charlesp210
Member
Unlikely considering there's a correlating Denon offering for almost any Marantz (and more of course)... unless there was a significant cost savings - at the component level - I would guess any differences are merely 'hobbling' of features that are still present. In many cases they're probably more 'hard-set' at the factory than on the Marantz version. Though this would merely be conjecture on my part based on owning several models from both brands over the years. I can't see adding internal amps equaling less noise (and a lower MSRP)... but anything is possible.
They might choose to use a "correct" neutral sounding steep digital filter rather than a "champagne sound" slow digital filter.
It's a design choice, not a matter of more intense circuitry. And possibly one of several such design choices.
BTW, I'm on the side that the faults, as shown, are tolerably inconsequential to the point where, you might like the Marantz sound better, or at least convince yourself you do on occasion. It's not neutral, but it's inconsequential compared with the potential advantages of the room correction with editor app, and other such features, if they "work" for you. (I haven't enough experience with such things to know if they'd work for me. They might work for me in the context of a second "AV" system if not my high-end-as-I-can-make-it main system.)
Actually, the fancy buffers (I'd really like to see intense comparison of 7705 without the HDAM buffers, and 8805 with), copper shielding, etc, are not meaningless in this application. And not just for the luxurious looks (though...that does seem to be a driving factor in this market segment).
One tweako choice demands others. So if you have an especially ultrasonically noisy digital reconstruction system like a slow filter or DSD, it places HIGHER demands on the following circuitry. So the fancier stuff might actually help more than it does if a correct digital filter were chosen.