Yamaha vs Marantz Receivers Comparison

Mid-price Marantz and Yamaha receivers comparison

Marantz SR6015 vs Yamaha RX-A6A

We can start comparing Yamaha vs Marantz models with mid-budget receivers SR6015 and RX-A6A. They are similar in many ways, representing full-fledged 9.2-channel devices with processing of 11 channels with an additional amplifier, support for 8K, compatibility with a huge number of streaming services, and decoding a wide range of surround sound formats. However, some significant differences may affect your choice.

Starting with the design, the receivers have many differences. The SR6015 is smaller and weighs 26.45 pounds. That’s not insignificant for a good AVR, but compared to the 41.2 pounds of the RX-A6A, it’s just small. This fact affects ventilation, and the Marantz SR6015 overheats when operated for long periods, unlike the Yamaha RX-A6A. Both disappointed me with their unassuming LCDs that don’t show anything. But I’m old-school, and I like Marantz’s controls hidden under a protective cover much better than Yamaha’s touchscreen controls. Especially since the Aventage line comes in a glossy case, which leaves dust and fingerprints on it even before you’ve touched the surface, in terms of build quality – both receivers are great. Their components and parts are unquestionable and will last a long time.

The Marantz SR6015 has nine power amplifiers with an output power of 110 W/8 Ohm . Besides this, the SR6015 is equipped with Dolby Atmos, Dolby Atmos Height Virtualization, DTS:X, DTS Virtual:X, Auro 3D and IMAX Enhanced. RX-A6A rated power (20 Hz – 20 kHz, 2 channels) -150 W (8 ohms, 0.06% MTF), which is important because both models handle 11 channels with the addition of an amplifier, and this power is more suitable for the system. This is important because both models handle 11 channels with the addition of an amplifier, and such power is more acceptable for bigger systems. As for surround sound, this model works with the same 3D sound decoders as the Marantz SR6015. But Surround:AI automatically optimizes the surround effect in real-time, and CINEMA DSP creates a concert hall effect, which makes this unit significantly different. They give new possibilities to surround sound and make this model more versatile.

Marantz and Yamaha use the latest generation of video processing . This means they are ready to handle ultra-high-definition 8K video sources. They can view content at such a high resolution and generate it from other materials by scaling. The only difference between the receivers is that Marantz has only 1 HDMI 2.1 input (out of 8), while Yamaha has 7 out of 7.

In the movie test, the Marantz SR6015 performed well. It combines precise signal processing. Clean, accurate, and powerful subwoofer calibration of the Audyssey SR6015 made the sound as adequate as possible to the size of the room and what was happening on the screen. In addition, even in the most significant noise, dialogues were always clearly understood and ideally positioned. Audyssey generally stands out among other systems because it adapts the sound as accurately as possible, and even an inexperienced user can handle it.

The situation is like the competing model. The Yamaha sounded excellent – very clear, dynamic, accurate, with deep and precise spaciousness. The sound field was well separated from all the speakers and floated naturally in the room. The effects were localized overhead, and the ambient noise spread widely and, most importantly, plausibly throughout the room. However, the YPAO calibration system lags far behind Audyssey and requires additional manipulation in manual settings.

When watching the movie “Dune” (in anticipation of the release of the second part, I decided to review the first part), both SR6015 and RX-A6A were great. But it’s worth realizing that fans of these brands are divided into two camps where some appreciate the warm, realistic sound of the Marantz, and others enjoy the crystallinity and chiseledness of the Yamaha. The difference is palpable when you view the same scene. When Paul commands his mother to get him water, and the background noise fades away, leaving us only the slight tinkle of ceiling decoration in the room, the Yamaha gives the impression of being immersed in hypnosis. But the moment the “voice” bursts into the frame, the Marantz gave away my sensations of eeriness, getting under my skin. This is a subjective judgment, and you have to choose the uniqueness of the sound to fit your tastes. So, I recommend listening to the receivers before you buy. They are just too unique.

Marantz SR6015 pros and cons

Yamaha RX-A6A pros and cons

Premium Marantz and Yamaha receivers comparison

Marantz CINEMA 50 vs Yamaha RX-A8A

In the premium segment of my review are models with identical prices but different features, starting with the number of amplification channels. The Marantz CINEMA 50 has 9 channels, but with an additional amplifier, you can expand the system to 11 channels (as in the case of the SR6015). The difference is that the CINEMA 50 has pre-outputs for 4 independent subs. The Yamaha RX-A8A has 11 full channels, and only 2 subwoofers can be connected. Given the different power outputs of 110 watts (Marantz) and 150 watts (Yamaha), these configurations will, in reality, have the same quality result. Still, I didn’t get enough power for 11 channels from the CINEMA 50 (for 9 channels, it sounds like a beast). It’s also a question of whether you accept having more elements in the system, more variation with it, or whether you want fewer components.

Regarding construction and design, I can pretty much repeat word for word the description of the previous pair. But the CINEMA 50 looks more modern than the brand’s older lines. It’s gotten to the point where there are no inputs on the back panel for older equipment. Whether that’s a good or bad thing is up to you. It’s just that the company has started releasing new generation models (release year 2022). RX-A8A (2021), in its turn, does not differ from A6A. The same glossy surface requires care and handling with gloves. But it is beautiful – that’s for sure. Both models use high-quality components; the control is smooth, soft, sensitive, and precise. Gold-plated RCA connectors are also a sign of elite. Weight is again a difference maker. The Yamaha’s massive 47.2 pounds and optional anti-resonance design are significantly heavier than the Marantz’s 29.8 pounds. And more weight always indicates better quality and resistance to vibration. That’s important. Meanwhile, the CINEMA 50’s setup and control application is childishly delightful in its simplicity but not primitive.

The video path is HDMI version 2.1, and both receivers support 8K video and a wide range of HDR formats, with HDCP 2.3 protection and eARC. The CINEMA 50 has only 6 inputs, while the RX-A8A has 7. But I had plenty of room for connectivity in both cases. Yamaha has taken the trouble to equip their receiver with upscaling to 8K this time, but I liked improving video resolution with the Marantz. I noticed no significant flaws, while the A8A had more frequent pixel popping and short video lag.

As far as stereo is concerned, the receivers are on about the same level. I won’t even list the number of wireless capabilities and supported streaming services so as not to waste your time. The quality will satisfy anyone, as both brands have built their unique multi-room systems, HEOS and MusicCast, and have perfected them. The only difference in the Bluetooth capabilities I noted was Yamaha’s support for the AAC codec. But in practice, I didn’t notice any difference for Apple equipment using it with the Marantz. For the CINEMA 50, it’s worth noting the use of Current Feedback Topology and HDAM, which the brand uses in its high-end models. They help create incredible sound quality, and that’s the kind of thing you pay a high price for. But the RX-A8A’s internal components are just as good, and the stereo sounds great.

The picture is about the same in movies as in the previous mid-segment pair. There is a significant difference in the intonation of sound transmission (warm in Marantz and crystal cold in Yamaha), which is a matter of your taste only. Surround sound formats are supported across the spectrum, and we have all the same differences in IMAX availability for DTS:X in the Marantz and CINEMA DSP HD3 in the Yamaha. I like what these two buddies do, and I don’t think you’ll go wrong in your choice unless you have a clear preference for sound temperature. However, if you have a large home with multiple zones, the RX-A8A offers multi-room video for 3 zones and surround sound for 4, while the Marantz only provides 3. It’s the same situation with calibration, and long ago, Yamaha needed to change their approach to YPAO and refine it to modern standards. But you have Artificial Intelligence (AI) technology built into the DSP that analyzes and optimizes surround sound in real-time.

But let’s get to the point. Yamaha has succeeded in creating a natural home theater experience. The rich sound and wide soundstage put me right in the center of the movie. The RX-A8A was impressed with its lively sound, which did not become harsh even at high volume levels. At the same time, the Marantz delivered a wide dynamic range and a rich, sprawling sound that was better than the competition’s test. And for all that power, the receiver’s sound is fast and agile, with precise transient response and full control of the acoustics.

Marantz CINEMA 50 pros and cons

Yamaha RX-A8A pros and cons

Marantz SR7015 vs Yamaha RX-A3080

And the first of the pair is a 9-channel AV amplifier with 125 W/ Ohm and 165W /6 Ohm. The SR7015 supports Dolby Atmos, DTS: X, and Auro-3D (up to 11.2ch) and is IMAX Enhanced certified. The Yamaha RX-A3080 differs from the competitor in its more balanced approach to the design of both digital and analog parts. Moreover, the device has sufficient power. The amplifiers deliver 150 watts (into 8 ohms) for each channel at full load.

The SR7015 can handle 8K video, but only on one input and two outputs. All other inputs process signals in accordance with the HDMI 2.0 standard but also master modern video functions. Besides Dolby Vision and HLG, Marantz also understands HDR10 + and the new Dynamic HDR.

And the receiver from Yamaha loses to its competitor in video processing. Its video subsystem can work only with UltraHD video streams. However, I have to say that in addition to the ability to pass 4K video through itself, there is support for HDR10 and the Dolby Vision standard.

I tested the receivers as usual with the film. Again, the Yamaha`s receiver has managed to create a natural home theater feel. The rich sound and wide soundstage put me in the very center of the film. In stereo, the RX-A3080 impressed with its lively sound that never got harsh, even at high volume levels.

The Marantz SR7015, on the other hand, delivers impressive sound whether it operates in dual or multi-channel modes or plays 3D audio. What impressed me immediately about it was its substantial headroom, which ensures confident-sounding even when all channels are actively used. The result is a wide dynamic range and rich, sweeping sound which is better as in the competitor’s test. And for all that power, the receiver’s sound is fast and agile, with the accurate transient response and complete acoustics control.

Marantz SR7015 pros and cons

Yamaha RX-A3080 pros and cons

Budget Marantz and Yamaha AV receivers comparison

Yamaha RX-V6A vs Marantz NR1510

And now the budget segment is next in line. Here I have a Yamaha RX-V6A with 100 W / 8 Ohm per channel and a less powerful Marantz NR1510 with 50 W / 8 Ohm or 60 W / 6 Ohm. In the RX-V6A, I immediately want to note support for Dolby Atmos with the function of synthesis of virtual high channels, as well as Cinema DSP 3D. About the NR1510, I can only say that it does not have Dolby Atmos or DTS: X surround sound decoders. It is based only on Dolby TrueHD and DTS HD Master Audio. The number of amplification channels simply explains this. The RX-V6A has 7.2 channels, while the NR1510 has only 5.2. The power is also justified because the Marantz model has a narrow design, and in such receivers, this indicator is always reduced so that the device does not overheat.

The low-profile Marantz looks classic, has a full bright LCD, and a standard set of push-button controls on the front panel. The Yamaha RX-V6A is not in the Aventage lineup but follows a modern design with a glossy surface that makes me shudder. The plastic panel feels too flimsy to the touch, though, and the volume control doesn’t rotate as smoothly as the Marantz. Nevertheless, you may wonder why, with such differences, the cost of the receivers is almost the same. I can explain it with the example of buying an auto. For example, you have an old, reliable Mercedes in front of you. It has driven before and will drive after you, although it lags in some modernity. This is Marantz. Yamaha is more like a fast Honda. Great, modern, bright, shiny. The only problem is it’s not a Mercedes. And that’s the same for every pair in my review.

The Yamaha RX-V6A has a good HDR10 + video path for more realistic images and 4K / 120Hz and 8K. Furthermore, music Enhancer enhances compressed audio. In addition, the device supports MusicCast multi-room technology and voice control. The Marantz NR1510 can be praised for having the latest version of the eARC system on the video path. There is also 4K, Dolby Vision, or HLG, but without scaling.

Having started my testing, I was pleasantly surprised. Yamaha conveyed the sound of the film impressively. The 3D effects seemed tangible and accurate, but the pitch effects played a little ahead. In the music compilation test, the V6A played as clean and airy as it was dynamic. The music was even believably spatial in some moments. Bass was reproduced cleanly, albeit a little underrepresented with the calibration settings.

The Marantz NR1510 is excellent for stereo. The receiver broadcasts smooth and detailed sound. I could even call it soft, but here the damping is limiting the effect of the resolution. Even so, the sounds are rich and light, sonorous and gentle. It is less harsh than the competitor. The tonal balance is impeccable, although the sound is far from dry and dispassionate versions of neutrality. It also produces great surround sound in movies, but it’s hard to compare receivers when this one is inferior in channel count and just can’t support ceiling-mounted ones.

Yamaha RX-V6A pros and cons

Marantz NR1510 pros and cons

Stereo Marantz and Yamaha receivers comparison

Marantz NR1200 vs Yamaha R-N303

And at the end of the series of reviews, I propose to compare two models of stereo receivers. I’ll start with a model from Yamaha R-N303. This compact receiver is equipped with a suitable power transformer that delivers a maximum power of 100 W/8 Ohm or 120 W/6 Ohm. That kind of power seems impressive compared to the competition. The Marantz NR1200 has only 75 watts per channel. But it’s not that simple with this couple.

Regarding the construction, since the models were released quite a long time ago (2015 and 2019), both receivers have good cases. Today’s inexpensive stereo receivers are less reliable (as is often with new-generation tech). However, one major difference might influence your choice if you’re really savvy about sound and want to set up an optimal system for your hearing. A button adjusts the Yamaha R-N303’s treble and bass frequencies. You choose only the options offered by the manufacturer without intermediate nuances. The Marantz NR1200 has rotary controls for this, and I could find the desired ranges for myself quite accurately. Plus, it has more connectors.

The NR1200 has its huge advantages. It connects five HDMI inputs, each supporting HDCP 2.3, 4K / 60Hz video, HLG, and more. In contrast, Yamaha has no video capabilities at all.

It is also worth noting that the Yamaha model has WLAN or LAN connections to the local network. Support is declared for TIDAL, Deezer, Qobuz, Napster, vTuner, Sirius XM, etc. And also, of the features – the model is equipped with a Bluetooth module, capable of receiving and broadcasting an audio stream to mobile devices, incl, on Bluetooth headphones. The networking capabilities of the Marantz NR1200 are pretty good too. In addition to standard Bluetooth and Wi-Fi, the presence of HEOS and support for Airplay 2 allow the model to be integrated into a multi-room installation.

Marantz NR1200 pros and cons

Yamaha R-N303 pros and cons

Discontinued models

Yamaha RX-A1080 vs Marantz SR5014

This section presents another pair of Marantz vs Yamaha mid-segment receivers. I started with audio specs, as always.

Yamaha is equipped with an amplifier with 110 W/8 Ohm, which allows you to drive 5.1, 7.1, Dolby Atmos configurations. It also has its Presence system onboard and numerous DSP modes (including the Cinema DSP HD3, which requires the installation of seven physical devices).

Alternatively, Marantz SR5014 is equipped with discrete, more powerful amplifiers capable of delivering 100 W/8 Ohm and 140 W/6 Ohm per channel, plus high currents on all nine channels. Plus, I want to highlight, the device is equipped with HDAM modules, which provide high quality without the slightest distortion and a wide dynamic range during high-resolution audio playback.

Yamaha perfectly processes a 4K video stream. In addition, all analog video signals input to the receiver are converted to digital and output to the monitor via HDMI. As a result, there are upscale images up to the 4K standard. And so is the competitor. The Marantz receiver supports Dolby Vision and the new HLG technology, which is currently the most advanced option for transmitting HDR images. In terms of video capabilities, the devices have parity.

It’s time to test. And I started, as always, by watching a movie. And as I expected, the SR5014 sounded pretty soft. The sound was tonal with a slight warm undertone. The bass was played quite soft and not very clear or explosive. I haven’t missed a single detail in uppercase. Marantz has an excellent high-frequency resolution.

Yamaha’s sound is closer to the Marantz profile, and does not noticeably change the style when switching from stereo to multichannel. In music, this is expressed in naturalness, which should have freedom and dynamics. Paying attention, balance, and harmony prevail in the general perception – in this style, it is difficult to significantly improve anything to not spoil the whole composition. The music flows in a clean, unobstructed flow, has its tempo, turns, strokes, and flashes, but above all, it is connected.

Yamaha RX-A1080 pros and cons

Marantz SR5014 pros and cons