New reference Marantz compared to McIntosh


For those who’ve had the chance to compare, how does the newer reference Marantz components compare to McIntosh? The prices are almost comparable.
Convert?fit=crop&h=128&policy=eyjlehbpcnkioje0ota2ndg0njusimnhbgwiolsicmvhzcisimnvbnzlcnqixx0%3d&rotate=exif&signature=f9571042ffa648152a0ea6cf103a194b3a291de79e6f1da1882c63788c2c81a0&w=128sndsrtaud
For what it is worth I have a McIntosh MA6600 and Marantz PM8004 integrated. The PM8004 is below the reference line of Marantz.

The PM8004 is a tad leaner sounding. The MA6600 more warm sounding to my ears. Both are excellent. The MA6600 just more so. I would think the Marantz reference line would be top notch. The McIntosh besides premium sound also brings some wonderful features beyond that of the Marantz. Either would great too own and more than worth a audition.
Here's a good review of the Marantz Reference Series SC-7S2 Preamplifier and MA-9S2 Mono Amplifiers.
The reviewer compares the MA-9S2 Mono Amps to the 7000$ Bryston 6B SST2 amp and the 3100$ NuForce P-9 preamp.
The reviewer also uses the top of the line Marantz UD9004 Universal Player.
http://www.soundstagehifi.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=242:marantz

Here's a review of the Marantz UD9004 universal player which plays everything.
http://www.audiophilia.com/wp/?p=4417
Late reply but here is how the D&M Holdings McIntosh cloning sequence goes:

1. DVD-A1UDCI
2. UD9004 (add beefier metal)
3. MVP891 (add McIntosh logo, delete one HDMI)

Any of these players should make a MCH SACD afficionado very happy, as currently there are no other MCH SACD players sporting six AKM 32 bit DACs along with fully balanced stereo stage.
I have owned both. The Marantz Reference Gear is world class and as musical as McIntosh. So really you cannot go wrong. I just replaced my McIntosh C2300 tube preamp with the Marantz SC-7S2 preamp and I am very happy, no loss of what the C2300 did well, but now I have all of that, plus a lower noise floor with better micro details and a touch of glare is gone. Use the Marantz with my McIntosh MC403 amp with great musical results. The front end is a Marantz SA7-S1 CD/SACD player and I have to say does not get much better than what I am now listening to, no matter the format.
I have owned both. The Marantz Reference Gear is world class and as musical as McIntosh. So really you cannot go wrong. I just replaced my McIntosh C2300 tube preamp with the Marantz SC-7S2 preamp and I am very happy, no loss of what the C2300 did well, but now I have all of that, plus a lower noise floor with better micro details and a touch of glare is gone. Use the Marantz with my McIntosh MC403 amp with great musical results. The front end is a Marantz SA7-S1 CD/SACD player and I have to say does not get much better than what I am now listening to, no matter the format.
I had the marantz pm 15s2 integrated amp(very nice) Then I picked up a mc2100 hooked it up to the marantz and used the marantz as a pre amp.(nicer) Then I picked up a c-34 and replaced the marantz.(much nicer)  The marantz sounded cleaner at higher volume. The Mcintosh sounded more musical and detailed everywhere. Both amps seemed to like bigger drivers over smaller ones. Both are non fatiguing but the mcintosh is much more dynamic. Ive owned a few different marantz set ups and the pm15-s2 was my favorite  But I sold it and kept the mcintosh.

I see this thread has been resurrected.  FWIW, I audition my Marantz PM15S2 for several hours against a McIntosh MA6300 that was approximately the same output into a pair of Sonus Faber Cremona loudspeakers.  I walked out of the store with the Marantz and it wasn't due to the PM15S2 being $1500 less either. 

I would say the Marantz reference gear, the stuff built at their reference factory in Japan, compares very favorably if you want solid state.  In all fairness to McIntosh, they make both and the MA6300 was their entry level integrated.

I had a MAC6700, 200 watt per channel integrated, with a built-in tuner module, which replaced an NAD Masters Series M3 180 watt per channel integrated.

Before buying the M3, I compared it with the top end Marantz and I thought the M3 didn't sound like it was "struggling" to drive a pair of Totem Fire monitors.  The Marantz seemed to be "running out of gas", especially listening to dynamic symphonic music.

I always wanted McIntosh equipment, but before upgrading from the M3, I told my wife that I suspected it would sound "different", but not necessarily "better"...boy was I wrong.  The McIntosh just sounded smoother, more "musical", didn't seem to have "its sound".

The MA660/6700 both have the McIntosh "autoformer", which I suspect has some role in the smoothness of its sound.

I've since upgraded to McIntosh separates.  One distinct advantage in McIntosh equipment is its ability to hang on to its resale value.