mustang guy Posted September 14, 2014 Share Posted September 14, 2014 (edited) I am perplexed by something I see time and time again. The Marantz 2385 is one of the most powerful receivers Marantz has ever made. In fact, it is rated at 185 wpc, which is higher than even the Pioneer SX-1250 or SX-1280 rated at 160 watts. What is strange to me is that these 2385's frequently sell for under $1,000. That's around the price it's little brother, the 2270, sells for. In fact, you can get a 2385 for less than you can buy a 2285 for way less than a 2330. As for the Pioneer SX-1250 is 50-100% more than the more powerful Marantz 2385. There must be something I am missing here. Should I be buying a Marantz 2385 before the rest of the world realizes they are missing out? I am very tempted.... Edited September 14, 2014 by mustang guy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Boxx Posted September 14, 2014 Share Posted September 14, 2014 I am perplexed by something I see time and time again. The Marantz 2385 is one of the most powerful receivers Marantz has ever made. In fact, it is rated at 185 wpc, which is higher than even the Pioneer SX-1250 or SX-1280 rated at 160 watts. What is strange to me is that these 2385's frequently sell for under $1,000. That's around the price it's little brother, the 2270, sells for. In fact, you can get a 2385 for less than you can buy a 2285 for way less than a 2330. As for the Pioneer SX-1250 is 50-100% more than the more powerful Marantz 2385. There must be something I am missing here. Should I be buying a Marantz 2385 before the rest of the world realizes they are missing out? I am very tempted.... Hold out for the SX-1980... It puts out 270 wpc... It won the battle of the monster receivers... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tigerwoodKhorns Posted September 14, 2014 Share Posted September 14, 2014 Forget the vintage stuff and buy this and a QSC PLX amp: https://community.klipsch.com/index.php?/topic/151966-parasound-halo-p3-preamp/ 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mustang guy Posted September 14, 2014 Author Share Posted September 14, 2014 (edited) I am perplexed by something I see time and time again. The Marantz 2385 is one of the most powerful receivers Marantz has ever made. In fact, it is rated at 185 wpc, which is higher than even the Pioneer SX-1250 or SX-1280 rated at 160 watts. What is strange to me is that these 2385's frequently sell for under $1,000. That's around the price it's little brother, the 2270, sells for. In fact, you can get a 2385 for less than you can buy a 2285 for way less than a 2330. As for the Pioneer SX-1250 is 50-100% more than the more powerful Marantz 2385. There must be something I am missing here. Should I be buying a Marantz 2385 before the rest of the world realizes they are missing out? I am very tempted.... Hold out for the SX-1980... It puts out 270 wpc... It won the battle of the monster receivers... The SX-1980 is indeed a killer receiver. Didn't it test out at like 450wpc, even though its a 270 rating? I am really discussing this for the purpose of an investment. I am thinking the 2385's are currently undervalued. Is there something intrinsically inferior about the 2385? I don't have any speakers I need even this measly 185 watts per channel for. Edited September 14, 2014 by mustang guy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul79 Posted September 14, 2014 Share Posted September 14, 2014 (edited) Nothing at all wrong with them. Other than the preamp and tuner sections are a real PITA to work on. Very pretty receiver. Edited September 14, 2014 by paul79 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tigerwoodKhorns Posted September 14, 2014 Share Posted September 14, 2014 I am perplexed by something I see time and time again. The Marantz 2385 is one of the most powerful receivers Marantz has ever made. In fact, it is rated at 185 wpc, which is higher than even the Pioneer SX-1250 or SX-1280 rated at 160 watts. What is strange to me is that these 2385's frequently sell for under $1,000. That's around the price it's little brother, the 2270, sells for. In fact, you can get a 2385 for less than you can buy a 2285 for way less than a 2330. As for the Pioneer SX-1250 is 50-100% more than the more powerful Marantz 2385. There must be something I am missing here. Should I be buying a Marantz 2385 before the rest of the world realizes they are missing out? I am very tempted.... Hold out for the SX-1980... It puts out 270 wpc... It won the battle of the monster receivers... The SX-1980 is indeed a killer receiver. Didn't it test out at like 450wpc, even though its a 270 rating? I am really discussing this for the purpose of an investment. I am thinking the 2385's are currently undervalued. Is there something intrinsically inferior about the 2385? I don't have any speakers I need even this measly 185 watts per channel for. Well, that is easy. Buy one and rave amout it on all of the forums. I remember when Andy recommended the HK twin power receiver to Justin many years ago. They became all the rage. Same thing with the old Scott integrateds that Craig rebuilds. Word gets out and they go up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fjd Posted September 14, 2014 Share Posted September 14, 2014 (edited) I am perplexed by something I see time and time again. The Marantz 2385 is one of the most powerful receivers Marantz has ever made. In fact, it is rated at 185 wpc, which is higher than even the Pioneer SX-1250 or SX-1280 rated at 160 watts. What is strange to me is that these 2385's frequently sell for under $1,000. That's around the price it's little brother, the 2270, sells for. In fact, you can get a 2385 for less than you can buy a 2285 for way less than a 2330. As for the Pioneer SX-1250 is 50-100% more than the more powerful Marantz 2385. There must be something I am missing here. Should I be buying a Marantz 2385 before the rest of the world realizes they are missing out? I am very tempted.... According to AMK Products there were ~ 5,345 (+/- 5.88% margin of error) Marantz 2385's made. It may be one of those instances where low volume does not translate very well to collectability. http://amkproducts.com/Marantz_Production.htm It seems that some of the models with the highest production are the most collectible....more nostalgia maybe as those are the models we had a better chance ot experiencing when young, but could not afford? I've got a couple vintage Marantz receivers more for nostalgia/conversation reasons. For me, when I was younger and could not afford one, I tended to be more infatuated with the black face, tuner wheel, and deep blue lights. When my audio budget could accomodate it, I chose my 4400 (very complete restoration and has the green scope tube) and 2325 (only serviced & if I had not lost track of the tech that did the 4400, it would be a complete restoration). Besides, from a pure power perspective, I believe (going from memory, but I should do the math) that 185W vs. 125W is only an ~ 1.5dB increase in power and once I moved to more efficient speakers, perceived sexy won out over power every time. Not my pictures, but since I'm not in town I posted a couple found on the net. Edited September 14, 2014 by Fjd 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mustang guy Posted September 14, 2014 Author Share Posted September 14, 2014 Nothing at all wrong with them. Other than the preamp and tuner sections are a real PITA to work on. Very pretty receiver. Isn't it true that's one of the reasons the Pioneer SX-1250 is so desired? not only is every part still available, but they are modular and easy to work on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mustang guy Posted September 14, 2014 Author Share Posted September 14, 2014 I am perplexed by something I see time and time again. The Marantz 2385 is one of the most powerful receivers Marantz has ever made. In fact, it is rated at 185 wpc, which is higher than even the Pioneer SX-1250 or SX-1280 rated at 160 watts. What is strange to me is that these 2385's frequently sell for under $1,000. That's around the price it's little brother, the 2270, sells for. In fact, you can get a 2385 for less than you can buy a 2285 for way less than a 2330. As for the Pioneer SX-1250 is 50-100% more than the more powerful Marantz 2385. There must be something I am missing here. Should I be buying a Marantz 2385 before the rest of the world realizes they are missing out? I am very tempted.... Hold out for the SX-1980... It puts out 270 wpc... It won the battle of the monster receivers... The SX-1980 is indeed a killer receiver. Didn't it test out at like 450wpc, even though its a 270 rating? I am really discussing this for the purpose of an investment. I am thinking the 2385's are currently undervalued. Is there something intrinsically inferior about the 2385? I don't have any speakers I need even this measly 185 watts per channel for. Well, that is easy. Buy one and rave amout it on all of the forums. I remember when Andy recommended the HK twin power receiver to Justin many years ago. They became all the rage. Same thing with the old Scott integrateds that Craig rebuilds. Word gets out and they go up. I tried that with a used Yugo once. Didn't work... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul79 Posted September 14, 2014 Share Posted September 14, 2014 Nothing at all wrong with them. Other than the preamp and tuner sections are a real PITA to work on. Very pretty receiver. Isn't it true that's one of the reasons the Pioneer SX-1250 is so desired? not only is every part still available, but they are modular and easy to work on. Sure, the 1250 is much easier to work on, but they typically need allot more parts than this Marantz to make them reliable. They all have their quirks. Serviceability is far from what really makes the 1250 receiver desirable. I'd take a 1250 over the 2385 for sonic reasons alone. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willland Posted September 14, 2014 Share Posted September 14, 2014 Serviceability is far from what really makes the 1250 receiver desirable. I'd take a 1250 over the 2385 for sonic reasons alone. I would take a Luxman R-117 over either one. Wait I had one and sold it to DeanG. What an idiot I am. Seriously, the Pioneer and Marantz "monster" receivers were the kings of the 70's but the Luxman R-117 ruled the 80's alone. Bill Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mustang guy Posted September 14, 2014 Author Share Posted September 14, 2014 I like the horizonal tuner dial on the Marantz units. Very cool, and I think much of the reason for their popularity. The Pioneers have a more solid look overall, IMO. I have never owned a Luxman or even heard one. Any opinions on this non-working Luxman R-117? http://www.ebay.com/itm/Luxman-R-117-Receiver-Not-Working-For-Parts-or-Repair-See-Description-/171459774083?pt=Vintage_Electronics_R2&hash=item27ebcc8683 If I could get it for $300 delivered, would it be worth looking at? Paul, do you restore/repair Luxman? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
willland Posted September 14, 2014 Share Posted September 14, 2014 (edited) I have never owned a Luxman or even heard one. Any opinions on this non-working Luxman R-117? I could get it for $300 delivered, would it be worth looking at? Of course what repairs it needs should be the determining factor, but if only minor and minimal $$$, you will love it with Heritage, Legend, or Reference Klipsch. A true powerhouse with a hint of velvety midrange warmth(think NAD), very detailed highs, and low frequency ooomph to drive just about any speaker out there. I have seen them for sale as low as $250.00 non working to $1000.00 mint with box. I sold my as close to mint without being mint R-117 to DeanG for $475.00 shipped and that was an average price of what was for sale at that time(4/2013). https://community.klipsch.com/index.php?/topic/143512-fs-luxman-r-117-receiver-the-one-to-have-sold/?hl=%2Bluxman+%2Br-117 Bill Edited September 14, 2014 by willland Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fjd Posted September 14, 2014 Share Posted September 14, 2014 (edited) I like the horizonal tuner dial on the Marantz units. Very cool, and I think much of the reason for their popularity. The Pioneers have a more solid look overall, IMO. I believe that the Pioneer SX-1250 may have been the pinnacle of receiver engineering and really put Pioneer at the top of the mainstream audio community at that point in time. In addition, the SX-1250 seemed to signal a change in styling as the styling seemed to be copied endlessly by other manufacturers. It kind of signaled the death of the Marantz silver, black face and blue light theme in some respects. When I was a kid I bought one of the original (before the issues with Pioneer) Foster Electronics built Realistic STA-2100 that was a heavily discounted close out that seemed to take styling queues from the Pioneer style. From a solid state Class B amp perspective, I don’t listen much to differences between these types of receivers anymore as my focus tends to be more along the line of Class A tube and Class A solid state for my critical listening.; however, as mentioned in an earlier post, I will hook them up for passive listening, nostolgia, and as a nice conversation piece. Here is a list of some of the most powerful (mfg 8 ohm ratings) pre-1990 vintage receivers of all time. 1. Technics SA-1000 - 330 WPC 2. Marantz 2600 - 300 WPC 3. Sansui G-33000 - 300 WPC 4. Pioneer SX-1980 - 270 WPC 5. Marantz 2500 - 250 WPC 6. Sansui G-22000 - 220 WPC 7. Sansui G-9700 - 200 WPC 8. Kenwood KR-9050 - 200 WPC 9. Hitachi SR-2004 - 200 WPC 10. Marantz 2385 - 185 WPC 11. Pioneer SX-1280 - 185 WPC 12. Technics SA-5770 - 185 WPC 13. Rotel RX-1603 - 180 WPC 14. Nikko NR-1415 - 175 WPC 15. Fisher RS-1080 - 170 WPC 16. Yamaha CR-3020 - 170 WPC 17. Concept 16.5 - 165 WPC 18. Technics SA-5760 - 165 WPC 19. Kenwood KR-9600 - 160 WPC 20. Luxman R-117 - 160 WPC 21. Onkyo TX-8500 MkII - 160 WPC 22. Pioneer SX-1250 - 160 WPC 23. Sansui G-8700 - 160 WPC 24. Sansui G-9000/901 - 160 WPC 25. Sansui 9900Z - 160 WPC Edited September 15, 2014 by Fjd Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick J B Posted September 14, 2014 Share Posted September 14, 2014 Forget the vintage stuff and buy this and a QSC PLX amp: https://community.klipsch.com/index.php?/topic/151966-parasound-halo-p3-preamp/ Burn the witch!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garyrc Posted September 14, 2014 Share Posted September 14, 2014 (edited) Could be good or bad. That period was not a particulary good one for Marantz. Perhaps that rep was partly an artifact of people being used to the wonderful Saul B. Marantz amplifiers of the '50s and early '60s, some of the sweetest in audiophile history, or the pretty good good ones of the very early '70s. I never heard the 2385, but heard some of the others of that vintage, on a variety of speakers, including Khorns, KLH, EV, etc. and they did not sound very clear, (unfairly) compared to, say, Luxman. Was the 2385B better? Was there an European version? We had one of the lowest powered ones of that era at work (2316???). It lasted from 1977 through the Quake of '89. Not that power matters much with your speakers, but is that 185 w.p.c. RMS, or 185 w.p.c. measured with one of the fudge factors of the '70s? Maybe you are not going to use it, but display it? It is very good looking, IMO. Edited September 14, 2014 by Garyrc Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimjimbo Posted September 14, 2014 Share Posted September 14, 2014 From a perspective of experience with numerous Marantz (including the 2385 and 2325), and currently Pioneer SX-1250, 1050, and 950, I would agree with Paul that sonically the Pioneers are superior (In My Humble Sonic Opinion...). Now, what Paul may disagree with, is that while the 1250 is beautiful and hugely capable of driving most anything, as is the 1050, save some money and get a SX-950. Plenty, plenty, plenty of power for efficient speakers such as our faves, and a fantastic low end that will drive Heresy's like you can't believe. No sub needed....let me say that again....no sub needed. I haven't yet hooked one up to my LSI's, but I'll bet it's pretty sweet....next weekend... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason str Posted September 15, 2014 Share Posted September 15, 2014 Dad purchased a 2265 new back in the mid 70's to replace a Fisher unit, both were handed down to me at one point. A good friend owned a 2325, i thought both sounded very similar to my 2265. Never heard the 2385 that i recall though i do forget many things over time. Personally i would choose the Marantz over the Pioneer units though i do still run a Pioneer SX-780 in the shop. Choosing one over the other weather it be sonic detail or aesthetics both have stood the test of time and either brand would be a good pick to restore if it happens to be your cup of tea. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul79 Posted September 15, 2014 Share Posted September 15, 2014 (edited) "save some money and get a SX-950" I agree to a degree. However.... What you get with the 1250 vs its smaller siblings is a truly high current amp and a world class tuner. And....... film coupling caps throughout the preamp and amplifier. It's not only more powerful, but sounds better also IMO. Yes, you can get allot of the 1250 in a 950 FE, but the 1250 is just more transparent as well as more powerful. The 1250 is also the only receiver I have had on my bench that doubles down into 4 ohms. The ONLY receiver. Edited September 15, 2014 by paul79 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimjimbo Posted September 15, 2014 Share Posted September 15, 2014 Obviously, Paul needs more folks to send him units to work on, cause he's spending far too much time here on the forum.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.