Deciding between Yamaha or Marantz

Hello everyone, I need to get a new Pre and trying to decide between the Marantz AV8801 or the Yamaha CX-A5000. The Marantz is about a $1k more, is it worth it? Speakers are SF Liutos, Mac MC205 for power, thanks in advance.
are you doing a two-channel system or a multichannel system?
I thought in the beginning, I would do mostly movies, but I would say 80% music and 20% movies.
skip it all, Sony 5400ES the best.
i'm still not clear whether you have two speakers or 5+, but if you're only using two speakers, you're better off with a two channel preamp that the multichannel ones you're looking at.
My apologies, I have 5.1 set up.
Post removed 
I use to have the AV7701, but whenever I had any type of component connected to it, there would be a hum/buzz coming from all 5 speakers. I tested the amp, Oppo, PS3, cable lines and TiVo. I've returned multiple AV7701s, I tried the Oppo as my pre, no noise, I tried a different pre and no noise. Just seems like the AV7701 isn't playing nice with my components.
If you're budget permits the new Marantz AV8801 around $2300 has a great review on home theater magazine, I've had Marantz AVR and like them very much I also had several Yamaha AVRs and prefer the Marantz.
I now use an Arcam AVR400 that I'm happy with.
Good luck!
Thanks for your suggestion, if I could find the AV8801 for $2300, I would get it.
Hope this helps
I sold Marantz for a very long period. In the past I loved it a lot. But during time Marantz started to use less expensive parts in there sources and amps. This changed the sound i the lower price range Marantz works. They use quite small transformers in there amps. When you compare it to Onkyo they use more and better parts. So what is the difference between the Onkyo PR-SC5509 and the Marantz AV8801? The focus of instruments and voices is a lot sharper with the Onkyo. But the biggest difference is when you use a higher level of amps and speakers which also can give a wide and deep stage. The stage of the Onkyo PR-SC5509 is a lot wider and deeper when you compare it with the AV8801. Marantz is what we call a more 2-dimensional image. I am also a Audyssey installer. With Audyssey Pro and the Onkyo PR-SC5509 I beat many even stereo pre amps of 10.000 dollar. With the Marantz I cannot get the stunning 3 dimensioanl image of the Onkyo PR-SC5509. Yamaha is not of the same level of these both.
Bo1972, thank you for response. I was thinking about the Onkyo as well, as it is in the same price range of the Yamaha. I will find a Onyko dealer and take a listen.
I owned the Pass Labs XP-20 for over 2 years of time. I have over 3 years of experience with Audyssey. With my way of measurement with Audyssey pro I beat my old XP-20 with my Pass Labs poweramp. The Onkyo PR-SC5509 with Audyssey pro is stunning. I have to admit that I measure totally different than Audyssey does. I use Audyssey Pro from a highend perspective. People with very expensive pre amps don't understand why an Onkyo beats there expensive stereo pre amp. Hearing is believing. Without Audyssey the Onkyo is not that special. With the Marantz the same thing. Audyssey is not an easy system to use.
Post removed 
BTW Marantz uses Audyssey MultEQXT32, and I agree with Bob_Reynolds as far as the Marantz, it does sound smooth, I've had some of the higher end Yamahas the Marantz sounds better to me.
Integra DHC-80.3 is the same as Onkyo PR-SC5509.
The Marantz has the option to use Audyssey pro as well. The difference between XT32 and our way of Audyssey Pro is so big. Like you bought an amp which is 2-3 the amount. It is so much more natural sounding, like you bought a class A amp. There is so much more drive and also resolution compared to XT32.
Consider the Arcam AVR750. Runs in class A up to 20W or so for 8-ohm spkrs, but kinda pricey
I sold Arcam for over 8 years of time. It has a very musical sound, but does not give the level of depth and wide of the Onkyo and Integra. There is almost no depth. And there is no roomcorrection. With Audyssey Pro you can get a superior level in sound compared to any system without. Audyssey EQ and Dynamic Volume will give you a lot more resolution and dynamics when it is used precise.
I'm using the Arcam avr400 for about two years now and love it, works great with my Merlins vsm mme, very powerful at 90wpc and slams the bass.
The Arcam avr750 would be my next receiver if I can justify the extra power or convince myself that I needed which shouldn't be too difficult.
Love Arcam!
Here's a review of the Arcam avr750
I sold Arcam for over 8 years of time. I realy like the products they make. A few years ago I went to Arcam in England for a few days. Very nice people. But the level with an Onkyo TX-NR5010 with my own way of Audyssey Pr measurement is superior to an Arcam 750. The difference is that I can get a much more realistic sound with the 5010 with my measurement. The biggest difference is that I can build a very wide an deep stage with the 5010 and Pro. Also the resolution is at a much higher level. Without the measurement the level in timing with a subwoofer is of a much lower level. Without roomcorrection you Always will get more acoustic problems. The integration you can achieve with Audyssey pro is of another world. Without roomcorrection I would never have gone to use surround for myself. Audyssey did change my thinking about surround and also for subwoofers to use for stereo. Before this I was only interested in highend Audio for stereo use. I never thought that I could achieve the level which I had in my head for a long time. At the end it was possible. With Audyssey Pro and my way of measurement I got the stealth integration with my subwoofer.
With the 5010 I can get a very deep and wide stage. The stage of the 750 is so much smaller. These days I only focus and sell a 3 Dimensional sound. Most 2 dimensional products I only use to let my clients understand the difference in stage between them. It is very easy to make people understand why it is superior.
Per Bo..."These days I only focus and sell a 3 Dimensional sound. Most 2 dimensional products I only use to let my clients understand the difference in stage between them. It is very easy to make people understand why it is superior."

Yeah, I guess all you got to do is look at the specification in the manual that says whether the component is 2 Dimensional or 3 Dimensional. Its that easy.

Problem is no such specification exists. It all a matter of subjective opinion based on listening and in Bo's case, he prefers to listen and recommend the product lines he sells!

He is an audio salesman Kalbi23 and I suggest you be careful taking any advice from him. Marantz and Arcam are very fine, good sounding products even though Bo "thinks" they are 2 Dimensional. Remember there is no measured or written specification called Dimensionality to prove this - only what's in Bo's mind.
In the 15 years I am in this business I Always test as many as I can do see what the properties are of a brand. Depth and wide is a very important part you always test and compare. And yessss you have to find this out yourself. It is very easy to let people hear the difference in stage between Onkyo and brands like Marantz and Arcam. A client used a Marantz surround receiver so we brought in the Onkyo TX-NR818. This one gives a much bigger stage and a much sharper image compared to Marantz. It is very easy to let peolple hear why it is better. When Marantz would be better, this would be the one to sell. I can get Marantz for the same conditions. But I want my client to get a 10 and not a 7,8 or 9. Arcam has a very musical sound, but has not the 3D image Onkyo can give. Every person understands the difference. Most shops has less knowledge and do not know all the different properties of all the brands they sel. This makes it so easy to compete. That is why I love to send my clients to other shops for 2 dimensional products. I do this way for over 6 years know. It gives a lot of fun to do.
I sold a lot of Marantz and Arcam in the past. They still make good products. I am Always looking for the best overwhole sound. So I choose those products who are able to give a better end result. It is the difference between good, better and best. I am only interested in the best. This makes it a lot easier to compete against other shops in audio.
Soundstaging, dimensional realism, and imaging are speaker performance terms...and in order to achieve this one has to take into account the entire system...not just amplification...where power...or reserve power comes into in dynamics and low short...a more liquid, effortless sound...depth and 3d imaging are largely due to speaker design and placement...
I compared many amps in my life. They have a very important influence on the stage as well. When you compare Onkyo, Pass Labs, Primare, Denon, Marantz and Arcam on the same speakers the difference is huge. The Pass Labs has by far the widest and deepest stage, Followed by Primare. Then Onkyo comes. Arcam, Denon and Marantz have only a little of depth. I have done these tests over and over again. For me it is like 1 and 1 is 2. Even When I used speakers who could give a deep stage and the amps as well. After we connected a Arcam cd or dvd player the depth was gone. For depth all parts need to be good at giving a deep and wide stage. In 15 yera sof time I have done thousends of tests in audio. Because this is the most fun thing to do. I was addicted to this for many years. In the beginning when I started in this business I did 80 hours every week in audio.
+1 to Phasecorrect's comments as he is correct! Speaker design and especially its placement in a room, is critical to achieving a deep soundstage and thus obtaining the 3 dimensionality that Bo so often talks about. Not the brand of amp.

The amp is important Bo, as long as it has the power and reserve to properly drive the speakers and effortlessly supply whatever power the speakers demands without distortion.

Your only proof of dimensionality is that you listened in tests for 15 years. Many of us have double that amount of time listening too, yet we don't rattle off a list of brands proclaiming one is superior in dimensionality and the other isn't. And the ones that you claim are superior just happen to be the ones you sell. But its based on your opinion and nothing more.

Bo, if there was a way of proving that some amps are more dimensional than others by actual objective testing and printing those results on a spec sheet, the manufacturers would do it. And not need Bo proclaiming which ones are.
FWIW...I have listened to Onkyo over the years...and their products have improved immensely...and they do have the recent reviews to prove it...if they have an all...over Denon/ would be a the entry level price point...which is more featured focus than music first one moves up the chain...say 800-1k and higher...the playing field becomes more level...and the overall musicality of Denon/Marantz more terms of audio performance/construction....and value...I thought the Marantz line that was still made in Japan about a decade ago was extremely competitive...
Marantz changed the level in parts they use for there amps and sources. This changed the sound and quality a lot. In the past I sold a lot Marantz. But these days I am not such a fan anymore. Onkyo made the same misstake as Marantz. But there is one difference. They went back to better and more expensive parts. I am not focussed on a brand. But Always focus on that brand what gives the best quality at the moment. When I compare a Denon or Marantz with Onkyo on Monitor Audio speakers I loose depth and wide. And I loose individual focus. When you owned a lot of highend this is the way you want music to sound. I was looking for brands what could give me the depth and wide as some good highend brands can do. I wanted to create a stunning level in sound for a much lower price. So it is affordable for many people. Audyssey Pro how I use it changes the overwhole sound dramaticly. It becomes so much more realistic like the more expensive amps. The difference in sound between Audyssey XT32 and Pro is stunning. Arcam has a very involving sound, but lacks the deep and wide stage brands like Primare gives. When you compare the sound of Arcam to Pass Labs ( what I did a lot) the difference is huge and you know how much better Pass labs is. Okay it is a different price ,but it is still a big difference. The same about stage. In the last months I sold a lot Onkyo to people who own Marantz. It is easy to let them hear the difference in speed, drive and also focus. This is after my measurement. When you can measure more dynamics compared to the Audyssey way the sound also becomes more involving. The lost of dynamics is a reason why Audyssey can work negative.
Interesting....even with the best amplification...MA is not known for their spatial presentation or excessive depth...being a Brit design....they are forward voiced...not knocking them...just an observation...if one seeks depth of stage...try Maggie's or Vandersteen...they really excel in that area...much better than a conventional box design

"In the last months I sold a lot Onkyo to people who own Marantz"

Since you now admit that you are a dealer, you need to identify yourself as a dealer in every post. That is the standard on this website. You are certainly allowed to post your opinion. But, as a dealer, you need to post that you are a dealer in every post.

Let me blunt. When I asked you about your status a few months ago, you said you were a "consultant". Now you openly admit that you are selling product. Time to come clean. You are a dealer and you need to make that clear every time you post.
I do not own a shop, and yes I do consulting. I worked for over 8 years in a shop. Consulting is about freedom. I only wanted to sell what is the best in every price range. Clients get more value for money and it is very easy to compete.
Bo - you say you are selling equipment, right? If so, you should identify that you are doing it. I do not care if you own a shop or not. Most people here are hobbyist. You are in the business. You should put that in your posts.
I said it before, I have nothing to hide!
Then add a statement to your posts like other people in the business do. Just add a little note at the bottom of each post that you are in the business. That seems pretty simple.
Hey guys, I am demoing the AV8801 right now. It does sound better than the AV7701 I had, but not at almost the double the price. I think it may be due to the fact the AV8801 is made in Japan and the AV7701 is made in China which effects the price. My dealer has ordered me the Yamaha, so I will make a decision soon on which to keep. I will not be using the pro set up, as I am not paying additonal for that set up. So my decision will solely be based on what it can do out the box.
The difference between XT32 and Audyssey Pro ( how I use it) is even bigger than buying an extra poweramp of 3000 dollar beside it.
We measure at totally different places and hights. This gives superior dynamics and endresults compared to how Audyssey use it. I have done many tests before I knew how to use it. Ofcourse I keep this for myself. I have a big advantage compared to competitors in this business now.
So, Bol972, if you will not tell everyone "how I do it," your recommendations are not useful since no one else can do it your way. Also, how does your measurements "at totally different places and hights" not apply equally to XT32 as you say they do to AudysseyPro? I hear a lot of assertions but no explanations or evidence.
All I can say Audyssey need to be used extreme precise. You need to do many many measurements to find out yourself. The people of Audyssey are smart people. But I think differently and I use it differently. My focus is on how much dynamics I can measure. How to get the most deep and wide stage. How to get instruments very sharp and small in dimension. The best resolution. That is why I use it my way. The way Audyssey use it, it is ok. There were many aspecys I didn't like when I did it there way. The 3th time of doing a measurment I had thought how to get a better end result. The funny thing is that I spoke a person who thought he knew how I do it. But it is a lot different. Audyssey is not an easy system to use. But when you use it precise, you can get a much higher endresult than all the others. I Always say: Audyssey has almost no room for errors. This you have to keep in mind!!
I am sure many of us will thank you Bo for another detailed yet absolutely meaningless explanation. Its been awhile since I had a good laugh reading one of your diatribes and this one ranks up there with your best.

My favorite parts and I quote you..."The people of Audyssey are smart people. But I think differently and I use it differently" and "That is why I use it my way. The way Audyssey use it, it is ok. There were many aspecys I didn't like when I did it there way"

So my question to you Bo, is that if you get better results than Audyssey, why not bring your own room correction solutions to market? If you actually made something that you perpetually claim is superior, you may gain some credibility and make some money too. Instead, you choose to make unsubstantiated claims and seem to be quite happy viewing yourself as an audio legend in your own mind.
I am not a technician. They are great technician. I am addicted to music since I was 6. They do totally different things, like they are better in developing. I am happy that these people are here to bring us much better sound quality. I started in audio for work in 1998. I am a lot different than most other people in audio. I spend much more time in testing. Compared to most other people in this business I spend a lot more money on audio. I also spend a lot more money on music, bluray and concerts than most other people in this business. I have never seen this as a job or hobby. It is like a natural part of who I am. I am a very demanding person and a perfectionist. I use brands in audio cause of there properties. I want to know if they have those properties I am looking for. This way of thinking ans working has the big advantages to create a much higher level than other shops do. I want my client to get the best sound for there money. i Always want to win from every other shop in audio. Because I love competing, that is why I love shows. The other thing why I love shows is because I f....hate all those worse and average demos at shows. Many of these people are not good enough and see there job as work. As a perfectionist you can get very irritated by everything what is inferior. In audio there are too many inferior products. And yesssss on of the most importsnt reasons why I still do this work. I have seen and met many dissapointed people who spend a lot of money on audio. Often they made wrong decisions or got the wrong advice. And I hate all those people in audio who focus on just making money.
All sauce, no meat.
Hey guys, every village has one. Give Bo a break. His posts are self defeating and are not likely to influence anyone in any matter of importance. Engage him and this could go one forever. Your choice. :-)
It is as it is, hearing is believing!!
Why not give Bo the benefit of the doubt if we too can benefit?
Please tell us Bo how to perform the Pro measurements ourselves. I don't believe you'd be hurting your own business by dispensing info to this niche audience.
Bo said
And I hate all those people in audio who focus on just making money.
Of course I keep this for myself. I have a big advantage compared to competitors in this business now.
That's what I love about the gy...he stakes out a position and sticks to it...or maybe he just hates himself which causes so much stress that he relieves it by endless self-promotion????