[size=small]
Day 5 Impressions, 125 Hours of Burn-In.[/size]
If you don't already have one--
buy a Radio Shack Level Meter! There is no more useful audio tool you can own. It's a cheap $40 bucks or so, and some of the best money you'll ever spend in this hobby.
You
cannot trust your ears to tell you when two components are level matched. A difference of even half a db can tip the scales in favor of a particular component or make you believe two identical components are different.
Shame on me-- I did not use my meter when I did my initial impressions of the Marantz vs. my modified Sony. Remember when I said that I had to crank my amp to the 11:00 position to get the same volume level as the Sony gave me at 10:00? Well, as it turns out, the two units are level matched when the Sony is at 10:00 and the Marantz is set at the half-way point between 10:00 and 11:00. This is a difference of 3db, and that's significant.
So why did my ears tell me they were the same at 10:00 and 11:00? Three possibilities:
1. My hearing is perfect and during the subsequent 125 hours of break-in, the unit's output has increased by 3 whole db. Possible, but unlikely.
2. There is a treble roll-off of 3db in the Marantz vs. the Sony. Ten seconds of listening to the Marantz will tell you that's just not true. But again, I have not used a test CD to measure tones to verify this, so take with a grain of salt. Still most gear today measures ruler flat anyway, and IME, those specs are of limited use anyway compared to your own ears.
3. The smooth, unfatiguing liquid sound of the Marantz fooled my ears to the tune of 3db. Now I tend to listen loud (but safe-- use that meter, and never listen at levels that cause any sign of fatigue), and the Marantz appears to give me 3 extra db to play with before I start to get those advanced warning signs of fatigue. It took 3 extra db to bring the Marantz up to the level where I got the same "tickle" or "excitement" or sense of "texture" as I do from the Sony. So, the Marantz may be 3db "cleaner" or "smoother" than the Sony, giving you that extra headroom before the first tingly warning signs of fatigue show up.
I tend to go with explanation #3. And here's where there may be a slight red flag for a certain kind of listener. I've often read reviewers describe the "texture" of a component as a positive attribute. To me, if there's "texture" to the sound, that means there's distortion or grain, plain and simple. Listening to the SA-7S1, you wonder where the hell the digital grain went? It just ain't there.
I happen to *love* the sound (or lack of sound) of zero grain. For me, grain gets in the way of the music and reminds you you're listening to audio instead of music. But I can see some people being suspicious of the textureless, edgeless, grainless, flowing liquid sound of the Marantz. Is that actually a coloration, or is it in fact a lack of coloration? That's a deep philosophical question along the lines of the sound of one hand clapping, and I don't have the answer for that... Me, I only know two things-- "I like" and "I don't like". I like the "sound" of the Marantz.
OK, so now that I've level-matched the two players, do my initial impressions of the Marantz still stand? Yes.
It doesn't do everything well (but I'm confident these things can be corrected with mods), but let me start with the positives.
Hands down, the Marantz images and throws a soundstage like nothing I've ever heard before. The soundstage size is nothing short of HUGE, and has a vast and profound sense of depth that's simply stunning. I know there are people who object to big soundstages, but sorry, as you upgrade and get better gear, a bigger, better soundstage is just one of the natural consequences. Deal with it!
A/B-ing between the Marantz and Sony makes the Sony's already big soundstage just sound puny. The Marantz "life-sizes" or "right-sizes" images of the performers. They are as big as life, holographically portrayed, and eerily realistic. If soundstaging and imaging are hot-buttons for you, you are gonna love the Marantz.
The bass is developing nicely with burn-in. TIGHT doesn't even begin to describe it, it
*growls*. The tone of the bass is also incredibly realistic, fluid, and nuanced. Still missing a bit of the grunt force of the Sony, but closing in, and well within the limits of what complete burn-in can do.
Speaking of tone, again, I have to hand it to the Marantz, it's a tone machine. It's always reminding you of what music is all about. It's not that the Marantz is gooey, honeyed, sweet, lush, over-cooked-- it absolutely isn't. If anything, it could be faulted for being a tad on the dry, prosaic side. I don't know how it does it, but it reveals a whole new sonic pallette of tones and timbres in your old work horse recordings you thought you knew like the back of your hand.
I've often said you can tell a lot about a component by the way it handles tape hiss. The Marantz seems to naturally suppress the sound of tape hiss. That, or it "right-sizes" tape hiss dynamically compared to the actual sounds captured on that tape. Tape hiss should be low in level and unobtrusive, but some gear can compress the sound, forcing the level of the tape hiss up higher in the mix. The Marantz doesn't do that. Instead, the tape hiss is discrete, exceptionally smooth and analog sounding. It's not as granular, or "digital" sounding as the Sony. Yes, again, it doesn't have the same "texture" as it does on the Sony. It has no texture in fact, whether you like it or not!
OK, that's the good news. The bad news?
The background of the Marantz is just not as black as the Sony, and the sound is just not as palpable as the Sony. There's a teeny-tiny bit of fog and distance between you and the music, not noticeable unless you have something to compare against that does not have it. I don't think burn-in will fully address this, but it's still within the realm of possibility.
The Marantz still does not have the sheer power, force, and heft of the Sony, and I suspect that will always be out of its range no matter how many hours of burn-in are applied (though it has improved somewhat). The Sony just can't be beat (in any source I've heard) in terms of sheer slam, pop, thrust, heave, and oomph. And that's all down to the hot-rodding it's undergone.
The more I listen to the Marantz, the more impatient I get to have it modified, but my mod man won't touch it until it's all the way burned-in. At the risk of sounding like an advertisement, I'm convinced mods work, and make good on their essential value proposition of taking mass-produced components up to unheard-of levels of performance at a ridiculously low cost. When this unit gets modified, I'm confident it's going to mop the floor with anything in its price class and several steps above.
Yes, you void your warrantee, and that ain't no small thing. But that's a risk I'm willing to take and have taken many times in the past, all with excellent results.
OK, there will be one more report when the unit reaches full maturity at close to 300 hours of burn-in before it goes off to be modified.
See you then!
