seconds away Posted November 5, 2009 Posted November 5, 2009 I have recently purchased a pair of Elac FS68's, the next step is amplification. Budgetary considerations are suggesting a surround receiver. This doesn't worry me greatly if the stereo performance of the unit is enough to satisfy someone who likes good sound but isn't ever going to be purist (i.e. can't afford to be a purist ). I have been offered a Marantz SR4300, this would represent considerable relief to the budget. There will not be any chance to audition the Marantz, the offerer is a trusted friend on the other side of the country. I am interested in the opinions of the forum, particularly in the stereo capabilities of the Marantz SR4300. Cheers, Michael
2Brix Posted November 6, 2009 Posted November 6, 2009 Hi Michael, I guess the SR4300, being the model that replaced the SR4200 ? I didn't really follow their model history closely. Anyway i have the SR4200 and use it for home theatre duties, not a big priority for me at present, but it does a OK job in the context of being the entry level model back in 2001/2002, and that i bought on model run-out pricing. Although recently it has developed a crackle in the left rear channel when decoding DTS soundtracks ... waiting for the missus to complain so i can suggest an upgrade:p If the SR4300 on offer suits your present budget it may be a good interim measure, but depends what you (or anyone) considers 'good' sound. If your use is more casual and occasional, it could make sense to buy it now and then later on-sell or use in a secondary system. However if you do not need/use 'surround sound' and are going to spend some hours a week specifically listening to music as a hobby/interest, as opposed to BGM, i suspect you will be happier with a dedicated stereo amplifier that will get the most out of the FS68's. Cheers, Ed
seconds away Posted November 7, 2009 Author Posted November 7, 2009 A marantz SR4300 or SR4003? do you have any relevant info on either, or are you just wondering if I know how to type?
Nick69 Posted November 8, 2009 Posted November 8, 2009 Sorry my bad - I hadn't heard of the marantz SR4300 before but i have been looking into the SR4003 (latest and most budget av-receiver marantz offers) and was unsure if it was a typo. I probably should have googled it before answering but i didnt...
stephennic Posted November 8, 2009 Posted November 8, 2009 I have recently purchased a pair of Elac FS68's, the next step is amplification.Budgetary considerations are suggesting a surround receiver. This doesn't worry me greatly if the stereo performance of the unit is enough to satisfy someone who likes good sound but isn't ever going to be purist (i.e. can't afford to be a purist ). I have been offered a Marantz SR4300, this would represent considerable relief to the budget. There will not be any chance to audition the Marantz, the offerer is a trusted friend on the other side of the country. I am interested in the opinions of the forum, particularly in the stereo capabilities of the Marantz SR4300. Hi, I have the Marantz sr4300. I have had it for about 5-6 years. It is quite good on 2 channel for a reciever - musical and warm. It got 5 stars in what hifi and got good reviews in other mags -in its time it competed well with all in its price range ($999). I compared it to the yamaha, harmon kardon, denon, pioneer and prefered it for 2 channel over the others, the yamaha probably was better in the surround mode. It is perhaps a tad light in the bass ( a sub makes up for it) , nice fluid musical mids (yamaha was a little forward and hard, harmon kardon a little soft lacked punch, denon little clinical, pioneer - yuck), slightly rolled off top but still smooth and detailed. I plug in my Nad power amp for the front speakers when i wanted a little more grunt and brighter sound. Its about 85 RMS, it is good in surround, voices and instruments are clear however its probably on the more relaxed side than exciting in yer face sound. As long as your system (speakers, cd, dvd etc) isnt on the two warmer side it should be ok. I havent upgraded as I have dedicated two channel, and yes it dosent have all the features like HDMI inputs etc, but its quite a nice sounding machine for its price. It seem better than the others on 2 channel to my ears back then - not bad as a reciever probably not quite as good as a good dedicated amp ( marantz can lack a little in punch/dynamics - but with my 12 inch sub plugged into for 2 channel/surround listening can add some punch - deep, tight bass). Hope that helps. Cheers, Steve. :nana
Recommended Posts