Mega-Receiver Smackdown: SR9200 vs. B&K AVR 507
Written: Sep 27 '02 (Updated Mar 29 '04)
|
Product Rating:
|
|
| Sound: |
 |
|
| Ease of Use: |
 |
|
| Durability: |
|
|
|
Pros: Best value at this price level: high current, THX Ultra, HDCD, etc.
Cons: Lighter than B&K by 20 lb, which likely reflects lower build quality.
The Bottom Line: For our money and our ears, this is the best receiver we could find. You'll be ecstatic over the listening pleasures to be had with this receiver.
|
|
|
| LSMillers's Full Review: Marantz SR-9200 7.1 Channels Receiver |
We originally purchased the SR7200, set it up in our home and wrote an earlier review on it. We subsequently decided to upgrade to a higher quality receiver, and this review is about our experience comparing Marantz's top-of-the-line SR9200 against B&K's best receiver, the AVR 507.
SR9200 vs SR7200
Our reasons for trading in the SR7200 included an impression that, as good as it sounded, the showrooms with the higher level receivers were producing even better sound. Warmer, fuller, richer sound with brighter highs and a better presence than with the 7200. We also upgraded our speakers, so our improved sound has to be attributed to both factors and not just to the receiver.
The Receivers
We knew we wanted something better than the 7200, but we weren't sure that it was the 9200. We'd read that B&K made the best receivers available, and a local shop (Century Stereo in San Jose) was offering it on discount at $3,000. They were also selling the 9200 at this price, but Cambridge Soundworks was selling it for $2200 as part of a package with their top speakers.
The B&K AVR 507 is the company's best receiver. B&K has an established reputation as one of the best companies in high-end audio, and has extensive partnerships with Motorola. The Japanese-based Marantz is also one of the best names in the field, with its name derived from one of the founders of high fidelity sound, American Saul Marantz. Its parent company is Phillips. The SR9200 is the best in Marantz's line, offering 140 watts times seven channels (versus 150 x 7 with B&K).
Both receivers have massive toroidal transformers, extensive copper shielding and superior build quality throughout. The B& K unit weighs 62 lb versus the 9200's 42 lb, which the store salesman insists is due to B&K's lavish use of superior components. He especially stressed that the high current capacity of the 507 far surpasses that of the SR9200. We finally concluded that the best way for us to assess such intangibles was to actually test each unit in a showroom environment.
The Speakers
For our listening test we had the B&K receiver set up with $2000/pair B&W floor speakers, as well as their center and surround speakers. B&W is an English company, and their speakers are considered among the best available ("used in recording studios" per our salesman). To this we added a Velodyne 1200 watt subwoofer. This combination would be a $7300 expenditure (pre-tax).
The SR9200 was set up with Cambridge Soundworks' Newton Series (their best) T500 floor speakers, MC500 center and S300 surround speakers, with their 1,000 watt subwoofer added to the mix as well (for a total of 1600 watts devoted to bass sound, including the T500's bi-wired subwoofers). All this for a total of $5100.
The Music
We took three disks to each showroom for our tests, and played each at the 0 decibel setting. This level produces a very loud sound volume (around 100 decibels), and pushes the receiver and the speakers to their limits.
. The first disk was the overture to Wagner's opera Tannheuser. This was to test the volume and range of sound that the systems could sustain. The second disk was in the new DVD Audio format, of the fourth movement of Beethoven's 9th Symphony, and was used to determine both the vocal reproduction and sound clarity within each of the five channels. The third disk was a DVD of the Lord of the Rings, and the selection we played from this was the cave scene, wherein Bilbo et al are attacked by goblins, trolls and a monstrous horned demon. This was to judge the wallop of the low frequency sound effects (LFE). The receivers were set to Dolby Prologic II for the first and last disks.
The Results
1. CD (Tannheuser):
The B&K/B&W combo was breathtaking, from the soft horn entre to the reverberating finale. At the peaks the sound filled the entire room without any distortion, quite an accomplishment considering the volume of over 100 decibels. (pick a slow time to do this; otherwise you'll drive the salesmen nuts with your excessive noise and overuse of the room).
The SR9200/Soundworks presentation suffered in regard to the differences in the quality of the two showrooms. The prior one was attractively furnished and well designed acoustically. In the Cambridge Soundworks room, however, we could hear the room ventilation fan and the equipment was sprawled unattractively throughout the room. The acoustic design left a lot to be desired, as the room appeared to be a re-fitted large store room. One had to close the eyes and use imagination to overcome these obstacles.
Other than the above, however, the SR8200/Soundworks combo was also able to fill the room without distortion, and the ranges in volume were well handled at all times per these ears. For our money we couldn't tell the difference between the two systems. A critical factor for me personally with this music and the Beethoven DVDa is the "tears" factor: in both cases the music was able to evoke emotional responses at key points, something less likely to happen with a lesser system. In both cases there was no distortion or artifact to interfere with my listening pleasure (other than the aforementioned ventilation fan)
We had conducted these tests earlier on our SR7200 unit as well, in combination with the next-to-top-of-the-line Newton 300 series speakers. I did notice some distortion at this extremely high volume, especially in the surround speakers. Also, there was not as much clarity or warmth as either of the two other receiver/speaker combinations.
2. DVD Audio (Beethoven's 9th):
The B&K/B&W equipment played this music marvelously, easily handling the tremendous volume coming through all five channels. The vocal quality of the Ode to Joy was excellent, coming clearly and strongly through the two rear surrounds while the orchestra was filling up the front three channels.
The SR9200/Soundworks presentation was no less effective, with the possible exception of the rear surrounds. When the vocals came through there was a slightly discernable distortion in the rear surrounds as compared to the clarity of the three front channels.
In the SR7200 this effect was somewhat more pronounced. Again, remember that the volume was set to a level just below the pain threshold. The store manager suggested that the distortion was likely due to the calibration levels set for the surrounds, which were set several decibels above zero to adjust for the size of the room and the speaker placements. He also admitted, however, that the Soundworks surrounds aren't well matched with their top-line front speakers, a circumstance that could benefit from a bi-wired pair for each rear channel. This is fully possible with this package, which supplies four surrounds as compared with the two accompanying the B&W system in this test.
3. DVD Movie (Lord of the Rings):
With all three systems the floors shook each time the giant cave troll's club hit the ground, and the sense of three dimensions was effectively created with arrows whizzing past your ears and angry orcs screaming right into your face. Even the lower end SR7200 matched the performance of the higher end units in this test, which really doesn't strain a capable system to its maximums. It did appear that the Soundworks subwoofer combination outpowered the Velodyne, with the 350 extra watts giving a little bit more of a rumble when needed.
Conclusions
These are both great systems, and you can't go wrong with either one. If money is no object then the B&K/B&W combination is likely the better performer for the $2100 more that you'll spend. In fact, lay down even more and upgrade the floor speakers to B&W's best, which are really impressive. The B&K receiver likely is better constructed than Marantz's, although I can offer no concrete evidence of this other than the 50% greater weight of the former.
The distortion issue mentioned above is likely a speaker problem rather than a receiver-associated one, and the remedies also mentioned above would likely solve it.
The SR9200 appears to have more bells and whistles (such as HDCD capability) than the B&K 507, and the 9200's remote's functionality appears to be much better. Both units have computer interfaces to allow for future software upgrades.
We decided to save our money and buy the Marantz combination, as for us the most important fact was that we really couldn't discern an audible difference between the two systems. More sophisticated listeners may indeed detect substantial differences, but for our ears the Marantz meets and exceeds all our expectations.
Recommended:
Yes
Amount Paid (US$): 2200
|
|
|
|
Epinions.com ID:
LSMillers
|
 - Top 500 |
|
Location: California
Reviews written: 43
Trusted by: 26 members
|
|
|
- Add to My Yahoo!: 
- Add to Google Homepage: 
© 1999-2010 Shopping.com, Inc.