The best sounding FM Tuner is.....

hi bart,

save yer money, & do not purchase *either* tuner. there's literally dozens of vintage tuners that will outperform either of these, and the most expensive will cost ) go here for great tuna info:

http://www.fmtunerinfo.com/

here's the forum site for tuna:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/fmtuners/

regards,

doug s., so many tunas, so little time... ;~)

I have never personally seen, touched, measured or listened to a Marantz 10B. The gentleman that calibrates all of my test equipment happens to own one though. After aligning the unit, he not only told me that it measures better than any other tuner that he's ever repaired / calibrated in most every respect, but that the sound quality is also unmatched in most every respect. Given that the complexity of design and production costs that this product brought with it are what brought Saul Marantz to his knees financially, forcing him to sell the company, i can believe that this is a truly astounding product. That is, when it is fully aligned with all of the circuitry working as it was designed. Then again, i'm taking someone else's word on it, but i've never had to doubt their word before.

As far as the fmtunerinfo goes, i've had some very different results than what they've reported. On one tuner, i commented to them that it sounded "tinny", like a transistor radio. They posted this and responded back on their website that the tuner actually sounded very good and was quite full bodied sounding. After comparing the tuner to several others, in one of the other reviews they referenced this tuner and said that it had somewhat of a "solid state sound". Yet if you read their main review of this tuner, it says "we think it sounds great but two of our contributors think it sounds bright". Bright is not the same thing as lacking in warmth with a glaring upper midrange / hot lower treble.

Another tuner that they absolutely trashed is a very nice sounding unit. If it sounded as bad as they said, i would have been a fool to buy the four of them that i have. I actually heard a demo where we were comparing the signal directly from the turntable feeding the broadcast station's transmitter and then listening to the broadcast over the air via this tuner. It was as close as one could get. Is the tuner "ultra-sensitive", "fancy" or built like a tank? Not by any means. Does it sound good? Most certainly, my answer is a resounding "YES" !!!

Speaking of sensitivity, the tuner that i spent the least amount of money on has the most sensitive front end of any that i've ever used or owned. The fact that Larry Schotz designed the front end, the manufacturer touted the sensitivity of this unit as being the high point of the design and one reviewer stated that "the sensitivity exceeds the theoretical limit" should tell you something. The tuner website said "they were pretty good values when new and still sound pretty good on strong signals". All i can say is that it sounds better on using a 6' piece of wire as an antenna on a distant station than my Magnum does using a highly resonant FM antenna mounted on the roof of my building.

Another tuner that i had, and that they referred to as the first "super tuner", measured better than any other tuner ever made in some respects. Yet when i listened to these tuners, the sound quality from unit to unit was anything less than consistent. Given that i've owned well over a half dozen of these specific tuners, some of them at the same time, i was able to do many "head to head comparisons" between them. Super tuner it is not, at least not sonically. Why did i have so many of them? I kept reading about what a great tuner they were, so i bought a bunch and was going to keep the pick of the litter. I ended up selling all of them out of disappointment. One guy was so unhappy with the performance of the tuner, that i gave him his money back and i kept it. I'm going to work on this one in the near future and hopefully improve the sonics.

Another tuner that i have that sounds very nice has some very obvious "digital" flaws to it. It probably doesn't measure all that well compared to some of my other tuners, but there i still keep hanging onto it.

If there is one thing that i have learned out of all of this, it is this. One of these days, i need to clean house : )

If there is another thing i've learned, it is that these guys are doing the best that they can with what they've got to offer their sonic observations. All mass produced gear have tolerances that cause some units to measure and sound quite different from the next. On top of that, atmospheric conditions vary from day to day and even hour to hour, so relying on "over the air" test results can be somewhat less than conclusive. Other than that, i appreciate the time and effort that they put into performing these tests and sharing their observations with us. At least with these guys, we know that they aren't afraid to point out flaws and / or amend previous statements that need correction as their levels of experience and equipment exposure increases. Sean
>

sean,

your comments about fmtunerinfo.com yust reinforce what i believe to be true about *all* audio gear, only more so, for tunas. :>) it's the fact that system synergy, tastes, & room is key. it's more-so for tunas, because you also have to take into account your location, as the same tuna can sound different, depending on location/signal.

the reviews & comments on the fmtunerinfo site (especially jim rivers' "shootouts") should only be used as a guide - i, too, have different results for some tunas than what's posted on the site, tho some i agree with. a couple examples:

1) the revox b760 rates really well, while its identical-sounding (imo) sibling the b261 ranks poorly. i owned both, & they were absolutely identical - both supurb, if not quite up to the standards of my faves. i kept the b261 & sold the b760 cuz i preferred the ergonomics of the b261, if not the looks.

2) the tandberg 3011 rates pretty well, but i found mine to be worse than a pedestrian adcom gft-1a. (the adcom, btw is at least as good as any magnum-dynalab ft101, imo...)

3) the mitsubishi da-f20, is ranked at the top of the "m" class, yust below the bottom "c" class tuna, the revox b760. imo, the mitsu is definitely a better sonic performer than the revox, & at least as good from a sensitivity standpont as well. other tuna that i like better than the revox, that are even further down on the "shootouts" list include the sumo charlie & the pioneer f-91. i also like my technics st-9030 better, but it's been modded. but, based upon my experience w/a stock st-8600, which is not as good a tuna as the st-9030, i would surmize that even stock, the st-9030 would be at least as good as a revox b760. other tunas that i think are at least as good as the b760 include the sansui tu-717 & yamaha t2.

re: the review "shootouts" done by jim rivers, you must realize this is one person's opinion, based upon results obtained w/an all-toob system in a 12x14 room. and, you must also realize how close the sonics are, of the tunas he likes. what is telling to me is something like this one example - the pioneer f-91 is presently ranked 43rd out of the 79 tunas reviewed up to this point. jim, referencing the f-91 to his top-ranked kenwood l-02t says this:

"...In a large room, in a big sound system, I might choose this Pioneer over the L-02T...."

this (and my own personal experience), tells me that there are really more similarities than differences between good tunas. vintage tuna is cheap enuff so that you can buy several, keep the one(s) you like, & sell the rest, w/o losing any money. you certainly don't need to drop big bucks on something like a md-108. ;~)

and it's also enlightening to know that jim rivers' absolute fave tuna - better in his opinion than the accuphase t109v, kenwood l-02t, etc, is one that can be picked up for less than $100, and modded w/less than $100 worth of parts. (or pay someone like bill ammons ~$300 to do one up for ya, if yure not into diy.) i'm talking about the kenwood kt-7500, one that in stock form ranks near the bottom of jim's shootout list. i happen to own one of these, modded by bill ammons. it *is* nice - it makes *my* personal class-a list; but it's not my fave! :>)

doug s.,
so much tuna, so little time...

Tandberg 3001A--- One went for over $900 on ebay. The sound is remarkable. A living presence type of experience. Vocals are rich and deep. I wouldnt part for mine for $2000. Just my opinion.

I like my Accuphase T 105. It is very nice sounding tuner.

hey blueranger, i have a completely refurb'd slightly modded tandberg 3001a. i also have several tunas i paid <$500 for, that i like at least as well or better. (and several more that i've already sold that were better than the tandberg.) make me an offer on the 3001a! ;~)

doug s.

cant use another 3001a. sorry

Sedond, (or anyone with "a lot" of tuner experience) do you care to say which is your favorite tuner, stock or modified, for best sound and reception.
I have been looking for something better than my Mac MR-78 which I have had for over 15 years. It sounds excellent to me (I may have a good one) but "they" say others can sound better. I also need great reception to pick up the stations I like.

Thanks for any responses.
Martin

hi martin,

i dunno how to say this w/o being sorta insulting, but i cannot imagine *any* of the tunas i've listened to over the past coupla years that *don't* sound better than the mr78. reception, on the other hand, is a different story. the mr78 is acknowledged to be one of the best out there.

mind you, i have never heard the mr78. ;~) *but*, i *have* owned an mr77, which i had completely refurb'd. and the mr77 & mr74 are acknowledged by mcintosh afficianados to be the best sounding mcintosh s/s tunas. even richard modaferri, designer of both the mr77 & the mr78, has stated a properly aligned mr77 will sound better than even a modaferri-modded mr78. this info was related on the yahoo fmtuner forum.

so, i base my opinion of the mr78's sonics on my experience w/my refurb'd mr77. the mr77 was the *only* tuna out of a couple dozen i have owned over tha past coupla years that i would *not* be happy to have as my only tuna for sonic bliss. it had a flat soundstage, and lack of detail. it *was* sensitive, tho.

my fave tuna, for both sonics *and* sensitivity, is my modded harmon kardon citation-18. this guy yust does everything right sonically, *and* it's a signal hawk. other tunas i would recommend for sonics *and* reception, (my personal "class-a" list), include the nikko gamma 1, technics st-9030, accuphase t101, rotel rt-2100, mitsubishi da-f20, sumo aurora, roksan caspian, pioneer f-91, philips ah673, modded kenwood kt7500/kt8300, sony st es730s. these are the ones that make my personal class-a ranking for both sonics *and* reception.

others that make the reception grade, but are a tiny hair off the pace sonically, include the sansui tu-9900/tu-517/tu-717/tu-719, refurb'd tandberg 3001a, yamaha t-2, onix bwd-1 w/soap-2, revox b261/b760. note the sonic differences here are so slight that they'd be noticable w/my "class-a" list *only* in direct a-b comparison. any of these i could *easily* be satisfied with for long term listening. the difference here really *are* tiny.

then, there's the tunas that i consider class-a for sound, but a hair off the pace for reception. these would include the luxman t12, sumo charlie w/rack handles (non-rack-handle units not being aligned by its designer james bongiorno), philips 185.

also, an important note. except for the tunas i have noted as being refurb'd/modded, all these have had no recent work afaik. a proper refurb/alignment could easily have a major sonic/reception impact on these (or any) tunas.

the mr77 i owned, tho wery sensitive, yust dint sound good to me at all. my modded mcintosh mr65b tubed tuna, on the other hand, sounds great - in my class-b category, knocking on class-a's door. but you better be able to *see* the tower of the radio station yure trying to get! ;~)

regards,

doug s.

Hi doug,
Thanks for such a complete response!
Guess I need to hear more tuners!
Certainly no offense taken.
I'll do some research and try to pick up a selection from your lists for a listen.

I did buy a Kenwood 9900 with intentions to have APS modify it but it sounded thin and raspy, and I was afraid it didn't have the potential for greatness. I may have been too quick to judge.

Do you care to say who you would recommend for mods?

It's very helpful to get your opinion, in contrast to the ones on fmtunerinfo.com, since you have such extensive tuner experience.

Thanks again.
Regards,
Martin

hi martin,

i also forgot to mention the hitachi ht-8000 - another cheapie tuna that sounds fantastic, & has excellent sensitivity.

re: the kenwood kt-9900, i agree it is a miserable sounding unit stock - i owned one & was extremely disappointed. but, gawd, was it pretty! :>) i recommend it for mods, cuz the modded kt7550 i owned, (which isn't nearly as good stock as the kt-9900), was fantastic.

for mods i would recommend joseph chow or bill ammons. ed hanlon of aps does do good work, so i have been told by those i trust, but i, personally, couldn't send him my biz cuz he refused to provide answers to *any* questions you may have about what he does. i attempted to do biz w/him a coupla times, but didn't follow thru, cuz he was so rude to me, and accused me of trying to steal his "trade secrets"!?! the one time i did actually send him a tuna, it also needed repairs; he said he couldn't fix it, so he sent it back. the guy i sold it to was able to get it fixed no problem.

joseph chow adwertizes on agon. here's his website:

http://www.componentplus.us/pages/upgrades.html

and bill ammons' info can be found on the fmtunerinfo.com site. one caveat about mr. chow - you have to specifically ask him to replace & match the filters, it's not part of his normal procedure. (unless he's since changed this.)

bill ammons is *the man* when it comes to tuna, imo. i have also had decent results from stephen sank, who did my mr65b & hk citation 18, but i don't think he does filter matching/replacing, either... and, he takes *forever*.

regards,

doug s.

Hi doug,
Thanks again for all the very helpful information!
You have given me a lot to work with, and it's greatly appreciated. I'm on my quest for a great tuner!

Regards,
Martin

creek t40 and t43

Well now this is an interesting thread. Especially since we are getting into high definition broadcasts.Not many folks are focused on these components anymore. If so they go after the solid state by far.Yes the Onyko's have terrific reception,amazing. The modded Onyko that I listened to I had to turn it off within several minutes it's sonics were that bad. It was proclaimed to be as good as the Kenwood and Sansui hot shots but less monies with the mod of course. I've listened to a Marantz 10B and then the world reknowned HH Scott 4310 Broadcast tuner used in tandum with the same. They would go back and forth to pick up the best signal and the winner would lock in and broadcast, talk about ahead of their time, WOW. The 4310 creamed the 10b within seconds, it was amazing. I beleive upgraded and properly aligned this tuner will crush anything known to man. Also there is a close second best Scott tuner also. What is it? In my most humbled opinion, Joe

lithojoe, the 4310 *is* the "close second best" scott tuna. :>) most tuna freaks will tell you that the 310d w/an outboard mpx decoder, or the 310e, are better sounding tunas than the 4310. (even most honest scott freaks will tell you this - the 4310 is a collectable.) most tuna freaks will also say the vintage fisher tunas like the fm90r, fm90x, etc, will *also* sound better than *any* of the scotts, tho they're not as sensitive. as will the 3000-series & above tubed sherwoods. again, the sherwoods aren't as sensitive.

so, i think it highly unlikely that a 4310 will crush everything. or even come close for that matter. i have yust sold a perfect 310d & its matching 335 mpx decoder; the decoder has been refurb'd. this combo *was* supurb, no doubt. and, its sensitivity *is* pretty amazing, for an old tube set-up. but its sonic performance, imo, is exceeded by the fisher/sherwoods mentioned above, as well as any number of other tunas i have owned or still own.

ymmv,

doug s.

Doug: Listen we are going to have to agree to disagree. There can be sonic variables to all vintage tube equipment. Very often two identical models will not sound the same. Or one mod on the same unit may not sound nearly as good as anothers depending on their expertise. So in your audio world reality you may have experienced your flawed conclusions. In my personal experience it is often the case that I may have to go outside to get some fresh air first. Then I seek out recording engineers,electrical engineers, 25 year plus tube manufactuer's with their own circuit designs, etc. to formulate opinions and recomendations. Then spend another ten years validated those opinions or recommmendations and come up with a public opinion. Not rely on the "tuna freaks" or reviewers perked by the advertisers, and the forum want to be's. Please I must take your opinion with a large grain of salt. I won't take that grain throw it over my shoulder and hope I picked the right piece of vintage tube unit for audition. The 310-D or 310-E is only noted greatly for it's sensitivity. When your ready for a shoot out please let me know grab your best tuna or someone else's and will go deep sea fishing and see who comes back with the trophy. That certaininly will put this thread to rest. As always best regards!

the Acccuphase T-1000 tuner. And people can actually buy
one. The bad part is that it costs $4500. I intend to buy mine soon.

More for curiosity I have an old (but refurbished) Fisher 88 which is one of the last ones built that required an external MPLX for stereo. This feeds into a McIntosh CR 12 audio/visual control unit and then the signal goes into seperate tubed amps (McIntosh 2102 and Audio Aero Capitole). This whole mess sits below my NEC 50XM5 plasma. Needless to say I get quite the bug-eyed looks from visitors to my home. The old Fisher sounds really good, although it is there more for the curiosity factor. I recently broke many of the above mentioned rules by splitting the feed from my roof-top Circuit City antenna that pulls in UHF(digital TV, analog feeds, etc.) and I cut the end off from a piece of coax cable and am using this roof-top feed for my Fisher's antenna. Great signal reception from stations far away. I can now walk around my living room without 'getting in the way' of my FM signal.

Jazzbird: It's funny you mention this expensive tuner by Accuphase. I just had a shootout with a Scott tuner and it creamed this expensive unit. It's very hard currently to beat a good tube tuner. It's a different story with other components.

Another option: Try an old Sansui (probably easier to find than a vintage Scott or Fischer).

About Sean's post up there... I agree with everything. And also: "fm tuner info" is one of the great white elephant websites of all time. I like Kenwood tuners, but there are plenty of good tuners out there, and if you look at the site, what you slowly start to realize is it's a self-justification for using old Kenwoods. Furthermore there is no baseline for quantitative vs. qualitative measurement, and very little actual evidence from oscilliscopes that any of what they are saying bears any relation to reality. All ceramic filters are better than IR's. No explanation. Modded tuners are always "better". Better sounding or better engineering tested? Again no answer. Wide bands are always better than narrow. Ridiculous. Then people start quoting these lunatics on ebay or over on the asylum and start flame wars over it. It's driven some things through the roof that, frankly, suck, while other great lower-priced-initially tuners languish. That site, TNT audio, which gets a lot of tech stuff plain old wrong (like ultralinear is always push-pull and triode is always single-ended; even in the same amp ...eh... wtf?) and also Arthur Salvatore's site about how Michael Fremer is defrauding people (which may be true, but the way he goes about relating his story is on the level of, I was abducted by aliens!) ...anyway, it all made me start a thread called: Do you believe everything you read on the internet? Audio is like everything else. Some people know what they are talking about, and some people don't. Being able to put up a webpage doesn't make you competent.

biomimetic, it is clear that you have only scanned the tic site & its related chat forum.

>>
huh? where else are you gonna find so much info about so many different tunas?

>>
huh? a close reading of the site makes it clear that there's scads of tunas, not yust kenwoods that are worthy of listening to. but, there's no escaping the fact that kenwood made way more than their share of tunas, which is why there's quite a few good tunas w/the name "kenwood" on it. and no, i am not a big kenwood fan - i tried & sold three...

>>
where on the site does it say there *is*? but, the fact is, specs *do* play a big part in the tuna ewaluations, which a close reading of individual tuna stats, & a following of the chat forum will indicate. and, the fact is, the participants are some of the best rf engineers around, & they *do* measurements. a *lot*.

>
want an explanation? ask on the forum; you will get lotsa opinions.

>>
again, ask, you will get answers. but, in fact, you are wrong, this info *is* given.

>>
as is your statement that this is what the tic & the forum say. again, you have to be more thorough in your readings.

>>
huh? there's so few flamewars on that site, it's amazing, quite frankly. of course, agon is so strongly moderated, there really isn't even a conversation flow here. :>/

>>
sounds like what happens w/all reports about all other gear in audiodom, no? tho i disagree that there are reports of good tunas that are actually sucky. of course, i *do* have disagreements w/the opinions/rankings of all the tunas over there, having tried almost a hundred different tunas in my home over the past few years. examples:
- the revox b261 is excellent - on par w/the b760. but, the mitsubishi da-f20 is better than both.
- the tandberg 3001a is *way* over-rated. a decent tuna, for sure, but a reliability nightmare, surpassed in sonics & reception by many many tunas. equaled in sonics & reception by something as cheap as the hitachi ft-8000.
- mcintosh s/s tunas are only so-so sounding, exceeded by so many tunas it isn't even funny. they are exceeded by most every tuna i have ever tried, in fact. they *do* certainly have excellent reception capabilities, tho.

so, does this mean that i am a white elephant? cuz i have opinions about tunas that you or others may not share? no - it's yust one more data point on the chart. which is all the info on the tic & its forum is or is meant to be.

relax & yust enjoy the magic of a good fm broadcast w/a quality tuna of your choice on a revealing rig! ;~)

ymmv,

doug s.
but not everyone hears the same, eh?

My post was for Sean. No; I didn't just scan the FM Tuner Info site. It seems to have more or less spawned out of a local radio club's tuner shootouts, and the guys as well as the tuners are the same vintage. Baselines are biased, when they appear, and the guys who run it all use more or less the same equipment (Kenwood), except for the one off-center guy who uses a *gasp* Sansui. FYI- I actually use a Kenwood tuner, but I don't think it's the greatest thing since sliced bread, which is my point: Accuphase, Sansui, Sony and several others all made great tuners you can pick up for around $60 now, that sound as good as many things that are hundreds of dollars more.

I didn't say that spec's don't effect things, but then again spec's aren't everything. None of the major designers lists whether they are using Rhodium plated connectors, what their topology is, how they wind their transformers and out of what (or if they buy them wholesale from others), if they use silver wire, what kind of capacitor construction they believe in, how many gangs and why, what kind of filters... so basically spec's can mean whatever you want them to, based on how you measure them. Fm Tuner Info though "has the answers" on "what's best" in the tuner world. Which is almost always a heads up that you are dealing with either an idiot or a zealot. Saying it sounds "good" to you based on some meaningless baseline is neither engineering or science. It also has nothing to do with applied audio theory. Does anyone really believe that a 500w receiver from Best Buy is a true 500w and sounds better than a 20w tube amp? And anyway, what kind of 500w? Class A, AB or D? Am I supposed to be impressed? Because I'm not.

And this is generally how I feel about sites like FM Tuner Info. The Vintage Knob I like, and to me is more just historical. For instance someone made a key statement above: the Marantz 10B "can be" one of the best tuners out there when aligned correctly, etc. Well of course it can: it has one of the biggest plates around, the 805 tube, and so by virtue of electric theory it must be one of the most sensitive and widest in audio bandwidth. But not acccording to FM Tuner Info. Not the MR71 either. They found both "flabby" and "grainy". Well... you can pretty much stop right there, can't you? Because either they don't know how to properly align a tuner, they don't know how or when to change a tube, or they're deaf. I'm not a "the-more-expensive-it-is, the better it is" guy, but those two tuners are top notch.

One of the reasons I like 6 Moons even though many of their reviewers are about 180 degrees from where I am on the audiophile spectrum is they actually tell you what kind of music they like, the dB level they play it at, and what their favorite components and room treatments are, and how long they have had them. You can kind of relate to someone then, even if you wouldn't want their system. "I put it on my oscilliscope in my basement" and it "sounds good" isn't good enough... ...I mean seriously... ...would you buy a car from a guy who told you he had turned it on and it came on ok, so he's sure it "runs good"? I think not.

Actually it's very hard to beat the sonics on a modded and properly aligned Dyna FM-3. Put that one in your chimney and smoke it.Have yet to hear anything but a tubed circuit sound good in a tuner.

Since this thread began in 1999, we have flogged this to death. In the 48 years of this hobby have had damn near every tuner through here tube or solid state.

No other component you will add to a system is more dependent on an outside source than a tuner analog or digital. Much of its performance is dependent on signal transmitted.Environment signal is transmitted through. From there it becomes the antenna used. I have never found an inside antenna to have the performance of a good outside antenna. Then comes into play the tuner itself. there is a wealth of good used tuners on the market. But any 20 year plus tuner is going to need some work, just nature of the beast, be it analog or digital.

With the vast majority of radio stations now owned by a handful of corporate enitities such as Pilot and Clear Channel and others of that ilk, this almost becomes a moot point. Signals from FM these days do not have the strength they once had, when many of these stations were independents. Programming is for the most part dreadful.

As for me I have gone to the Polk XRT 12 XM radio tuner and have solved my problem. Great music, no commercials, and the antenna problem no longer exists for me and at the paltry sum of .43 cents a day for the monthly subscriptions I get the music I want to hear as well as a lot of other great music,news and sports, I would otherwise miss with an AM/FM convential tuner. And the good thing is the Polk XRT 12 Tuner looks like a system component and fits right in with the other gear in the rack.

And as of this post date, Crown has released a home XM Radio tuner.

I'm lucky enough right now to live in an area with 2 college radio stations, plus several local owned majors and a jazz station. It's a good deal; I had posted a thread trying to get someone to chime in with a farthest signal acquired (I'm leaving the area). Corporate radio is just such a cash cow, and now with HD you can't even mod a really good tuner anymore without getting digital garble in the spectrum... I had been reading something in Scientific American a few years ago about how the electromagnetic spectrum is a natural resource like any other, and it's becoming depleted by the FCC with no oversite accept corporate lobbyists. It really is grim, especially when you look at astro research and because of cellphones and satellite phones it's impossible to recieve and degauss effectively many of the smallest kinds of radio signals. Look at the trouble SETI@HOME has been having with their mathematical breakdowns. Now that it's down to, "Hey, why does it sound like I have Star Wars sound effects in the background on my favorite station?" and "My cell calls are being dropped all the time...", people are starting to notice. But like so many other things with those in power telling you "the jury's still out", it's probably already too late.

“Baselines are biased, when they appear, and the guys who run it all use more or less the same equipment (Kenwood), except for the one off-center guy who uses a *gasp* Sansui.”
---1st of all, the above is not true. 2nd, the site is actively supported by over 3700 members. and, the site’s opinions reflect the diversity of its members, not yust the opinions of the folks who run the site.

“FYI- I actually use a Kenwood tuner, but I don't think it's the greatest thing since sliced bread, which is my point: Accuphase, Sansui, Sony and several others all made great tuners you can pick up for around $60 now, that sound as good as many things that are hundreds of dollars more.”
----i bought a modded kenwood kt-7550 – the tuna that is the “shootouts” author’s fave tuna. i liked it, but it was certainly not *my* fave. i have many other personal disagreements w/the shootouts rankings. but does this mean that i think the site has no useful info? absolutely not. i have a brain, & can separate the wheat from the chaff. ;~) actually the most meaningful statement in the shootouts, imo is where the author is comparing his top-dog kenwood l-02t tuna to the mid-pack pioneer f-91. (an excellent sounding tuna, imo, btw.) he states:
“...In a large room, in a big sound system, I might choose this Pioneer over the L-02T...”
i couldn’t agree more, that the differences between good tunas are in fact quite small; this statement illustrates this fact quite succinctly.

and, *PLEASE* - tell me where i can find a sansui tu-517 or better, or *any* accuphase tuna for $60! :>) not interested in the sony's; i already know of fantastic $60 tunas from philips/hitachi/nikko that aren't as ugly. ;~)

“I didn't say that spec's don't effect things, but then again spec's aren't everything... ... so basically spec's can mean whatever you want them to, based on how you measure them...”
---this cracks me up. earlier you complained that there aren’t specs or measurements, then you say they aren’t everything. :>)

“...Fm Tuner Info though "has the answers" on "what's best" in the tuner world. Which is almost always a heads up that you are dealing with either an idiot or a zealot. Saying it sounds "good" to you based on some meaningless baseline is neither engineering or science...”
---are you *sure* you didn’t just scan the tic? perhaps you are reading a different site than the one i am reading. the one *i* read makes it perfectly clear that it does *not* have the answers. that what sounds good to one person may *not* sound good to someone else. that a tuna that sounds mid-pack in one system may be the best sounding tuna in another system. this is one of the reasons i like the site so much. the engineering & science it *does* stress is that of quality alignment/parts/rf engineering. stuff that many contributors to the site know a hell of a lot about.

“It also has nothing to do with applied audio theory. Does anyone really believe that a 500w receiver from Best Buy is a true 500w and sounds better than a 20w tube amp? And anyway, what kind of 500w? Class A, AB or D? Am I supposed to be impressed? Because I'm not.”
---again, i am not sure what site you are reading, cuz the above has nothing to do w/the tic which *i* read.

“For instance someone made a key statement above: the Marantz 10B "can be" one of the best tuners out there when aligned correctly, etc. Well of course it can: it has one of the biggest plates around, the 805 tube, and so by virtue of electric theory it must be one of the most sensitive and widest in audio bandwidth. But not acccording to FM Tuner Info.” Not the MR71 either. They found both "flabby" and "grainy". Well... you can pretty much stop right there, can't you? Because either they don't know how to properly align a tuner, they don't know how or when to change a tube, or they're deaf. I'm not a "the-more-expensive-it-is, the better it is" guy, but those two tuners are top notch."
---many many tuna aficionados do not like the 10b. actually, in the tuna world the 10b is a wery polarizing entity. and, i think the tic’s write-up of the 10b on its site is wery well-balanced, & accurately reflects the diwersity of opinion about this tuna. (in fact, one of the stellar attributes about the tic site, imo, is that it is so balanced in regards to most *every* tuna, giving, whenever possible, counterpoint opinions & other reference sources for those seeking more info.) so, no, i pretty much *can’t* stop right there. again, it has me questioning whether or not you are looking at the same tic i am looking at. another point re: the 10b - many tuna & marantz aficionados think that in fact the 20b was the best tuna marantz ever made.

and nowhere on the tic could i find the words flabby or grainy mentioned w/either the 10b or the mr71. mebbe you are referring to someone’s opinion on the yahoo forum? or another site altogether? and, most (if not all) the time, the state of a tuna’s refurb/alignment is stated when it’s being talked about. re: the technical abilities of folks like bob fitzgerald , bill ammons, mike zucarro, mike williams, ken bernacky, ed hanlon’s secret tech, mark wilson, terry dewick, etc; you will not find better qualified tuna technicians *ANYWHERE*. jus cuz *you* think the 10b & the mr71 are top-notch, doesn’t mean that they *are*. mebbe there's a disagreement about them between knowledgable people? mebbe others respect them, but like other tunas more? so this means that they are either poor techs, don’t know when to change a tube, or are deaf? and you say the tic is the group that has issues? lol! :>)

“One of the reasons I like 6 Moons even though many of their reviewers are about 180 degrees from where I am on the audiophile spectrum is they actually tell you what kind of music they like, the dB level they play it at, and what their favorite components and room treatments are, and how long they have had them. You can kind of relate to someone then, even if you wouldn't want their system. "I put it on my oscilliscope in my basement" and it "sounds good" isn't good enough... ...I mean seriously... ...would you buy a car from a guy who told you he had turned it on and it came on ok, so he's sure it "runs good"? I think not.”
---i like 6 moons also. but the: “"I put it on my oscilliscope in my basement" and it "sounds good" statement isn’t even close to what the fmtunerinfo.com site is all about. not even a little bit close. like i said before, you either didn’t look at the site thoroughly (there is a *lot* of info there), or you are looking at some *other* site. because surely you can comprehend what you are reading. you can, can’t you? ;~)

ymmv,

doug s.

Well, Sedond, I guess you proved me wrong: some people DO believe everything they read on the internet.

"Well, Sedond, I guess you proved me wrong: some people DO believe everything they read on the internet."
----ok. i admit it, you got me - i believe everything i read on the internet. especially what i read on the fmtunerinfo.com site, (and its associated yahoo fm forum):
1)some people wrote that the marantz 10b tuna is the best tuna ever made. it must be true.
2)some people wrote that the marantz 10b tuna is a damned good tuna, but near impossible to keep properly operating, therefore not worth the hassle. it must be true.
3)some people wrote that the marantz 10b tuna is outperformed by many other tunas, even when the 10b *is* properly operating. even by marantz's own solid state 20b. it must be true.

reality is, i can't believe everything on that site even if i *wanted* to - it's too... *BALANCED*! ;~) it is fair, & it looks at issues from every angle. something that cannot, obviously, be said about all its readers.

ymmv,

doug s.

ferrari,

i agree that the state of present commercial fm radio is pretty dismal. but all it takes, (for me anyways), is one or two decent public radio stations that broadcast a quality signal & play music i like, to make it all worthwhile for me. most of my "sweet-spot" listening is actually done w/fm playing.

re: xm, i have found it to be completely unlistenable, even for 30 seconds, in the "sweet-spot". it is barely tolerable, even as background music. its shrill, compressed, etched signal invariably gives me a headache after a while. i convinced a good friend who has it to try a tubed buffer stage between his xm receiver & his preamp. this does help a little, making it slightly less irritable as background music. but it is still completely unlistenable as a serious music source. so, i don't care *how* good the programming is. if i can't listen to it, it's completely worthless to me.

ymmv,

doug s.

The Magnum Dynalab MD 109,it smokes anything out there.I had a Day Sequerra for 2 years and I thought FM broadcast was really bad, but when I got the 109 I realized FM through the 109 sounded great,Tuners just stink.

Sedond. The radio stations in this area are pure crap and the few NPR stations here are not of the music variety.

As for XM it is a god send for me and have not had any sonic or operational issues with it. It comes in totally clear with great separation, and have not found it shrill,compressed or grainy.

Wish we had a decent NPR station near here. I had a great one in the Denver area that I now miss. Believe me if the Polk XRT 12 and the XM broadcast did not deliver as they do, I would just give up on broadcast alltogether. But thus far for me XM delivers.

strapper, i hope the md109 is a significant step up from the md108, which is handily beaten by a slew of older vintage tunas, costing *way* less - like $500 or less. (as is the sequerra, according to many folks that have actualy compared them to good vintage tunas.) personally, from my experience w/lesser m-d's, & from my experience w/several accuphase tunas, if i had the $$$, i would be spending it on the new accuphase t1000. still way-spendy, but ~half the price of the md109. i know i wouldn't trade my accuphase t100 for an md108, that's for sure! well, mebbe i would, if part of the deal was that i could immediately re-sell it! :>) the write-ups i have read about the latest accuphase t1000 have me drooling - sonics way better than *anything* before it, even the exalted sansut tu-x1, kenwood l-02t, etc. and that's even *before* you use its digital out into an outboard dac - then it gets even *better*. i may have to sell a bunch of my vintage tunas & get one! :>)

ferrari, i feel your pain, re: crap fm - there are only two or three stations in my area that make fm listening worthwhile for me. but, (and this is not meant in a derogatory way at all), i really question your system's resolution or your hearing, if you can actually sit in the sweet spot & listen to xm. while i haven't heard the latest polk xm tuna, several folks who have listened to it have told me that, while it's marginally better than older xm tunas, it is still only useful for background music, not serious listening, even if you use its digital out to an outboard dac. but, hey - it works for you, that's what's important, eh? :>)

ymmv,

doug s.

If I had decent stations around here, would not have gone the XM route as their would be no need to. However that is far from the case here. I find more tham acceptable for my needs, whether or not it is hi-rez or not, is a moot point for me. It gets the music I want to hear, when I want to hear it and sans the commercials and offers excellent taping of the air. I am not concerned in regards to my system or other members system. I find it fits my needs quite nicely and at 63 now, who cares what others think, it is not a remote concern of mine.

My point in offering the XM solution, was simple, if other members have less than stellar FM in their area. The Polk XRT 12 XM is a solid alternative. Beyond that, C'est le Vie.

Doug- you're still the best tuna fan! Geez- it's been years since I rememeber speaking with you - so great that you are still chiming in on these forums- keep the tuna faith!

btw- my only tuna is a slightly modded Accuphase T-101- thinking of a second tuna. My system is high efficiency, and very revealing- looking for a tuna with the most 'full-bodied' sound- any ideas on a few to go after? say, under $1,000... (there is a guy right in my area selling a Tandberg 3001 on eBay right now, but I believe you had so-so things to say about that one...)

I'm currently using a very nice old Amber 7 tuner. Still own a Kenwood KT 917 which I'm not going to replace because FM content in my area doesn't justify it. However, I have to say I am surprised this tuner was not specifically mentioned at all. I have owned an MR 78, an Accuphase T 101, a Mitsubishi DA-F10, a few Pioneers, an old Fisher tube tuner which I can't identify today, NAD 4055, Draco Micro/CPU 100 and dozens of others over the years. Of all of these, I would say the KT 917 was the best all around performer. Are they so rare that none of you have heard one?

hi sutts,

the accuphase t101 is a fantastic tuna, imo. as is the t100. these are both near as good as it gets, especially if you're looking for "full bodied". they may not be the last word in detail, but they are close, imo. another to check out if you're wanting full bodied is the sansui tu9900. again, not the last word in detail but still close. all these will respond well to mods, tho i only owned stock iterations.

my all-around fave is still my modded hk citation 18. it was good enough that i was able to part with a modded accuphase t109. not sure what i will think when i receive my modded sansui tu-x1. ;~)

from what folks who have listened to one have said, the new accuphase t1000 is the one to get, but it won't help you if you're looking to stay under $1k. :>)

for me, at <$1k, i would look for a hk 18, a mitsubishi da-f20, or an aiwa au9700t & get 'em modded, if you're wanting to improve on your t101. but, the results will not be mind-blowing - the t101 is a damned nice tuna, imo. and you're right, i would awoid the tandberg 3001a - extremely overpriced, imo - nice sonics & reception, but you can do better for less. and, quite unreliable & difficult to service. i owned two of 'em & was happy to sell 'em both.

macro, i have not heard a kt917, but the folk at the fmtunerinfo.com site think pretty highly of it. it did fairly well in their shootouts, tho many less expensive tunas did better. (and some more expensive ones dint do as well.) i have owned an immaculate kenwood kt9900 (bronze kt8300) & was extremely underwhelmed - excellent reception, so-so sonics. that, & a refurb'd mac mr77 were the only two tunas i have sampled over the past several years that i wouldn't be happy with, sonically. (and most mac tuna aficionados will tell you that the 77 *and* the 74 are better sounding than the more well-known 78.) but these analog kenwoods' sonics *do* respond phenomenally to mods. i owned a modded kt7550 (bronze-faced kt7500) that sounded *superb*. the fmtunerinfo.com site has quite a bit of info on the 917 as well as a lot of other kenwood tunas - kenwood seems to have made about as many tunas as all the other mfr's combined.

ymmv,

doug s.

I went from an Accuphase T-101 to my KT 917 and found that the Kenwood was quieter and had a greater sense of precision in both function and presentation. The T-101 was softer sounding and the 917 seemed more honest due to higher resolution. They were both great but the KT 917 was an easy choice when I had them both here for comparison.

I've owned alot of tuners since I created this thread almost 7 years ago. It's kind of amazing that we audiophiles have such a passion for the analog gear of yester-year. After trying Fanfare, Magnum, vintage Yamaha, etc. I finally settled on a Kenwood 600T in my main system and a Kenwood KT-8300 for my office system. I sent both of them to ComponentsPlus USA to have the premium upgrades performed. I really didn't realize just how much improvement the mods would render. I probably now listen to the tuners more than any other component. The only others I want to try is a Marantz 10B, an Accuphase 109 and maybe the megabuck top of the line Magnum. Thanks everyone for your input! Happy listening......

I place a vote for the Linn Kremlin.

I have had the pleasure of owning several tuners over the past 50 years, most of which were McIntosh. Loved them all. I don't think you can find a bad tuner in their lineup. Started with a MR-71, then an MR-74 and now own a MR-85.

The inner detail of the MR-85 is outstanding. Run the tuner directly into my tube amplifier which has a volume control. Will be purchasing a C220 preamp in the next near future to go with the MR-85; like the remote capabilities of the tuner to be active. The MR-85 is superior in my humble opinion than the Magnum Dynalab tuners, however, the triode series from the 106 up are perhaps the best sounding tuners on the market. Chose the MR-85 because is sounds so good, is user friendly and loaded with features that will enhanse any fine audio system. Truly an outstanding product at a reasonable price. If you have good FM in your area, get an MR-85.

jaguar, i suggest you try a marantz 20 or 20b; most tuna aficionados say it's better than the 10b, that the 20/20b is marantz's best. (i own a completely refurb'd 19 receiver, which has the 20b tuna inside it, & it *is* an excellent sounding tuna.) based upon my experience w/the lower-level m-d tunas, & upon the comments of others re: the md-108, i would recommend not bothering w/the ~$9k md109. i know you can exceed the sonic performance of the md108 with literally dozens of $200-$1k vintage tunas. also, i had an accuphase t109 modded by joseph chow. while certainly excellent, it is not worth the money, imo, & i dint miss it when i sold it. i have a coupla others that are as good, if slightly different in presentation. now, the accuphase t1000 is one i would like to try - from reports of others, it is head & shoulders above anything they have ever heard, including the big guns like the kenwood l-02t, sansui tu-x1, etc...

joey, i have never heard a kremlin in my own rig, mebbe some day. :>)

butch, i must heartily disagree w/your assessment of the mac tunas. easily the most over-hyped, underperforming tunas around, imo. well, at least as much as the m-d tunas! ;~)

most tuna addicts will tell you the absolute best sounding s/s mac tunas are the mr74 & the mr77. even richard modafferi will tell you that a properly set up 77 is better sonically than even the modafferi-modded 78. well, i owned a refurb'd/aligned mr77 & it was one of only two tunas i have auditioned in my rig over the past several years that i would not be happy listening to as my only tuna. (the other was a stock mint kenwood kt8300.) and, i have owned ~80 tunas.

while i have never heard the mr85, i trust most other comments about them, from those who have heard it, which are a bit different than yours. i also trust ron cornelius, mcintosh’s present main product mgr, who readily admits that the current mr85 doesn't compare to the older mac tuna offerings. a search for "mr85" on the yahoo fmtuner forum comes up w/47 posts, for warying comments about this & other mac tunas.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FMtuners/msearch?query=mr85&submit=Search&charset=UTF-8

and, if you think i am a mac basher, well, all i can say is that i really *do* like my stephen sank modded mr65b, tho it's still not my best sounding tuna. :>)

ymmv,

doug s.

I own a Marantz 2110. I live in an apartment and can't hook up a decent antenna. I'm using an old car antenna and the reception is great. I don't know what this means, if anything.

Xrayz, does your 2110 drift much? Mine does.

Joeylawn36111- It does have a tendency to do that. There's only a couple strong stations near me. It's pretty good on those. As for the others, I just chalked it up to the weak signals/subpar antenna. Also, I have no idea when it was aligned last.

you named them all...also, but not quite there, tandberg 3011, revox, accuphase ti00

I recently acquired a Magnum FT 101A with Etude status upgrade. The manual of this unit recomends the ST-2 antenna, which I've just purchased for $129. While installing this as high as possible outside, apparently provides the best reception, the antenna is presented as an "indoor/outdoor" antenna. Unable to install it outside, I am obliged to use it indoors with reception limited it seems, to a mere 10 stations. Has anyone had experience with this antenna - indoors or out with any more positive results? Thanks.

Try an old(late 70's) Hitachi FT920 tuner(cheap like borscht) with 'v.good' AC conditioning. I bought one new in 76/77, it has been on 24 hours a day ever since w/o any trouble!, and I enjoy the FM sound immensely(so does anyone who listens except a 17 yr old male)-surprisingly so- through my Spectral system(of course there is some carrier noise but it does'nt distract me-teho.

Thanks Psacanli - could you suggest where I might find the Hitachi FT920. A unit that still plays after being on 24 hours a day for 30 years, surely deserves a look and I'm curious........

I've owned myriad vintage FM tuners and have enjoyed everyone of them.

Of the tuners I've owned, my favorites include:

Day Sequerra FM Studio

McIntosh MR65B

Marantz Model 125

Revox B261

Naim NAT 01