Marantz vs Yamaha

[avconnection]

Has anyone compared the following
SR-9600 (Marantz) vs RX-Z9 (Yamaha)
VP12S4 (Marantz) vs DPX1300 (Yamaha)

How about
CRS6 series (Speakercraft) vs R5650C (Klipsch)

Thanks for any input

[OEX]

How about the $1,000 & $1300 price point receivers.

[Sean Hotchkiss]

I've found the Marantz receiver's Audessey EQ with multiple mic position calibration to be much better than the Yamaha parametric setup. I own a Yamaha, but install Marantz. (I'm saving up again)

[vbova27]

I was going to say that most Yamaha receivers run hot. I personally think Marantz makes a better receiver, some say that Yamaha sounds the best, but Marantz gives you more depth in features and what you do with the sound. Plus, they do not run as hot and are more powerful.

[vwpower44]

I was going to say that most Yamaha receivers run hot. I personally think Marantz makes a better receiver, some say that Yamaha sounds the best, but Marantz gives you more depth in features and what you do with the sound. Plus, they do not run as hot and are more powerful.

I would go with Marantz as well. IMO their surround sound is faster and more accurate than the Yamaha. I have Installed both, and the Marantz is easier to control, easier to install, and less quirks.

Mike

[ATOH]

Marantz. Easier control, 1 way serial works, IR port on the back, never liked the way older Yamaha receivers would cycle through DTS, analog, etc. as you pushed input buttons. Do the new ones still do this? Do the new ones still require two way serial or request to send, etc?

I sold Yamaha for years, and at one time preferred the Yamaha over Marantz (about 4-5 years ago) but Marantz has been great for the past couple of years and they've been great.

[vbova27]

ATOH, what is the best equipment to use to control the multiroom? That is the only thing that I dislike about the Marantz, that you need to plug the back - what exactly do you use to get those multiroom commands without that 15 second delay?

Thanks

[ATOH]

Discretes from Marantz's website created using Makehex. If you have the actual discretes the "delay" you're speaking of won't effect you. Just ask Pedro! If we're not using serial we ALWAYS use the plug on the back. It's part of the reason I like Marantz. I don't have to put emitters on the front!!!!

I don't do second zone on receivers. I did one time and it was recently for one of my clients that:

A: Offers to be the guinea pig for testing and RAVES about us to everyone.
B: Only wanted a speaker on the porch and they COMPLETELY understand that anything beyond that requires at minimum a Marantz ZS5300 if they want to do anything past that.

I know I've said this before, and I'm sure some here think I'm crazy but I believe in using a device JUST for it's specific purpose. A/V receiver is for audio and video for the surround system PERIOD. Even to the point that we use stand alone AM/FM, XM, Sirius, etc. tuners even if it's build into the receiver, additional amplifiers for any additional zones, hopefully you get the idea.

Then again, this is how I am about everything. I hate all-in-one printers, TVs with VCRs or DVD players in them, almost anything that tries to combine 2 things into one chassis. There are always compromises somewhere, somehow.

[djnorm]

Yamaha has a discrete code for EVERYTHING YOU COULD EVER THINK OF!

They have an IR input on the back.

They have just about everything you asked for.

The general opinion around the store is that Yamaha is better for surround sound - better chips etc... and the Marantz is better for simple stereo/audio quality.

I'm a fan of the Yamaha, and it has nothing to do with the fact that at the last three trainings I won a big door prize...

[Limelight Systems]

The Audessey EQ has taken the Marantz to another level. The Yamaha eq is just not in the same ball game. I think the mid to high end of both products are great but the Marantz is better period.