Marantz PM 17SA v PM 8003


I need to decide on one of these in the next 18 hours My main conern is that I have heard the PM 17SA is pretty laidback sounding. I know the 8003 can rock and is dynamic as I had an 8004 at one time but what about the PM 17SA?? thanks
geph0007
Tough one. At 60 vs 70 wpc into 8 ohms, the power output is negligible. So besides the obvious aesthetics, the PM 17SA is older and was built at Marantz' reference factory in Japan. The PM 8003 is newer and built in China.

Having a PM15s2 built at the reference factory, I can attest to the extreme quality of Marantz built there, so I would go with the PM 17SA.
I would assume that the PM-17SA would hold it's value better so if you are one who flips equipment often I would consider going with that one. I agree with Paraneer and I can't help but think the 17SA is built to much higher standards.
I have no doubt it is a higher standard . I am just worried about it not doing justice to rock and blues. Back when I worked in the audio bizz in the 80s we sold mid fi to lower hi fi stuff so I would go and set a $5000 systems and they guy would have a $15.000 system in another room. He would ask me listen to it. I have very good ears and can tell differences pretty quickly. It appeared and sometimes still does that an audiophile system or the idea of one is to see how laided back and smooth one can make it to the point where it does not sound anything like music and you wonder if the person has ever left the house or heard and actual instrument in their room. Now we are into the age of hyper detail which to me does not sound anything like what i hear in front of me when an instument is playing A well known speaker maker once said to me 'people have more crappy detail coming out of their system then you ever hear when
I am not looking to flip but the loser leaves as i cannot afford to have funds tied up.
I have no doubt it is a higher standard . I am just worried about it not doing justice to rock and blues.
Don't quite understand your concern. Since you worked in the audio biz, then you know that there is no difference between the 60 & 70 wpc. In fact, I checked the specs and both units are rated at 100 wpc into 4 ohms. So, their power amp sections are almost identical.
And since the PM 17sa is built to a higher standard, why wouldn't it sound better?
Correct. Not a power issue. Some pieces are voiced to be more laidback Some more dynamic I have owned or tried Creek, Marantz, Vincent, Cambridge, Bel canto Luxman, NAD ,Adcom ,Rotel, Anthem ,HK , Tandberg and on and on Two of the most music,rich real sounding units that I have had, flaws and all an NAD 7020 receiver (ie 3020 amp) and the Exposure 2010S.
I am going to give the Marantz a try.
"In fact, I checked the specs and both units are rated at 100 wpc into 4 ohms. So, their power amp sections are almost identical."

Nothing could be further from the truth. Yes, its possible that the 2 amps may be very similar, but there's absolutely no reason why they can't sound completely different. There's no way that you can tell what an amp sounds like just by looking at a spec sheet.
Nothing could be further from the truth. Yes, its possible that the 2 amps may be very similar, but there's absolutely no reason why they can't sound completely different.
I believe that was exactly my point. I thought I was pretty clear meaning their power OUTPUT sections are almost identical so go with the amp that is better built as it is bound to sound better. As a Marantz Reference owner, thanks for reaffirming my point. Maybe I can do the same for you someday.
" I thought I was pretty clear meaning their power OUTPUT sections are almost identical so go with the amp that is better built as it is bound to sound better."

Your point is clear. It just doesn't make sense. If they're almost identical, then why would they sound different? Also, if they're almost identical, then why would the build quality be different?
Why not see if the seller is willing to bring the amp over so you can make a quick comparison assuming its for sale locally. This would take the speculation out of the equation. Hell give them a couple bucks for gas if need be. To sit here and guess which amp might be better based on specs or what country it was manufactured in seems rather senseless. You will only know from auditioning it for yourself. Even if someone were to chime in that has owned both may still not help you as we all hear things differently.
Your point is clear. It just doesn't make sense. If they're almost identical, then why would they sound different? Also, if they're almost identical, then why would the build quality be different?
Just because their power OUTPUT is almost identical, doesn't mean they can't sound very different because of build quality. Besides, in case you didn't know, these are integrated amps we are talking about. So there is a preamp section that has nothing to do with their power amp section. This can and often will radically change how an amp, given the same power OUTPUT, will sound.

Finally, these are also two different models - one made in Japan and the other made in China. That's why the build quality would be different. So, my point makes perfect sense.
So then you are talking about the performance of the amp by looking at the spec sheet. And now that you've clarified it, you're referring to power output only and not sound quality. That wasn't clear in your other posts. To be honest, though, I never trust specs on an amps power. In this particular case, since they are both SS amps made by the same company, at about the same time, then I guess its possible to get away with looking at the stated power output as accurate, in relation to each other. If you were to measure both amps the same way, they would probably be close enough to make the claim valid. But no guarantees.
So then you are talking about the performance of the amp by looking at the spec sheet. And now that you've clarified it, you're referring to power output only and not sound quality. That wasn't clear in your other posts.
Thanks for finally seeing it my way. I am somewhat surprised by why you couldn't see my point the very first time I posted it. I will repeat my exact quote again and note that I specified Power Amp Section. Further I said almost identical; not exactly.
In fact, I checked the specs and both units are rated at 100 wpc into 4 ohms. So, their power amp sections are almost identical.
And since the PM 17sa is built to a higher standard, why wouldn't it sound better?
Sorry if the above wasn't clear enough. I guess I should learn to write better or run the risk of soliciting your unwanted comments. Hopefully the OP knew what I meant though and from the sound of his last post, I believe he did.
After all, that's the most important part as it was his question that I provided a positive response to.
I have the PM 17mkII here While a few things have changed in the system I would say the PM 8004 I had at one time had a little sharper images with detail more obvious but the 17 has a slightly warmer more fluid sound. The bass is a little more full It sounds more "high end ' for lack of better terms
Thanks for letting us know which one you went with Geph. Now that you have experience with both and have noted the differences in their sound quality, which one do you like better. Are you happy with the PM 17's sound and keeping it?
I will let you know soon
I have not sat down for a complete comparo but the 8003 has tighter bass ,detail is easier to hear ie more transparent and it is more neutral verses the PM 17 warmth This is going to be interesting