We like you here in America. I think yours is the most interesting of the people doing videos about audio. You really know your stuff. Going way back to cover the vintage stuff like you do is great. The other reviewers are the equivelent of music reviewers confined to reviewing only the music that came out in the last few weeks. Thanks!
Another truthful review a little like harmon kardon amps at the time looks and presence but not quite coming up with the goods despite hefty price tags
The upside of this is that 1970's Harmon Kardons are relatively cheap because they made such garbage later on and ruined their reputation. They don't have the same curb appeal as Marantz. With dual wound transformers and low feedback the sound is a cut above most
Great review again Kelvin, having owned a Marantz PM 82 your review is spot on, I sold the Marantz and purchased a Denon PMA 1080R, My sony PS-x600 with a Denon Dl103 is a glorious combination, If you can find a good quality PMA 1080R i'm sure you would love the sheer finesse and detail the Denon pumps through your speakers. keep up the good honest reviews.
Nothing sounds like it is going down to 10Hz, because it is inaudible to the human ear. You can feel it, but most speakers can't go that low. Also, typical instruments don't go down to 10Hz (subsonic), other than very long pipe organs. However, having a broad frequency response beyond what we can hear is still beneficial to sound quality for other reasons. My mono blocks go from 2 Hz to 125 kHz. It's quite impressive to see Marantz attain such a broad frequency response at that price point. If it was easy to achieve all companies would do it. Almost everything in audio design is a trade off. You try to better this and that gets worse. Only the very few best engineers can do magic and tweak up all of the critical specs to top notch sound quality and knowing when to stop when the better numbers start sounding worse.
Great review, Kelvin. I’ve repaired and recapped a couple of Marantz amps (PM-40SE, PM-32) and whilst they’re not as powerful as the one you have, they share similar characters. They had no particularly bad points and came across as neutral and un-coloured, so the instruments sounded tonally realistic. It was only when I substituted a freshly upgraded and rebuilt NAD 3240PE that I realised just how lifeless the sound was. Not just the NAD either, my current vintage amp is a Sansui AU217 MkII, and that is really in a different league. It has the balance of the Marantz with the guts of the NAD. To be honest, in my small study the NAD was actually too much, I think it would drive Isobariks given half a chance!
@@lovehorses2669 hi, I’m using a Musical Fidelity E1. It’s had the full works of upgrades to ensure it’s as new in terms of sound quality and it is truly lovely. Compared to the other vintage amps I’ve owned at the budget end of the market, it has a sweeter tone with huge levels of detail
Thank you Kevin for the honest reviews. I would have surely thought that cool looking Marantz would be the ticket if I ran across it and paid too much. I sure appreciate you telling it like it is, in your experience. I'm a fan from across the pond. Keep up the good work 👍
"A competent performer" - yes, damned with faint praise! Thanks, Kelvin, for popping the balloon of Marantz's reputation. Some people won't like to hear that, but it's true: not everything they put their name on was god-tier good. Is it truly 'class A' with the corresponding drop in output power, or is it just another variation on Technics' 'new class A' method of variable bias current?
I suspect the phono stage was designed to mimic the cd sound of the time, which was brighter than what we had been used to on vinyl. I think this gave the illusion of detail to CDs of the era, which with the lack of surface noise and absence of crackles was compelling.
Hi Kelvin I enjoyed the video and the comments section as usual, loads of interesting stuff on both. I recently bought an amp , there were 3 amps to choose from, from a friend who deals in hifi, had a 3 amp shoot out listening through a pair of Rogers studio 2s, rare high end speakers. The first amp was a Arcam Alpha 10, second was Arcam A38 FMJ and last was a Toshiba Aurex SB77. The Toshiba won hands done , even the owner was surprised how good it sounded, the other two souned resrained or filtered, the Toshiba had so much more life . Like the Marants you spoke about, nothing really stood out with the two arcams but the A38 FMJ sounded better than the Alpha 10 and was £100 more than the others. Must be the sensitivity you mentioned about later amps. Always enjoy your videos , look forward to the next. Thank you, Stu
As usual great info on vintage kit - thanks Kelvin! I am partial to Arcam amps of the 80's and 90's. I recently found a gem from the early 80's - Arcam Alpha first gen for < £50. This amp is one of the most musically satisfying amps for its little spec. I think its more musical than sub 1000 amps today. Hope you can do a review on it soon to give your honest opinion!
Are the amps you review refurbished? Degraded capacitors will negatively influence the sound, especially dynamics, and these bricks are getting old. I’ve no opinion on this or other gear, just curious.
I have got two Sansui for four ones and I was thinking of recap In one of them they both sound pretty much exactly the same Does anyone have a recommendation for someone to do that work I might make a video out of it Thanks K
I have a PM44SE knocking about which was the entry level Marantz at the time. I didn't use it for very long because it kept crapping out with distortion and volume drops after a few weeks. It was bought used for £50 when I was setting up my first Hi-Fi system. I liked it while it was working.
Hi Kelvin as always a great detailed review not full of dressed up media hype and something for the guy in the street to gain an insight into the sound and quality of affordable hi fi ...if you get a chance please try a Marantz pm66se ki signature i think it will give you a pleasant session
Hi Kelvin, I agree with Donny, please can we have your opinion on Luxman amps. I would like to see a review on the L210, one of the last Luxman amps still reasonable priced.
I had a both the Luxman R-117 and a Luxman R-114 and liked the R-114 much better. It was sweeter sounding, and well defined while the R-117 had the grunt, I felt it wasn't as refined as it should have been. Still a nice amp, but there were better choices for me.
It looks Cheap! I like the looks of my Marantz 2220b better, I paid $300 for! I had the Marantz 2275 back in 1974 with the walnut cabinet and imperial 7 speakers. A person has to remember you have to look at it also!
To me , the Marantz PM amplifiers had no drive. Everything present but not necessarily correct. The Cambridge Audio amps had a totally different presentation. Airy, lively, (some may say a little bit too lively), detailed and quick: an engaging, edge-of-the-seat listen. The two companies products were always placed in side by side comparisons in a certain well known British hifi journal and the Marantz kit always seemed to come out on top for some inexplicable reason. During my work in the field of audio, I had plenty of time to listen to both and I know exactly who I'd spend my money with.
accurate review, I have one stashed away somewhere, reasonably good but not great, that's about it to buy one now, they are considerably more than you estimated. however do not buy one. you missed a golden opportunity to pull the top off and see why it only sounds ok. it's build isn't as good as you might expect, I recall the front panel being plastic, i cant remember if the base is, i would hope not, but it might be, and the circuit board that mounts on the front panel has mainly low grade components, puny wiring and also uses ribbon cables, there are high quality and beefy components on other boards, but they are mixed with low grade components and puny wiring. It might weigh 17Kg, but about 7Kg of that must be the half inch thick solid cast Iron side panels that don't serve any useful purpose. i just had a thought mine is either a PM80 or PM83, but i doubt there is much difference. at the end of the day. i didn't consider it good enough to use, and its been sat in a box ever since.
I think we have similar tastes and if you can find a "twin power" harmon kardon (ie. hk505) you're in for a treat. They're still pretty cheap stateside
Tha CLASS A switch on these drops the output to one quarter of total output power when selected, so it effectively becomes a different (polite sounding?) and quite low powered amplifier. Maybe need to review it in it's full power Class AB mode too.
I have a PM something in my cellar, black probably a lesser model, it doesn't have the Class A button. Anyway similar conclusions on my part, clean, precise, a bit dry bass, polite.
Hello there Kelvin! Great video, I had Marantz amps in the 80's, and while they were mostly heavy, which is usually a good thing, they wouldn't drive inefficient speakers, such as some AR 58"s I had. What are your views on late 70's Yamaha amps? I have a CA810 in the loft, last used it a few years ago, dates from 1978 I believe. Looks good, but I'm using a Cambridge CXA at mo, sounds ok I think.
And another thing. This amp is 40+ years old. Get it recapped and then listen again. Also, for those questioning the class A cred, from what I can see in the schematic, it does run in class A when you hit that button. So get out the frying pan and chuck in a couple of eggs because when you crank it up in class A mode, it will run hot.
Thing is this Amp sounds like other Marantz amps of that period and later that I’ve had so there is consistency there bunch of people agreeing by the way in this comment section
I totally agree with you, the sound quality of the Marantz p.m. 82 can be defined as dull evening class A. I have had my P.m. 82 for near on seven years. I have tried it with allsorts of speakers and have had no satisfaction Until I paired it with Bose 901s with the equaliser putting it through the processor input, unbelievable it came alive sparkling, image under total control give it a try. Best regards.
Nice Video Kelvin, I totally agree with you on the weight thing , I have a Sony FA 808 ES from the same era and it weighs in at a whopping 24 kgs it is an absolute beast, blows away any thing I currently have and have ever owned (which is quite a few). Have you had Any dealings with the old Sony Es line of amps?
"Heavy", typically means big transformer (won't run out of juice/current limit) , big filter caps (better dynamics) and big heatsinks (more class A range with zero crossover distortion). Heavy is usually good. In the end an amp needs a good design with quality components, but weight is often a good indicator.
Integrated amps were always popular in England in the 90s but with the exception of a few British amps they never found a market in North America because distributors never made them available to us. All we got was mostly crappy receivers. I remember reading reviews in early 90s British mags of all kinds of Japanese integrates amps none of which found their way here. It pissed me off that the UK had much more (and better) choices in consumer audio because our distributors didn't see enough profit to bring them in.
This guy is a real Hi-Fi freak! It seems pretty obvious that when you start with High-End equipment you won't be satisfied after a short period of time. I am a musician (Piano, Guitar, Bass) and I find myself still looking for better sounds. In search of a signature Tone as I call it. I am asking myself: is there a unit (Amp, Turntable, Cables, and Speakers) that gives you the best overall impression? I guess it would make things easier to take the next step, than digging through all possible machines available. When you read this, Kelvin: is the Marantz 2220 Amplifier made for a 20m2 room? That's at least what the name suggests to me. My music room has 20m2. Can one say that Marantz is the brand if you want the best overall solution?
Kevin, sometimes harsh vocals are not caused by lack of quality of the amp, but vice versa. The Quality of an amp is showing lack of smoothness or quality in vocals (edgyness). Or all recordings. This Beth Orton song is just not the best recording, has major flaws and the Marantz is showing it, as it should. Therefore we have to be cautious judging the gear. As for this Marantz I have one and this is very good amp - and while it is true the Class A switch ain't doing much all the rest is really okay - great bass middle and highs, linear characteristics, space, separation and location.
Mr. Kelvin, If you had to choose one of the best, in your opinion, Vintage Marantz, which one would it be? First of all, what concerns the sound. What is your opinion about the Marantz 4000 series? Thank you, Dragan
I get the impression your mind was made up before the review, Marantz to my mind has always generally delivered quality and their vintage amps are good value for money. I have a PM75 with its famous DAC TDA 1541 chip. To my mind it’s phono stage is excellent and much better value than the modern stand alone units you have to buy these days.
Sorry, but their vintage amps are terrible value for money, with prices inflated by collectors. I have a bottom-of-the-range PM200 (my first amp, bought in '79) and I've seen even that on eBay several times for over £200. It's simply not worth anything like as much - it performs adequately for a bargain-basement amp, but no more. You can get as good - or better - performance for less, from under-the-radar brands. I agree with you about the Philips TDA1541 chip, though. My ugly old Marantz CD56 is still a tough act to beat!
Great review Kelvin. Does this get overly hot in class A? i remember the pm-80 running quite hot and needing good ventilation, especially the early models with the higher idle current.
Just bought a marantz Sr 670u, cant find any reviews on it, has 100 watts at .2% THD, have you ever heard any receivers in this series was made in 1997 ?
LOL! In one word, it IS a ... Marantz! In fairness to the brand, the main target for their products wasn't the audiophile listener. It was rather the 'general music loving' listener. This was evident when, Ken Ishiwata, their head designer - engineer had the CD63 player _modified_ for audiophile use. In standard form it was just a good CD player. The CD63 KI Signature was at another level.
Hi Kelvin, why don't you design and build your own power amplifiers like I do? The power amplifiers I've designed and built sound just a good as extremely expensive commercial equivalents. Now if I can do these things, anybody can in my opinion.
That's a very useful skill to have Jim. From what I can gather, Kelvin isn't really up for changing out the old electrolytic caps on his vintage speaker crossovers himself and thinks it is a job for an electronics technician. I've told him it's relatively easy for anyone to do, if they can access the crossover boards, so I hope he has a go at doing that at least.
I wouldn’t have a clue how to make a power amp I would happily attempt capacity of changing partly I’m really concerned I’ll get the wrong parts or it won’t sound right I am really worried about that more to do with amps than speakers I would imagine
@@peterlarkin762 Here is one of the power amplifiers I built. However, I built a second one so I could bi-amplify my Tannoy's. www.diyaudio.com/forums/solid-state/96192-post-solid-pics-691.html
@@peterlarkin762 Around 30 years ago I built a stereo power amplifier using the Maplin 150W mosfet modules. I modified the circuit to make it DC coupled and increased the negative feedback decoupling cap to 220uF for improved bass response. Slew rate was around 35 V/uS and THD 0.01%. Make no mistake this amp would eat a Naim NAP 250 for breakfast if having a top notch PSU , it would disgrace a Quad 405 . It would also please valve amp lovers.
I have marantz pm 151 pm26 pm45 pm64mk11 and the quarter class A pm 64 is the most powerful on paper but least musical of the four. The other 3 are fine and extremely musical and very enjoyable to listen to. I also have the pm 44 and pm 66se from early to mid 90s and although one hifi mag in particular loved them i found them to be amongst the worst amps i have ever heard. Gutless lifeless with seemingly no power and they were boxed and mint. Although they were not the worst amp i have ever heard. That honour goes to the harmon kardon pm6150 which was also very well reviewed and it is a sonic light weight so bad in fact i concluded that it must be faulty so i searched for a mint boxed example and eventually found one as new. It sounded dreadful as well and the little marantz pm 151 destroyed it musically and had more power to the sound etc etc. I still have all these amps and have repeated the tests with the same results.
Not to hard to find a better amp than the 3020! I've repaired two and besides the shoddy assembly (probably the first euro amp to be mass produced in Asia), they are average at best. It took a few versions of it before they got it somewhere near right.
@@andrevanstiphout I had a 7020, basically the 3020 and 4020 tuner in one box, and it didn't live up to NAD's reputation*. I found it lacking in dynamics and top-end sparkle compared to Japanese amps and receivers of the same vintage. In the end I gave it to a friend. I do wonder if that 'NAD sound' gave rise to the widespread tales of "vintage warmth", because I have quite a few vintage amps and receivers that don't fall into that camp at all. *except for build quality - it felt cheap.
Still, no thanks. I have a hard-on for Harman Kard-on!! Much better equipment, not pretty, but superior in my opinion. My 730 twin-power Harman Kardon puts a lot of vintage to shame
9:45 Perhaps in a way, an amp is like a girlfriend and NOBODY wants a girlfriend who is just "okay" or "competent". One wants to look forward to seeing one's amp at the end of the day and one can't wait to hear music on it and be blown away by the quality of the sound and the emotions created by the music, so it seems that 1993 Marantz just didn't deliver the goods unfortunately.
@@martindevon3204 They did have a beautiful turntable back in the 80s called the TT 1000. It was a Glass/bronze sandwich construction with a separate power supply and it was a looker.
"It doesn't sound like it's going down to 10Hz to me". What??? Your speakers won't go that low. I'm guessing you're in your fifties so I doubt you are going to hear anything below say 80Hz. I love your videos but please get someone to review them before you upload.
Another great review. I've noticed you don't mention vintage Technics amplifiers in any of your videos. Do you not rate them? I've been enjoying a Technics SU-7700 amp that was gifted to me during lockdown. Keep the videos coming 👍
