|
Bronze Member Username: DarrenmcWinnipeg, Manitoba Canada Post Number: 13 Registered: Mar-04 | Would the Marantz SR 5001($800.00)CDN or SR 6001($1150.00 CDN be an upgrade from my Onkyo SR701 receiver which sell for about ($935.00) CDN? I use the receiver about 50/50 for music/video. The front speakers are powered seperately through an Acoustat Trans Twin Nova 200 power amp. Also the NAD T753 ($1290.00)CDN was recommended to me? Any thoughts would be appreciated. Thanks. |
|
Silver Member Username: ClaudermilkPost Number: 433 Registered: Sep-04 | I've been out of it for a couple years now, but when I was heavy into researching for my system I came to the conclusion that the Marantz was a nicer unit IMHO. It seemed they didn't bother with all the useless fancy bells & whistles (like 22 ways to distort your sound to pretend you're in a stadium or music hall, etc) and concentrated on quality components. The Marantz units seemed more substantial and quality to me. So far I have no regrets with my 5400 after 2-3 years service. I avoided NAD as there was a lot of talk about a humming problem (particularly on that 753 model)--which I am surprised to still see some current discussion on. Seems like maybe the problem was never solved & they just did enough to keep current customers happy enough not to go after them? Don't know, but it's enough to keep me away. |
|
Bronze Member Username: Alright_boyPost Number: 44 Registered: Jan-07 | If you do the research, check the specs and audition the equipment, you should have the answer to your question. Are you merely asking for someone else's preference? |
|
Bronze Member Username: DarrenmcWinnipeg, Manitoba Canada Post Number: 17 Registered: Mar-04 | Not asking for preference just wether or not these particular receivers are an upgrade based on sound quality/performance/price? I would not spend say $1000.00 and the receiver will be barely a step up or a step sideways in what it would achieve. |
|
Gold Member Username: NuckPost Number: 6365 Registered: Dec-04 | Darren, for 1k there are lots of used seperates to look at, depending on how you want it to perform. |
|
Bronze Member Username: Jedi1Post Number: 29 Registered: Aug-06 | Marantz or Onkyo?? well no doubt i'll go for Marantz . Marantz looked solid and sound better. i have no regret for my Marantz SR7500. although SR7500 is replaced by SR7001.. |
|
Bronze Member Username: Alright_boyPost Number: 65 Registered: Jan-07 | "Darren, for 1k there are lots of used seperates to look at, depending on how you want it to perform." I beg to differ with that assessment, especially if you are looking for digital sound processing like dolby digital and/or dts. Well let me rephrase. Probably a lot out there at that price point but not of much quality. |
|
Silver Member Username: GavdawgUpstate, New York Post Number: 459 Registered: Nov-06 | you don't think Rotel and NAD seperates are decent performers, and don't think they will outperform a receiver? wow... |
|
Gold Member Username: KanoBC Canada Post Number: 1155 Registered: Oct-04 | Outlaw 970 - $699 Outlaw 990 - $1099 http://www.outlawaudio.com/products/index.html Quality - Check Digital Processing - Check Better performance than any receiver under $3000 - Check And it's new not used. Only problem is getting 3 more amps for the centre and surrounds. |
|
Silver Member Username: GavdawgUpstate, New York Post Number: 475 Registered: Nov-06 | Kano, IMHO a B&K receiver might be comparable to that combo, but it won't be cost effective. Your point is well taken. I think that B&K home theater receivers are around $2500 to $3500. |
|
Silver Member Username: GavdawgUpstate, New York Post Number: 476 Registered: Nov-06 | yikes... the "low end" model is higher than I remembered. the AVR505 lists at $3200. The AVR507 lists at $3500, which is where I thought that one was at. Never said B&K was cheap :-P |
|
Gold Member Username: NuckPost Number: 6483 Registered: Dec-04 | $3500 receivers. Yikes! |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 4406 Registered: Feb-05 | Ditto! |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 4407 Registered: Feb-05 | B&K is very good though...may just be worth it. |
|
Gold Member Username: NuckPost Number: 6491 Registered: Dec-04 | No. It's just wrong. Unless the receiver is huge, with dual torroidals, mono channels and capacitance out the wazoo, no. A 5 channel adcom with a processor, maybe, not one box to break once. |
|
Gold Member Username: Frank_abelaBerkshire UK Post Number: 1973 Registered: Sep-04 | Darren, The short answer is no. All these manufacturers know what the others are up to and price their models accordingly to compete in price bands. Your question is a bit like asking whether a Toyota Corolla is an upgrade from a Ford FOCUS. They're different, you may prefer one over the other, but you couldn't really call the move an upgrade. The items you're looking at are in or around the same price bracket as what you have already. They may provide a different sound than the one you're getting at the moment (which may be enough for you) but they won't offer a substantive upgrade to the sound you're getting currently. Regards, Frank. |
|
Gold Member Username: ArtkAlbany, Oregon USA Post Number: 4410 Registered: Feb-05 | I'd rather have the B&K than the Adcom Nuck...that's just me....oh and I've owned adcom products. |
|
Bronze Member Username: Alright_boyPost Number: 79 Registered: Jan-07 | B&K or Adcom? Tough choice and I own both. Prefer the Adcom amp and pre-amp combination at this time. I find Adcom has that almost indescribable "punch" or responsiveness that is great for my listening preferences. But B&K is close. To me, B&K has a warmer sonic signature which is really appealing on certain listening material. But when I listen to the Yellowjackets, as an example, the Adcom really shines. Almost a toss up. |
|
Silver Member Username: GavdawgUpstate, New York Post Number: 483 Registered: Nov-06 | http://www.bkcomp.com/avr507.asp |