Yamaha vs. Marantz sound??

I have had different Marantz Recievers in the past, years ago. Great Great sound. But I always ended up with a Yamaha. Now have the R-2000 and love it. I am not going to tell you which ones sounds the best, that is a hard choice. But just for my ears...I like the Yamaha. Not saying it is any better sounding then the others, it is just my 'ears' taste. If I run across another Marantz...heck yeah...I will buy it.
 

Attachments

  • forever summer 2.jpg
    forever summer 2.jpg
    147.7 KB · Views: 28
Well, is it the original Mark Levinson, Madrigal Mark Levinson, or Harman Group Mark Levinson?
There is so much change over in ownership, engineering, and leadership at these companies that there's absolutely no point whatsoever in trying to argue who made the best stuff. From model to model in the same company there can be more variation than between another model by a different company. My Pioneer SX-838 sounded more like a Sansui than it did the SX-3800 I had at the same time, which sounded more like a Yamaha CR-1020 than the Yamaha A-1 did. The A-1 sounds more like my Levinson, actually...to go full circle

Good post from John VF I only have one brand of two different models
a Pioneer SX980 and SX3900 they are quite different inside and sound
very different . I`ve only heard a couple of Yamaha receivers
at best buy and that was not a good place to evaluate so I`ll
leave opinions to others . All i can say is from pictures I`ve seen
some of their stuff looks well made .
 
Last edited:
My two favorite receivers of the 70's, my Marantz 2275 and the Yamaha CR1020 (which I've never had the pleasure to own but WILL someday). It's kinda like comparing a 69' Z28 Camaro with a 67' Boss Mustang, there is no winner, only what YOU prefer. I do love the the warm powerful sound of my Marantz thru my beautifully restored NLA's. But I must admit the Yamaha 1020 (and 2020) are probably the the most elegant and classy looking components I've ever laid eyes on. Sound? Hell its been so long since I've heard a vintage Yammy I couldn't say, but from what I've read here if you partner it with a mellower sounding speaker well that might just be the ticket.
 
I will weigh in...I have owned the Marantz 2285B, the Yamaha R-700,R-2000, and CR-1020. To me I like the Yamaha's. At least to my ears, to my eyes, the Marantz is..stunning. But my taste , my ears, my eyes are different then yours..so..I say both are good. But if you picked either, you can not go wrong.
 
I have a Yamaha-driven system and I have a Marantz-driven system. Both of them are good systems, but they are different. Alot of the difference depends on such things as the phono cartridge, speakers, cables, and even the music being played.

Neither, to me at least, is better or worse, just different.
 
I have a Yamaha-driven system and I have a Marantz-driven system. Both of them are good systems, but they are different. Alot of the difference depends on such things as the phono cartridge, speakers, cables, and even the music being played.

Neither, to me at least, is better or worse, just different.


I started out as a collector to just see and compare the different sounds of different equipment. Started out just being happy if things worked and sounded good, but as I started getting things serviced and brought to spec....it all had to be serviced. (Thankfully a friend is trading me his efforts for mine and we are both getting the gear we love.)

What I immediately figured out was all of the stereotype descriptions of a "signature sound" do not hold up through a whole product line. You can get away with it if all you hear is a sampling but saying a big Marantz is "overcolored" is ridiculous. Saying a big Yamaha is too "clear and bright"....you have not sat "gobsmacked" in the middle of it's beautifully defined presentation field delivered through speaks that are built to deliver it.

Lower watt gear of both have trade offs and really need some true effort in pairing and setup to maximize them to reflect what there bigger brothers pack. (I face the fact that my low Marantz sounds "thick"" and my low Yamaha sounds "thin"....but I have them maximized with speaks and in the right space to compensate...appreciate the little shits!) The bigger gear is a different world and me comparing one as better than another will not happen anytime soon...as it is impossible for me to do so. Pairing, my mood, music choice all changes things at the drop of a hat.

BUT.....you have to listen to top vintage Yamaha through my (temporarily borrowed) Polk Rti A9's! Defined meets defined with a slight soft blending...it's magic and kicks all right out the door...for now! A newly found minty Pioneer SX-1050 just sits crying in the corner...for now too....thinking it may not be special enough to kick out a similarly spec'd Yamaha, Marantz, Sansui or Sanyo....yup...Sanyo. (The Pioneer is still too new to me and still learning it.)
 
Last edited:
Each one of us have different range of hearing, each one of us have different speakers. So Amp vs Amp is subjective at best. But.....I have owned a completely refrub'd Marantz 2285....nice...but...
Then I fired up my Yamaha CR-1020....
What I, or my ears, and speakers determined is that I liked the Yamaha more.
The Marantz was ...more colored but sounded nice ..nice..
The Yamaha was clearer, and if this makes any sense at all, I hear-imagined-felts a certain clarity more so with the Yamaha.
Now remember, both these receivers have been brought up to specs, no caps the whole works.
I have since sold the Marantz 2285, which I still have seller's remorse about.
But I will not take anything away from the Marantz, I think they are nicer units, in looks, but both in built are about the same.
Just a different approach by the engineers...
which gets back to each one of us , and our...tastes.
 
If using the ADS L-710's I'd lean toward the tighter sounding amp. The mids and highs are really nice on the 710's and I don't think "detail" as we're referring to it in Yamahas' case will be objectionable. I don't know how Yamahas are in the damping factor department, but the 2 smaller woofs in the ADS 710's prefer higher damping for clear articulate bass. Plus, my 710's were 4-6Ω speakers- my Marantz stuff hasn't been quite as solid in the bass running at lower impedance. Just my .02...
 
Yamaha is voiced to sound much like thier Pianos. On the trebly, detailed side of the spectrum. Slightly lean side of neutral.

I couldn't disagree with this more, when it comes to their cr-x20 series. I have a 220 and 620 and if they were any warmer, I'd give them up. In fact, I have the treble set to "1" on my 620 and on "2" on my 220.

I've never understood where these Yamaha=Bright comments come from, when it comes to their vintage receivers... Maybe from their 80's gear. Now I've had some Yamaha ear bleeders from that decade.
 
I find Yamaha to be the tightest and clearest of all. As time goes on in my learning my ears I find I need the best of colored and "tight and clear" both. Yamaha will always be the only one for tight and clear I suspect. As my gear shrinks I know Yamaha will always have to be amongst the final "sets" of gear.....can't use only OK speaks with Yamaha
I hate to say it but finding Pioneer's later "classic era" (76-79) to be a little of a middle ground "compromise job" between Marantz/Sansui and Yamaha....try fighting my developing opinion but it keeps being confirmed. (SX-1010 and big separates are different.)
 
Last edited:
I find the Yamaha sound to be boring and sterile in many ways, but amazingly accurate with very good control over the woofers.

If I was in a situation where I had to choose between the two brands, but couldn't use any EQ or tone control, I would probably lean toward the Marantz stock sound.

But I do use EQ, liberally. I find that in that context, it works best when I have control over the EQ and everything else in the electronics chain is as neutral/accurate as possible. Trying to add EQ onto something that already has low-end bloat as part of it's stock sound signature makes things much more complicated and difficult to achieve the desired end result.

I play my system very close to it's limits. When I bottom out a woofer, it sounds like someone hitting a paper-plate with a wrist-rocket slingshot, and it's the quickest way possible to ruin the mood. With my Yamaha system, I can actually play my system much louder than before, but almost never bottom out a woofer anymore. I EQ in just as much bass as ever. Funny how that works.
 
IMO/IME

I find Yamahas to be "fast", "dry" and on the "brighter" side, more oriental sounding. Marantz is equally colored but with their house signature sound of "slow", "warm" and "smooth". Of course these thing are different for different models but in general terms as having a house signature sound I think yamahas and marantz are opposites. This I see as a positive since people can choose what they enjoy listening to best.

I find harman's to be more fast, accurate but neutral. Middle ground of some sorts.

Makes sense?
 
It's quite obvious (and understandable) that we are all basing this on different brands of speakers that, on the most part, bring forth an additional layer of coloring.
 
What an amazing thread. I read it all and loved it. I learned so much. I never knew how good martinis are!
 
IMHO its all about wax and dust. After I've taken a nice long hot shower everything sound crisp clean natural. But if I haven't cleaned the wax out of my ears....and especially in spring when that greenish yellow dust is floating around and sticking to everything....everything sounds warm and fuzzy. Don't you agree? Its like the sound of a tesla compared to a 426 hemi thx! Sheesh. Audiophiles. What a messed up bunch ; )
 
That's 426 hemi gtx not thx. Dam talk to text. I actually came upon this thread searching for the yamaha vs marantz sound because I had to make a choice. Not of the hurtyturdy upidy high end rich man's stuff in this thread. More poor retired man. Like me. It was either a yamaha cr420 or a superscope r340. Same price same condition. I went with the r340. Thank you one and all. Now lets go home pinky. We're done here.
 
I think the choice of speakers and of course personal preference plays a big role in determining the best sound for each of us with a mostly uncolored source.

My Yamaha Rx A770 A/V receiver is my first Yamaha and I must say it does an excellent job with stereo music powering my Energy Reference Connoisseur RC 30 towers. The lean, tight sound is the perfect compliment to the warm, fat sound of Energy speakers.

My guess is with speakers that have a lean, tight sound already , an amp with a warmer, more full bodied character, like perhaps a Marantz might be a better fit.
 
I went through a lot of vintage units and when the dust settled Yamaha rose to the top.The Marantz units were some of the first to go.I like playing a setup close to it's limits and the cleaner, uncolored Yamaha sound served the vintage speakers better than the Marantz which tended to get kind of muddy when push came to shove.
 
I donk't drink anymore (but maybe I should take it up again). Comparing equipment from different manufacturers is a lot like deciding on what beer you like best. Some days, I preferred a tastes great, less filling approach and went with a Miller Lite. Other days, I wanted a full bodied lager, stout, ale, etc. The good thing was, there were plenty of ways to satisfy my tastes. Same thing with audio I guess (for me at least). I only know a few people who drink only one kind of beer. These are generally men with no palate who only drink X or Y, brand loyal till the end. Like the guy who ate a McDonald's Big Mac every day for 20 years, I feel they don't know what they are missing. It's good we have so many choices. Some receivers pair well with one type of music, others with another. If you only listen to one type of music though, you're really missing out. Why limit yourself to listening with one brand of equipment?
 
Back
Top Bottom