rx-v665 vs sr5003

[reyz]

simple question: based on their specs, which one has a better bang for buck?
quality, cleanliness and clarity. would also like to hear the opinions on the character of the sound that is output from either, for anybody who has experience with either/both of these receivers?

also, if it would be possible, any comments on whether it'll be a good match with the following 5.1 boston acoustics set i have coming right up in a week's time:

CS-226 flstanding
CS-225CB centre
CS-23 surrounds
CS Sub 10 10" subwoofer

and on a sidenote, though this may sound like a stupid question: is the v665 definitely an improvement over the 663 in all areas? cos the salesguy i spoke to said its definitely a no-brainer and they're offering it at the same price as the 663. cos i've been hearing rave reviews about the 663 being a great entry-level receiver on the forums here, but no word or sight of a 665 anywhere..

thanks so much!

[got rice]

Reyz to be honest with you there really isn no comparison. the Marantz 5003 hands down. If sound quality is what you after than this is the better choice. The yamaha is nice, but not the quality of a Marantz.

On top of that the 5003 has a superior calibration tool, offers upgradable software via ethernet, cleaner aesthetics(subjective), and pre outs for more power down the road. Also better looking IMO.

[ZIPPO]

I'd go with the Marantz SR5003 or the Yamaha RX-V663 over the Yamaha RX-V665. Read this to find out why I chose the 663 over the 665, especially the section on the 663 vs. 665.
http://www.audioholics.com/education...nology/trading

[CasualKiller]

5003 no contest.

[ZIPPO]

So Watts the Problem?
I totally understand and respect the tradeoffs between amplifier power and features in budget A/V receivers. Heck just a few years ago, you couldn’t get a 7.1 A/V receiver with HDMI 1.3a A/V processing and decoding for under $2k, now you can get them for under $500 with OSD support via HDMI no less. That’s progress!

What I do take issue with however is when a receiver company releases their next generation of receivers at the same price points with virtually the same operational features, but costs reduces the power supply in attempts to increase profit margins.

Let’s take a look at the differences between two $549 Yamaha receivers as an example. Yamaha isn’t the only brand I’ve noticed this trend with mind you.

The upgrades for the new model (RX-V665) includes HDMI up-scaling to 1080p, HDMI pass thru to enable video when your receiver is turned off, and 2 more HDMI inputs. The downside is no s-video, one less optical input and a significantly reduction in power. When a receiver company rates their amp at 1kHz, this usually means a full bandwidth measurement will be about 10-15% lower. Thus I suspect if we were comparing apples to apples, the RX-V665 would only output around 70wpc compared to the 95wpc rating of its predecessor. Of course with nearly an 8lb weight reduction and considering both receivers use linear A/B amplification, this also likely means the RX-V665 doesn’t have the power reserves to drive multiple channels with as much poise and finesse as the RX-V663.

For the above example, the consumer must decide whether or not the upgraded features of the new receiver are worth the sacrifice in amplifier quality. I suppose it depends if the end user leans more towards emphasis of video features than audio. If they desire both and one day have intentions of adding external amplification, than doesn’t this become a moot point?

Not always. From my testing of A/V receivers from various manufacturers, most of them simply slap preamp outputs on the back of their receivers for a marketing feature. It is a very inexpensive way to impress the unsophisticated user into being awed. They usually don’t put decent op-amps that have enough output to drive external power amplification to its full potential without the internal preamp of the receiver first clipping and going into gross distortion. Remember these receivers are designed as a closed loop system to work optimally with their own internal components. If the manufacturer is cutting costs in the power supply of their product to offer you more features, it’s a safe bet they aren’t giving you a higher quality preamplification section to power an external amplifier.
from Audioholics.com

[got rice]

Zippo you nailed it

that's WATTs it is.

[talstarone]

I own a Yamaha RX-V665 and will have to agreee with everyone else.
The Yamaha is a very good receiver(especially for the price $429.00)and has a host of features.

But Marantz is in a league higher then this model of Yamaha (There are some higher end Yamahas that will hold their own against most similarly priced receivers).

But Marantz builds some sweet products.Go for the Marantz!

[reyz]

hmm, i see. so the main issue here is that when adding external amps on a 665 compared to the 663 and sr5003, the sound quality will significantly suffer and distort? lets say if i dont add external amps, will it still be a step down in sound quality from the other 2 models? i also noticed the sr5003's 90wpc is "continuous", does that mean that if you run it long, the power output is maintained consistently (more so than the 665's) ?

thing is, i kinda purchased the 665 already. but back at the store where i got it from, its priced at the same as the marantz and 663 exactly. so if i move quickly, i might be able to swap it back around.

anyway, if this is the case, does the Marantz have a nicer-looking, more user-friendly OSD and iPod compatibility (an added dock that is roughly the same price as the Yamaha's ipod dock) over the 663's? and also HDMI video upconversion and upscaling to 1080p? if thats the case i might go with it instead of the 663 when deciding to swap.

btw, last but not least ( i know i've a lot of questions)... is the same model sold in different parts of the world, of a different make? im not sure where the marantz models sold in south-east asia (where i currently reside for the time being) are manufactured. assuming though that all abovementioned models are of the same specs/quality as advertised in the States websites and shops, then this is a moot point i s'pose...

[ZIPPO]

The 663 has a higher power output than the 665 (95wpc vs. 70wpc).

" When a receiver company rates their amp at 1kHz, this usually means a full bandwidth measurement will be about 10-15% lower. Thus I suspect if we were comparing apples to apples, the RX-V665 would only output around 70wpc compared to the 95wpc rating of its predecessor(RX-V663). Of course with nearly an 8lb weight reduction and considering both receivers use linear A/B amplification, this also likely means the RX-V665 doesn’t have the power reserves to drive multiple channels with as much poise and finesse as the RX-V663."

The Marantz SR-5003 would power your speakers the best.
The Yamaha RX-V663 would be your 2nd best option.
The Yamaha RX-V665 would be the least watts per channel out of the 3 choices.

[reyz]

a pressing question though.. does sr5003 have HDMI passthrough capabilities? i know its upconvert/upscaling capabilities are good though, from what i've read.

[ZIPPO]

Yes.
Both audio & video.

[reyz]

ok, no brainer. absolutely have to thank you guys for enlightening me on this.

[callas01]

Originally Posted by ZIPPO

The 663 has a higher power output than the 665 (95wpc vs. 70wpc).

" When a receiver company rates their amp at 1kHz, this usually means a full bandwidth measurement will be about 10-15% lower. Thus I suspect if we were comparing apples to apples, the RX-V665 would only output around 70wpc compared to the 95wpc rating of its predecessor(RX-V663). Of course with nearly an 8lb weight reduction and considering both receivers use linear A/B amplification, this also likely means the RX-V665 doesn’t have the power reserves to drive multiple channels with as much poise and finesse as the RX-V663."

The Marantz SR-5003 would power your speakers the best.
The Yamaha RX-V663 would be your 2nd best option.
The Yamaha RX-V665 would be the least watts per channel out of the 3 choices.

+1, haven't I told you this before reyz?? Anyways, the bench testing on the 663 yielded only 47 wpc with 5 or more channels driven, so even that receivers #'s are inaccurate. My guess is that the 665 will rate ever lower.

[ZIPPO]

The Marantz SR6003 is the step up model of the SR5003, these are it's power rating results.
The Marantz SR5003 will probably test similar.

Marantz SR6003 A/V receiver
Test report
(continued)







By Daniel Kumin
April/May 2009
Power output from the Marantz SR6003 A/V receiver was very impressive. It substantially beat its 100-watts-per-channel ratings in single-channel, stereo, and even 5-channel tests (rare for any receiver), and it very nearly managed 100 watts all around even with all 7 channels driven. Frequency-response and distortion tests gave uniformly excellent results as well. But noise and linearity results consistently fell a bit short of theoretical targets, factors that together suggest a moderate least-significant-bit error in the digital-to-analog conversion system. Although this would restrict ultimate dynamic range by a few dB, it’s almost sure to be undetectable in real-world listening, and I noted no such artifacts in my evaluations, including fade-to-noise audibility tests over headphones.

from soundandvisionmag.com



Marantz SR5003 A/V Receiver:
HT Labs Measures
HT Labs Measures
Five channels driven continuously into 8-ohm loads:
0.1% distortion at 103.8 watts
1% distortion at 118.0 watts

Seven channels driven continuously into 8-ohm loads:
0.1% distortion at 88.2 watts
1% distortion at 99.9 watts

from hometheatermag.com

[CasualKiller]

The 5003 was 118 watts 5 channels, 99.9 watts 7 channel.

http://hometheatermag.com/receivers/...ver/index.html

The 663 tested at 43.4 watts 7 channel and the 665 was 39.6 I believe.

[callas01]

Originally Posted by ZIPPO

from soundandvisionmag.com



Marantz SR5003 A/V Receiver:
HT Labs Measures
HT Labs Measures
Five channels driven continuously into 8-ohm loads:
0.1% distortion at 103.8 watts
1% distortion at 118.0 watts

Seven channels driven continuously into 8-ohm loads:
0.1% distortion at 88.2 watts
1% distortion at 99.9 watts
from hometheatermag.com

Exactly why I told my wife I want to upgrade to this receiver..... they don't test much better then that.....

[reyz]

Originally Posted by callas01

+1, haven't I told you this before reyz?? Anyways, the bench testing on the 663 yielded only 47 wpc with 5 or more channels driven, so even that receivers #'s are inaccurate. My guess is that the 665 will rate ever lower.

haha, my bad. i recall the one where you recommended Onkyo or "here" with the marantz but that kinda slipped my mind cos of the price difference.

Totally forgot about the superior quality of the marantz when i was making my buying decision.

but good news today! called up the owner and he agreed to swap for the sr-5003, but kept asking me whether i was sure of this decision. haha. apparently yamaha does better sales here than marantz.. but for the same price points, i now don't see why people will pick the yammy over it (much less the 665). perhaps, like the article stated, "unsophisticated" buyers. hahah. now that i reflect, cant believe the guy chided me in one of our earlier conversations at the store. he said one shouldn't be so bothered about quality when looking at entry-level receivers... simply brushed it aside though. heh.

anyway, my sr-5003 will be coming in silver (i think) and hopefully it's a complete match (in terms of manufacturing quality) with the model selling over at the states

[callas01]

I was just giving you a hard time, anyways, I think you will really like the marantz. Oh, and yes the quality of entry level receivers should be scrutinized heavily. And I don't consider the Marantz 5003 entry level.

[reyz]

Originally Posted by callas01

I was just giving you a hard time, anyways, I think you will really like the marantz. Oh, and yes the quality of entry level receivers should be scrutinized heavily. And I don't consider the Marantz 5003 entry level.

certainly! i've been abusing the workplace library (yes we have one!) and its catalogue of DTS dvds saving private ryan and jurassic park sound absolutely fantastic for decade-old movies

[edit] imho, the 90s still has the best range and collection of movies that straddled perfectly between oscar quality and commercial appeal =)