM
Give Pioneer Elite a listen

nightflier
04-07-2006, 12:41 PM
After suggesting the Outlaw, someone challenged me to actually buy one, so I did (sort of, I purchased the 970 w/o internal amps because I have an external amp). I thought long & hard about Marantz and Outlaw, and although the Marantz has more input choices, the audio features on the Outlaw were the deciding factor. The Outlaw is the only one that lets you fine-tune the crossover for each speaker. The only other receiver in this price range that I've found that can do this is the HK DPR1001, which I currently own. It will be interesting comparing them.

nemesj
04-10-2006, 09:41 AM
It sounds like the Marantz and the Outlaw deserve a look. I've heard that the Marantz is pretty laid back, so it might not be a good match for the paradigm's which a are a warm speaker. Is there any validity to that? I.E. a bright receiver is better with warm speakers?

emorphien
04-10-2006, 03:07 PM
It sounds like the Marantz and the Outlaw deserve a look. I've heard that the Marantz is pretty laid back, so it might not be a good match for the paradigm's which a are a warm speaker. Is there any validity to that? I.E. a bright receiver is better with warm speakers?
I generally thing so, unless you want it really mellow and warm. I like to be on the slightly warmer side of neutral but I do expect good, detailed highs.

accastil
04-11-2006, 02:57 PM
It sounds like the Marantz and the Outlaw deserve a look. I've heard that the Marantz is pretty laid back, so it might not be a good match for the paradigm's which a are a warm speaker. Is there any validity to that? I.E. a bright receiver is better with warm speakers?
on the contrary, i must say that new Marantz line sounds overbright to me...and yes, they sound good with paradigms. i own both paradigm 20 V3 and marantz SR 5500

frenchmon
04-11-2006, 04:24 PM
on the contrary, i must say that new Marantz line sounds overbright to me...and yes, they sound good with paradigms. i own both paradigm 20 V3 and marantz SR 5500


Well let me chime in here.

I own the 5500 aswell with the Paradigm monitor 7's and must say this is a wonderful set together. I have been a Marantz fan for years from the late 70's and must say your claim of the HK kicking but over the Marantz is a total lie. Its about what you want in gear and the sound you like. Both are very good gear. I have yet to hear any Marantz gear being bright in sound...Marantz is a very natural sounding receiver, with being known for mid-range clarity that other "bright" sounding receivers fail to produce...Having said that so is the Paradigm speakers. The reason I picked Paradigm with the Marantz was for the natural and acurate music the two would produce without going over board with pricing.

If you really want to here music the way it was meant to be heard take a listen to Marantz Reference line.

frenchmon

orgasmdonor
04-11-2006, 06:23 PM
For music I would go with Harmon Kardon. I auditioned Marantz and Denon receivers with Paradigm Monitor series speakers at my local dealer a few months back when I was looking and eventually bought a new receiver. IMO the Denon sounded much better than the Marantz for music. I used the same CD and player for both units. They were the Marantz 8500 and the Denon 3806. I ended up buying the Harman Kardon avr635. With no regrets. The H/K 635 is rated at 75 watts per has as much power ( no fib) as both the Denon and Marantz I listened to and sounded better musically ...very "warm". I bought the Harmon off H/K direct on ebay for 500 bucks (refurb) and has a two year warranty from H/K. So I saved a few bucks. I have had the receiver for about two months with no problems. I listen to music about 80 percent of the time and I am also a musician ...the forty-one pound H/K 635 is a great bang for the buck. At home I use athena and paradigm speakers and I would have to say after I bought my H/K I have never been happier with the sound I'm getting.

RoyY51
04-12-2006, 05:54 AM
I have owned both Onkyo and Marantz 5.1 receivers, and there was a noticable difference in their sonic presentation. The Onkyo was very bright, almost harsh, and did not bring out the best in my Monitor Audio Bronze 2 speakers. The Marantz, on the other hand, was warm and lush, and had a much better bass response than the Onkyo. Listening to music through the B2's was a much more enjoyable experience with the Marantz. I was able to get a satisfying low end without the addition of a subwoofer, something I can't even say about my present receiver, the Nad T763. The Nad, however, has other attributes that keep it at the top of my list.

Hope this helps!

accastil
04-12-2006, 05:32 PM
Denon - very thin sounding but clarity is best.pretty much like a yammie
Onkyo - dynamic range is best but lacks clarity
Marantz - excellent highs and mid freqs and clarity but lacks the low frequency reproduction
HK- well balanced sonic quality with matching clarity and much power.

all of these being tried with paradigm 20 V3's and mordaunt short 502's using a rotel stereo power amp.

GMichael
04-12-2006, 05:38 PM
Denon - very thin sounding but clarity is best.pretty much like a yammie
Onkyo - dynamic range is best but lacks clarity
Marantz - excellent highs and mid freqs and clarity but lacks the low frequency reproduction
HK- well balanced sonic quality with matching clarity and much power.

all of these being tried with paradigm 20 V3's and mordaunt short 502's using a rotel stereo power amp.

Do you remember what models you used?

L.J.
04-13-2006, 05:50 AM
Hmm.....I didn't think there was such differences sound wise between equally priced AVR's. I'm sure there is, but that dramatic and noticeable?

Perhaps I should say the hell with speakers and start swoppin' out AVR's instead.

GMichael
04-13-2006, 06:22 AM
Hmm.....I didn't think there was such differences sound wise between equally priced AVR's. I'm sure there is, but that dramatic and noticeable?

Perhaps I should say the hell with speakers and start swoppin' out AVR's instead.

I don't know. I have a friend with an Onkyo and the same speakers as above. They seem to sound very good to me. He used to have a B&K amp that he got rid of because it didn't sound any different to him than just driving the speakers with his AVR.
I'm so confused now.:confused5:

frenchmon
04-13-2006, 06:51 AM
I don't know. I have a friend with an Onkyo and the same speakers as above. They seem to sound very good to me. He used to have a B&K amp that he got rid of because it didn't sound any different to him than just driving the speakers with his AVR.
I'm so confused now.:confused5:


The Marantz lacking low frequency reproduction and the Denon very thin sounding but clarity is best.pretty much like a yammie and the Onkyo lacks clarity????


These are all different sounding recievers but what you have said about them is the first I have ever heard. In fact I have heard all of the above recievers and have been into this hobby 30 years or so, and understand and know what these recievers can do, and they do none of what you said.

frenchmon

GMichael
04-13-2006, 07:06 AM
The Marantz lacking low frequency reproduction and the Denon very thin sounding but clarity is best.pretty much like a yammie and the Onkyo lacks clarity????


These are all different sounding recievers but what you have said about them is the first I have ever heard. In fact I have heard all of the above recievers and have been into this hobby 30 years or so, and understand and know what these recievers can do, and they do none of what you said.

frenchmon

Huh? Was this meant for me or accastil?

nightflier
04-13-2006, 10:18 AM
nemesj,

I have owned several consumer-line products from Onkyo and I have to say that their DVD players, CD players, and receivers all have a bright edge to them. It's not a problem, particularly if you like that sound, but it is just a character of the company's products.

At this price point, however, I think the more important factor is the features. Onkyo is pretty much up there with Denon with all types surround effects, and just about the same hook-up options. Some usability features that mattered to me, should not be overlooked IMO:

- adjustable bass management (everything cut at 100Hz. is not bass real management)

- easy-to-understand on-screen display (this is were the JVC's, Pioneers, and lower-end Yammies drop the ball)

- video up-conversion (it's really irritating to have to switch inputs just to see the OSD)

- solid, widely spaced connectors (most people forget to check this, and it's a real pain when your fancy digital cable doesn't fit next to another cable, or worse, breaks the RCA jack on the inside of the unit).

- enough video inputs (too many of the lower end receivers still only have 2 CV inputs and no DVI/HDMI inputs).

- 5.1 inputs (if you will be using the system 60% for audio, you really should consider SACD or DVD-A, maybe not right away, but leave the option open)

- Pre-outs (also overlooked, but there will invariably be a point where you will need more power, especially with HK, Yamaha, and Pioneer. And that friend who couldn't tell the difference when a BK amp was added, probably only watches Sundance Festival films).

- Auto speaker setup (I prefer to teak things manually, but for many people this is a god-send. And try to find one that has the mic built-into the remote rather than having an extra mic dangling around after you've got it set up).

To sum up, at this price point, look for features first. My feature list may not be yours, but draw up a chart between the models and compare them. Some features may become a whole lot more important to you than you think in the long run.

orgasmdonor
04-13-2006, 02:50 PM
The comment was made that AVRs in the same price range will sound about the same. I totally disagree with that. Companies amplify differently. I am an electric guitar player. I can tell (most of the time) what kind of amplifier the guitarist is using when listening to a CD. But, I have owned or tried nearly every guitar amplifier on the market. They ALL sound different. Mesa Boogie, Marshall, Peavey, Bogner, Crate, VHT,...etc....etc....tube amp or solid state... all have their signature tone via their patented individual amplification process. I can tell the difference between a Denon, Marantz, and an H/K amp by listening. I know we all could. If we use the same speakers, cd/dvd player, and cd. Yes. Each company uses different DAC's and different amplification processes to give them their signature sound qualities. With AVR's you do have to listen closer, but not much. I listen to and play very "heavy" music. The H/K sounds the best to me. When listening to heavier music you have to cut the mids and crank the tone and bass. That is what the musicians do when they record the stuff. The H/K can get the mids out and give you a much fuller musical range with the "warmish" tone level. I can go on all day about this subject....Time for a beer..AiiiiiiiiiGHT!!!

frenchmon
04-13-2006, 03:48 PM
Huh? Was this meant for me or accastil?


No Michael...it was ment for accastil. I happen to disagree with him on those points.

frenchmon

GMichael
04-13-2006, 03:52 PM
No Michael...it was ment for accastil. I happen to disagree with him on those points.

frenchmon

Me too. I was hoping to get model numbers to see if we were talking apples to apples.

L.J.
04-13-2006, 04:34 PM
The comment was made that AVRs in the same price range will sound about the same. I totally disagree with that. Companies amplify differently. I am an electric guitar player. I can tell (most of the time) what kind of amplifier the guitarist is using when listening to a CD. But, I have owned or tried nearly every guitar amplifier on the market. They ALL sound different. Mesa Boogie, Marshall, Peavey, Bogner, Crate, VHT,...etc....etc....tube amp or solid state... all have their signature tone via their patented individual amplification process. I can tell the difference between a Denon, Marantz, and an H/K amp by listening. I know we all could. If we use the same speakers, cd/dvd player, and cd. Yes. Each company uses different DAC's and different amplification processes to give them their signature sound qualities. With AVR's you do have to listen closer, but not much. I listen to and play very "heavy" music. The H/K sounds the best to me. When listening to heavier music you have to cut the mids and crank the tone and bass. That is what the musicians do when they record the stuff. The H/K can get the mids out and give you a much fuller musical range with the "warmish" tone level. I can go on all day about this subject....Time for a beer..AiiiiiiiiiGHT!!!

Not sure if this is directed at me or not, but I was asking a question, not making a statement. I agree with you on the difference in sound, I was more or less curious about how big or little this diff is. I started a thread on this awile back.

http://forums.audioreview.com/showthread.php?t=15673

I have not heard HK but would like too. I have heard the words "warm" or "dark" associated with this AVR so often that I'm curious. Accastil sparked my interest because he makes it seem as if this diff in sound is a night and day diff. I have done upgrades and what not, but have never heard a dramatic diff. Of course, this is my owm opinion.

Beer!!!!! That's what I'm talkin bout. But more like rum 'N' coke!!!