The old balanced vs unbalanced argument. “That old chestnut?” It depends on the circuit design, power supply, and design of the corresponding amp. In theory balanced should sound better, all being equal, but in reality all is not equal. I like to see the option to run XLR balanced cables and I’ve looked at the Marantz hoping it came with balanced outputs, but it’s mostly due to gear compatibility as I have a balanced headphone amp that really shines with balanced sources. However, other amps don’t and I wouldn’t rule out the Marantz until I heard it. I really only pay attention if the source gear has a true balanced design, and proper power supplies. Now...the Technics mentioned above does not support Roon, that is a killer for me. The Marantz is Roon tested which is fancy speak for “it will play via Apple Airplay” which may mean lower resolution. I won’t ever buy another piece of gear that doesn’t support Roon (looking at you, Sony HAPZ1ES), so hopefully Marsntz will step up to Roon Ready vs Roon tested. I have a Technics DVDA10 DVD-A player from a decade or more. It is pretty but only average quality. I’ve listened to Technics DACs of recent, and I would not choose them over high end Marantz. |
The most ignorant audiophile are the ones always blabbing about balanced being the only way to have a good system. A true balanced system will cost double the money but very unlikely give better sound, it is all about implementing the best design and parts. Of course (real) balanced equipment has it place, but very seldom do we need it in home Hi-Fi. There is doubt that there is a lot of good sounding balanced equipment on the market, but so is there single ended equipment sounding just as good and made much cheaper as no need for doubling of parts. Some designers are of the opinion that doing everything double increases the chances to worsen the sound quality instead of making it better. |
I have posted this link before, but I think some of you would find it interesting. http://www.pureaudio.co.nz/?page_id=270 |
