RCVR: Marantz 4270

[eyg2181]

It's been pretty quiet in these parts for a few weeks, so i figured i'd shake things up a bit with another looker.
The Marantz 4270 Quad Receiver!

Rarity: UNKNOWN
Average Sale Price: $500-?


Front:

Front Left:

Front Right:

Back:

The Marantz 4270 In The Dark!:

Marantz 4270 W/ The SQ Adaptor:

 

[Doug G.]

Ah, such beauty!

Doug

 

[Disclord]

Marantz had discussions with Tate Audio, LTD. and Audionics for a Tate IC DES-based SQ adapter for this receiver, but the delay in the chip design by National Semiconductor and slow-going by Audionics made Marantz drop the idea. I guess the Tate DES adapter would have been the SQA-3?

 

[skydog2112]

That is a work of art.There is two on ebay right now, one auction is over $500 and the other is buy it now at $800.Truely a beauty.Marantz looks so much better with the wood box.

 

[jefe1]

Yes but isn't the 4400 model more desirable because of the increased power and the scope? I do agree about the wood case.

 

[skydog2112]

Yes I'd rather have the 4400 (with a wood box).What is the scope for anyway?Is it just something cool or does it serve a purpose?

 

[Quadrockasaurus]

The 'scope in the 4400 is mostly for the tuner metering....signal strength and multipath...maybe for checking if signal is out of phase as well (never tried it). It'll also tell you if your source is mono rather than stereo before your ears will...otherwise, it's a funky old-school lightshow. Very pretty on acoustic instruments and some classical music....although it's occasionally handy for a few other things. I've noticed when I compare the waveforms between source and copy on a tape recording I've made...I notice the waveform is not quite the same. Sharper on the original, more diffuse on the recording. I guess you could use it somehow to pick how accurate your (..tape or whatever) recorder is...or something like that. I haven't really done any major experiments in this area...I'm just mentioning it as a passing interest.

To be totally honest...despite the scopes funkyness... sometimes I wish my 4400 just had some regular meters as well....like the 4300 & the 4270 below it in the range. The scope for tuner metering seems like overkill. I also prefer the push button tape monitor switches on the 4270...than the stiff knob on the 4400 & 4300.

I've never owned a 4270...but from where I'm standing, for just sheer the convenience of design (..those buttons I mentioned)/looks...and I guess secondhand affordability (usually much cheaper than the 4400/4300)...this is probably the best vintage Marantz quadraphonic receiver in the range.

I have heard a model near the bottom of this range as well (...I think a 4230...or something like that) and it sounded excellent, (..amp & tuner)...I don't think you can go wrong picking up any of the units in this range...

 

[skydog2112]

Thanks Quadrock,one more question if you don't mind.Would'nt a Marantz 4270 be comparable to a Sansui QRX-7500?The reason I'm asking is why do the Marantz' go for more than the Sansui.On ebay tonight a 4270 went for $700 plus,where as a QRX-7500 went for $305.The condition was about the same.I've even heard the Sansui' are a little better quads over all,from a few differant sources online.I don't know if this is right or wrong.tia I know looks has got a lot to do with it.The 4270 is about as good looking of a receiver I have ever seen.

 

[Quadrockasaurus]

Thanks Quadrock,one more question if you don't mind.Would'nt a Marantz 4270 be comparable to a Sansui QRX-7500?The reason I'm asking is why do the Marantz' go for more than the Sansui.On ebay tonight a 4270 went for $700 plus,where as a QRX-7500 went for $305.The condition was about the same.I've even heard the Sansui' are a little better quads over all,from a few differant sources online.I don't know if this is right or wrong.tia I know looks has got a lot to do with it.The 4270 is about as good looking of a receiver I have ever seen.

Don't wanna throw this 4270 thread too far off...but to answer your question...I own a Sansui QRX-6500 and a Marantz 4400. For overall sound quality (...and no offence to this thread intended..) I much prefer the Sansui, and I'd think the (top of the line) Sansui QRX-7500 would be quite a bit better than the (mid-range) 4270...but I haven't heard a comparison.

The 4270 is a pretty looking unit, and it should sound great....but at the prices you mentioned....seriously....grab a QRX-7500..!!

 

[Quad Linda]

It would have been SQA-T.

A very pretty receiver. Sold piles of these back in the day. I have a 2440 w/wood case, remote, SQA-2 and SQA-1. Many romantic nights with nothing but those blue lights illuminating the room.

Linda

Marantz had discussions with Tate Audio, LTD. and Audionics for a Tate IC DES-based SQ adapter for this receiver, but the delay in the chip design by National Semiconductor and slow-going by Audionics made Marantz drop the idea. I guess the Tate DES adapter would have been the SQA-3?

 

[Disclord]

It would have been SQA-T.

A very pretty receiver. Sold piles of these back in the day. I have a 2440 w/wood case, remote, SQA-2 and SQA-1. Many romantic nights with nothing but those blue lights illuminating the room.

Linda

Marantz was supposed to produce a QS module with the Sansui Vario-Matrix IC's but I don't think they were ever produced, even in prototype form. The SQA-2 is the CBS/Motorola IC's with the standard design, so its "Full Logic" SQ performance is exactly what CBS intended at the time.

 

[TVB]

I love Marantz Quad stuff. My retro Quad system uses a Marantz 4100 Quad integrated amp with SQA2. It has the same beautiful power meters with blackout face. The sound is fantastic..Incidently, I just sold my Marantz 2440 wood cabinet on line for $110.00, which was more than I paid for the 2440 with the cabinet and SQA1 adapter combined..People do love those original wood cabinets. I also have a Marantz 4000 Quadradial preamp and Adcom 4channel power amp waiting in the wings...Love that Marantz!

 

[krkier]

The SQA-2 is the CBS/Motorola IC's with the standard design, so its "Full Logic" SQ performance is exactly what CBS intended at the time.

The SQA-2 has the CX-chipset from Sony, nothing from Motorola. The one with the Motorola chips is the SQA-2B with the Sony CX-050 as basic SQ decoder, and the MC1314 and MC1315 for the logic.

-Kristian

 

[Disclord]

The SQA-2 has the CX-chipset from Sony, nothing from Motorola. The one with the Motorola chips is the SQA-2B with the Sony CX-050 as basic SQ decoder, and the MC1314 and MC1315 for the logic.

-Kristian

Thank's for correcting me on that - I don't think I've ever seen reference to the SQA-2B before - the SQA-2 seems to be all that's ever talked about, yet I must have seen some mention of it to know that Motorola IC's were used at one point - at least Marantz never used the Motorola MC1312 SQ Matrix IC since Sony's was much so much better. Marantz probably got a cheaper price on the Motorola Logic IC's - they were never expensive.

 

[TVB]

So which decoder is better..the sqa 2 or sqa2b..I just saw an sqa2b on line that was $355, not sure what it went for...

 

[Quad Linda]

Actually, mine is SQA-2B.

Linda

Thank's for correcting me on that - I don't think I've ever seen reference to the SQA-2B before - the SQA-2 seems to be all that's ever talked about, yet I must have seen some mention of it to know that Motorola IC's were used at one point - at least Marantz never used the Motorola MC1312 SQ Matrix IC since Sony's was much so much better. Marantz probably got a cheaper price on the Motorola Logic IC's - they were never expensive.

 

[Disclord]

Actually, mine is SQA-2B.

Linda

Did we talk about the IC's used in it? I can't remember, but if we did, I'll bet that's where I mixed up my info. I wish I could remember stuff as well as when I was 20.