Marantz SA-10 CD/SACD player

what is then?
ps. under $10,000

 

I can tell you this, I have been using the Marantz for a couple of months, it's operation is so quiet, so smooth, and all the functions work flawlessly, unlike another player I had before I bought the Marantz, which was the discontinued PS Audio Direct Stream Memory Player, with the Oppo transport. Another real plus with the Marantz SA-10 is it's beautiful DAC, every function, every source, flawless reproduction, so nice!

According to the article I have given, the Yamaha can be purchased at a substantial discount, which is always nice. I'm sure either player would be exceptional, however I have been sold on the SA-10 and it's superlative, well engineered DAC for a long time before I purchased one, finally!

▷ Marantz SA 10 vs Yamaha CD-S3000: Review & Full Comparison

Good luck in choosing a winner. In my book they would both be winners!

 

Does marantz have a transport only version?

 

I'm using Audioquest interconnects (I forget which ones) and the stock power cord.

 

I'm not aware of a Marantz transport only, however, don't discount their DAC, it's wonderful! If you have a DAC, you might want to sell it and use the Marantz DAC instead, which is what I did, I sold my PS Audio Direct Stream DAC. Here is some info on the DAC in the SA-10, it's impressive. I use the USB with my HP I-7 computer, the coaxial with my Sony 4K Blu-ray player, and the Optical with my LG 4K television, it works flawlessly with all inputs!



Marantz Musical Mastering: MMM-Stream and MMM-Conversion

DSD is at the heart of the way the SA-10 handles digital audio: PCM and DXD inputs are all upconverted to DSD at 11.2MHz using the proprietary MMM-Stream converter within the player, and then the high-frequency signal produced is processed by the unique MMM-Conversion stage, used in place of a conventional DAC, to produce the analog output.

The MMM-Stream section of the process replaces the oversampling filters normally used in digital to analog conversion, and allows the implementation of the Marantz Musical Mastering filtering. These filters - one providing a slow roll-off and very short impulse response, the other offering the option of a medium roll-off with short pre-ringing and longer post-ringing - are essentially the same as those found in the Marantz SA-11 disc player and NA-11 network music player, but here they're implemented at a much higher oversampling rate, thanks to that upconversion to DSD11.2.

In fact, two system clocks are used, to ensure the most accurate upconversion of the incoming signal, whether its from disc or the digital inputs: the 44.1kHz of CD, and its multiples - 88.2kHz, 176.4kHz and so on - are upsampled to 11.2896MHz, while 48kHz and its multiples are taken up to 12.288MHz. This is done for maximum precision, and to avoid any need for sample rate conversion of the kind were the system to have to convert, say, 192kHz audio to DSD12.2MHz.

In addition, all of this conversion is now done in Digital Signal Processing with 32-bit floating-point precision, rather than the 24-bit integer method used in such systems in the past.



Combining this with the reduction to a 1-bit signal straight after the oversampling filter and Sigma Delta Modulation allows a pure DSD-standard signal to be passed to the conversion section in the form of a very high-frequency stream of pulses, requiring only a very high-quality low-pass filter to remove all the superfluous high frequencies and pass the purest possible audio to the player's output stage.

So why develop all this in-house? The Marantz engineering team says that, as ever, extensive listening sessions gave the reasons: We found big sound quality differences when PCM signals got converted to DSD outside of a conventional DAC and then fed to the DSD input of the conventional DAC. The conclusion of our finding was that for best sound quality we have to do the conversion ourselves.

"This experience led us to evaluate all kind of SDM structures and optimise this to achieve the best sound quality."

The same thinking informed the design of the DSD-to-analog filter itself, which feeds into the familiar Marantz HDAM (Hyper Dynamic Amplifier Modules) in the output stage, here used in dual-differential configuration for optimal sound quality.



In the same way, even the headphone output on the player is optimized: like the HDAMs, it's built entirely from discrete components, rather than using simpler 'amp on a chip' technology, for the very best sound quality.


Built to Perform

Like the partnering PM-10 integrated amplifier, the SA-10 is constructed to the highest possible standards, with a double-layered copper-plated chassis for excellent rejection of mechanical and electrical interference, and casework constructed from thick non-magnetic aluminium panels and 5mm thick top lid. Both products also sit on aluminium machining feet.



That may all seem very complex, as well as making it clear just how much work has gone into the design of this player, but in essence at the heart of the SA-10 is a digital-to-analog solution that's as elegant as it is innovative, and developed by the Marantz engineering team for one very simple reason:

 

I'm not sure of that link, it has the dimensions, price and weight wrong for the Yamaha. What CD player is 55cm wide?

 

That link you provided is odd. The Yamaha weights 20kg, little over 43lb, not 16kg. Thats net, boxed it weighs even more, over 55lb.

I believe the Marantz is 1 or 2lb less heavy, but it's got a lot more machinery inside of it due to the heavy duty dac section. It's something I have very little interest in actually, hence why I asked do they sell a transport only.

Several CD players back in the day were over 20" wide. The older Pioneer Elites back in the early 90s using stable platter transports were massive units, over 40lb of pure machined metal, tons of copper used in the construction. Ditto for the Sony SCD-1. The Yamaha CDS3000 seems to take inspiration from those.

What I like about the Marantz is how much more compact it is, it looks roughtly to be abou 25% smaller then the Yamaha, but is nearly the same density. But I'm purely interested in them as a transport. Both units appear to be using excellent CD Mechs to reduce noise and performance. Maybe the Marantz is a little better? I just don't give a hoot about dacs though, I will be acquiring my own.

Hmm... maybe I'm better off going for a an older Philips or Pioneer transport after all...

 

Actually the Yamaha is not 20" wide. The dimensions on that comparison website are giving the boxed dimensions!

 

I have a Yamaha CD S3000 and think it sounds amazing as a player, having said that.... when used as a transport only I actually prefer the sound (of CD) from my Primare BD32 (Oppo 93 transport) run into a 20 year old Audio Note DAC 2.1x Signature. The Primare is XLR digitally connected and the Yamaha RCA to the dac so there is a chance this could be the difference and, as we all know, Audio Note DAC's are not known for measuring well but sounding great and Yamaha is all about accuracy so there maybe a miss match? Not sure that is any help at all! If you need SACD then Luxman and Esoteric would be worth looking at but if it's simply a CD transport you are after then there should be many, many options available.

"Hmm... maybe I'm better off going for a an older Philips or Pioneer transport after all..." maybe the best option. Of course the Audio Note UK transports would almost certainly be better option depending on your budget Audio Note CDT One/II CD transport & DAC 2.1x Signature D/A processor

 

Why don't you start another thread asking that question or search for a thread discussing that. As has already been posted this is a thread discussing the Marantz SA-10. It's not a thread discussing what's the best CD player under $10,000.

Try Google or search the Marantz website. Pretty basic tasks IMO.

 

Hi all, this is my first post on this forum.
Does anyone here know of any test/review where the SA10 is compared to the Ruby SA-KI. ???
Or if someone have done a honest (blind) test one vs the other?
Or maybe a test comparing Marantz SA10/Ruby SA-KI to some other high end gear?
I have read some magazine tests/review, it seems like everyone is positive never negative!!! , Marantz have made perfect creations!

I have the opportunity to buy a one year old used SA10 from a private seller, or a one year old used Ruby SA-KI from a dealer.
Both have the same price.

 

Here is a quick dealer comparison of the two products. The SA-10 does have many improvements over the SA-K1, but you would be very happy with either of them. I can tell you the SA-10 has one extremely "smooth" and quiet transport. Everything about the SA-10 has been well thought out and engineered. If the condition of the players is comparable, I would absolutely opt for the SA-10. Just out of curiosity, are they both the same color, black or Champagne ? I would also mention the DAC in the SA-10 is so very nice, I have no complaints at all. I use mine with the TV optical out, Blu-ray coaxial out and computer USB. Every function works perfectly every time, no lock in problems which I have experienced with other brands I have used in the past. Bottom line, the SA-10 would be a nice improvement over the SA-K1, but again, you would be very happy with the Ruby as well. Let me also mention the balanced outputs with the SA-10, which most people want in this level of player.

Compare Marantz SA10S1 vs Marantz SA-KI Ruby vs Marantz CD6006 vs Marantz CD5005

 

Thanks,
The SA10 is black and the Ruby is champagne.
What I have learned so far is that both have the same transport SACDM-3.
The specifications are almost identical except for the balanced out on the SA10. B&H Photo have missed a few specs on the Ruby.
On the SA10 it's possible to select different Dither and Noise shaping the Ruby does not have this option. For 44.1/16, is it useful or not?
The SA10 is slightly heavier by 1.3kg or 2.66lbs, does the Ruby has a smaller transformer? Or is there an extra steel plate in the bottom of the SA10 ?
Do they have the same D/A converter chips, the AK4137EQ ?
Are the analog section the same in SA10 and Ruby ?
Buying new the SA10 is more expensive so something inside the Ruby are inferior.

What is so special about Ken Ishiwata KI-equipment? Did he select "better" components or did he change the circuit boards layout or both?
According to Marantz Ken Ishiwata was involved in the development of the SA10 as well, without taking credit and putting his name on the front.

How is the SA10 compared to other similar high end products?

 

I would choose the SA-10. At the same price there is no reason to get the Ruby. It only offers less than the SA-10.

The SA-10 has the latest cutting edge DAC from Marantz, developed in-house.

I love my SA-10. I think it sounds better than my Oppo UDP-205 and my previous Esoteric K-01x.

 

Better than Oppo UDP-205 and Esoteric K-01x !!!

THAT is some serious jewels.

In what way do you think the SA10 sounds better than the K-01x ?

I have not listen to the Marantz players yet, but I think the K-01x is a wonder, clear and clean.
Soft yet aggressive when needed.
I listened to a two-channel recording of organ music recorded in a cathedral and I was thinking "I'm there, this is for real, i'm in the cathedral".
It gave me goosebumps.
And violines smooth as silk.
If the SA10 or Ruby sound is close to that of K-01x, I want a Marantz.

My "Stereo"
Loudspeakers: Megatrend mk1
Amplifier: Michelson & Austin TVA-1 (6550 tubes + modified)
Digital music source: ?

 

The K-01x is a great player. I thought it was a bit analytical - I can't say I connected with the sound for whatever reason. I sold it when I got my Oppo UDP-205 and was very happy with the Oppo as its replacement.

Another reason to choose the SA-10 is being able to choose the filters, dither, and noise shaping. I changed two of the defaults and am happy I had that choice. If you appreciate the sound of the K-01X, you might prefer one of the other filters and noise shaping as I did.

I also directly compared the Oppo-UDP 205 to the Marantz and greatly preferred the Marantz in that instance.

Unlike the K-01x, where converting PCM to DSD didn't bring benefits (in my opinion), the DSD conversion in the SA-10 has no such downsides (in my opinion).