audiobliss Posted September 8, 2004 Share Posted September 8, 2004 Which receiver do you think is better for music, NAD or Marantz? In particular the NADT743 or the Marantz SR7200 or SR7000(I know these are older Marantz models but they sound better in 2 channel stereo than the newer Marantz models IMO). Can't demo the NAD but I've read good reviews about them. What do you guys think? I particulary like the smooth midrange Marantz has. I read on another forum that NAD has a more "clinical" sounding midrange. What do you guys think? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
audiobliss Posted September 8, 2004 Author Share Posted September 8, 2004 Surely somebody has experience with these receivers. Anybody? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boomer9911 Posted September 9, 2004 Share Posted September 9, 2004 your Marantz is a bit old 7000? You are right about the better sound quality, I have pushed Marantz A\V Receivers since day 1 due to the "music" quality and still believe the older models are of top quality, I own a Marantz Reference SR-18EX audio\video setup with a Klipsch Heritage sound system...oh ya... The 7200 would be better, but if you get the chance to score an SR7300OSE snag it, cheap $$ Receiver, but built with higher end parts found in the Reference line in all honesty, compare to the regular SR7300. Any A\V Receiver can cover "the" sound fields, dts, pro logic I & II, etc, but who covers the highs, mids, and lows of "music" quality....MARANTZ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
audiobliss Posted September 9, 2004 Author Share Posted September 9, 2004 boomer, Have you personally compared Marantz with NAD for music? Also, are there any more views? I'm sure more of you than this are familiar with these receivers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
boomer9911 Posted September 11, 2004 Share Posted September 11, 2004 Have I personally compared,no..have I heard..YES..various combos.. What I am stating is in comparison any A\V Receiver can produce the digital signal required for Video\Audio setups..dts..prologic I & II, etc..your reader provides the "quality".. If you want to use a A\V Receiver for 2 channel music, for a turntable, casette, reel to reel, etc, no one covers the soundstage better than Marantz for the highs..mids..lows..IMO..and used as an amp and not pre-amp with seperates.. Most A\V Receivers are bright IMO, Denon is nice, but then again owned by the same Co....Marantz has gone back to Old school and New school at the same time IMO... 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.