[wasifazim]

A number of Tuberoller's assertions are ill-informed:

The Marantz SA8260 uses the Cirrus Logic CS4397 DAC for BOTH redbook and SACD (it's an all-rounder); Sony uses its own DAC in all Sony SACD players.

The Marantz DV8300 uses the CS4392 DAC, a lower-cost unit than the CS4397; it's also an all-rounder.

He does not own the second-generation Marantz SA14S2, which was only released in Asia.

While it's true that Philips and Sony were the co-developers of SACD, Marantz was owned by Philips at the time; in fact, Marantz *designed* Philips' flagship SACD/DVD-video player, the SACD1000; this machine is nearly identical to the SA8260 from an audio standpoint, with the same DAC (again, a CS4397, not anything by Sony), Marantz's proprietary HDAM discreet output stage and the same transport mechanism.

By the way, the original SA14 used a Philips DAC7 (TDA1547) for redbook.

The one thing I won't argue with is his opinion of Marantz SACD players, not because I agree, but because these things are highly subjective. For the record, I think Marantz units sound better than equivalent Sony SACD players on both SACD and redbook.

- Wasif.

 

[Tuberoller]

Quote:

Originally posted by wasifazim A number of Tuberoller's assertions are ill-informed: The Marantz SA8260 uses the Cirrus Logic CS4397 DAC for BOTH redbook and SACD (it's an all-rounder); Sony uses its own DAC in all Sony SACD players. The Marantz DV8300 uses the CS4392 DAC, a lower-cost unit than the CS4397; it's also an all-rounder. He does not own the second-generation Marantz SA14S2, which was only released in Asia. While it's true that Philips and Sony were the co-developers of SACD, Marantz was owned by Philips at the time; in fact, Marantz *designed* Philips' flagship SACD/DVD-video player, the SACD1000; this machine is nearly identical to the SA8260 from an audio standpoint, with the same DAC (again, a CS4397, not anything by Sony), Marantz's proprietary HDAM discreet output stage and the same transport mechanism. By the way, the original SA14 used a Philips DAC7 (TDA1547) for redbook. The one thing I won't argue with is his opinion of Marantz SACD players, not because I agree, but because these things are highly subjective. For the record, I think Marantz units sound better than equivalent Sony SACD players on both SACD and redbook. - Wasif.

duh!!!!

Well I popped the covers of both the Marantz palyers I had and the DACs are the same.I don't have the Marantz SA-14 in front of me but again,I assert that based on an actual inspection and not something that I have read anywhere,the DACS are the same.

 

[wasifazim]

Quote:

Originally posted by Tuberoller duh!!!! Well I popped the covers of both the Marantz palyers I had and the DACs are the same.I don't have the Marantz SA-14 in front of me but again,I assert that based on an actual inspection and not something that I have read anywhere,the DACS are the same.

"..the DACs are the same"...the same as what? the Sony? or are you just saying that two different Marantz models have the same DACs?

The facts I just quoted are based on actual inspection of my own SA8260 as well as what's quoted on Marantz's website, and from emails with Marantz of America.

Wasif.

 

[merc]

Quote:

and from emails with Marantz of America.

I don't know how much you can trust the info you get directly from the folks at Marantz? Previously, I had an engineer tell me that the 8300 used the CS4397 DAC, and then you were told that apparently it uses the CS4392? I wish at least they'd tell a consistent story???

 

[wasifazim]

Quote:

Originally posted by merc I don't know how much you can trust the info you get directly from the folks at Marantz? Previously, I had an engineer tell me that the 8300 used the CS4397 DAC, and then you were told that apparently it uses the CS4392? I wish at least they'd tell a consistent story???

As a further confirmation, here's a link to Marantz Japan's product page for the DV8300; it's in Japanese, so run it through Babelfish..it mentions that the DV8300 uses the CS4392.

 

[merc]

Thanks Wasif... I don't doubt it, it is just that the Marantz folks(well no one really knew until I got a call back from the "expert" located on the east coast who) told me that both the 8260 and the 8300 used the 4397. Of course, I explained that I was tired of waiting for my ordered and much delayed 8300 and was considering buying the much less expensive 8260 instead... so, maybe their greed instinct kicked in...

My 8300 is due into the US on the 21st with delivery within a week after that....

Hell! Why can't some freaking company make a really nice MC audio only player?

 

[zikarus]

I agree to markl´s point of view.

Nonetheless: If I had to buy a multiple-standard player today I would at least wait for the new Yamaha DVD 2300 to enter the shops. As far as I have read, this player is a true step forward (audiowise). But I have not heard it yet. In Europe the Yamaha will be available for around 1450 Euro list / 1200 Euro street.

 

[merc]

I've heard the 2300 and although it was excellent on video performance, I didn't think that the SACD and CD audio output was as good as the Sony 555es player.

 

[BobaFett]

For those guys who own the SA8260, may I know how much it cost when you bought it and also which AMP/Speakers you using for your combo.

Cheers!

 

[JML]

The Absolute Sound has a review of the 8300 -- April/May 2003. Bottom line -- "In sum, the DV8300 is an excellent player of DVDs of all varieties, but it is a disappointment on CD and SACD, the formats in which Marantz has traditionally excelled. And because every format sounds 'digital.' in the unflattering sense of the term, the player left me longing for analog sources."

 

[merc]

JML: Can you post the review for us all to read? Or, did you actually pay $10 for a review from someone named Taffel? If Harley or the great one did this "ear only" review, I might have more confidence in it. As it is... who is Taffel and since AS uses no real testing, why should I trust this guys ears, instead of believing the objective audio testing done in other Mags?

 

[Dusty Chalk]

EDIT: DELETED. (Mod -- feel free to completely delete this post, and subtract one from my post count. Thanks.)

 

[JML]

Quote:

Originally posted by merc JML: Can you post the review for us all to read? Or, did you actually pay $10 for a review from someone named Taffel? If Harley or the great one did this "ear only" review, I might have more confidence in it. As it is... who is Taffel and since AS uses no real testing, why should I trust this guys ears, instead of believing the objective audio testing done in other Mags?

I can't scan it until next week, and anyway to do so would be a violation of their copyright. I am not endorsing the magazine or the review -- I'm just passing on what they said.

I had a trial subscription to the Absolute Sound that I am not renewing. For a brief while they flirted with reviewing things that did not mean a second mortgage for most people, but then they reverted to type. I am also letting my subscription to Stereophile lapse, for much the same reasons.

I used to read those magazines when I was a college student in the 70s with no money and when one might actually own some of the stuff that was reviewed. Now, thirty years later, I simply cannot imagine the kind of income needed to consider buying a turntable for $78,000, a phono pre-preamp for $28,000, cables for $5,000, etc. When I become a millionaire, I will consider buying Halcro amps, a Rockport turntable, the Verdi/Purcell/Elgar digital front end, etc. Until then, I will marvel at the income level needed for such toys.

As far as "objective testing" goes, there I cannot agree with you. Ears rule, and educated ears rule best. The problem is that the mind is a funny thing. You hear what you want to sometimes, and other times you hear what the advertising revenues tell you to hear. Measurements are nice, too, but I don't listen to measurements. And they're always learning how to measure better, and are figuring out how what they hear relates to what they measure. Of course, I have listened to things that measured well and sounded awful.

 

[john_jcb]

I listened to the Marantz and 2 other players for an afternoon a while back.

http://www4.head-fi.org/forums/showt...ighlight=963SA

To be honest I thought the Philips 963SA was just as good on Redbook, SACD and better on DVD. We played a test DVD and the Philips handled straight lines better virtually eliminating the jagged edges. For 3X the money I was not impressed.

 

[tom hankins]

after reading the absolute sound review on the marantz i'm going to wait for the mcCormack UDP-1 universal player to come out and try it. i've had a chance to listen to the dna-225 amp by them alot lately and wish i would have gotten them instead of the krell kav250's for my main system.