I 've looked at this and you're not comparing apples with apples.
The specific Marantz mentioned in this post is the SR6013, the figures you are using are for the SR6014.
I said my Marantz was similar but it is the 2014 model SR6008.
Here's a quote from the Marantz review you've used on ASR
Marantz takes one of the best AVRs we have tested, the Denon AVR-X3600H and reduces its performance into mediocrity in many areas. It seems that they are following audiophile fads, ignoring good engineering and proper audio research and science. I understand the need for differentiation but for heaven's sake, please don't sacrifice performance for it. Make the chassis out of gold or something. But please leave the active circuits alone. You have a good platform. Please don't ruin it this way.
Needless to say, I can't recommend the Marantz SR6014.
There are no figures quoted in either review for the current capacity. Mention is made in the review of the M2si about the fierce protection circuits causing problems with Amir's usual (and only half the story) method of testing power.
All this is irrevellent as it's the sound that matters, not some top trumps spec fest.
There are no mentions in the reviews of the power supply current delivery capacity or the total capacitance available. I do not intend to reply further.
@Gasp3621 said :- No i haven´t read the book sadly, but he quotes from he`s books are mentioned in many forums.
Can I suggest that you read the book before engaging in an argument with someone who has ?
I don`t need to read any book to understand which is more powerfull unit and you shouldn´t either. Marantz has larger powersupply as it needs to power 9 speakers and also it has larger capacitor banks (2x 12,000uF/71V at least in SR6014 and your M2Si has 2x 10,000uF/63V). We don´t need to argue which sounds better, clearly you know the answer already and that´s good. Maybe i should have added more smileys.
You can clearly see the measurements for both in 2channels for 8ohm and 4ohm which are taken with lower distortion than usually accepted (0,08%). The max power and peak power output are industry standard CEA-2006/490A with higher distortion, quite meaningless although we can see class a/b amps having more headroom for peaks than class-d amps. The equipment used is the same AP as with any other people who measure these products although i think Amir uses newer model as example Arcam had older AP device and couldn´t run many tests Amir did. No need to blame person if you don´t like the results. The objective data is there to see and it`s on par with others. There is nothing wrong as example Amir double checked all measurements with Marantz engineers (+Denon also) and they both agreed. You get what you see here. The issue is HDAM which adds noise and distortion. Also the DAC has slow roll-off and it seems to be more tuned by ear vs. Denon which measures better objectively, that should be the aim = total transparency. For Marantz sake they changed HDAM for the SR8015 and it does much better! Keep in mind that no one really tests receivers and show us how they measure, manufacturers have been got it easy until now. We have already seen years ago that when they started to push more features there was some cost savings in the more important parts, at least Yamaha did that with cheaper models. You don´t have to agree with the person measuring the devices. He is electrical engineer and thinks bit different than normal persons.
I probably looked wrong then about your model, but SR6008 still has the same 110w 8ohm 0,08% 2ch spec as the SR6014 tested. These manufacturers doesn´t change internal parts often, it´s usually more features and newer connections.