I was looking at the pearl amp lite and cdp. But i'm confused about the reviews. What Hifi says not so good, but Hifinews find it "Outstanding product". What is true? I will also buy the MA RX 6 speakers. For my music, most metal and pop, it sounds very good, very lively with good bass and attack. I also heard Dynaudio Excite X32. Sounds also good expecially the highs, but for my music i think a little boring. No attack and the bass too light (very small woofers).
Maybe i must go for a NAD C356 with the 546 cdp, but it looks horrible and here in the Netherlands NAD has no good reputation.
Or will be the Marantz cd 6004 better than the lite cdp with the lite amp?
It's is very simple really and no need to for any confusion, buy what you like the look and sound of.
Mac mini > AVI ADM9Ts
Hm; the price of a Marantz cd 6004 is now 350,-- Euro. A NAD C545 500,-- Euro.
I hope you read my review of the Pearl lite. I have now lived with the Pearl lite for a few months. It is truly outstanding if you want natural sound. Sound which is natural is not necessarily exciting but fatigue free. Please do not take What Hi Fi says as gospel truth. Even though they may claim to be objective they are not always. They like an upfront, bright, forward sound and so have docked stars off both the Pearl lite cd player and amplifier and also the Spendor S35R2 which is a beautiful pair of book shelf speakers. The goal of high end as opposed to hi fi is to make the system disappear. I have the the following set up: Marantz Pearl lite cd player and amplifier, Marantz NA7004, Cadence Arita bookshelf speakers, Atacama stands, Van den Hul Revelation cables and Siltech interconnects. This is a very natural sounding system. Initially, I thought the Pearl Lite sounded lifeless but then I realized later that what was actually missing was the hi fi' ish quality of most amplifiers. Close your eyes and buy the Pearl lite. At 699 GBP, it is a steal. Marantz's build quality is outstanding and if you want to upgrade later you can use it as a preamplifier and get mono blocks.
Loudness and excitement are hi fi qualities not high end. Most of the reviews in What Hi Fi are superficial. If you want serious reviews, read Hi Fi News and Stereophile. A serious review should have both measurements and a wide range of music.
But ultimately you need to like the sound. So get a run in amplifier and listen to it at home with your partnering equipment.
Anand... Though I agree with your take on Pearl Lite (Yes, I bought one after contemplating for years and trying various other amplifiers.. It will work in the second system but will be with me for some time!) and also to some extent WHF reviews favouring brightness / sparkle, I still respect (if not fully) their rating system. It is not perfect but I am glad it is there!
They like an upfront, bright, forward sound
I agree with AnandR with reference to the WHF reviews. Their reviewers definitely do like an upfront, bright and forward presentation. Witness their long term admiration and constant 5 star awards to all Cyrus products.
Project 2-Xperience Superpack/Dynavector 10X4 - Electrocompanient ECP1 - Arcam CD17 - Plinius 9200 - Magneplanar MG12
(I had an Arcam Solo-Mini and felt it outperformed their A18 by a country mile.)
So - does that mean you prefer your Marantz MCR-603 to both the above?
Rega RP6 Groovetracer sub and counterweight/DV20X2L/Rega Aria/Naim CD5XS/Flatcap XS/NAT05XS/ND5XS/Supernait 2/Dynaudio 1.8-II
Have heard the Marantz pm lite, but with my music didn't like it. It will me one of the next amps.:
Rege Brio R
Next week listen to these.
When I bought my Solo-Mini the Marantz M-CR603 did not exist.
When - over three years and another system later - I opted to go back to an 'all-in-one' there was no contest.
The Marantz didn't have ventilation holes all over it like the Solo-Mini, it has AirPlay and an optical digital connection and the Solo-Mini has none. The Marantz is twice as powerful and looks better than the Solo-Mini. A comparison of the two - on grounds of sound quality - was out the question because it would have been irrelevant. I'd have got the M-CR603 even if it had cost as much as the Solo-Mini.
I would have needed to add a seperate DAC and an Apple TV (or Airport Express) to a Solo-Mini in order to get the same functionality/connectivity as the M-CR603 which would have been pointless.
Besides, the sound quality of the M-CR603 was - and still is - plenty good enough to extinguish any curiosity even on purely 'academic' grounds.
Marantz M-CR603 • Rega R3 loudspeakers • AirPlay • Apple iPad Mini • Apple iPhone 5 • Apple iMac • Apple AirPort Extreme 802.11N • Humax HDR-Fox T2 • Panasonic TX-L32D25B • Sony BDP-S390
Mentioned it before, but you may have missed it. Try and audition the Onkyo TX8050 for more or less the same reasons Chebby mentions the MCR-603. Sound quality on the 8050 is excellent and connectivity is likewise.
Onkyo TX-NR818 / Tannoy DC4 speakers / Marantz UD-7007
AVI Lab Series CD player / various cables
It must be a pure stereo amp.
I think Obiwan used the word 'pure' to mean it must just be a stereo amplifier with no other functions/features. (No DACs, no tuners, no wireless etc.)
In this modern age more and more stereo amps will come with bit's an bobs, and they will/do sound as good as their "pure" brother's. As ever the caveat "try before you buy" applies.
Marantz product has its very unique sonic signature and some people like it but not for some others. As a lot of folks have already mentioned try an audition before you buy.
Enjoying music from a dream hi-fi system in a well treated room.
HiFi news have a test of six amps, in the September issue, including the Pearl Lite amp. The interesting outcome is about the Heed amp, not the Marantz.
© 2014 Haymarket Publishing