Thanks Thanks:  0
Likes Likes:  1
Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Marantz 400 vs. 400B

  1. #1
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    25
    Points
    1,050
    Level
    17
    Level completed: 50%, Points required for next Level: 50
    Overall activity: 9.0%
    Achievements:
    1 year registered1000 Experience Points
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Marantz 400 vs. 400B

    I know they're different, I've been doing my reading but which is better?

    Have a line on a 400 which would look really nice next to my 4270 but would it be worthwhile to hold out for a 400B? Or are they just different from each other with no real preference?

  2. #2
    Exiled QQ Veteran Quadzilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    London, Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    1,827
    Points
    21,788
    Level
    92
    Level completed: 44%, Points required for next Level: 562
    Overall activity: 29.0%
    Achievements:
    Veteran10000 Experience PointsTagger Second ClassSocial
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: Marantz 400 vs. 400B

    I have a CD-400B that I recently had repaired and recapped. It has automatic 30kHz subcarrier adjustment (the CD-400 does not), probably just preset but not having another pot in such a delicate signal path is likely for the best ... and it is a LOT easier to dial-in than my JVC. I have never had a CD-400, but some people prefer to have that adjustment. The 400B also has record noise reduction circuitry, but I don't know if the 400 has it or not. Whichever you buy, find someone to recap it for you. It is well-worth the investment. It is over 40 years old, and a capacitor failure can damage something that cannot be replaced.
    Last edited by Quadzilla; 11-11-2017 at 08:45 PM.

  3. #3
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    25
    Points
    1,050
    Level
    17
    Level completed: 50%, Points required for next Level: 50
    Overall activity: 9.0%
    Achievements:
    1 year registered1000 Experience Points
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: Marantz 400 vs. 400B

    My understanding is that the CD-400 (no B) *is* essentially a JVC 4DD-5 in a Marantz case. Not sure exactly what the CD-400B is if anything, but it's a different design.

    Only experience I have so far is with a Sansui QRX-7001, and I have yet to try to play CD-4 on it. I still need media, and a suitable cartridge. However, I've been gifted (really!) a busted Marantz 4270 that should be back from the spa in a week or two, and it seems that accessories for this unit are falling out of the sky (I just missed a SQA-2 on the bay as well, simply because I've been spending too much this week - it went for about half what they usually seem to go for)

    Anyway, I have no idea what's good and what's not although for the price offered I am probably going to get the CD-400 anyway and see how it goes.

  4. #4
    Exiled QQ Veteran Quadzilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    London, Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    1,827
    Points
    21,788
    Level
    92
    Level completed: 44%, Points required for next Level: 562
    Overall activity: 29.0%
    Achievements:
    Veteran10000 Experience PointsTagger Second ClassSocial
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: Marantz 400 vs. 400B

    Since JVC developed the CD-4 format, a lot of demodulators were based on the JVC 4DD-5 ... or they were identical and just rebadged (a Fisher unit comes to mind, but there were more). It won't hurt to try the CD-400. I am using a JVC unit with a Sansui QRX-7001 in my home office system. I love having the adjustments on the front of the receiver, but I just can't get it to work. Maybe the knobs just need cleaning, but they are damn-near impossible to get at. Using the stand-alone demodulator also allows me to pass the phono signal to a Rega phono preamp, which is MUCH better than the Sansui's phono input. Good luck with the CD-400.

  5. #5
    1K Club - QQ Shooting Star Q-Eight's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2003
    Location
    Castlegar, BC, Canada
    Posts
    2,584
    Points
    35,373
    Level
    100
    Level completed: 0%, Points required for next Level: 0
    Overall activity: 0%
    Achievements:
    VeteranSocial25000 Experience Points
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: Marantz 400 vs. 400B

    I have a 400B that refuses to detect the CD-4 carrier. Luckily, I only borrowed it from a friend to see if it worked. Since it doesn't, it goes right back to him and I'll keep my Technics.

    Seems weird though that it wouldn't detect carrier.
    The voices in my head come from Right Rear only!

  6. #6
    Moderator The Quadfather's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Location
    Dixie
    Posts
    1,408
    Points
    18,295
    Level
    85
    Level completed: 89%, Points required for next Level: 55
    Overall activity: 7.0%
    Achievements:
    Veteran10000 Experience PointsSocial
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: Marantz 400 vs. 400B

    Quote Originally Posted by n8nagel View Post
    My understanding is that the CD-400 (no B) *is* essentially a JVC 4DD-5 in a Marantz case. Not sure exactly what the CD-400B is if anything, but it's a different design.

    Only experience I have so far is with a Sansui QRX-7001, and I have yet to try to play CD-4 on it. I still need media, and a suitable cartridge. However, I've been gifted (really!) a busted Marantz 4270 that should be back from the spa in a week or two, and it seems that accessories for this unit are falling out of the sky (I just missed a SQA-2 on the bay as well, simply because I've been spending too much this week - it went for about half what they usually seem to go for)

    Anyway, I have no idea what's good and what's not although for the price offered I am probably going to get the CD-400 anyway and see how it goes.
    For the "suitable cartridge", try an Audio Technica AT440MLb It's a very effective cart for CD-4, and it's not that expensive, usually under $200.00 . I use it's predecessor, the AT440MLa. Be aware, it is not sold as a CD-4 cart, and the specs are deceiving. If you went by the specs, you would think "stereo only". And by the way, the Marantz CD400 is a JVC 4DD5 recased. I mean it's the exact same circuit board. It's top notch as 4DD5s are top notch. The CD400B is a different design, utilizing automatic carrier adjustment, but it isn't necessary, because if you have a good cart, and a good 4DD5, you only have to set it once. I have never heard a CD400B, but I have read of some users having trouble with the self adjusting carrier setup, but it might not be a problem with a really good cart, like the AT440MLb.
    The Quadfather

  7. Likes Circular Vibes liked this post
  8. #7
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    25
    Points
    1,050
    Level
    17
    Level completed: 50%, Points required for next Level: 50
    Overall activity: 9.0%
    Achievements:
    1 year registered1000 Experience Points
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: Marantz 400 vs. 400B

    Well, I'm glad to hear the CD-400 isn't a consolation prize as I already bought it

    I am still waiting to get my 4270 back and don't have a suitable cart yet (mostly because I'm anticipating the bill for the 4270), but I have tested it as an outboard phono pre and it's working at least in that respect, so I've got that going for me...

  9. #8
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Posts
    25
    Points
    1,050
    Level
    17
    Level completed: 50%, Points required for next Level: 50
    Overall activity: 9.0%
    Achievements:
    1 year registered1000 Experience Points
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default Re: Marantz 400 vs. 400B

    Quote Originally Posted by n8nagel View Post
    Well, I'm glad to hear the CD-400 isn't a consolation prize as I already bought it

    I am still waiting to get my 4270 back and don't have a suitable cart yet (mostly because I'm anticipating the bill for the 4270), but I have tested it as an outboard phono pre and it's working at least in that respect, so I've got that going for me...
    Follow up:

    After a new MPX board and at least some sort of adjustment/alignment... I have a working 4270!

    Action items:

    1) scrub the knobs and fix a few where the metal is coming loose from the plastic
    2) replace the little Phillips screws that hold the face on - those are the most glaring cosmetic flaw
    3) hope that some rich friend or relative realizes I need a wood case
    4) buy an AT cartridge
    5) screw it, I'm selling a kidney so I can get both a wood case and a SQA-2B

    and FINALLY... and the reason I'm posting...

    how do I correctly hook up the turntable -> CD-400 -> 4270?

    Most of it is pretty obvious. Assuming that CD-400 should be as close as possible to turntable, pretty obvious where TT RCAs land, hook CD-4 front and rear outputs of CD-400 to CD-4/Aux jacks on 4270, hook aux cord (CD player) to aux input on CD-400. Correct?

    THEN I am assuming that *if* I want to use 4270 phono stage for 2-channel instead of CD-400 I connect another patch from 2CH DIRECT OUT on CD-400 to PHONO on 4270 and throw the switch on the back of CD-400. Correct? (is 2CH DIRECT OUT after going through phono stage in CD-400 or just a pass through? Am assuming the latter otherwise why call it "direct"?)

    NOW the question. Where do I land the ground from the TT? It seemed to work fine landed on only the CD-400 when I tested but if I use the 2CH DIRECT OUT should I then daisy chain it to the ground terminal on the 4270? Or is there no real meaningful differences in the two phono stages? Seems like for "transparent" and "non gear weenie friendly" operation I should just rely on the phono stage in the CD-400 and forget about 2CH DIRECT OUT.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •