| Columns Retired Columns & Blogs |
April 11, 2012 - 11:35am
#1
Marantz vs some other brands
| Loudspeakers Amplification Digital Sources | |
Analog Sources Accessories Featured | |
Music Columns Retired Columns | |
Show Reports | |
Features Latest News Community | |
Resources Subscriptions |
© 2024 StereophileAVTech Media Americas Inc., USA
All rights reserved
Look at integrated stereo amplifiers like Marantz PM8004, NAD, Cambridge Audio, Music Hall, etc. or stereo receivers like the Outlaw RR2150 or Harman Kardon HK3490.
I deffinitely will go for receiver, not integ. amp. So what you will say to compare Harman Kardon HK3490 and Marantz SR 5006? I saw very good thinks about these two. HK have only 20W more, but Im confuse about sound quality.. it seems bought have excellent sound just the HK is cheaper than 5006. Am I right?
which has superfluous audio and video circuitry and amplification not needed for a two channel, music listening system. The main difference between a stereo receiver and a stereo integrated amplifier is that the former has a radio tuner. So, if you don't listen to the radio, you don't need a receiver. And even if you do listen to the radio, I believe one is better off with a good amplifier and a good vintage tuner. http://www.fmtunerinfo.com/ A vintage tuner will perform much better than most of the tuner sections of receivers marketed today.
Here is the Akai AT-2600 tuner I use which I paid $165 for in 2005.