Question Is The Upgrade Worth It - Marantz sr6012 or Yamaha rx-a3070

Marantz sr6012 vs Yamaha rx-a3070

  • Marantz sr6012

    Votes: 5 26.3%
  • Yamaha rx-a3070

    Votes: 7 36.8%
  • Marantz sr7012

    Votes: 7 36.8%

  • Total voters
    19
D

Deleted member

Guest
Greetings to all..

Background story;

I wonder if some of the users on here can help and offer some advice, ive been getting the upgrade bug just months after buying the Denon avr x2500 i previously had the Yamaha rxa 1070 (2017 model) before this, but just a month or so after purchase it developed a fault which caused the unit to trip into protection mode and not come out maybe i was just unfortunate as i bought the Yamaha on the basis of its reliability record, as it was still practically brand new i was able to get a refund and get the denon x2500 as at that point i thought to myself why not take this opportunity to try a different brand.

Denon vs Yamaha;

Yamaha...

So moving on to what my subjective thoughts are on the performance of the Denon and the Yamaha, ill start with the Yamaha as this was my first av receiver, i found the Yamaha to be an excellent performer the build quality was top notch and the features was more than i needed another plus was the music performance of the Yamaha in 2 channel listening which surprised me if I'm being honest it was quite good considering it was an av receiver, however were the Yamaha failed to impress me was its inability with dialogue particularly when watching movies, don't get me wrong the overall performance was powerful with a very open sound stage with good steering of effects around the surround channels but the dialogue just seemed to get lost in the sound track no matter what sound mode i had it in, but overall i was very impressed with the Yamaha 1070 and i wouldn't write off ever getting another Yamaha.

Denon...
So moving on to the Denon what are my subjective thoughts now living with it for over 3 months, well in a nut shell I'm very impressed indeed, i found the Denon to be very expressive with an open sound stage and offer a very powerful presentation and most of all the dialogue has been crystal clear and has been able to keep up with the most demanding of movie sound tracks, however were the Denon has failed to impress me has been in 2 channel listening for me it just lacks that something, not bad but not as good as i would like it to be comparing it with the Yamaha maybe its not fair to compare this to the Yamaha as its lower down the av receiver food chain but in the interest of fairness when comparing the two this would be my hang up in regards to the Denon, but overall I'm seriously impressed by the Denon's overall performance.

The big question;

So this leads me on to the question considering all what i have said should i upgrade to either the Marantz sr6012 being that its part of the same company and shares the same build as the Denon but tuned better for music listening as i understand it or should i upgrade to the Yamaha flagship model as on both units can be had for a real good price at the moment this has been my dilemma for the past week any thoughts welcome.

Room size = 5m x 5m
Speakers = full 5.1.2 Dali zensor range
Subwoofer = Svs PB 1000
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You have got some other options..

One is to use an integrated amplifier for music, and share the speakers with the AVR via a speaker switch.

Or, there is the Nad T758v3 AVR, which is reportedly very good for both music and movies and comes with Dirac room correction.

NAD T 758 V3 AV Receiver
 
It's a bit of a hard one. I've had a demo of the yamaha a couple of weeks ago I couldn't fault it with the usual excellent processor and some very good dacs I also can say it does a very good job of 2 channel as well the dealer compared it to a very nice musical fidelity stereo amplifier he had the only thing is the yamaha room correction compared to the marantz excellent xt32. and sound quality I think personally I'd be more swayed to go for the marantz
 
You have got some other options..

One is to use an integrated amplifier for music, and share the speakers with the AVR via a speaker switch.

Or, there is the Nad T758v3 AVR, which is reportedly very good for both music and movies and comes with Dirac room correction.

I appreciate the feedback i would be getting either a power amp or integrated amp later down the road for more critical 2 channel listening to integrate into the avr via the pre-outs etc, but at the moment my budget would only go as far as the Yamaha 3070 or Marantz 6012 so i was wondering which would be a better choice in your opinion or other users opinions, as the price of these av receivers is really good at the moment id be open to any others around this price range you could think of.

It's a bit of a hard one. I've had a demo of the yamaha a couple of weeks ago I couldn't fault it with the usual excellent processor and some very good dacs I also can say it does a very good job of 2 channel as well the dealer compared it to a very nice musical fidelity stereo amplifier he had the only thing is the yamaha room correction compared to the marantz excellent xt32. and sound quality I think personally I'd be more swayed to go for the marantz

I agree with you at the moment I'm leaning towards the Marantz and i also agree with your assessment about the room correction as audyssey seemed a slight improvement in my room but then again i never had the higher room correction in my old Yamaha 1070 that the 3070 has which makes me wonder.
 
Just had a look at the spec of the yamaha and the original price nearly £2300 a lot of kit especially if you are getting a good deal mined change I'd go for yamaha
 
Audyssey cannot compensate for the Yamaha's greater power or the superior DACs it uses. The Marantz SR7012 is actually a more comparable Marantz model than the SR6012 and should still cost you less than the A3070. The SR7012's DACs would still not be as good as those onboard the Yamaha though and neither of the Marantz receivers would include the additional Yamaha DSP associated with Yamaha models. I'd not count room EQ as being a major reason to choose either. The Audysssey XT32 room EQ correction would be better in terms of the lower end frequencies, but Yamaha's own YPAO parametricc EQ correction isn't bad.
 
Well said as I originally said go for the marantz then I had a look on yamaha website and quickly posted back
 
I've owned both a Yamaha receiver in the past (RX-A2010) and changed this to a Marantz SR 7011 (current receiver).

In my limited experience, the Marantz completely wipes the floor with the Yamaha - the latter was big and bold whilst the former is detailed and expressive.

Of course, there's a synergy involved between components, your speakers and the room, and whilst I hesitate to say with certainty that there's a "house sound" associated with both manufacturers, I would say that the Marantz certainly sounds far sweeter in my room with my speakers.

Things are slightly complicated as you aren't comparing like-for-like: the Yamaha you're interested in will definitely be better specified than the Marantz you're interested in, but whether that means it will sound better to you is up for debate.

But, in my limited experience (again), the Marantz definitely sounds more musical than the Yamaha, which sounded more tuned towards film presentation. I voted Marantz in your poll, but you might find the Yamaha will give you everything you're looking for. Not helpful, I know - sorry!
 
Yeah i appreciate the feedback guys this is why i love this forum you can go in with one idea and come away with a totally different opinion, i think after the feed back ill look into going for the Yamaha 3070 and also getting the Yamaha as1100 for 2 channel listening as the as1100 is also on offer at the moment, or the Marantz sr7012/6012 with the Marantz PM8006, what are your thoughts on this combination.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Yamaha combination

iu

iu
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Marantz combination
iu

iu

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I've changed my vote to the Marantz SR 7012!

Okay, so you want to go two-box, is this straight away or at some point?

Again, we come back to whether you think there may be a "house sound" associated between the two manufacturers. Also, you have complicated matters somewhat by not comparing like-for-like again: the Yamaha AS1100 is a stereo amplifier designed for music reproduction, the Marantz MM7025 is a power amplifier designed to complement AV processors or receivers for film soundtracks.

Both would been designed for a different remit and to produce a different type of sound. I suspect many respondents would vote for the Yamaha combination under these conditions as a stereo amp will usually outperform a power amp for reproducing music, but the Marantz combination might sound better overall in your room and with your speakers.
 
I've changed my vote to the Marantz SR 7012!

Okay, so you want to go two-box, is this straight away or at some point?

Again, we come back to whether you think there may be a "house sound" associated between the two manufacturers. Also, you have complicated matters somewhat by not comparing like-for-like again: the Yamaha AS1100 is a stereo amplifier designed for music reproduction, the Marantz MM7025 is a power amplifier designed to complement AV processors or receivers for film soundtracks.

Both would been designed for a different remit and to produce a different type of sound. I suspect many respondents would vote for the Yamaha combination under these conditions as a stereo amp will usually outperform a power amp for reproducing music, but the Marantz combination might sound better overall in your room and with your speakers.

Appreciate the feedback, in answer to your post i would be going for the av receiver first then soon after getting either the Marantz power amp/integrated or either the Yamaha integrated amp depending which av receiver i bought.

i understand what your saying in regards to the Yamaha amp being an integrated amp the problem is that Yamaha don't have a like for like with the Marantz they only do a 11ch power amp which would be way out of my price range so hence why i choose the Yamaha as1100 as it is around the same price range.

the same integrated amp from Marantz would be the Marantz PM8006 at the same price as the as1100, what are your thoughts regarding those combination's.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I read this thread because I have an Anthem MRX510 and I am looking for a change. Loved the sound of my Yamaha 3040 I had before so I know the Yamaha sound, but I have wonder what is better Yamaha or Marantz, had a Denon surround amp what I loved before they brought in room correction. I find the surround of the Anthem is lacking, the sound field is small, it's better in stereo but now I have the Arcam A49 for stereo used with the Anthem in processor mode.

Not trying to hijack somebody's thread but my problem fitting in the OP question and I am wondering the same.
 
I've changed my vote to the Marantz SR 7012!

Okay, so you want to go two-box, is this straight away or at some point?

Again, we come back to whether you think there may be a "house sound" associated between the two manufacturers. Also, you have complicated matters somewhat by not comparing like-for-like again: the Yamaha AS1100 is a stereo amplifier designed for music reproduction, the Marantz MM7025 is a power amplifier designed to complement AV processors or receivers for film soundtracks.

Both would been designed for a different remit and to produce a different type of sound. I suspect many respondents would vote for the Yamaha combination under these conditions as a stereo amp will usually outperform a power amp for reproducing music, but the Marantz combination might sound better overall in your room and with your speakers.

The Marantz MM7025 is a 2 channel power amp that is not specifically designed for use with an AV receiver or for use in a home theatre setup. It isn't marketed by Marantz as being for use within a home theatre setup and is decribed as being "a sensational upgrade to an existing stereo system". Where are you getting the impression that it was designed specifically for use within a home theatre setup?

A power amp is a power amp and doesn't include different additional circuitry dependant upon how it is to be used. The only down side in association with power amps with more channels is the strain this puts upon their PSU. THe signal paths will not be different depending upon how it is to be used.

You can techncally use it with either of the two receivers and you'd benefit in either setup. What it gives you is greater headroom in association with the channels it is used to amplify and if the receiver is set to a PURE DIRECT mode then you'd end up with more power with lower THD and less signal to noise than if using the receiver's own integral amplification to power the 2 speakers. All that is needed in order to benefit is external amplification that is better in terms of its headroom and noise than that associated with the AV receiver's own integral amplification.
 
I have had both denon 4200 and marantz 7011; along with 2 channel integrated amps from marantz, creek and naim used in preouts and none really came close to my arcam with dirac. more so than any dac, it really sorts out your room issues and for critical music listening, is a must have imo.

the nad would be the best choice for both music and music in an all in one solution. i'd also throw anthem into the mix
 
Room EQ correction is wonderful, but only of use if you actually need it. It will not make a receiver sound any more musical. Only the manner in which the manufacturer tuned the receiver can determine its signature sound. If this were not the case than the DIRAC Live equipped NAD receivers should sound exactly the same as those made by Arcam. Do they?

The vast majority of integrated stereo amps have no room EQ correction what so ever and almost all of them will beat any comparably priced AV receiver when it comes to their musical abilities.

Arcam are good with music because they've a heritage of designing well engineered amplifiers and not because they include DIRAC Live. DIRAC is a bonus and not the reason for people wanting an Arcam receiver.

The same goes for Audyssey. Onkyo used to include Audyssey. Were Onkyo receivers better with music than Yamaha?

I too have had both Denon and Yamaha receivers and went back from Denon to Yamaha because I just didn't like the way the Denon receiver sounded. Not everyone likes the way one receiver or amp sounds compared to another. Arcam's advantage is their neutrality. Even this will be influenced by the speakers and they actually effect what you are hearing far more than what is powering them.

All in all, you need to go audition the kit and hear what it sounds like, preferably via the speakers you intend using in your setup.
 
Last edited:
Note that if you really wanted a setup that would make many jealous after listening to it then I'd suggest a combination of the lesser Marantz SR6012 plus the 7 channel IOTA AVXP1. This would cost you about the same as the SR7012 plus MM7025, but you'd be getting 7 channels of external power as opposed to just 2.

IOTA AVXP1 7-Channel Power Amplifier Review

I'd maybe also suggest you start looking at better speakers too in order to benefit from the better amplification.
 
Last edited:
Note that if you really wanted a setup that would make many jealous after listening to it then I'd suggest a combination of the lesser Marantz SR6012 plus the 7 channel IOTA AVXP1. This would cost you about the same as the SR7012 plus MM7025, but you'd be getting 7 channels of external power as opposed to just 2.

IOTA AVXP1 7-Channel Power Amplifier Review

I'd maybe also suggest you start look at better speakers too in order to benefit from the better amplification.

You really know how to put a spanner in the works don't you :D

was just looking at that 7 channel IOTA AVXP1 and its now really.. really. got me interested, it looks like a quality amp, thanks i didn't even know it existed before you just posted the link i'm definitely going to further research this amp, thanks dante01.

-------------------------------------------------------------------

AVXP1_Back_x700.png
 
Last edited by a moderator:
+1 for the IOTA here too.

It's really made a huge difference to my system and I'd thoroughly recommend one.

And apologies for my mistake earlier. Dante is right: power amps can be used in both Hi-Fi and Home Cinema set ups and my brain went a bit wonky when I posted that. This is what happens when you haven't had enough sleep!

As to your query about whether to get a Marantz stereo amp to partner another Marantz AV receiver, I suppose on paper it would be a better fit than a Yamaha stereo amp to complement a Marantz AV receiver, but I have no direct experience of this so can't really say either way.

I know with Home Cinema speakers it's recommended that the Front LCR all be from the same manufacturer to keep tonal consistency, but I don't know if the same principle applies for amplification? Maybe someone else can answer this. But I haven't noticed any difference between my IOTA running the base level of five speakers (Front LCR and Rears) and the Marantz running the Sub and Atmos speakers in my system, so maybe it doesn't.

What I can say is that you are potentially creating so many options and variables that it might be almost impossible to make a choice! I still tend to err on the side of an AV receiver for Home Cinema duties and a stereo amp for music, but I suppose any combination might work for you.
 
It is suggested that you ideally try use the same amplification for all channels. This would result in the output being consistent irrespective of which speakers are active. Differences in the amplifications signature would be less apparent as sounds transfers around a room from one speaker to another. The front three would particularly benefit by keeping the amplification the same relative to the centre as associated with the speakers to either side of it and by ensuring that the signals going to those three speakers is endowed with the same signature sound.
 
Well this thread has spiralled on, looks like the options are wide open now!

I have had a Marantz, Denon, Cambridge Audio, Sony and Yamaha AVRs as well as Marantz and Musical Fidelity integrated amps with HT bypass.

I am going to say that my current set up sounds pretty great, and is at least as good as my multi box set-up that I've had before.

An Arcam AVR550 plus a 2 channel power amp for the atmos speakers plus a Roksan K3 DAC for 2 channel music listening, into the Arcam using its stereo direct mode. I also have a small sub linked in via high level for music listening. Just throwing that combo into the mix, might be a similar budget to some of the other options that you are now considering.
 
Oh you bad boy! I have had my Denon X2400 for a matter of 8 months and, like you, not being impressesd with its musical ability is making want to upgrade already to either a higher end 2018 Denon model with pre-outs or a Marantz SR6012. I would want to get it right before a house move next year too so would be looking something with minimum 5.1.4 with possibility of 7.1.4 like the SR6012 with external amp. I'll keep an eye on whatever you do.

Sorry to pop a question in your thread, but would I be right in thinking that I could use an external amp to drive my Q Acoustic 3050's in stereo, with the rest of the channels in a 7.1.4 configuration? I guess I'm asking, in 7.1.4, can you use the external amp to drive any stereo channel?

Damn you and this forum :), this could get messy as I then think the SR6012 may be too good for my Q Acoustics 3050, 3010 and 3090c! Maybe I should go with a speaker switch and stereo amp for now...
 
Really good solid feedback from everyone its much appreciated, i have had a ring around to check stocks of the Marantz sr7012 and the Yamaha rx-a3070 and hopefully they should still have stock, so I'm now 90% leaning towards the Marantz sr7012 with either the IOTA AVXP1 or Marantz MM8077 at a later date.

I'd maybe also suggest you start looking at better speakers too in order to benefit from the better amplification.

i agree but that will have to be further down the road and a new thread :smashin:
i have had my eyes on either the Dali Rubicons or Dali Opticons or Kef R series..

An Arcam AVR550 plus a 2 channel power amp for the atmos speakers plus a Roksan K3 DAC for 2 channel music listening, into the Arcam using its stereo direct mode. I also have a small sub linked in via high level for music listening. Just throwing that combo into the mix, might be a similar budget to some of the other options that you are now considering.

your setup sounds really well put together i have still never heard an Arcam, i think i may throw myself a curve ball and audition one before making any purchase as i have heard alot of good things about them.
 
I have a Denon X6200 as the main processor with a Rega Elicit-R driving my front KEF R300 stereo pair through it's HT by-pass function. For music it is far superior to the way the Denon sounded if you have to play music and surround sound from the same speaker set up.
 
Room EQ correction is wonderful, but only of use if you actually need it. It will not make a receiver sound any more musical. Only the manner in which the manufacturer tuned the receiver can determine its signature sound. If this were not the case than the DIRAC Live equipped NAD receivers should sound exactly the same as those made by Arcam. Do they?

The vast majority of integrated stereo amps have no room EQ correction what so ever and almost all of them will beat any comparably priced AV receiver when it comes to their musical abilities.

Arcam are good with music because they've a heritage of designing well engineered amplifiers and not because they include DIRAC Live. DIRAC is a bonus and not the reason for people wanting an Arcam receiver.

The same goes for Audyssey. Onkyo used to include Audyssey. Were Onkyo receivers better with music than Yamaha?

I too have had both Denon and Yamaha receivers and went back from Denon to Yamaha because I just didn't like the way the Denon receiver sounded. Not everyone likes the way one receiver or amp sounds compared to another. Arcam's advantage is their neutrality. Even this will be influenced by the speakers and they actually effect what you are hearing far more than what is powering them.

All in all, you need to go audition the kit and hear what it sounds like, preferably via the speakers you intend using in your setup.


I have to disagree with this. Yes each manufacturer has a so called house sound but that's not the whole story of how things sound. we are hearing sounds across a frequency range so to say rc correcting frequency anomalies created by the acoustic properties of the room cannot help an amplifier more musical imo is wrong. audyssey with my marantz 7011 was not able to remedy the frequency issues in my room and when it did, a lot of the time it sounded unnatural.

Yes my arcam did sound better than the marantz without rc enabled but my arcam avr to my ears sounded better than my creek evo amp and a naim supernait i had on home loan. the main reason being that no matter how well engineered an amplifier was, my room was still creating the same anomalies

going through dirac and seeing the issues i was having in my room made it very clear what issues my room was creating.

I would also go on to say that no room is perfect acoustically and 99% of rooms would benefit from rc's like dirac, room perfect etc.

Here is a thread i put together when i first swapped from my marantz. some people inc the op may find it of some interest.

Just upgraded to an arcam from a marantz
 
I'd didn't say that anomalies cannot be corrected, I said that room EQ correction is only of any use if required. The vast majority of stereo setups have no room EQ correction of any description and most would still suggest these setups still portray 2 channel music better than any comparable AV receiver including room EQ correction.Anf yes, I know that Lyngdorf do stereo setups with room EQ correction (RoomPerfect), but I'm not Sean Connery or a millionaire.

Nothing against room EQ correction, but it isn't the be all and end all and shouldn't be what determines which amp or receiver someone purchases. I've used Audyssey and the resulting audio was still not as appealing as it was or is now using a Yamaha receiver. I'd like DIRAC LIve, but only if it is included onboard a receiver I also like the sound of. Room EQ correction will not negate an AV receivers own signature sound.

Also note that if you want DIRAC then you've a premium to pay in association with the manufacturers who've actually adopted it. It should also be said that these manufacturers are the ones that you'd expect to be making AV receivers that sound good with music simply due to their heritage. I'm sure Arcam or NAD wouldn't suggest that their AV receivers sound as good as they do because they use DIRAC? Surely all their competitors would need to do is to also adopt DIRAC?

It should also be made apparent that many suggest they get the best stereo performance from their AV receiver while the receiver is set to its PURE DIRECT or similar mode. This would in most instances bypass the room EQ correction filtering. Also note that room EQ correction is a digital process that involves downsampling the audio. Audyssey for example has to reduce the sample frequency down to no more than 48kHz in order to be able to process the audio. Other systems are not as cut throat, but still downsample in order to allow the receiver's CPU to process the signal. I believe that DIRAC's use of a mainframe computer located in Switzeland helps to reduce this onboard DIRAC equipped receivers? If into HD formatted stereo content then you may want to take this into consideration when deciding whether or not to apply room EQ correction.
 
Last edited:

The latest video from AVForums

TV Buying Guide - Which TV Is Best For You?
Subscribe to our YouTube channel
Back
Top Bottom