What to do with my Marantz 2600?

[John in MA]

Yes, I have one. I've owned this beast for about 6-7 years. I felt great when I bought it and thought of all the stuff I'd do with it. Unfortunately, my house and any speaker I could fit is a bad match. Additionally, it's also so complex that I rarely use it for the possibility of something failing I can't afford to fix.

I'm not sure if my ears are playing tricks on me, but it doesn't seem as clear as some smaller units I own. Using 40-50W NAD or Rotel gear I get more enjoyment unless the windows need blowing out.

Anyway, now I'm trying to figure out what direction I should head in. I get a kick out owning it and someday I might be able to use it in a suitable situation. It's a lifelong dream. On the other hand, I get no reasonable listening use out of it and it's dormant most of the year. I'd also prefer the centerpiece of my system to be something a little smaller and more managable.

So, any opinions? It's been a really conflicting issue for me. This is not an ad, I'm not thinking of selling at the moment, just trying to make up my mind. I'm only looking for opinions on keeping and not using vs. replacing it with a newer/different/smaller unit I'd get daily play out of. It's like owning a vintage car you never drive.

[Negotiableterms]

First, I'm compelled to point out that we don't allow sales pitches in the threads. In the optimistic hope that you're really after advice, here's some:

The sound quality of a 2600 is very good. You're not likely to find something today that will seriously outperform it. If you're concerned about age, it can be sent to Echowars for a complete re-do, and will come back with better sound than all but the most high-end stuff.

If you're willing to settle for lesser sound, you can buy a whole system for the price of a 2600 today.

If you're really interested in selling, pay the $2 for a classified here, and you'll be pleased with the results.

[alexkerhead]

"What to do with my 2600?"

Give her to me...^_^

[mjr4077au]

Yeah... I'll take it.

[John in MA]

C'mon guys, I've never been accused of being serious, but I'm trying here. :) Just looking for thoughts on this.

Right now I'm sort of alternating among other equipment I've picked up here and there: Smaller Marantzes of similar vintage, various low-watt NAD gear, an '80s Luxman reciever I'm not impressed with at all, and a nice basic Rotel RA-840BX that's my current rig paired up with Heresys. One problem is that soon I'm going to repair my Walsh 4's or Realistic Mach ones and I'd like more pop than any of these can provide. The 2600 is a bit big and complex for my tastes, plus I can't afford to have it overhauled into a condition I'd be comfortable running day-in day-out.

At the moment I'm sort of leaning towards something large and very simple that I can work on. A basic amp/preamp set or an integrated amp along the lines of my Rotel but more powerful.

[1 Starr]

I say enjoy it. I'd like to try that monster out.

[mhardy6647]

Horns & tubes, John. Horns & tubes.

[Lefty]

C'mon guys, I've never been accused of being serious, but I'm trying here. :) Just looking for thoughts on this.

Right now I'm sort of alternating among other equipment I've picked up here and there: Smaller Marantzes of similar vintage, various low-watt NAD gear, an '80s Luxman reciever I'm not impressed with at all, and a nice basic Rotel RA-840BX that's my current rig paired up with Heresys. One problem is that soon I'm going to repair my Walsh 4's or Realistic Mach ones and I'd like more pop than any of these can provide. The 2600 is a bit big and complex for my tastes, plus I can't afford to have it overhauled into a condition I'd be comfortable running day-in day-out.

At the moment I'm sort of leaning towards something large and very simple that I can work on. A basic amp/preamp set or an integrated amp along the lines of my Rotel but more powerful.

Well I have no specific advice for you but will tell you that I faced about the same situation about a year ago. I had been aquiring large TOTL receivers for about 10 years. Most were thrift store finds that needed only minor repairs. After a while I just felt that I had too many of these monsters and not getting that much enjoyment from them. They take up a large amount of space and are not easy to work on with all the stuff they have to fit into one case.

I then lucked into a really nice Sony preamp, 2000F, and decided to go the separate component route. I listed the large receivers locally and sold all but one, my SX-1980. I find the separate components are much easier to work on, and acquired service manuals on all. I need to upgrade the turntable next but have the funds because of the good prices the TOTL receivers fetch.

So ultimately you have to reach your own decision, but you do realize that for the price that the 2600 can fetch you could acquire just about any component system you might wish for.

Lefty

[M Jarve]

I also own a few examples of the 2600. The one I inherited from my grandpa was the only one that worked (the other two suffered from the notoriously bad transformer). In terms of sound quality, it is not Marantz's best piece, and I always found it to sound slow and lethargic when compared to the 2325 or smaller 22XX offerings. If it were more reliable, it would have made a good PA amp, and that is about it.

I'm holding on to mine just in the hopes that I may be able to resurrect them some day. But, my intention all along was to fix them up and sell them, save for the one I got from my grandfather.

If I were you I would sell it (before the transformer goes bad, as it inevitably will). They fetch a pretty sum by those looking only at their specs and ignorant of the units very real shortcomings. I would take the proceeds and buy a pair of Kenwood L-09M monoblocks and (if you can find one) an L-07C preamp and be much happier for it.

[SoCal Sam]

It doesn't sound like you play your 2600 to really enjoy it. If that is the case, you might not miss it if you sold it. The 2600 is easily one of the most expensive and highly sought after monsters. For the money, you can get any number of receivers and separates systems that will sound great and you will not be afraid to put through it's paces.

[markd51]

Agreed, the Marantz 2600 is a highly sought after piece of equipment for Marantz Collectors. There's many others also, such as a Black Face 2385B, Black face 2285B (I once owned one, it's on Ben Blish's Vintage Marantz site, and it's matching 5025 Cassette Deck which was also mine is shown there too)

As far as sound, much of Marantz's gear left me wanting. I've owned a good 10 vintage recievers from Marantz, and only two I felt sounded "acceptable" (the 2285B Black Face, and a 2265)

I owned two perfect 2330B's and both sounded terrible IMO. With a Bass, Mid, and Treble Tone control, there was no getting good sound no matter which way you adjusted them. Sure, lots of power, but tonal quality, and musicality were absent.

Also owned a bought new 4400 Quad back in the old days ($1200). Two months later, the CRT Display blew, and I dumped it for a $160 loss.

Another poster mentions that there was nothing back then (or almost even today that will beat it?) Hogwash I say. Any piece of McIntosh gear back then, and now will literally stomp any piece of Marantz gear ever made, period!

Take any piece of marantz gear you choose, and I'll put a comparable Mac piece of equipment that will best it, hands down. Even Marantz's highly collectable Tube gear (8B) The Mac 275 will best it.

The problem with this Marantz 2600, is not the inability to find compatible speakers. You could hook it to a pair of $30K Dynaudio speakers, and it's not going to alleviate the shortcomings present in this piece of equipment. I've found most Marantz equipment to be veiled, cloudy, lacking air, musicality, detail.
One could buy a $250 Hafler Amp, and get much better performance, and enjoyment.

My recommendaations.... dump the 2600 for a good buck, let someone else enjoy it, and find yourself a mint McIntosh MC-7200,(200wpc) or MC-7300 (300wpc) Amp, and a compatible Mac pre-Amp. You will never look for another piece of equipment again, I assure you.

I'll never argue the fact that Marantz had some of the prettiest gear to ever hit the shelves back then. I've even personally found most Sansui Gear of the era to outperform much of the Marantz Amps-pre-amps.

I won't get into Tuners, as I feel this is a whole different topic. Mark

[Negotiableterms]

The sound quality of a 2600 is very good. You're not likely to find something today that will seriously outperform it. If you're concerned about age, it can be sent to Echowars for a complete re-do, and will come back with better sound than all but the most high-end stuff.

Another poster mentions that there was nothing back then (or almost even today that will beat it?) Hogwash I say. Any piece of McIntosh gear back then, and now will literally stomp any piece of Marantz gear ever made, period!

Well... I'd appreciate a more polite response, but we're not actually in disagreement. Here's what reconciles things:

First, we're discussing receivers, not separates. The OP said he wants less space taken up, not more.

Second, unless you spent time with a 2600 back when they were new, it's unfair to conclude on their sound. I remember being impressed with it (for a lowly receiver) back then. I have an SX-1980, and I never thought much of its sound until EW was done with it. Now, I'm quite impressed. It's not as good as any of my Mc separate stacks, and neither is my Mc 4300V, but it's unreasonable to think they would be, and the same applies to the 2600.

There are very few receivers, yesterday or today, that will better the sound of an EW-tweaked 2600. Today, there are very few 2-ch receivers, period. The Outlaw would probably do it, but it's not nearly the same power, and almost nothing else is as likely to continue to appreciate.

Now, Mike's comment about the transformers was a surprise to me, as I thought that problem was mostly confined to the 2500. But, if he's got two DOAs on his hands, it must be a 2600 problem, too.

There's one other point. If it were me, now that you (John, the OP) have mentioned you own other vintage stuff, I'd sell off the excess to pay for the 2600 to go see Glenn (Echowars). I'd do that before I did anything else. Then, I'd see how I liked the results. If you don't, it'll fetch a very high price, and you can move on to some great separates, or a 2385, or a 4300V, or whatever, as you'll have plenty of funds to burn. :music:

[John in MA]

Thanks for the input, I really appreciate it. My issue with the 2600 wasn't so much as finding a speaker to make it sound good, but that at the low power ranges I can listen at it just doesn't come into its own. If I had a big hall and a stack of massive speakers maybe it could win me over on power by itself. It's certainly attractive to look at, and the oscilloscope gets major style points.

If I did have the 2600 reworked I'd still be using at far less than its capacity, and the reliability issue would still hang over my head. I don't need the features. But really the biggest factor is that it's worth a dispropotionate amount compared with how much I'd enjoy it. Given my limited means it's hard to justify keeping that value sitting on a shelf when the audio side of things could be replaced.

Any more suggestions for simple combos or integrated amps in the 100-200 watt range? I'm not looking for a reciever--I already have a Pioneer TX-9500-II tuner I'm very pleased with. If there was something that was both good and affordable I wouldn't be opposed to a bulky amp. Since the replacement would actually get used I could live it.

[Negotiableterms]

Wow... John, for what that 2600 will bring, there are a lot of choices. What speakers are you using?

[Lefty]

Thanks for the input, I really appreciate it. My issue with the 2600 wasn't so much as finding a speaker to make it sound good, but that at the low power ranges I can listen at it just doesn't come into its own. If I had a big hall and a stack of massive speakers maybe it could win me over on power by itself. It's certainly attractive to look at, and the oscilloscope gets major style points.

If I did have the 2600 reworked I'd still be using at far less than its capacity, and the reliability issue would still hang over my head. I don't need the features. But really the biggest factor is that it's worth a dispropotionate amount compared with how much I'd enjoy it. Given my limited means it's hard to justify keeping that value sitting on a shelf when the audio side of things could be replaced.

Any more suggestions for simple combos or integrated amps in the 100-200 watt range? I'm not looking for a reciever--I already have a Pioneer TX-9500-II tuner I'm very pleased with. If there was something that was both good and affordable I wouldn't be opposed to a bulky amp. Since the replacement would actually get used I could live it.


Well if 100 watts per channel would fill your needs then I can certainly recommend the Sony components I have now, the TA-2000F preamp and TA-3200F amp. It's a little off the mainstream of brands and models but being in the electronics field my whole life I was super impressed with the design, material and construction that Sony put into this series. They use no weird or impossible to find parts (except their transformers of course) that could not be substituted with modern replacements. The service manuals are complete and easy to read. In all I'm just very comfortable with living with them now and long into the future. I just didn't feel that way with the TOTL receivers I had accumulated.

Lefty

[2DualsNotEnough]

Why not a mcintosh amp/preamp combo used from one of our fine sponsors?You know it will be in great shape sonically,and you can always find parts and service for Mac components.
Jimmy

[John in MA]

Wow... John, for what that 2600 will bring, there are a lot of choices. What speakers are you using?

Well, I'm not looking to get a $2000+ replacement. Truck needs new AC, etc. Main factors are reliability, clarity and range over pure power, and ease of service. I wouldn't mind it being a little cool :) but that's really beside the point.

At the moment I'm running a pair of vintage Klipsch Heresys in a small, live room. They'll probably be replaced with either the Realistic Mach Ones I just picked up, or a pair of Ohm Walsh 4's that've been perpetually waiting for repairs--another use for some of the 2600's value. Future possibilities include a pair of Marantz HD-880's needing woofers that I happen to have a line on. For any of the big speakers I'm a little limted in powering options since I have nothing capable of more than 50W/channel.

Everything else is fairly mundane. The Pioneer tuner, Thorens TD-280 table, surprisingly good Onkyo 6-disc changer, and a better Sony dual tape deck that's filling in for my Nakamichi RX-202 and Teac 3-head I keep forgetting to overhaul.

[mhardy6647]

If you're really in MA, John... I don't think we're gonna be needing A/C much for quite some time!

[John in MA]

Ah, but you forget how it helps defrost.

[luvvinvinyl]

How about a Yamaha CR-2020, understated at 105 wpc, and <10% of the proceeds of the 2600?

[Duffinator]

How about a Sansui G-8000. It's got 120 wpc, looks fantastic, sounds as good as it looks, easy to repair, and it's almost half the price of a G-9000 but sounds almost identical.

[luvvinvinyl]

Echo may still have Charmaine's Sansui...

[markd51]

Sorry, I did not mean to insult any here. To Mr. "negotiableterms", my apologies. Your first response to John wasn't exactly a blanket statement, but was somewhat vague.

Honestly, my first response did miss the mark also, because you are absolutely correct, in that McIntosh, nor any other manufacturer back then (or even now) had such a very unique product, with such unique features as the Marantz 2600. I agree too, that a product that is 25-35 years old will in many cases lose its specs over the years due to age-wear.

To John in MA: Click on Negotiableterms name to read his profile. Note the equipment he is using. It says a pair of McIntosh MC-501's, and a pair of MC-1201's!

Both of these Monoblock Amps he owns will virtually melt any speaker on the planet if turned full volume.

Seeking sheer volume levels was not the purpose of him buying Amps with such overkill of wattage, nor did he buy them to make himself stone deaf within a week's time, but that Amps like this have the power reserve on hand to supply better realism to the music for transients-dynamics.

Other purposes too, may be to drive multiple speaker systems throughout a home without undue stress on the equipment-amplifiers.

Ultimately John, it's your call of what to do with this Marantz. Think it over wisely, as once it's gone, you might be kicking yourself, particularly if this model you have is in mint, or very close to mint condition. I predict that these will never go down in value as time goes by, but only become more, and more valuable. (I can hear others saying NO!, don't talk him out of not selling it!!!! lol)

By the way John, I don't believe you mentioned the speakers you use? Mark

[basicblues]

Well if you don't need to sell the 2600 for the daily bread, I'd tuck it somewhere safe and hang on to it. It would certainly be costly now and in the future to replace and others have covered that tweaking the gem would bring you desirable results. This really sounds to me like you really want to sell the 2600, replace with ??? and you just need that little extra justification that your not screwing up by doing so. It never hurts to bounce the ball off a few AK'ers for solid advice.

But be the final judge for yourself regardless of someone elses experiences on what's best for you, not all vintage gear has been in the same environment or treated the same through the years anyway. My 2500 and 2325 were in a funeral home of all places...and they still didn't wake the dead either BTW...

Ultimately, you have to evaluate your current and future needs from an audio and financial standpoint. Good luck and remember that whatever you decide it will all be burned up on the final day anyway...

[Negotiableterms]

Well... there is one alternative that's been mentioned, but not discussed. If you're determined to have no reliability problems (meaning you're still going to worry even after EW is done), then go NEW. It's a seldom-heard word around this forum, but many of us hide new gear in their racks. Take a look at the Outlaw 2-ch receiver:

http://www.outlawaudio.com/products/rr2150.html

I've heard one and it was very impressive for the price and size.

[SB Marantz]

It is easy to say that any McIntosh amp wil blow any Marantz away but is it true?

In my opinion; NO, not at all.

McIntosh has a high quality standard in build quality but personally i don't like the dull sound.

Sure, not all Marantz gear from the 70's sound good and i think that Ben Blish is absolutely right about the ''cheaper'' models build from 1977 to 1980.

The 3250/B pre-amp and 170DC power amp and allso the 3650 pre and 300DC power amp.

I go with Mr. Blish on his opinion that these components are very difficult to beat.

I had have my hands on a few amps the last 6 years and never heard an amp that realy beat these previous Marantz amp's!

Only Marantz receiver that i dont like soundwise is the 2265.

Comming to power amps;

140- great build but average sound
170DC- great build and super sound
250- great build and nice sound but no totl

I once had a 2600 i it sounds alot like the 300DC.
In my opinion a very good amp section and i can not imagion that the owner can not find a good match?

What kind of speakers do you have???

To blame it on the amp is not correct.

Further more; i compared a Mac with a 1180DC once and the Marantz blew the Mac away!

Mac sound is listening with 2 fingers in your ears in my humble opinion!

http://img82.imageshack.us/img82/1163/img1060gi1.jpg

[markd51]

Hmm, '77-'80. Wasn't it around this time Marantz was taken over by Phillips?

I guess we could argue this until the cows come home, but just curious (not that I feel McIntosh ever marketed any really bad gear) what model Mac Amp was this you speak of? Do you recall.

Honestly, you've never heard much Mac equipment, this I can tell, as what you describe is nothing what McIntosh equipment is truly like. As you perhaps say in your comment to the original poster, is that speakers-amps need to have a synergistic effect together. An incompatibility just isn't going to cut it.

Funny that you also say the 2265 had an unacceptable sound. Out of the 10 Marantz recievers I owned, one of the better sounding units was my 2265, and the dead mint Euro Black Face Model 2285B that was mine for a few years, and is pictured on Ben Blish's site (with also its matching 5025 Black Face Cassette Deck)

The worst I owned was two mint 2330B Units. They had volume yes, but horrible tone, grainy sound and also a virtual monotonic sound. There was little in the way of good dynamics. As I said in an earlier post, with three tone controls set anyway you tried, set flat, or whatever, there was no getting what I call acceptable, pleasing good sound.

As far as McIntosh gear goes, there are different camps of course, just like any other gear. Some people love them, and some hate them for whatever thier reasons be. Same with speakers. Some love JBL, some don't, some love Klipsh, and some don't.

Many who have the boo coo bucks to run the gamut of the very high end, went to Krell, went to Levinson, and in all truth much of this gear does not perform, last, or sound as good as much of the modern Mac gear. Take a listen to a Mac MC-352, a MC-402, or a pair of MC-501's, and then come back, and tell me the Mac gear sounds like you have your fingers in your ears. Some have compared-evaluated the McIntosh MC-352 to the Krell FPB-300, and agree the Mac is a better sounding Amp. (and it will hold its value much better too against the Krell too, there's a reason)

I've heard both, and in all honesty, the Krell FPB-300 is absolutely no slouch! An Amp I could easily live with. Of course now, I'm comparing apples to oranges, in putting 21st century technology against the '70's gear.

Still though, going back 30-35 years, McIntosh was still the one to beat. Back then, I once auditioned a MC-2205-C-28 Combo powering two JBL 4343 monitors. It sure didn't sound like I had my fingers in my ears! lol

Such Amps as the venerable MC-2105 was around from 1967-1979. There was good reason. The other, the MC-2205 was also a very oustanding Amplfier. One of the best Amps of yesteryear that McIntosh ever made (SS) was the MC-7200.

In closing, I will say I was, and still am a Marantz fan. There's no denying that there was something special, and unique with much of the gear they made.
Defintely sexy, I'll say that.

I can recall back the many moons ago quite easily like it was yesterday, sitting in my living room, and watching my brand new Marantz 4400's CRT Display, while cranking out the tunes with my brand new then TEAC 3340S, going out to 4 new then JBL L-65 Jubals!

The Marantz is long gone, but not my TEAC, nor Jubals. Mark

[bully]

Write a good auction story and shoot excellent pix of the 2600 and put it on eBay. With the money buy a nice Yamaha M-80 and C-80 or C-85 preamp. Or look for the spectacular Yammie C-2x preamp. You would have money left over for a very nice tuner

[bully]

Yes, I'm not a fan of MArantz gear. But vintagestereo rates the 2285B highly and it may be a receiver to look for.
At 85 wpc, I would recommend the Nikko NR-1015 and I have one and might be persuaded to sell it. Yes, it sounds great and has a very nice tuner.

[beemer]

LOL, I just found this thread. Back when, I owned a Marantz 2600. Yep, sold it for $300 "back when". Hindsight being what it is, I should have stuffed it in the closet. :nono: :tears:

I had it in a room 18'x24 driving a pair of AR9 floorstanders. Anytime I would ask the 2600 to push the AR9's a bit, it would clip and goodbye to the tweeters. A friend suggested that I try the Carver "magnetic powerfield" amps that were becoming popular about this time. Those were no better than the marantz in my application. Someone told me about Hafler and the DH500 kit amp. I built one, then never had any more trouble with driving the AR9's. Plenty of headroom and no more blown tweeters. This taught me some valuable lessons to this day.

I do get a kick out of what the 2500/2600's sell for today, myself, I wouldn't pay 20% of that for them, knowing what I do now, however I can certainly see the collector value.

Please, this is not a post to knock either vintage Marantz or Carver, just my observations with the equipment back in the day.

Best,

Paul :thmbsp: