|
Vintage Asylum Classic gear from yesteryear; vintage audio standing the test of time. |
|
|
|
Vintage Asylum Classic gear from yesteryear; vintage audio standing the test of time. |
|
In Reply to: Re: Marantz MR 235 or Philips 796? posted by Ace of Pace on March 9, 2007 at 05:51:10:
It is hard to describe the sound of the Philips as to do so requires a comparison to something more common or well known. For instance most know the signature sound of say Marantz, Pioneer, etc and realize each has a different sound; not right or wrong only different. This is a result of corporate voicing.The receiver also reflects the corporate sound, or at least the Laboratory Signature sound and is almost bang on with the separate tuner, preamp and power amp. Doesn't help, does it. I own the separates and in terms of sound they are quite different from my Mc system that I have had for decades and is my main system. The Philips with its sound I have decided to keep as it is very easy to listen to for long term without ear fatique, feeling a loss of the quality of the Mc signature sound or even miss the Mc sound.
The receiver imparts the same feeling and sound. It is not as what I term thick sounding as say a Marantz 22xx series, it is not as hard and harsh sounding as the Pioneer sound (no flames please, this is what I hear). It is between these and seems to have had an engineering goal of not trying to develop what we used to term a market driven sound.
I've heard similar signatures with units from ARC, Krell, and other more limited higher end companies. Remember, this was Magnavox trying to rebrand itself as a very real serious player in the market and it seemed to put the design money into the quality of the the sound.
They come closer to say a Yamaha sound but the Yammie is somewhat warmer or what I think of as sweeter sounding. They come a bit closer to the Tandbergs and maybe this is the lineup they come closet to.
Not sure this really helps and can only suggest for the going prices of these on the market, give it a try. A few have bought them and the result has been from an equal feeling for them to very close but something in their inventory they liked better; usually b/c of higher power ratings or hitting against 1 of those very rare and unique receivers such as the Sony STR 6060, 6120, or 6200. These are killers but unlike the Philips that seem bullet proof, the very early Sonys all need major tlc, especially the multiplex boards. I have the 6060 and waiting for a 6120 to get finished up and until I hit the 6060 the 797 was my top choice receiver. The 6060 displaces it not because it is clearly butter but it sounds closer to the Mc and I have a bias towards that sound and the 6060 when opened up shows a build quality that is as good as the best Fisher and Mc every made and that is HIGH praise. Owners of the 6120 say as good as the 6060 is the 6120 is even better, The 6200 replaced the 6120 and the difference seems to be the 6060 and 6120 had output caps while the 6200 did not. This design feature maybe part of the reason the 6060 sounds closer to the Mc as there is something between the output transistors (Mc has autoformers) and the speakers.
Bottom line is that IMHO, the Lab Series is a unigue and high quality and wonderful line of receivers and has an interesting place in audio history and represents except for Mc maybe the last demonstration of America's ability to design and manufacture a very high quality product. As for being 2nd to the above Sonys it must be remembered whan Sony designed and made these they were out to attain the status of being the McIntosh of Japan and for a few years proved they could do it.
Sorry for the long rant but, you can tell I am impassioned about the series.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Re: Marantz MR 235 or Philips 796? - Brian Levy 18:15:14 03/09/07 (0)
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
