Marantz 8b or Scott 299a

Discussion in 'Tube Audio' started by drums4reed, Dec 31, 2017.

  1. drums4reed

    drums4reed New Member

    Messages:
    11
    Can't decide I thought the Marantz bit but listing to the Scott it's really a great unit ...I'm I wrong?
     

     

    Please register to disable this ad.

  2. Selmerdave

    Selmerdave Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    713
    One's a power amp, one's an integrated. As good as the Scott is, I don't believe it's in the same league as the 8b.
     
    soundmotor and crooner like this.
  3. trainbuftony

    trainbuftony Electron Herder Subscriber

    Buy both if you have the means. The Scott will punch above its weight class, and the Marantz, well it's a marantz... 'nuff said. Oh and you can always send me whichever one you decide you don't like.
     
    Archguy likes this.
  4. Chrisxo55441

    Chrisxo55441 AK Subscriber Subscriber

    Messages:
    2,351
    Location:
    Twin Cities Minnesota
    i would vote to keep the 8B its an awesome amp. if you really want to burn a hole in your wallet get a Marantz 7C for a preamp when paired together they are truly wonderful a match made in heaven.
     
    Brice, autoanalog and onemug like this.
  5. primosounds

    primosounds Parallel single ended EL84 ,EDCOR OPT Subscriber

    Messages:
    2,000
    Location:
    Terra, 21st century CE
    Ok, seeing that you are new to AK, and the type of question, is not the usual comparison made, since the Marantz 8 cost upwards of 3000 bucks and the 299A is less than a 1000. Also the power tubes for the Marantz are EL34 vs Scott 7189 (EL84). Power output is 35w/chnl vs about 20w for the Scott. Most buyers of the Marantz are collectors with money to burn or guys/gals who inherit the amp from family or friends. One thing for sure, 3000 vs 700 (average costs) , the Marantz will not sound that much better than the Scott. At this price level, McIntosh gear is a fair comparison, although for some reason, Mac never produced an EL34 amp, nudge, nudge, wink , wink.
     
    drtool and trainbuftony like this.
  6. Chrisxo55441

    Chrisxo55441 AK Subscriber Subscriber

    Messages:
    2,351
    Location:
    Twin Cities Minnesota
    I had a frickin bonfire at my house :) but it was well burned and the 8B is awesome and was worth the marantz tax
     
  7. primosounds

    primosounds Parallel single ended EL84 ,EDCOR OPT Subscriber

    Messages:
    2,000
    Location:
    Terra, 21st century CE
    Don't get me wrong, it IS an awesome amp but i guess i was fortunate enough to audition it without any pressure. That is i did not spend for one and so not really invested but just willing to let its sonic signature do its thing. But when it came down to a careful consideration of all factors, in my system it was not so much better that i wanted to buy it from the seller. My EICO HF89 and a custom made PP UL EL34 made with Dynaco A430 output transformers were sonically similar with slightly different nuances. If you like the particular nuance then it is worth the money.
     
    Last edited: Jan 1, 2018
  8. Pio1980

    Pio1980 AK Member Subscriber

    Messages:
    24,214
    Location:
    Angel Station, Alabama
    Only the McIntosh MC225 is considered the SQ rival to the Marantz in the Mac line.
     
    autoanalog and crooner like this.
  9. Selmerdave

    Selmerdave Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    713
    MC30s?
     
    gmfgmfgmf1 likes this.

     

    Please register to disable this ad.

  10. robert_kc

    robert_kc AK Subscriber Subscriber

    Messages:
    697
    Location:
    Midwest USA

    :lurk:
     
    autoanalog and Archguy like this.
  11. primosounds

    primosounds Parallel single ended EL84 ,EDCOR OPT Subscriber

    Messages:
    2,000
    Location:
    Terra, 21st century CE
    What do you mean SQ?
    I think some Mac users would beg to differ with that statement.
    Come on you Mac heads, Marantz 8 vs your favorite Mac tube amp. What say you?
     
  12. Pio1980

    Pio1980 AK Member Subscriber

    Messages:
    24,214
    Location:
    Angel Station, Alabama
    I did a websearch on comparisons of Mac tube amps to the Marantz 8/ 8B, the MC225 was the popular rival. It's also the the simplest of the unity coupled Mac amps.
     
    onemug likes this.
  13. Steve O

    Steve O Super Member

    Messages:
    1,150
    Location:
    SE MI
    You sure bout that? I think most would agree the respective “house” sound might be a little different betw Mac and Marantz but...................
     
  14. Pio1980

    Pio1980 AK Member Subscriber

    Messages:
    24,214
    Location:
    Angel Station, Alabama
    That is also my take, that generally, the Marantz is classic quality tube sound, Mac leans more to modern tube, bridging the difference to solid state. Otherwise, the simpler circuits can sound more "direct" to the source, if different otherwise.
     
  15. paul cbc

    paul cbc Active Member

    Messages:
    309
    Location:
    Oregon
    I believe the comparison of an MC 225 to a Marantz 8B is due to the fact that the 225 would be the most similar sounding vintage Mac tube amp to an 8B. Translation: Most neutral sounding vintage McIntosh.
    Best sounding to your ears? Up to you.

    The MC 225 is much less colored/toobey sounding than say an MC 30.

    A Marantz 8B is a very clean/neutral sounding vintage tube amp imho.
    All very nice amps. Like different kinds of ice cream-pick your favorite flavor.

    Sorry to the OP for drifting off topic:
    If you prefer the sound of the 299A, save yourself a bunch of dough and enjoy the music!
     
  16. autoanalog

    autoanalog Justin Credible Subscriber

    Messages:
    3,452
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    I vote Marantz, but I’m biased.

    FE6267B7-8B0C-4D29-82F8-1F54E8F891CD.jpeg
     
    Last edited: Jan 5, 2018
    drtool and crooner like this.
  17. Pio1980

    Pio1980 AK Member Subscriber

    Messages:
    24,214
    Location:
    Angel Station, Alabama
    The Marantz is an ultimate aspirational acquisition for tubeophiles with nostalgic cachet, considered by some the sonic touchstone tube amp but at a price nowadays. The magic is top quality output transformers, backed by a solidly engineered and well sorted out circuit topology supported by adequate power supply reserve. Marantz wasn't the only source that met those standards, but build quality and reputation makes them special.
     
    Last edited: Jan 4, 2018
    soundmotor and crooner like this.

     

    Please register to disable this ad.

  18. soundmotor

    soundmotor super modified Subscriber

    Having owned many Scott 299s and still have one now, it would be the Marantz without question. That +3dB power bump dramatically improves what your future speaker choices might be. There are some speakers that ~14W just aren't going to cut it on but ~35W will. Further, when you push the 299 you will hear it at the edges, it strains when out of its comfort zone. I've never owned an 8B but had one home several times. I should have made more of an effort to get one as it is very hard to find fault in. I definitely would compare it to same era McIntosh as well since both were well engineered and used excellent materials. It's why they still have the rep they do.
     
  19. soundmotor

    soundmotor super modified Subscriber

    I have an MC275. It is neutral, non-tubey. and most definitely reminds me of great solid-state. I have no issues with that.
     
  20. GordonW

    GordonW Speakerfixer Subscriber

    Messages:
    17,745
    Location:
    Marietta/Moultrie GA USA
    In terms of unmodified, as-produced vintage amps- if I couldn't have a HK Citation II, then a Marantz 8B would be the next choice. Probably followed by the Eico HF22, in terms of decreasing cost... all of those are very neutral, uncolored amps that just AMPLIFY in a wonderful fashion...

    Regards,
    Gordon.
     
    drtool likes this.

Share This Page