How does it compare to Marantz consolette in terms of sound quality?
1152931
When auditioning the A7 also took a Marantz Consolette for comparison. While the Consolette looked great with that shiny walnut back it didn't match up in overall musicality. The A7's bass is a bit more pronounced and cleaner sounding, the overall experience of the A7 a bit more musically rewarding. I went A7.
1152932
I've never experimented Marntz consolette but as far as I have used BW a7 it's quite loud. And gives a rich bass when you play it in high end. It has sharp and clear sound even in high volume. The only thing i am not satisfied with this product is I prefer low end bass. I love playing music in low volume with high base which i found missing on it. Otherwise it is a great piece. I't will shake the party night. I would say find out ur preference first. If u go for loud and crisp with deep punching bass then for it there is nothing wrong.
1152933
I've never heard the Marantz consolette. I am obsessed with sound, and I read countless reviews on this. The most helpful advice I can give is that it is not sufficient to have as your main living room stereo, in a larger, more open room. That being said, I have brought this on 3 vacations to houses in Montauk, brought it to afterhours at my buddies apartment, who has a smaller living room, and it currently sits on my bedroom dresser. The sound is the best I've ever heard from a portable(ish) dock type unit. The lows are very crisp, it is accurate, and it far exceeds what any normal person would need for most rooms. Even in my living room, it's fine, as long as I don't have a full house of people and I don't try to make it the only source of sound for a party. I would HIGHLY recommend this unit.
1152934
Never heard the Marantz consolette, but they do compare to my B&W; 800 matrix which cost a whole lot more.
1368627
I do not own this turntable anymore. I would try to contact Marantz directly!
2687
I'm completely satisfied with mine. Good sound for the money. The "aux in" feature is a nice touch also.In regard to whether they're for audiophiles, I'm definitely not an audiophile, so no clue. I think they sound good. They don't distort my music and have adequate base considering how small they are.These are little computer speakers, not stereo speakers. They are vastly better than the speakersthat came with my Dell computer. They aren't as good as the ones attached to my receiver (which costabout 7 times more).
1912498
I agree that the Marantz is a great yet simple amplifier. We have about sixteen ceiling mounted speakers and the Marantz delivers more than enough power to all of them. I barely run the amp at more than 30% volume and often ahev to tone it down as the sound output is excellent.
1533253
I cannot say for sure, but I use a Bose Acoustimass with our Marantz. I just don't know about versions. Ours is at least 20 years old so I just can't verify it is the same architecture as the series you referenced.
1163874
I don't know anything about the Yamaha. The Marantz is a good player, good sound and smooth functioning.
146216
Yeap, cause it is worth the price even at $800 !!! there is nothing on the market that give you the sound and ease of use, in such a small unit for any price range. When you use flac files and some good [CAT7] network cables, it gives sound close to my CD player !! I also agree, that I will not forgive Logitech for killing this product.
937714
As it was Marantz's flagship receiver (7009 has a few additional features), I'd say that is the last step before going separate... The equalizer is accessed through the GUI and is straight forward to use. The EQ, I believe, only has 9 or 10 ranges of frequency response where the Audyssey XT-32 has like 10,000 points of equalization that it can adjust for room correction. I'm running my 7008 with 9.2 speakers. I used 8 positions for setup but then adjusted the gain a bit to suit my taste...I like the rears to sound a little more active so brought those up a few DB. I also prefer a little more gain from my subs so I bring those up a little when watching something with a rockin' LF track. As it was Marantz's flagship receiver (7009 has a few additional features), I'd say that is the last step before going separate... The equalizer is accessed through the GUI and is straight forward to use. The EQ, I believe, only has 9 or 10 ranges of frequency response where the Audyssey XT-32 has like 10,000 points of equalization that it can adjust for room correction. I'm running my 7008 with 9.2 speakers. I used 8 positions for setup but then adjusted the gain a bit to suit my taste...I like the rears to sound a little more active so brought those up a few DB. I also prefer a little... » Read More As it was Marantz's flagship receiver (7009 has a few additional features), I'd say that is the last step before going separate... The equalizer is accessed through the GUI and is straight forward to use. The EQ, I believe, only has 9 or 10 ranges of frequency response where the Audyssey XT-32 has like 10,000 points of equalization that it can adjust for room correction. I'm running my 7008 with 9.2 speakers. I used 8 positions for setup but then adjusted the gain a bit to suit my taste...I like the rears to sound a little more active so brought those up a few DB. I also prefer a little more gain from my subs so I bring those up a little when watching something with a rockin' LF track. « Show Less
568461
Good Question, I haven't had this come up with my use of this product so far. I don't know the correct answer to your question and could not find a answer online anywhere either. This is well worth the money spent and I wish I would of pulled the trigger sooner than I did. You will probably need to call Marantz for the answer. Thanks and Sorry
2161309
I've seen 10% THD in print in multiple locations including Marantz publications so I'm inclined to believe that it is true. That said, in general I find vendor specifications to be quite misleading and a poor indicator of quality. I've had the system for about a year and am quite happy with the sound quality.
1163873
My personal preference would be the Marantz cd 5004. Both are very good cd players but I just trust the Marantz more. It has superior sound for the money and the build quality is excellent. And it's packaged very well.
886125
If your TT42 version has the phono preamp (there are two versions of the TT42, one with and one without), then yes. Otherwise you will need to install a phono preamp on the turntable output. Definitely worth it if space is a premium in your room. We use it as the sound for our living room tv. Right now, I'm streaming audio off my server. Definitely worth the purchase. IMHO. Our great room runs a full Marantz home theater setup (speakers excepted). Been a fan of Marantz for long time. Right price for what you get.
658444
Hadn't tried it until your question, but just listened to a classical piece on the NPR FM station and I thought the quality was excellent, the sound very clear and the stereo separation terrific. Another impressive feature for this unit.
1996295
It depends on what you want to do with it. The model with USB is really only for converting analog audio to digital which to me only makes sense if you have music on vinyl only and need to get it onto a digital device. If you are into the really high end analog sound then you should probably also be looking at a higher end turntable too. I would get the one without the USB and then get a good receiver/amp with a built in phono stage. Yamaha and Marantz make excellent units for not much money. I use a Yamaha that sounds awesome with all the effects turned off. That way you save some bucks and have time to decide how far you want to go with this. It depends on what you want to do with it. The model with USB is really only for converting analog audio to digital which to me only makes sense if you have music on vinyl only and need to get it onto a digital device. If you are into the really high end analog sound then you should probably also be looking at a higher end turntable too. I would get the one without the USB and then get a good receiver/amp with a built in phono stage. Yamaha and Marantz make excellent units for not much money. I use a Yamaha that sounds awesome with all the effects turned off. That way you save some bucks... » Read More It depends on what you want to do with it. The model with USB is really only for converting analog audio to digital which to me only makes sense if you have music on vinyl only and need to get it onto a digital device. If you are into the really high end analog sound then you should probably also be looking at a higher end turntable too. I would get the one without the USB and then get a good receiver/amp with a built in phono stage. Yamaha and Marantz make excellent units for not much money. I use a Yamaha that sounds awesome with all the effects turned off. That way you save some bucks and have time to decide how far you want to go with this. « Show Less
384052
The base on their other system (5.1) seems stronger but sometimes drowns out the speaking parts. The lifestyle system is calibrated better so all sound is much better between the bass and treble parts. There is still plenty of base and you can change it on the menu if you want more.
435250
Logitech does not make any speakers that can come anywhere close to having sound quality on par with the cheapest set of Klipsch speakers. Forget everything you've seen about the amount of power because that doesn't tell you anything about how well it well sound. Both speaker systems get plenty loud. If you don't believe me, buy both and return the Logitechs after you realize how terrible they sound in comparison.
472770
Honestly just ok. I found it somewhat flat and not dynamic. Really it was on par with typical MM phono inputs of receivers in this price range. I got a high output moving coil cartridge with a phono preamp and plugged into the line input. The difference was extraordinary. This receiver for me beat out the Marantz 8004 and the NAD 356BEE. I found them dull and needed to significantly increase the treble response to get any clarity. This Yamaha is very rich, dynamic, and has lots of clarity (if you like detailed upper frequencies).