BK or Marantz Multi Ch ??

Looking at a 5 ch BK (100w/ch) and a Marantz 5 ch (150w/ch) for home theater/music listening. Both used. Any opinions on which compnay makes the better amp ??
Thank you!!
The two are so close that you won't go wrong with either. Both are generally refered to as "warm" SS amps. The Marantz would give you slightly more headroom if you play loud...or if you are going to use one channel to drive a sub.
a while ago, i "upgraded" from a b&k avr 202 (rated at 105w/ch) to a pricey, gimmicky denon avr (rated at 140w/ch) and always regretted it--although lacking the (mostly unnecessary) bells and whistles, the b&k was vastly better sounding--a more natural, less "digital" presentation; it also had the best universal remote i've ever used. subjectively, at least, the b&k sounded more powerful--we all know how nebulous/inaccurate the claimed power ratings of avrs can be. now, i don't know what specific marantz model you're considering, but from my experience b&k (or alternatively, arcam) is a considerable step-up from the mass market fare, esp. for music.
I was assuming marantz monoblocks....not sure about any of the other marantz's but the monoblocks are great amps.
I have found B&K Amps to be very solid and strong. I have used a 200w X 5 (7250ii) and a 60W X 5 (I forget the name) and never had a problem watching action packed movies at loud volumes. I also run 3 subs.

I never found the Jap amps to be up to par. Often struggling during high demand times.


B&K Ref 50
B&K 7250
Mirage OM 6 with built in subs
Mirage OMR2 rears
Mirage OM3 center
Special made Sub 12 inch long fire cone

I also love that fact the music sounds good to.