Marantz 4400 Quadraphonic receiver

[Golden Gate ER]

Made 1974, it's not every day you find such a clean example.

 

[fiddlefye]

Not seeing any pics and I presume there are some? Hope it gets sorted out. I've never had a 4400, but I've owned two 4300s. Sold one and kept the mint one. It will be my one representative Marantz receiver and has a permanent home here in its nice wood case. The tuner section is really fine, you have quad to play with and when bridged enough power to wake the dead (far more that rated). What's not to like?

 

[Golden Gate ER]

For some unknown reason photos don't load on this site. I alwas get a invalid_file error. But it was not alwas this way. Strange stuff

 

[Golden Gate ER]

Just tried all photo sizes with 2.0M being the smallest still getting a "invalid file" message.

 

[TubeHiFiNut]

The picture links are to facebook.

Prime Minister - Erik, are there any issues linking a picture from facebook to HFH?

 

[Golden Gate ER]

I tried liking the photos becuase uploading would not work. Come to find out nither will linking.

 

[TubeHiFiNut]

I tried liking the photos becuase uploading would not work. Come to find out nither will linking.

Can you email the photos to me and I'll try?

 

[fiddlefye]

Ah, are the files listed as being .jpeg? If not that could be the issue.

 

[bktheking]

I've redone 3 4400's, nice receivers but man are they difficult to work on, so many boards and the relays are in the worst spot possible. It's close to a 2 hr job to change the pair, on a 22xx it's a 10 minute job. 2 hr for someone just doing them for the first time, once you get it down to a science they can be changed in under an hour.

 

[fiddlefye]

I've redone 3 4400's, nice receivers but man are they difficult to work on, so many boards and the relays are in the worst spot possible. It's close to a 2 hr job to change the pair, on a 22xx it's a 10 minute job. 2 hr for someone just doing them for the first time, once you get it down to a science they can be changed in under an hour.

Oh my yes, a whole lot going on in there. Tough to work on, not exactly a lot of fun to cart around, but when they're working they are pretty nice. I see you have a Citation receiver. I've only seen one and man, are they a thing of beauty! If you ever have some pics I suspect a whole lot of people would enjoy drooling over them.

 

[bktheking]

See if this works.

[/URL]

 

[bktheking]

Under the hood shot. When I got the unit it was missing the tuning cap cover which I have since purchased and installed. They are the same tuning cap found in the sx1250!

[/URL]

 

[bktheking]

I actually had 2 of them at one point in the house, this one was for an ak member who wanted one so badly I found it 3 provinces away- rebuilt it and shipped it to him in California. This one was a mess, I had to replace every single connector in the unit.

[/URL]

 

[bktheking]

The preamp board in them is a bear to work on, double sided boards- very difficult to get the components replaced on it.

[/URL]

 

[bktheking]

Another fact about the citation- the entire dial assembly is on a sub chassis that pivots upwards to allow you access to the lamps.

[/URL]

 

[TubeHiFiNut]

bktheking - The Citation Receiver has to be one of the classiest and most beautiful receivers ever made.....

 

[prime minister]

Agreed, David. Even though almost every receiver I have ever owned, especially the big ones, has been a sonic disaster, this thing still intrigues me.

 

[fiddlefye]

Agreed, David. Even though almost every receiver I have ever owned, especially the big ones, has been a sonic disaster, this thing still intrigues me.

My thinking on receivers is that if you're expecting one to do everything as well as separates or a good integrated you're bound for disappointment. I have a little collection of a few receivers that have come my way. I've never expected them to be capable of the level of performance of my integrateds let alone the separates, but for the purposes I put them to they make nice music. I have an Onkyo TX-4500 Mk II in a system in the kitchen, a Marantz 4300 quad in the shop and a little Advent 300 that we take to the cottage (plus a couple of back-ups). All have very nice tuner sections... why else bother with a receiver at all? Horses for courses....

 

[prime minister]

My thinking on receivers is that if you're expecting one to do everything as well as separates or a good integrated you're bound for disappointment. I have a little collection of a few receivers that have come my way. I've never expected them to be capable of the level of performance of my integrateds let alone the separates, but for the purposes I put them to they make nice music. I have an Onkyo TX-4500 Mk II in a system in the kitchen, a Marantz 4300 quad in the shop and a little Advent 300 that we take to the cottage (plus a couple of back-ups). All have very nice tuner sections... why else bother with a receiver at all? Horses for courses....

But that's what they said in the ads!

 

[fiddlefye]

But that's what they said in the ads!

I missed out on the ads and never owned a receiver until I was well into my 50s. A mint Technics SA-800 turned up at a yard sale for $5 and who can resist that? A few more have come along since. Pretty things and they serve some useful purposes, just not as a substitute for my principal systems.