THEY SOUND A LOT BETTER IF YOU TAKE THE LOUDNESS SWITCH OFF!
Apart from that, which receiver do you think sounds more musical? That's the one to go with.
Apart from that, which receiver do you think sounds more musical? That's the one to go with.
Marantz vs. Pioneer Receivers
Well I don't have comparative experience, but I have a dinged up Marantz 2250, with burnt out bulbs and somewhat scratchy volume and balance pots. But damn the thing sounds great. Musical, powerful, dynamic, warm, tuneful. Really good FM -- decent reception, excellent fidenltiy. Beats up on a couple of NAD untis I have, one intergrated and one rceiver. The wife really likes it alot -- it's the only audio purchase I've ever made (it was a steal at like $75CDN) about which she's never even bat an eyelash. In teh 70's, for mid fi types, Marantz, above all others, was the dream name. With good reason. Richard |
For direct model comparison, you may wish to do a search in the Vintage Forum at Audio Asylum . Each brand has its fans; especially when it comes to the TOTL model offerings. I currently own/have owned lower powered models from each (Marantz 2240; 2216B; Pioneer 636) and feel that they had about equal tuner and amp sections, with the Marantz preamp being the better of the two brands. If you are considering a purchase, factor in that the receivers, to operate at their best, will need to be thoroughly gone over, and that will usually run at least $200 or so. Regards, Rich |