Why not Marantz?
|
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 14
frequent flier
|
OP
frequent flier
Joined: Jan 2003
Posts: 14 |
In all these many months which I have been reading and occasionally posting, there have not been really any comments for or against Marantz. Ownership changes and technology advancements would seem to have brought them back around to a very viable contender.
I have loked at the new 7300 series and wonder why this isn't coming up in commentary as a player for our products and again why the no mention?
Can users of the marantz or knowledgable shoppers please educate me about this fine old name and where they are missing it since they are so void of commentary here on the message boards?
|
|
|
Re: Why not Marantz?
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 18,044
shareholder in the making
|
shareholder in the making
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 18,044 |
I love old Marantz equipment. It's solid, well made, sounds good, and is gorgeous. That said, I've never owned a piece of it that was completely functional. I'm thinking about having my 2220B fixed up, but we'll see.
Anyway, I've heard bad things about the quality on the 7200s, and I didn't find their lineup to be that good a value at the moment, at least when I was comparing to H/K. What I noticed was the 6.1 vs. 7.1 and the lack of all channel 192/24 processing until you get up to the 7300. Also, until you get to the 6300, you don't get B channel speakers. Then you have to go to 7300 to get multiroom.
Also, they're not as pretty as they used to be.
I am the Doctor, and THIS... is my SPOON!
|
|
|
Re: Why not Marantz?
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 62
old hand
|
old hand
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 62 |
I second that, those things are ugly.
|
|
|
Re: Why not Marantz?
|
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 16,441
shareholder in the making
|
shareholder in the making
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 16,441 |
Not to mention their bad website.
|
|
|
Re: Why not Marantz?
|
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 737
aficionado
|
aficionado
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 737 |
Believe it or not, but that did play a part in what I eventually bought. If I couldn't get the information I needed quickly and easily, I didn't bother to screw around with the hardware. I figure that any company that can't take the time to provide me with an easy point of access for the data I want doesn't deserve my business.
Rocket, specifically, lost my money because of this.
|
|
|
Re: Why not Marantz?
|
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 16,441
shareholder in the making
|
shareholder in the making
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 16,441 |
lucky for you, too!
|
|
|
Re: Why not Marantz?
|
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 608
aficionado
|
aficionado
Joined: Apr 2003
Posts: 608 |
i helped my next door neighbor put together a 6.1 system using a marantz receiver,and the sound is great,but,to use and set all the functions is very difficult,if you are thinking about getting one,spend some time with it in the store and see if its user friendly enough for you,i personally found it to be a big pain in the....ron
|
|
|
Forums16
Topics24,945
Posts442,486
Members15,617
|
Most Online2,082 Jan 22nd, 2020
|
|
0 members (),
1,136
guests, and
4
robots. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|