| Jimmy154 |
Hi,
I'm stupid, as you could probably see from the subject. I was looking for a tuner on ebay and i realised that I don't know anything about tuners. I was wondering if I could build a tuner? Cause some of them (i'm assuming they were the "good" ones) are very expensive.
What are some "good" tuners? Can any one point me in the right direction with a website?
I have a gainclone and 2-way speakers. So I know a little about those things, but not anything about tuners. If some can please, recommend a tuner for me. My cryteria is that i has to be cheap, but not suck, if that makes any sense.
Also are there any FM tuner pc cards that are good? Are there any at all, even; for pci? |
|
|
| Bill Fitzpatrick |
| Marantz made some excellent tuners in the 70's. |
|
|
| jwb |
| Velleman used to make a tuner kit, although I don't see it on their site anymore. It was model K4500. |
|
|
| chipco3434 |
I bought my son an old analog Denon TU-7. It's simply excellent and it cost $45 in a used record shop.
I would also suggest looking at satelite. If your taste is wide and varied, satelite is an excellent choice. I listen to the classical channels (3), bluegrass, NPR, some rock, and adult comedy. It's ten bucks a month. Some would argue that the "highs" are absent (>16kHz). For me, the benefit outweighs the detriment. |
|
|
| Jocko Homo |
Most of the easy chips are no longer made, new ones need a micro to control the tuner/PLL. Then you have to source 10.7 MHz filters........etc.
And to listen to what? Most FM now is corporate dreck. Nope, I would not waste my effort on making one to listen to stuff that lousy. Maybe where you are, it may be a tad better than in most other urban markets. Look for a used one, only to be wonder why it sounds so bad..........the tuner or the source.
Jocko |
|
|
| Damon Hill |
http://www.fmtunerinfo.com/
May be more information than you want to know...
I wouldn't want to tackle a DIY FM tuner without a lot
of research. I don't have the slightest idea of how
to design and build a decent RF front end, which is a
badly neglected subject. Years ago I was very
enthusiastic about it, but there are too many other
things I want to do now.
I did recently build a 'jpole' antenna for the FM band,
so I could have some sort of outdoor antenna; didn't
solve my multipath problems, though. |
|
|
| dnsey |
How about a Leak Troughline?
Many consider them among the best tuners ever made, and thy're still available fairly cheaply. I've owned a couple, and when they're well-aligned and used with a good antenna they live up to their reputation.
Go for a mark 1 or 2, and use an outboard stereo decoder for best results. |
|
|
| AndrewT |
Hi,
I used a Sugden t48 for a couple of decades and now retired. It still plays superbly but the manual tuning buttons(no digital tuning here) have worn out. No spares available to repair. Inside, the case is jam packed all the way to the lid, not like your modern tuners.
The later Quads are quite good, I have an FM4 (it is digital). but only 7 presets + manual.
I agree the Leak but not the stereofetic. Again manual tuning only and not at all sensitive. Needs a good aerial.
A lot of the digital tuners cannot compete with analogue in sound quality.
Finally, here in Britain FM sound is as good as it gets if you choose your stations, a live broadcast is unbeatable. Certainly better than DAB and possibly a little better than Nicam. All these signals are transmitted around the country by digital comms so it must be the pre & post processing that ruins the perfomance.
I think I hear a few arguments coming!!
regards Andrew T. |
|
|
| dnsey |
No argument from me!
The main limiting factor IMHO is the appalling degree of compression used much of the time, which makes me want to 'pop' my ears!
Oh - and the excessive top lift applied by many local radio stations. |
|
|
| Geek |
| Good tuner - find yourself an Akai AT-2400 or AT-2600. They have excellent rejection and sensitive enough to be rated "entry-level DX'er" :) |
|
|
| Rob M |
| Another option is to look to internet radio: most radio stations worth listening to have streaming audio feeds, often at higher quality that you're likely to get over the air. Right now I'm listening to this and enjoying it more than almost anything I could get locally. Of course, that just trades the "good FM tuner" problem for the "good PC soundcard" problem... |
|
|
| jackinnj |
| quote: | Originally posted by Jocko Homo
Most of the easy chips are no longer made, new ones need a micro to control the tuner/PLL. Then you have to source 10.7 MHz filters........etc.
And to listen to what? Most FM now is corporate dreck. Nope, I would not waste my effort on making one to listen to stuff that lousy. Maybe where you are, it may be a tad better than in most other urban markets. Look for a used one, only to be wonder why it sounds so bad..........the tuner or the source.
Jocko |
Wanna build a home-brew FM tuner ? I would grab an old Dynakit, Heathkit or Eico and tinker around. There is a huge body of knowledge in old RCA handbooks, or in the manuals you can purchase form www.w7fg.com and elsewhere. You will need an FM signal generator, scope and good voltmeter to align an FM tuner.
Before building a tuner a better iniitial investment is in a decent antenna -- and these you can homebuilt for next to nothing.
wrt Jocko's comment: Here in the NYC area we now have a classical wasteland as WQXR is chock-a-block with commercials, WNYC has limited it's classical repetoire -- only WBGO (Jazz) and WFUV (Blues, Jazz, New Age etc.,) so I agree -- most of my classical listening is on the web. |
|
|
| 1/137 |
Yes the web is great..
KPLU for Jazz
Great classical out of Sweden
Acoustic Sunrise on KFOG on Sunday..
And you can even tune in
Tierra del Fuego
http://www.airelibre.com.ar/
just like the tuner on the Firesign Theater abum.
rt |
|
|
| jackinnj |
| i am going to open a new thread -- "What do you listen to on the web?" |
|
|
| Hugh M |
I've had a Yamaha CT-810 analog tuner on my bench at work for some years now and its a fairly good sounding tuner that can be had inexpensivly at pawn shops and such.
Hugh |
|
|
| Geek |
| quote: | Originally posted by jackinnj
i am going to open a new thread -- "What do you listen to on the web?" |
So hard to find a 320KB/s stream though :( |
|
|
| chipco3434 |
I spoke earlier in this post about satelite radio... XM in this case. I indicated that it is pretty decent but lacks the "highs".
I was testing some speakers last night... basicly rewiring an array of 24 tweeters series/parallel (a real cluster^#%). I flipped on the amp with the sat as source. They sure are missing even when compared to a CD. Still like it for the variety though. |
|
|
| Jimmy154 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Hugh M
I've had a Yamaha CT-810 analog tuner on my bench at work for some years now and its a fairly good sounding tuner that can be had inexpensivly at pawn shops and such.
Hugh |
I was leaning towards getting one at a pawn shop somewhere for $10. Or local junkyard, where people throw away working tuners. Then again, I would like a somewhat nice one. But I'm not willing to spend much (less than $100). That limits me to eBay, pawn shops, and yardsales as far as I know.
I decided that I would like a digital one since it can store radio stations. Maybe analog can do this somehow, I don't know. Also I would like to use a remote with it. So I'm still looking, slowly like a turtle :D |
|
|
| gmarsh |
| quote: | Originally posted by Jocko Homo
Most of the easy chips are no longer made, new ones need a micro to control the tuner/PLL. Then you have to source 10.7 MHz filters........etc.
And to listen to what? Most FM now is corporate dreck. Nope, I would not waste my effort on making one to listen to stuff that lousy. Maybe where you are, it may be a tad better than in most other urban markets. Look for a used one, only to be wonder why it sounds so bad..........the tuner or the source.
Jocko |
I design FM broadcasting equipment for a living.
We put an ungodly amount of work into designs just to keep the sound quality as good as possible... And almost everything you find at a FM broadcast site nowadays is super high quality. Station engineers are *obsessed* with sound quality.
Once the "nurr uh-huh gangsta bling bling" garbage comes out of the music archive at the studio, it's processed by racks of the best equipment available. Everything is 24/96 or better from the studio, piped into the transmitter site at amazing quality, fed through obscenely expensive AES cables ("omg omg gotta be gold plated neutriks and brilliance cable, none of that switchcraft $!%#, it sounds like $@&*" -- direct quote from an engineer) into their audio processor.
...which clips, AGCs, dynamically-EQs and completely destroys the audio they're broadcasting, just to make the station loud and give it a signature sound... :mad:
And then the signal comes out of the audio processor at 24/96 or better and goes into our FM gear, and gets modulated using a brutal amount of DSP/FPGA resources to keep the quality as good as possible.
... because ultimately, for the listener who's driving their car in heavy traffic and only half-listening to the nonsense that's on the radio anyway, quality is paramount.
sigh. |
|
|
| Geek |
| quote: | Originally posted by gmarsh
I design FM broadcasting equipment for a living.
We put an ungodly amount of work into designs just to keep the sound quality as good as possible... And almost everything you find at a FM broadcast site nowadays is super high quality. Station engineers are *obsessed* with sound quality.
Once the "nurr uh-huh gangsta bling bling" garbage comes out of the music archive at the studio, it's processed by racks of the best equipment available....... |
With stations, especially rock/trance/dance/hip-hop so over processing the audio, why bother designing in sound quality? Especially hip-hop, why even bother designing something for these guys with any response over 300Hz? :confused: ;)
I agree to a point... Sound quality transmitted usually far exceeds the quality of the receiver. I listen to Classical a lot from CBC, no compression, processing, nothing on their studio programmes. It sounds great off-the-air through my AT-2400 tuner (tubified audio chain ;) ). Bonus for us. But then listening to it through cable (I live in the boonies), the junk Shaw does to the signal is disgusting. The sidebands are compressed and there's a heck of a lot of noise riding on the L-R subcarrier, making only mono listening practical.
Moral of my story, there's so much to go wrong with the signal in between, few people, other than audiophiles, could tell the difference between a $10 tuner and a $1,000 one. So yeah, go for a used tuner ;) |
|
|
| gmarsh |
| quote: | Originally posted by Geek
With stations, especially rock/trance/dance/hip-hop so over processing the audio, why bother designing in sound quality? Especially hip-hop, why even bother designing something for these guys with any response over 300Hz? :confused: ;) |
Oh, don't worry... we highpass our incoming content with a -3dB point around 0.05 Hz, and you can even DC couple your AES feed so your ultrasuperinfrabass is getting broadcasted with the least attenuation possible ;)
CBC is great. At the stations I've seen, they do process their signal but they do very soft processing - mainly it's AGC stuff to make their hosts talk at the same level as the music they're playing, with a bit of light compression to make the station a bit louder against the noise floor.
A live-jazz station in Colorado spent months developing the programming on their processor so that it would enhance their sound rather than clobber it, while still keeping a decent amount of modulation. I've heard the recorded, processed AES output of their processor, and it's absolutely outstanding.
For these kinds of stations, i'm proud to have created a no-comprimises, highest-quality-possible audio chain. But for the great majority of "HITZ-FM! top 5 songs, all the time!" type of stations, it just feels wrong somehow... |
|
|
| zinsula |
Good FM Tuner: Kenwood KT990D
Radio Stations: Here in Switzerland, our "national" Rock/Pop Station (German language) plays VERY loud (compared to other stations - don't know if they "overdrive" anything) and VERY compressed. Maybe a good thing in a noisy car, but at home I don't like it at all. No dynamics...:smash: |
|
|
| markp |
| My old Mcintosh MX-110 sounds very very good and picks up every station with clarity and good seperation. |
|
|
| Geek |
| quote: | Originally posted by gmarsh
CBC is great. At the stations I've seen, they do process their signal but they do very soft processing - mainly it's AGC stuff to make their hosts talk at the same level as the music they're playing, with a bit of light compression to make the station a bit louder against the noise floor. |
Really? I have a pretty trained ear for processing and I could'nt tell. My hat's off to them! :D
One of their studios (Vancouver?) has no "s" filter though that drives me nutz when female DJ's get on :rolleyes: "CBC Radio One" becomes:
See B See Radio One :xeye: |
|
|
| DigitalJunkie |
My vote goes for Sansui TU-717..Mostly because I've got one,and it's a pretty nice (analog) tuner.
It can pull in stations quite well,and has good sound.
I guess this one also makes a good entry level DX'er.
I can pick up a station from ~100 miles away with a length of wire,and I get a good solid stereo signal with a twinlead "T" dipole on the wall.
Not many other tuners can pickup that station here. ;) The sound is darn good too IMO. |
|
|
| adason |
i highly recommend technics st-9030
i made a couple of tuners myself around factory aligned front ends with good results
chips for good fm demodulators and stereodecoders are still available if you know where to get them
but its not worth it, get a good sansui or similar on ebay....it will cost less than parts |
|
|
| rayfutrell |
I recommend the Revox B760 if you can find one for a resonable price. They are sometimes on Ebay but the price is usually outrageous. I've owned one for over 20 years and see no need to replace it. When new the performance was unmatched and it is still excellent, even though this is a 25 year old design. The front end design is one of the best I have ever seen. The audio section could use some tweaking, but I hesitate to modify a classic with modern components.
Regards,
Ray |
|
|
| Mike Gergen |
Any comments on a Luxman T-400?
Presently on ebay, item #5737905415 |
|
|
| jackinnj |
the Pioneer receiver tuners of the 1970's are also fantastic -- I have an SX838 I bought when I got out of grad school and the tuner is great. the power amplifier is "wont" to give up on you, however. I have replaced the PA transistors twice.
Pioneer also made a series of auto tuners called "the supertuner" around the same time -- I replaced the GM unit in my Buick station wagon with one and the sensitivity was excellent, the noise in stereo very low, etc., etc. |
|
|
| davesaudio |
nobody mentioned magnum dynalab?
ok, maybe a tad expensive.....
;) |
|
|
| anatech |
Magnum Dynalab! Try overpriced LARGE. The Revox tuners are excellent, McIntosh are good. Marantz 2120 and 2130 are really good. There are lot's to choose from, even the Nakamichi ST7 is great (I wish I had one of these).
You need to like how it looks and how it operates. The $$ need to make sense and the rest of the family needs to be okay with it (wife).
It is amazing what you may find in some places. I got a Luxman C05 preamp that was headed to the junk pile (now in living room).
-Chris |
|
|
| davesaudio |
| quote: | | I got a Luxman C05 preamp that was headed to the junk pile (now in living room). |
so when is garbage day in georgetown?
:D |
|
|
| anatech |
Not for a very long time. You'd love to see my basement!
-Chris |
|
|
| gmarsh |
Oh, IMHO... the best AM/FM gear you can buy is probably something from Belar (http://www.belar.com).
Something like a FMRR-4 off-air receiver combined with a FMSA-1 or DSD-1 stereo decoder will give you incredibly good sound quality. We use this sort of equipment at my workplace to perform audio benchmarks on the broadcast equipment we make.
Might cost you several thousand bucks though. :D |
|
|
| richwalters |
Hey there.....short note......I'm amazed of the amount of poor audio quality of satellite transmissions.........there's alot of difference between stations esp european. Sat tuning has considerable convenience advantages, i.e no ghosting or image signal problems (ajacent channel interference) when compared to the standard FM tuner.
My 1970's Ambit analogue FM tuner and so many others can offer superlative audio quality. I'm not flinging my FM tuner away.. Not yet.. ..Nor those aerials which have good directional properties. They just as important.
Switzerland has abandoned it's SW slot in favour of Satellite transmissions.......Alot of us know too well that it becomes a question of time before the trend of general terrestial radio also follows this course.
rich |
|
|
| adason |
hi guys
i am cerainly no expert on satelite fm radio, but we have had digital fm radio promotion deal in our house for 3 months, wow, i have never heard such an awfull sound....
the sound from real fm radio, 30 years old hitachi fm tuner was like day and night
i dont know what else to say but buzzword "digital" just makes me puke
anyway i have both magnum dynalab ft-11 and technics st-9030 tuners, i bought magnum new for $500 and technics used for $130, and guess what, technics beats magnum in any parameter, sensitivity, separation, adjacent chanell, frequency response, noise floor, you name it...
i bet any good sansui or kenwood tuners do the same
dont make the same mistake as i did, dont buy new tuner
dont you guyes have an impression that more digital abominations are designed, the lower the sound quality? i mean we trade the sound quality for convenience, is that right? |
|
|
| richwalters |
| quote: | Originally posted by adason [/i]
[abominations are designed, the lower the sound quality? i mean we trade the sound quality for convenience, is that right? |
Hi there.......yes junk sound from commercial stations.......this is where the headaches start. There was an adage in the recording industry in the time I was working in it (1978-88) to put a transformer/s in the signal-in lead when interfacing to digital. This may seem controversial but this was done in many studio consoles and one in particular Neve got world wide fame for this. I regulary use a tube pre/main amp and transformers throughout the signal path. .. This can <round off> the upper freq sound without the tone controls and without jarring the squarewave shape.....some sounds are quite horrid.. CD players with direct o/p are generally pretty clean. Transformers also serve to isolate any hum loop . When I examined the FM decoder in my sat receiver, I didn't find proper wound coils on a former but open-wound types on down-signal conversion.
Those FM tuners which have mid 1970's ic's HA1196 & HA1137 with double detector IF's and stereo decoders are worth their quality in gold. Alot would say "whats this" ???
Where's the real broadcast standard radio gone ?
rich |
|
|
| purplepeople |
| quote: | Originally posted by richwalters
Where's the real broadcast standard radio gone ? |
Video killed the radio star. - Buggles. |
|
|
| richwalters |
Copy that....Yes quite appropriate...I missed that snippet....burning the midnight oil I .......you are quite right.
Happy Xmas
rich |
|
|
| markp |
| quote: | Originally posted by purplepeople
Video killed the radio star. - Buggles. |
Both in my mind and in my car!
:D |
|
|
| gmarsh |
| quote: | Originally posted by adason
hi guys
i am cerainly no expert on satelite fm radio, but we have had digital fm radio promotion deal in our house for 3 months, wow, i have never heard such an awfull sound.... |
IBOC or "HD Radio" digital radio? You're listening to compressed audio with a ~90kbps bit rate.
IBOC increases the high frequency limit up to 20KHz from analog FM's 15KHz, but in the meantime it messes up the sound - lots of compression artifacts, cymbals get "smeared", etc. Some music can actually sound better, but other music can sound completely awful.
Mind you, to a person that's used to 128kbps MP3, they'll probably hear the extra treble and think "wow, that's great!"... sometimes I hate having a trained ear.
And I'm talking about FM. Don't get me started on AM... |
|
|
| Hugh M |
All this talk about digital radio reminds me of the release of the CD format. Its got to be perfect Its Digital There's no noise when theres no music. Perfect!!! My how brainwashed we've become. I guess we'll just have to wait 10 or 15 years for digital radio to sound as good as analog does now.
Oh And if you think the fm digital stereo sounds bad wait till they add 3.1 more channels for 5.1 surround in your car in the same bandwidth!!! Boy that'll be perfect.
:xeye:
Hugh M |
|
|
| pinkmouse |
| I like Digital radio. Yes the quality may not be quite as good as FM, but the content is great. Lots of channels with lots of music and other stuff. To me, music is why I love Hi-Fi, not the other way around...:) |
|
|
| adason |
| quote: | | I like Digital radio. Yes the quality may not be quite as good as FM, but the content is great. Lots of channels with lots of music and other stuff. To me, music is why I love Hi-Fi, not the other way around.. |
we all love music....thats why we care so much how it sounds
if i hear great song i love in pathetic quality i can't stand it
i rather stop listening to it
its like you say you dont care how the food is presented to you, you just eat it to live, as long as you have plenty, even from the dirty plate
the other thing which bothers me about digital radio stations, that they are so cold, unpersonal, its just a stream of data, nothing live, just a computer behing it all
i enjoy fm radio besides great music for the human touch, the anouncer, the discussions, weather, trafic, news, everything happening right here right now...live
just my opinion |
|
|
| richwalters |
| quote: | Originally posted by adason
the other thing which bothers me about digital radio stations, that they are so cold, unpersonal, its just a stream of data, nothing live, just a computer behing it all
|
That opinion is exactly the opposite overhere in Heidiland and elsewhere in Europe....we have a mix of all rad/sat stations........the ones most listened to are the ones without all the commentary and commercial flannel spewed out ...........that must indicate something.
rich |
|
|
| adason |
| quote: | | that must indicate something |
be specific, what does it indicate? perhaps that people dont like commercials?
did you have an impression from my post that i like| quote: | | commercial flannel spewed out |
in the radio stations?
i do listen mostly to oldest listener supported radio station in the DC area, 89.3 fm WPFW, which has absolutely no advertisement of any kind....plus, their educational jazz programs, full of insight and knowledge are incomparable
after a couple of hours of digital stream of jazz music /or any other for that matter, i listen to classical and rock as well/ i need that live voice of anouncer in broadcast studio, no computer please
i imagine in the future there will be just a music server of ever recorded music, in some sort of compressed form, you just log in, specify what you want and there you go, hundreds of hours of your favourite digital stream |
|
|
| Ron Fischler |
This is an interesting topic to me, because I have always been fascinated by the magic of radio. I used to listen to the Texaco broadcasts from the MET in New York. My gosh. Radio can be good - or was.
I would suggest if looking for an old FM tuner, to consider one made by NAD, pre-1990, and put an excellent antenna on it. Not a good antenna, an EXELLENT antenna. A great antenna transforms the FM stereo experience completely.
I am presently using a NAD 7600, and the tuner is simply astounding. Like the great pyramids, we seem to have stopped making great tuners. |
|
|
| Geek |
| quote: | Originally posted by Ron Fischler
Like the great pyramids, we seem to have stopped making great tuners. |
And your answer, sir.... ;) |
|
|
| anatech |
Hi All,
And Geek has the answer to the question .. where have all the good technicians gone? It ain't worth it on a large scale any more.
-Chris |
|
|
| Ron Fischler |
Why manufacture a decent FM tuners today when other content delivery methods are destined to replace FM in the home entertainment rack? Most likely it will be streaming over the web.
Read the article in Forbes during the summer? They suggest content delivery in the home will be provided by the likes of Microsoft, Dell, and HP:) Oh - that hurts.
What really irritates me, is people today think FM does not sound very good, so they think obviously, that it never did. How soon they forget.
Where have all the good technicians gone? A good question. (This is my second post on this venue by the way, so I apologize for barging in like this...)
I have a friend who tells me that the age of the average professional home stereo technician in the United States is approaching retirement now. He thinks in another ten years, almost everything, regardless of expense, will be throw-away. If it breaks in warranty, it will be replaced. If it is out of warranty, the consumer will have to fix it himself or fling it into the trash.
I don't know if that is actually true, but it rings true. Maybe home theater repair will be outsourced offshore. If you want your 23.1 box fixed - it will have to be FedEx'd to a distant country to be repaired, and then FedEx'd back... |
|
|
| Geek |
| quote: | Originally posted by Ron Fischler
Read the article in Forbes during the summer? They suggest content delivery in the home will be provided by the likes of Microsoft, Dell, and HP :) Oh - that hurts. |
:bawling: :bawling: :bawling:
As a person who does not settle for less than a 256K webstream, thet will hurt - Imagine listening to Bach at 24kb/s? :bawling: :mad: |
|
|
| anatech |
Hi Ron,
Most professional audio technicians have moved to the industrial sector. I sold my audio service business because it does not make financial sense to do that work. I serviced high end home and recording devices.
The amount of knowledge and skill required to perform good work, and to keep up with new technology is worth more than the consumer sector is willing to pay. As the shop owner, purchasing and maintaining the equipment also has a high cost. We can thank the distributors of these products for the entire mess. We can also thank ourselves for voting with our dollars.
I don't think new products will be repaired so much as replaced. The rest hits the landfill. The most complicated repair will be subassy. replacement. Remember when a unit could be optimized?
-Chris |
|
|
| yldouright |
Jackinnj has given you the best lead. Look into the big metal tuners of the 1970's from the big three Japanese makers. FM broadcasting was hugely important and largely independent then so getting a good tuner was at least as important as getting a good phonograph. The best values are the Pioneer TX-9500 series which can be had for less than $200 in operating condition. They had the best IF stage to work on of all the tuners and when tweaked with better op-amps, new electrolytics, matched 10.7MHz filters and a little cleaning, they were the best performng, bar none, according to one source who owns just about every tuner on the planet including the state of the art L02. In their stock form they are solidly in the top 20 tuners of all time and the Magnum Dynalab is only slightly better than it. The Kenwood tuners were very similar to the Pioneers and their top of the line units are even more sensitive than the Pioneer offerings but they don't reject bad signals as well. Since Clear Channel got the FCC to loosen bandwidth regulations they and companies like them put out a signal which makes Kenwoods less happy in denser markets. Any serious tuner has no less than "four gangs", and if you want an explanation for what that means or how its defined, then you'll have to ask someone else.
The Sansui TU-9XXX series are among the best regarded so Netlist wins the award for the best recommendation but prices for these boxes are rarely under $1000 and a large part of their excellence is in their excellent parts matching, particularly in their IF filters.
To put this all in perspective, jockohomo gives you the salt you're going to need when shopping for a tasty tuner. Very few cities broadcast anything worth listening to :( |
|
|
| planet10 |
| quote: | Originally posted by 1/137
Yes the web is great..
KPLU for Jazz |
I'm a straight antenna shot at KPLU... being some distance away with the (Magnum DynaLab) rabbit ears i just listen in mono, but it still whoops the compressed stuff coming over the internet by a long ways.
dave |
|
|
| Geek |
KPLU is the best! :D
Before moving to Chilliwack, they came in pretty good off my folded dipole (Abbotsford, BC) on my Akai AT-2400. |
|
|
| planet10 |
| quote: | Originally posted by yldouright
Look into the big metal tuners of the 1970's from the big three Japanese makers.... The best values are the Pioneer TX-9500 series which can be had for less than $200 in operating condition |
Not just the big 3... the best tuners i sold* in the 70s were Onkyos -- even their budget receivers had good tuners (i've a TX220 that cost me $10 :)). The T-4055 is my favorite, the T-9 (if aligned well) is also excellent, i'm quite happy with my T-4040.
*(we also sold Pioneer, Kenwood, Sony, Nalamichi, Revox)
I just sold a TX-9500 (got $53 on eBay) and it was very good. Not as good sounding as the Onkyo but better at pulling the station in. Most of the tuners i sell on eBay usually go for about $20 (and i don't put any up that aren't reasonable) so there is some excellent value out there.
dave |
|
|
| richwalters |
Hi there.......for sevceral years in electronics.......my homemade FM tuner was one I specifically designed for HiFi quality at the end of the 70's era.......the HA series i'cs which it was based on are still around, but all I needed to do was to replace all the electrolytic caps which were drying out with new ones. A cheap refurbishment now offers excellent results.
rich |
|
|
| yldouright |
planet10
A TX9500 for $53 is an amazing deal!!! Looks like I should start trolling Ebay again because as I stated earlier, this IS the tuner to tweak. The top of the line Onkyo's were good tuners and sounded better probably because of their newer electronics but from a build/design standpoint (ie: shielding, simplicity and elegence of design, etc.) the TX9x00 series would be my choice. Let me know if any more of these show up on your door :) |
|
|
| anatech |
Hi Dave,
The best tuners I serviced were the Revox and the Nakamichi. The Marantz units sounded really good two (ending at 2120 / 2130). Personal taste I guess. :bullseye:
-Chris |
|
|
| Jimmy154 |
What is the reason that digital tuners are not as good as analog? Is it that you can tune an analog more precisely?
I guess people here listen to mostly one station because if I had an analog tuner I might as well just sit next to the tuner, since I change the station so much. Although there seem to be many digital tuners that you cannot use a remote with also. Maybe they are older models.
No one mentioned Carver, are they any good? |
|
|
| planet10 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Jimmy154
No one mentioned Carver, are they any good? |
I'm not a fan...
dave |
|
|
| TNT |
Hi!
Try to find a Pioneer F-91. They sound wonderful !
/j |
|
|
| richwalters |
| quote: | [i]Originally posted by Jimmy154
What is the reason that digital tuners are not as good as analog? Is it that you can tune an analog more precisely?
|
No they in fact tune to the centre freq......however if the phase lock loop (that's the business with the synthesizer frequency divider, phase detector and divide N counter digitals) haven't been optimised properly, an LF warbling can be heard in the audio. I get this with my SW set. Synthesizers have become the norm as channel spacings become ever more crowded and tighter. Stereo analogue receivers (good ones) typically reguire a passband between 200-250Khz for best results.....Narrowing the bandwidth will lead to "birdies", ajacent channel interference etc.
Synthesizer does permit tightening of these parameters, and perhaps does effect the quality of the decoded signal. So far I've been more dissapointed by the quality of the audio signal that sent out, not received. It's difficult to assess digital receiver quality when poor quality audio dominates the transmissions.
rich |
|
|
| Geek |
| quote: | Originally posted by Jimmy154
What is the reason that digital tuners are not as good as analog? Is it that you can tune an analog more precisely? |
Besides the good reasons mentioned already, many manufacturers give the digital features 90% of the consideration (and budget), then cheap-out on the all-important analog line.
| quote: | | No one mentioned Carver, are they any good? |
IMHO, Carver should stick to musician's stage gear :clown: |
|
|
| Ron Fischler |
There is no technical reason why a digital tuner, (one using a phase locked loop synthesizer) cannot be as good as an analog tuner, (one using LC circuits) in all respects.
A synthesized tuner has the advantages of being programmable, and having less drift. As the frequency of the band increases, it becomes much steadily easier to build a synthesized local oscillator as opposed to an LC based one.
A pll circuit derives its stablity from being locked to a crystal. If that crystal is ovenized, the frequency stability can be better than extremely good.
The weak point of a synthesized tuner is phase noise. However, if done properly this can be completely eliminated as an issue. Phase noise generally increases as a function of decreasing channel spacing. For example, a tuner that jumps in 25 KHz steps is going to have more phase noise than a tuner that jumps in 200 KHz steps. If properly designed a level above absolute junk, an FM tuner ought to be able to tune in 1 Hz steps with acceptable phase noise.
A level beyond pll would be to generate a tuner's local oscillator frequency using direct digital synthesis (DDS.) Here the sine wave is generated using a DAC.
The next step would be a real digital tuner using dsp - one which digitizes the FM band, (maybe the entire band at once!) at an IF frequency, or even digitizes the entire band in place (88 to 108 MHz!) Selectivity and signal detection can then be done in software. You could program selectivity to anything in 1 Hz steps, and you could deal with multipath issues using dsp. The tuner could even be made to recover the RDS information from all stations being received at the same time, and display it as a list.
It is all about money. What kind of market exists today for a good FM tuner? That's all there is to it. Unfortunately today - what music listeners want is junk.
Ron |
|
|
| markp |
| The old (ca 1980) Carver tuner was very highly rated in its ability to pick up any station in any environment. The problem was it sounded like ****. |
|
|
| anatech |
I think that was a result of seeing how many op amps they could run the signal through. All kidding aside, I have never seen so many op amps in a signal path as the standard Carver. I was factory warranty for Carver in Canada.
-Chris |
|
|
| markp |
| quote: | Originally posted by anatech
I think that was a result of seeing how many op amps they could run the signal through. All kidding aside, I have never seen so many op amps in a signal path as the standard Carver. I was factory warranty for Carver in Canada.
-Chris |
Yeh, all the early Carver stuff was 'over engineered'. By that I mean they used every trick in the book (and some that were not) to get good looking specs at the expense of sound quality. |
|
|
| HiFiNutNut |
I am now looking for a good FM tuner to listen to ABC Classic FM and 2MBS in Sydney.
I have read the fmtuner.com and others. It appears that most fans in the forums opt for vintage tuners. I am not an ebay person and am not interested in hunting from pawnshops to pawnshops. On the other hand, I don't want to spend $5,000+ for a new Accuphase that has good review, because $5,000 is really a lot of money for a tuner and my pocket is not that fat.
I don't really understand the logic how companies like Marantz who used to produce very good tuners in the 70's can't produce good tuners today? !!! Oh, yes, they don't make tube output stage any more, but I prefer solid state anyway, surely for the curcuits other than the analogue output, they would have improved much comparing to 70's? !!!
Has anyone got any new tuner to recommend?
What if I buy a NAD524 tuner (RRP AUD$400) and do component upgrade? i.e. replacing opamps, caps, diodes, etc? I have upgraded a NAD542 CD Player and got excellent result. Would I have the same luck with a NAD tuner? Sorry I still know barely anything about tuners.
Your thoughts are very much appreciated.
Regards,
Bill |
|
|
| jackinnj |
| quote: | Originally posted by Ron Fischler
There is no technical reason why a digital tuner, (one using a phase locked loop synthesizer) cannot be as good as an analog tuner, (one using LC circuits) in all respects. |
Oh, I think you might want to rethink that statement. At the very high end of ham radio -- which is all about plucking signals which are tens of dB lower than FM or AM broadcast out of the ether -- the quiet of an LC circuit is highly preferred -- QEX has done a series of articles on this. DSP has paved over a lot of the problems and is much less human intensive.
FWIW, I always thought that Pioneer did a really great job in their SX series of (ancient) receivers. I bought an SX838 from Harvey Electronics when I got married and the tuner is still better than anything which costs multiples of what I paid in real, 1974 dollars. Back in the cave-man era, the Pioneer "Super Tuners" were the ne plus ultra -- I had a huge Oldsmobile station wagon and replaced the Delco with a Pioneer SuperTuner, we would pile the kidz into it and drive across country listening to anything from Canada to Mexico. |
|
|
| KP11520 |
Hey Jack,
Man, you really dated yourself with things like: Pioneer Super Tuner, Harvey Electronics, Olsmobile station wagon and most of all, piling the kidz into the Oldsmobile station wagon and driving across country (who could afford that gas bill now?).
The Super Tuner was ahead of everybody else for car FM. Sweet!
FWIW, I recently bought a Sansui TU717 in PERFECT condition for $255 on eBay. What a deal! It is heavy, beautiful and a real piece of equipment. I also have a Creek T40 from the early 90s that was supposed to be amazing and British and very musical. My new OLD Sansui blows it away at 30 years old. I haven't even touched it with one mod yet.
Another member here, Serratoga, recently recapped his (Black Gates) and replaced the diodes with Schotkys and is blown away with his. He hasn't even done the filters yet or had it aligned. That will help with today's signals. I will do mine in the Spring.
I think this would be a better way to spend $400 than the NAD.
There are less than a handful of stations that aren't over processed and worth listening to, here in the Metro New York area. Jack's station 96.3, and 101.9 and 90.7 WFUV. But when you here them with a nice tuner, you are glad you did it. Don't forget to also pay a lot of attention to the antenna too.
Good luck!
Regards//Keith |
|
|
| davesaudio |
Vista cruiser?
Custom cruiser?
:) |
|
|
| KP11520 |
| I think more like "Party Cruiser." That was when he was young! |
|
|
| jackinnj |
Custom Cruiser -- my wife hated it so I got her a Ford Bronco (no kiddin') We drove that car from Long Island and NJ to the Midwest almost every three months for several years. We would drive it to Ohio to take my Mom out to dinner on a Saturday night, and return on Sunday!
Of course, I left the maintenance to my wife (who is a famous molecular biologist and discovered some kind of cancer cell) - I can tell you for a fact that a Ford Bronco can go for 100k miles without an oil change, but after that it is certain death!!
Please not to forget WBGO on 88.3 -- |
|
|
| KP11520 |
Geez Jack,
When you said pile in the kidz, I was thinking all your friends and going across country, like a College Buddies Road Trip. You were actually saying it like it was, with your wife and kids! Sorry!
That was a serious Dinner Trip! YIKES
Too funny about the Bronco!
Regards//Keith |
|
|
| moray james |
| this tuner was comissioned and built as the reference for the NAB (national association of brodcasters) and has both of the AM stereo decoder syatems. The unit can stand to be upgraded but out of the box sounds good. I have one and have not come across any tuner so far that made me want to change. |
|
|
| frankwm |
JVC T-X900 / T-X900L
If your market was one where this sold (circa 1986-88) then, typically, this reference-standard tuner can be picked up for peanuts...I've seen them on eBay.de sell for ~25euro's..
I've a dozen+ tuners - and this provides the most Transparent sonics - certainly compared to the rather 'sluggish' Pioneer F-91 - and I invariably use it in preference to Quad/Meridian/Leak/Cambridge (though the T55 is excellent) when making quality FM dubs from BBC R3.
Anyone finding the JVC would be in for a treat: - fast - dynamic - top-to-bottom 'see-through' quality - the tuner appearing to 'impose' no 'character' of its own onto the signal.
Google Victor T-X900 - and you'll see the Japanese k-nisi site @ the top - and there's a pretty decent Google machine translation. |
|
|
| Nanook |
pm me . please.
stew |
|
|
| moray james |
| are you going to be up to town before Christmas??? |
|
|
| Nanook |
got your pm, thanks.
as far as tuners go, I have a few and I think some of the technics ones are very good, and inexpensive here. Also have a really cheap Sansui T-80, analog /digital display and strength meter that is enjoyable to listen to. And if a DIY type, easy to modify. Don't forget the Onkyos either.
stew |
|
|
| scott wurcer |
I could just be me but the FM section of a Kaito ($75) shortwave radio sounds just as good as my Luxman T110 that was pretty good circa 1974.
My favorite college stations chose years ago to upgrade from tube gear to the same garbage limiters et all that the corporate stations use. |
|
|
| tinitus |
I have a small Luxman T-353 ... pretty good, and even better I got it fore free from a friend:)
I also have a Technics ST-G70 which is ok, but it cant compete with the Luxman
A few years back I tried several tuners because my good old Kenwood KT1100 broke down , not HiEnd but those new "cheap" tuners were barely listenable ... good tuners seem to be rare, and I wont spend 2000USD on a tuner |
|
|
| moray james |
| have heard some nice auto tuners over the years. In the late eighties or early ninties the japanese built a bunch or car Super tuners. You can probably finf one of those used for next to nothing these days. |
|
|
| jackinnj |
| As I mentioned a while back, the Pioneer "Super Tuner" in our Oldsmobile Custom Cruiser (urban assault vehicle) was the best I had ever heard. I had an Alpine in my GT Mustang of the same vintage and the Pioneer blew it away. |
|
|
| stex |
| Try Kenwood KT-1100, last analog tuner from Kenwood. |
|
|
| serenechaos |
Just got a Scott B350, put new caps & rolled tubes.
Amazing.
That thing can really sound nice.
Robert :) |
|
|
| bastek |
| What about the new Onkyo T-4555? Very good reviews on the analog FM, and can also do HD radio. Upgradeable to future formats via plugin modules. All for under $400. |
|
|
| jackinnj |
Well, I latched onto a Pioneer TX-9500 and it is incredible -- makes listening to WQXR, WBGO and WFUV listenable here in the NYC metro area.
I also have dug out of the dungeon a Fisher 400 and a McIntosh "Tuner-Preamplifier" MR-55 to compare. |
|
|
| BFNY |
Some people interested in high quality FM may be interested in a DIY project to make an outboard FM audio stage.
The basic idea is to take the FM composite signal (after the IF detector) from the tuner and (via RCA jack) feed it to an outboard FM stereo decoder. This way you have total control over the LF cutoff, parts, caps, power supply, wire, etc. used. You can also bypass the mute and relays normally found on tuners. In many cases, the stereo chip will also be better than the one in the tuner (for mid-early 80's tuners and older)
The outboard circuit is based on the LM4500, which has a very good reputation sound wise. An LM4500 FM MPX stereo decoder design that includes double sided board and chip ( parts list link at digi-key) is shown here - www.FMMPX.com
Bob |
|
|
|
