Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 36

Thread: Using HK 335 as a 6.1 System

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Jun 2005
    Posts
    16

    Default

    I can't disagree with the Marantz running hot. I have a SR6400 and need to leave the top open to the air it gets so hot.

    But purely considering sound, which performs better?

    The Marantz SR4500, which is rated at 80 watts/channel, retails for $430. The HK AVR 335, which is rated at 55 watts/channel, retails for $799. Even if you consider the Marantz power rating to be "overrated" the HK is still considerably more expensive. And I do realize Ascend will give you a discount if you buy a speaker package to knock the price down a little.

    But it seems to me that the Marantz SR4500 would be the reasonable choice based on price. Is the HK sound that much better (or at all better)? I'm very impressed with my current Marantz and know them to have an excellent reputation.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Syracuse, New York
    Posts
    1,222

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jcookson
    But it seems to me that the Marantz SR4500 would be the reasonable choice based on price. Is the HK sound that much better (or at all better)? I'm very impressed with my current Marantz and know them to have an excellent reputation.
    If you can't try both, I'm sure you would be very happy with either. I'd go with the receiver that had the features I'm interested in at a good price. That sounds like the Marantz in your case. Enjoy.

    David

  3. #13
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    49

    Default

    Well you would be a sucker to pay $799 for the 335. The 435 can be had for $600 shipped from J&R, and it has the much better version of the autoEQ/roomEQ. Of course, if you check out accessories4less, they sell refurbed Marrantz recievers.

    Edit: The 335 can be had for $469 shipped from J&R. It may have an MSRP of 799, but deffinitely doesn't sell for that. The Marantz on the other hand seems to actually sell for $399. Prices are closer than you may have thought.

    Really it comes down to personal preference. I haven't heard both brands next to each other in comparison, but I trust Dave f's reccomendation to go with the H/K.
    Last edited by Zyzzyva100; 06-04-2005 at 07:21 PM.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    311

    Default

    The Marantz receivers are close to the HK but in my estimation not quite as good in terms of build quality and electrical parts.

    A good indicator of quality among analog receivers and amps is weight, compare that and you'll find that the HK receivers that are conservatively rated at say 55 wpc equal or exceed other receivers that claim to have 100wpc.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Location
    Syracuse, New York
    Posts
    1,222

    Default

    http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=543412

    I recommend the AVS forum when shopping for a receiver. There is just so much information (and misinformation), rumors and unsubstantiated opinions that it just makes the whole experience more enjoyable.

    David

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Posts
    311

    Default

    thanks David, that certainly was an entertaining thread.

    After reading it I still get the impression that weight is a good indicator of quality though by no means the only criterion.

  7. #17
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Posts
    43

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyzzyva100
    Well you would be a sucker to pay $799 for the 335. The 435 can be had for $600 shipped from J&R, and it has the much better version of the autoEQ/roomEQ.
    Do you or does anyone know if the 435's EQ significantly better than the 430's?

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    466

    Default azanon

    Know of any threads/research that shows different receivers even matter much? I know i've asked this before, but i drive my 5.1 ascends with a 200 dollar sony and it just sounds incredible. (sounds much better since i wall mounted my rears, Clutchbrake) I do wonder sometimes if i could even tell the difference in sound quality with a $2000 Denon. Sure, if i were to push the sony past 100db, it might start to falter, but i just dont listen to music that loud. And i'll be the first to say my Sony does indeed get real hot. But so what? If it burns out, i could afford 9 more of them before I'd touch a 2K dollar denon.

    Up till now, my experience has been "the sound" is almost exclusively in the speakers; provided your receiver has enough power to drive whatever you have.

    If I could come across something conclusive that would show me a high end receiver would be worth the cost, i'd buy one.

    I'd just get either the entry level Denon (485) or HK (135); I think those support 6.1. I'm sure the wattage on both would be just fine. Make sure you dont need more digital connections though (think the 485 only has one optical one coaxial)
    Last edited by azanon; 06-05-2005 at 02:24 PM.
    Sierra-1 - Mains+Center
    Surrounds - HTM200SEs (x4 in back, and x2 Atmos)
    Sub - SVS PB-2000
    Receiver - Onkyo TX-RZ1100
    Oppo Darbee Edition Blue Ray
    Sony 4K blu ray player

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Manhattan Beach, California
    Posts
    7,034

    Default

    I thought I heard a big difference when I went from a Marantz 4300 to a HK 525.
    -curtis

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Dec 2003
    Posts
    466

    Default misc

    I thought I heard a big difference when I went from a Marantz 4300 to a HK 525.
    A Marantz 4300 is an expensive (high quality?) receiver though so that seems a little odd to me. I'd be suspicious that maybe you just didn't have the tone settings optimized on the Marantz, or maybe even a bad speaker connection into the receiver.

    I broke out my Sony receiver manual to try to look for anything about its specs that were inferior and I did notice something; (going off top of my head) At 8 ohms its only rated at 40hz-20,000hz at 0.09% THD. But if i'm understanding this correctly, even that shouldn't matter since i'm using a VTF-2, using the small setting, and crossed over at 80hz. Its rated at 90 watts per channel.

    If i were completely honest about it, the most attractive thing to me about a receiver like a Harmon Kardon would be just to impress company with the name.
    Last edited by azanon; 06-06-2005 at 05:30 AM.
    Sierra-1 - Mains+Center
    Surrounds - HTM200SEs (x4 in back, and x2 Atmos)
    Sub - SVS PB-2000
    Receiver - Onkyo TX-RZ1100
    Oppo Darbee Edition Blue Ray
    Sony 4K blu ray player

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •