Why even bother?


I have some general questions.
How any audiophile could be serious about having tuner in his of her system?
The FM signal is so compressed that sound is way far inferior to the sound from any records, CD and even tape.
Why some hi-end companies are still produce them?
I haven't seen any discussions regarding this matter.
What is your opinion?
Thanks.
misterl

Showing 3 responses by bdgregory

I agree with Muzikrat. IF I lived in a town with with a good college radio station I may have a decent tuner. But I don't so I don't. With the stations I can get, I hear far to much of them while I'm in the car. I have a cheap Kenwood receiver $100 Circuit City that I bought about 6 years ago, and I recently set it up on the shelf next to my system - and connect it through tape out. It's mainly for news/talk, but from time to time I find a good Jazz or Classical program on PBS. The fidelity has been surprisingly good.
Misterl, given that criteria - I agree with you. I don't understand the technical benefits of a state of the art tuner, but my money would go into other parts of the system or the room, and I would probably stick with my Kenwood receiver as a tuner (it has remote tuning, prresets, and decent reception). I think the other factor for me is when I have time to really listen, I want to listen to what I really want to listen to, not what someone is playing for me. I've been drawn in to radio programs before, but not when I was in "the chair" it was when I was listing to radio while doing something else.

. . . well that's my 2 cents anyway . . .
this has been a great discussion. Misterl, I don't think an apology is necessary . . . provocative statements are often the best way. I learned a lot from most of the posts.