View Full Version : sherwood s2100 tuner


radioactive
09-22-2005, 03:01 AM
well it's official i've fallen off the wagon today and landed up purchasing a new piece of audio equiptment.i was doing good until i started to browse the tuner section on ebay and thats when things took a turn for the worse.being a sucker for tuners i came across this beautiful looking sherwood s2100 and decided i just had to have it so $93 later it's mine.i know that the s3000IV and v have had great reviews but have had never heard of anyone using the s2100.i do believe the fm section is the same as the 3000IV but im interested in finding out if the am section is something to look forward to or any other general comments anyone might have on this particular tuner.
chris

goldear
09-22-2005, 03:24 AM
No experience with this exact unit. But I've got a 2200 (I think) out in my garage. It needs a lot of work though, as it is presently not working. One of these days I'll get around to fixing it up and alligning it, I hope...

FYI - I did find a good source for Sherwood schematics at one point though. If you need one, I think that I can still point you in the right direction (I hope that I didn't loose that link :worried: ).

mhardy6647
09-22-2005, 08:10 AM
My (mono) S-3000 FM tuner is the best sounding tuner in the house. I'd love to have an AM/FM Sherwood. It should be fine.

Brian
09-22-2005, 09:51 AM
Congratulations. The other than S3000 series is rather scarce. In the lineup the AM included versions were sold at a significant price increase over the FM only models and 1 reason you don't see many or the AM/FM version of the tube receiver.

radioactive
09-22-2005, 09:53 AM
goldear,
thanks if you can find that link please post it.

mrh,
if your looking for just a tube am/fm sherwood tuner and dont care if it's just mono you should pick yourself up a s2000.the s2000 are still relatively cheap when they come up for auction unlike the 3000IV and V.im still surprised that this 2100 went for a reasonable price perhaps prices are starting to come down on some gear.i'm hoping that everything works out great with it and i can use it with my fairchild setup but it'll have to go head to head with the tuner section in the mx110 before i take that out of the system.
chris

radioactive
09-22-2005, 10:05 AM
thanks brian.
the s2100's do seem scarce on ebay as compared to the others and that's partially why i jumped on it.as far as prices go the s2100 was $199.50 without case and the s300IV was listed at $160 without case.quite the jump for the convience for having am when everyone was jumping on the fm stereo bandwagon in the ealy 60's.
whats interesting is that it has a 15kc wide filter for am which might be useless with the crowded am band nowadays but i cant wait to see how it sounds.im also hoping the sensitvity is outstanding as ive read that sherwood made some pretty sensitive tuners.
chris

goldear
09-22-2005, 12:28 PM
goldear,
thanks if you can find that link please post it.
chris
Ok, here is one link, where you can purchase several Sherwood schematics. No 2100 though... :sigh:
http://www.vacuumtube.com/schemati.htm

Here is a link where you can get the S3000 schematic for free.
http://www.one-electron.com/FC_Consumer.html

There was a site that sold most of the old Sherwood Manuals, but I'm having a hard time finding it :worried:...

Wait, I think that I found it!!! This guy has almost everything, including at least one version of the 2100 service manual! :thmbsp:
http://www.w7fg.com/manual.txt

I hope this helps! Good luck with it, and keep us informed of your progress! Design wise there is a great deal of similarity between the Sherwood tuners design and the Mac tuners designs. Were it not for my Mac MR-67, my sherwoods would probably be a lot higher on my priority list...

radioactive
09-22-2005, 01:49 PM
thanks for the links goldear ive got them bookmarked.i'll definately keep everyone posted on the outcome once i get it.
chris

doucanoe
09-22-2005, 02:25 PM
radioactive,
So that was you!! :D

I was going to give it go right before the end but I got tied up with work. I think that your going to like that tuner. :thmbsp:

RC

radioactive
09-22-2005, 03:33 PM
I was going to give it go right before the end but I got tied up with work. I think that your going to like that tuner.
i thank you that you did'nt place a bid :ntwrthy: otherwise you'd have probally gotten it as my maxium bid was not a heck of alot higher than what i got it for.i thought for sure when i came home from work last night i would have been outbid.i consider it a fluke that i actually got it for what i did knowing what their other tuners usally bring. this being their totl tuner for 1962 and a near mint example at that i thought for sure it'd go into the $150+ range at least.i sure cant wait to hear it and add it to the ever growing collection of tuners.
chris

Pacopico
10-03-2005, 08:25 PM
You both are chumps - I was bidding on it too!

Glad someone "good" got it... :D

Brian
10-03-2005, 09:01 PM
Well, there is something to giving notice of our targets I guess. Congrats on the grab.

doucanoe
10-03-2005, 11:09 PM
Hey chris,

Did you get the Sherwood up and running yet? Im curious as to how you like it so far.

RC

jcmjrt
10-04-2005, 12:08 AM
That's a very nice looking tuner. Does it sounds as good as it looks?

radioactive
10-04-2005, 01:36 AM
You both are chumps - I was bidding on it too!
obviously you didnt want it too bad or you would have bid more :D
serioulsly i really needed another tuner like a hole in the head but i've heard so much great things about sherwood tuners that id give this one a try.buying this tuner has also had a domino effect on me as im now in the process of getting a s5000II to go with it.

doucanoe and jcmjrt,
i still havnt received it yet but as soon as i do i'll let you know what i think.

brian,
i was wondering what your thoughts are with the s5000II,S3000IV,and klipsch heresyII's.i know youve probally posted them but im too lazy to dig through the threads. :D
chris

kheper
10-13-2005, 11:42 PM
$93 seems a bit steep. I got an s-3000 for $25 on e-bay, then the seller, a sherwood zealot, privately sold me an s-3000III
for $15, but it was missing a knob. Both were very clean and mono. The s-3000 has a very tight bass. The s-3000III did not have a built in MPX unit, but I looked at the schematic and rigged up an mpx out. This tuner is ok, but the sound is a bit thin.

doug s.
10-14-2005, 10:53 AM
i am not familiar w/the am/fm units. i do own a s-3000-III fm mono, & it sounds supurb w/an outboard stereo mpx decoder.

the folks who know these tunas say the 3000 series sounds quite a better than the 2000 series (at least re: the fm-only units), at the expense of some sensitivity - the 2000's being a bit more sensitive. they must be *really* sensitive - my 3000-III's sensitivity is actually quite decent.

doug s.

radioactive
10-14-2005, 12:16 PM
$93 seems a bit steep. I got an s-3000 for $25 on e-bay, then the seller, a sherwood zealot, privately sold me an s-3000III

i wouldnt say $93 is steep for it considering how rare they are and what the s3000IV's go for.sure you can pick up the 2000's & 3000's all day long from ebay for around the prices you qouted but the 3000IV's and V's and even the 2100's generally sell for over $100.considering what you get for the money and from what ive heard about them it's a bargain. the only other stereo tube tuner that you can pick up in the $100 range that is any decent is the dynaco fm3 .all other tuners are usally quite a bit more such as the fishers,scotts, mcintosh etc...

by the way welcome to ak
chris

doucanoe
10-14-2005, 02:37 PM
Chris, I agree with what you are saying. If you were to stumble upon one for $25.00 to $50.00 then thats great, but the reality is that those finds are few and far between especially for a complete and fully functioning example with a case.

Im sure that if you ever grow tired of it, there will be a buyer out there who looks at it the same way. Of the 3 Sherwood tuners that I own, I got 2 for around the $50.00 mark and the other was $130.00 with shipping so it all somewhat averages out. The unit that I paid $130.00 for was absolutly worth it to me because its was beautiful cosmetically and fully functioning. Besides that I WANTED IT! :thmbsp:

RC

radioactive
10-15-2005, 12:28 AM
Chris, I agree with what you are saying. If you were to stumble upon one for $25.00 to $50.00 then thats great, but the reality is that those finds are few and far between especially for a complete and fully functioning example with a case.

how true that is.for the most part the deals and finds of a lifetime are diminishing at a rapid rate but you would never know from some of the posts here at ak and elsewhere.i've had a few myself so they are still out there,you just have to look a bit harder.

Im sure that if you ever grow tired of it, there will be a buyer out there who looks at it the same way. Of the 3 Sherwood tuners that I own, I got 2 for around the $50.00 mark and the other was $130.00 with shipping so it all somewhat averages out. The unit that I paid $130.00 for was absolutly worth it to me because its was beautiful cosmetically and fully functioning. Besides that I WANTED IT!

theres no doubt that i could easily get my money back if i ever decided to sell but i really dont consider that when i buy a piece of gear.i'm more of a collector so anything i buy usally lands up in the pile of gear i already have.im also like you in that if i want something bad enough i will pay more than the going price for it.this is a dangerous(for the pocket book)hobby but well worth it. :D

soundoc03
10-17-2005, 01:33 AM
I picked up a mint 210011 a few months ago on eBay for $73. Unfortunately the fuse holder shattered from poor packing and I have yet to fire it up. Fwiiw, I was told by a guy who sells and collects alot of Sherwoods that the 210011 is the best sounding and most worthy of modding. I also have a mint 2200 which has problem even after a going over from a well known SoCal vintage tuner guy.(see current post in Tubes) I have a 3000V which does sound excellent and is atleast a match for my Richard Modaferri modded MX-110 performance wise. I really like the looks of the old Sherwoods through they are not built nearly as well as Macs or Marantz. I am not familar with Fishers but the Sherwoods are definately in the same class as Scotts, and IMO look a lot cooler.

radioactive
10-17-2005, 01:51 AM
I picked up a mint 210011 a few months ago on eBay for $73.

wow thats the same price that the seller of mine paid for hid back in june or july.

I have a 3000V which does sound excellent and is atleast a match for my Richard Modaferri modded MX-110 performance wise

interesting.although i have a mx110 it's not modified so this is going to be interesting to see how the 2100 does against it.
i read your post on the 2200 and sure hope you can get it working properly.i too like the looks of the sherwoods and the way they had the different color schemes supposedly so you could match them to your decor.im also plaanning on getting a s5000 II to go with the s2100 so ill have a complete set.do you own any sherwood amps?
chris

soundoc03
10-17-2005, 02:16 AM
I have a mint fully functioning S-5000 and 2 different versions of the S-500011. The later both run 7868 tubes. One of the S-5000s had a blown transformer and I was lucky to find one on eBay for less the $20. I now have a good local tech to get it working but like most of these guys who do this for a hobby and then get "discovered", he is reluctant to take on new projects but I am working on him. BTW, Richard does a very professional job on the MX-110 and gives you a full detailed report. I am sure that the guys people use here on the board are also competent, but the market particularily on Audiogon does put a premium on RM's work so it is more like an investment on one of the few Mc pieces that even those cool on Mcs respect.

Brian
10-17-2005, 08:18 AM
I think the Sherwoods build is every bit as good as the McIntosh tube units. Think of the complexity of each and the result at the outputs. Sherwood knew how to make a reliable circuit and make complex answers to problems. The weak point of the day were the coils supplied by Miller and Sherwood rather than have the problem made there own. Copper is a better shielding material than chrome. I made the mistake for some years thinking from its looks it had to be less than steller until 1 day I took it off the shelf where it had sat for about 10 years, never having even beenpowered on and too a really good look at it and realized that this thing was really built and not a POS.

doug s.
10-17-2005, 10:09 AM
I think the Sherwoods build is every bit as good as the McIntosh tube units. Think of the complexity of each and the result at the outputs. Sherwood knew how to make a reliable circuit and make complex answers to problems. The weak point of the day were the coils supplied by Miller and Sherwood rather than have the problem made there own. Copper is a better shielding material than chrome. I made the mistake for some years thinking from its looks it had to be less than steller until 1 day I took it off the shelf where it had sat for about 10 years, never having even beenpowered on and too a really good look at it and realized that this thing was really built and not a POS.
owning a mac mr65b & a sherwood s-3000-III, i agree the build quality of the sherwood is every bit as good as the mac. cosmetically, it is clear that the mac has spent more money on this aspect... sonically, it's hard for me to compare these two, as the sherwood is dependant on whatever mpx decoder i use w/it since it's strictly a mono unit. both are excellent.

re: the less-expensive tubed mono tunas, the word is that the scotts are a hair less, sonically, than the fishers & sherwoods, but have better sensitivity/selectivity. and, that the sherwood 2000 is more sensitive than the later 3000/4000's but at the expense of sound quality. i still do not know enuff about the 2100 to know whether its fm section is closer to the 2000 or the later sherwoods...

doug s.

soundoc03
10-18-2005, 04:43 AM
All this dicussion got me motivated to fix the fuse holder on the S-2100 ll and set it up with a indoor wire dipole, Sherwood S-5000 and my "new" Vandersteen 1Bs. The tuner came without much in terms of a guarantee and the seller's poor description and pictures probably kept the interest low as $73 on eBay for this rarer model seemed like a bargain. Condition was actually near mint after a clean up, case was not included but the one for the S-2200 fits it perfectly. I am not sure how the mkll differs from the 2100. Unlike my S-2200 and the S-3000V the chassis is copper. The tuning meter is the same Venier gauge as the S-3000V. I believe the S-2100 has a horizontal tube instead. There is a orange stereo light similar to the S-3000V. Controls on the front are knobs for bands and tuning. There are two slide switches for AM wide/narrow(useless considering the number and density of AM stations) and FM hush in/out which didn't seem to make much difference. The bezel is chromed and the face is ivory which matches the S-5000ll amp. The S-2200 is brass and complements the original S-5000.

Well lucky for me it fires up and tunes very well though not as well as my S-3000V which was aligned by Mike Zucaro. The local jazz station KJAZ 88.1 tunes in nearer to 88.5 but sounds great. Even without an alignment I am impressed with the performance and sound. I think is sounds as good as the S-3000V and is demonstrating very good selectivity. A definate keeper! I had corresponded a year ago with a guy on eBay claiming to be an avid Sherwood collector who advised me to find a S-2100ll as it was in his opinion their best made and sounding tuner. At this point I won't disagree.

tropicalcb
10-22-2005, 05:30 AM
...looks good....have u got it yet?
~~ there's a sherwood 2000 11 on ausebay.. 5819688780 ..which I am considering. from wot i can suss out its mono am/fm & 117v 60 hz ... which is no big deal, but the starting price of AU$117 is a bit steep....anyone have any experience of this particular piece? .. and anyone got recommendations 4 circuits for a outboard decoder - fm mono is not my cup of tea ..... cb

radioactive
10-22-2005, 03:16 PM
soundoc03,

glad to hear you got the s2100 II up and running and by the sound of it(no pun intended) its on par with the s3000v which i had suspected.as for the differences between it and the 2100 i suspect its just the cosmetics and the replacement of the tuning tube with a meter.i also think that the circuitry and specs would be the same for both the 2100 and II although i havnt saw any yet for th 2100 II.

tropicalcb,

no i still havnt received the tuner yet but it should be here anyday now.as for that sherwood s2000 on ebay thats a bit too much for it.it also probally wont sell and will be listed at a lower price.if you could get it for around $50 or less id say grab it.as for circuits for multiplexers sorry i cant help you there perhaps someone will see your post and help you out.

doug s.
10-22-2005, 11:44 PM
...looks good....have u got it yet?
~~ there's a sherwood 2000 11 on ausebay.. 5819688780 ..which I am considering. from wot i can suss out its mono am/fm & 117v 60 hz ... which is no big deal, but the starting price of AU$117 is a bit steep....anyone have any experience of this particular piece? .. and anyone got recommendations 4 circuits for a outboard decoder - fm mono is not my cup of tea ..... cb


re sherwood tunas, that seems a bit high to me, unless it's truly pristine, & refurb'd. also, the word from those who have tried both is that an s-2000 will be more sensitive, while the s-3000 & later iterations will sound better at the expense of some sensitivity. i have never heard an s-2000; my s-3000 is sensitive enuff for me, but it certainly isn't up to that of my better (relatively) modern solid state tunas.

re: outboard decoders, join this site, & ask bob fitzgerald for info on his circuit - i know one member there is using one & he likes it a lot. bob may be coming out w/kits and fully-assembled iterations in the near future...

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

also, onething is still making a decoder that needs to be installed in a box. not exactly cheap, tho, at 119ukp:

http://www.onethingaudio.com/OTA/9152-OTA-MAIN.htm
http://www.onethingaudio.com/OTA/MPX/9152-OTA-MPX-A1.htm
http://www.onethingaudio.com/OTA/MPX/Images/9512-OTA-MPX-IMG-MPX1-D1.jpg

and you can always look out for a vintage decoder on ebay, but these seem to have escalated in price quite a bit recently... even a relatively lower-end model (compared to the sought after fisher mpx100 & scott 35/335) by eico or heathkit will still usually cost more than a nice sherwood tuna.

doug s.

radioactive
10-31-2005, 10:52 AM
finally :banana2: :banana2: :banana: its here.took forever but it was sure worth the wait.this tuner is absolutely beautiful condition besides a little dust and a couple dull spots on the 2 end caps its in excellent codition.time to hook it up and give it a listen pictures also to follow. :D now i just need the s5000 II.

radioactive
10-31-2005, 10:59 AM
finally :banana2: :banana2: :banana: its here.took forever but it was sure worth the wait.this tuner is absolutely beautiful condition besides a little dust and a couple dull spots on the 2 end caps its in excellent codition.time to hook it up and give it a listen pictures also to follow. :D now i just need the s5000 II.

doucanoe
10-31-2005, 12:44 PM
How about a S-5000? The II part is not necessary :D

Glad to hear it is looking great Chris! It should prove to be a fine tuner. I now have a S3000III headed my way but I would much rather own the 2100.

Want to swap? :D

RC

soundoc03
10-31-2005, 12:57 PM
The ll matches the chrome of the 2100, the 5000 has the same brass trim and knobs as the 2200

doucanoe
10-31-2005, 12:59 PM
Picky, Picky.......lol

RC

radioactive
10-31-2005, 01:35 PM
How about a S-5000? The II part is not necessary

really?if it's the el84 based one i could possibly be interested as i've said before.in the interim ill be getting the s5000 II from greg.congradulations on the 3000 III and hope you like it .i dont think im up for a trade quite yet i just got it :D .im also posiibly going to get the 2000II listed in the classifieds.


The ll matches the chrome of the 2100, the 5000 has the same brass trim and knobs as the 2200

true,so now i have to get a s5000 and a 2200 or the 2000II.dont you just like the addictiveness of this hobby :D

kbuzz
10-31-2005, 04:56 PM
i caught the sherwood disease also. Won two s5000s in the last two weeks. Averag cost, less then 40 bucks./..

Ive sent both to be checked by radio tuner x a board member...results to be posted later....

hope the sherwoods turn out to be as good as claimed....

radioactive
11-01-2005, 11:27 AM
kbuzz,
good luck with the tuners im sure youlll like them especialy once gone over and aligned.

i finally got around to taking a picture of the 2100 and theres one question i have .it looks like the endcaps on the side are gold as compared to the bezel which is silver is this correct?or do i have some perhaps from a 2200.im also experiencing some trouble with the stereo indicator light,although i can recieve in stereo it's very hard to get that light to come on.time to check a few tubes and then if i cant find the problem it'll probally be off for an alignment too.

mhardy6647
11-01-2005, 12:18 PM
FYI and FWIW, I got an S-2000 yesterday :-) It looks very nice, tho' I haven't had a chance to fire it up yet.

radioactive
11-01-2005, 12:26 PM
FYI and FWIW, I got an S-2000 yesterday :-) It looks very nice, tho' I haven't had a chance to fire it up yet.

great :thmbsp: another one for your collection.nice to see more and more people getting into the sherwood gear.by the way what color scheme did you get with this one?

chris

mhardy6647
11-07-2005, 09:49 AM
Had a (seemingly) bad experience turn good today... a couple of weeks ago, I bought a nice looking Sherwood S-2000 AM/FM tuner on a (very) popular on-line auction site. First time I've bought something there in quite a while. Advertised to be in good working order. Seller has a large amount of extremely positive feedback.

It came last week, exceptionally well packed, and looking very nice. Left positive, enthusiastic feedback without firing it up ('cause time was very tight last week). Finally got 'round to Variac'ing it up today. Initial performance was crappy: AM and (especially) FM. Dang! Cleaned the function selector and the two slide switches on the front. AM better now, but FM was really lame. Put it aside.

Went back and re-read the description. Description was very thorough and accurate as far as I could tell. Just didn't seem right that it wasn't working well at all. Pulled it out again and figured I'd check tubes and clean pins. Checked all the tubes ('cept the 6X4... it WAS working, after all!). Cleaned the pins and reseated everybody. Turned it on "FM" and was BLASTED with sound. Problem solved!

Both AM and FM are working excellently.

I guess the moral (if there is one) is that it pays to clean and/or reseat tubes after something 45 years old is shipped 2/3 of the way across the country to you.

THe ONLY problem with this ol' girl is that the magic eye tube is kind of dim. I'll A/B the S-2000 with my FM only S-3000. If it sounds as good as the S-3000, I'll swap eye tubes with the 3000!

soundoc03
11-07-2005, 01:30 PM
I had(have) the same problem with the S-2000 I bought from the same popular site last year. Also was in pristine condition but FM output was weak and tuning drifts badly. I thought I cleaned the pins but maybe I need to go back and do it again.

radioactive
11-07-2005, 02:01 PM
Pulled it out again and figured I'd check tubes and clean pins. Checked all the tubes ('cept the 6X4... it WAS working, after all!). Cleaned the pins and reseated everybody. Turned it on "FM" and was BLASTED with sound. Problem solved!

glad to see thats all it needed to get it up and running properly.

i finally got around to the s2100 today myself and checking all the tubes.it had a bad 6cb6,6ea8 and 6bs8.(at least they tested for shorts on the tube tester)i replaced them and now the stereo tuning indicator is working correctly and coming on with all the stations i tune in .the only draw back as to be expected is the dial is a little bit off now but i can live with that for awhile.

mhardy6647
11-07-2005, 02:21 PM
I got motivated last night (with my S-2000 success) and pulled out a very old AM-FM Radio Craftsmen C-810 tuner given to me by a friend from church (its original owner). I was unable to receive stations with it... checked all the tubes and found one with no emission (no air in it, though), and a couple with high grid leakage. Good thing about old radio tubes is they're cheap! Just ordered what I need from Dick Bergeron (Electron Tube Enterprises)... also an EM80 for the Sherwood.

BTW, and not entirely OT... I have heard that Radio Craftsmen was the parent company of Sherwood (or evolved into Sherwood). Do you or does anyone know if that is in fact the case?

kbuzz
11-07-2005, 04:03 PM
$93 seems a bit steep. I got an s-3000 for $25 on e-bay, then the seller, a sherwood zealot, privately sold me an s-3000III
for $15, but it was missing a knob. Both were very clean and mono. The s-3000 has a very tight bass. The s-3000III did not have a built in MPX unit, but I looked at the schematic and rigged up an mpx out. This tuner is ok, but the sound is a bit thin.

kleper- what is thin aout the the s3000- what are you comparing it to. It would help us ///

kbuzz
11-07-2005, 04:29 PM
I got motivated last night (with my S-2000 success) and pulled out a very old AM-FM Radio Craftsmen C-810 tuner given to me by a friend from church (its original owner). I was unable to receive stations with it... checked all the tubes and found one with no emission (no air in it, though), and a couple with high grid leakage. Good thing about old radio tubes is they're cheap! Just ordered what I need from Dick Bergeron (Electron Tube Enterprises)... also an EM80 for the Sherwood.

BTW, and not entirely OT... I have heard that Radio Craftsmen was the parent company of Sherwood (or evolved into Sherwood). Do you or does anyone know if that is in fact the case?


From my understanding both RC and Sherwood were chicago based outfits. RC was first. Recent review of craftsmen info available on the web has done little more but confirm rumour that when RC went down (or just prior to it) some of the engineers migrated to Sherwood. I do not know if sherwood was open or just opened.

I think the VTV issue covering the radiocraftsmen c500(my current amp of chioice) indicats that sid smith was one of those who left rc to sherwood. sorry if this info does not help much but i have alrready done the web work and wanted to save anyone else the trouble.

FYI as noted on my post above, i recently caught the sherwood bug-but based on design and price issues alone. Im not techniically competeent to restore any of the pieces i got but await restoration to comment on thier sonics. As a product of american industrial design i think they are kinda cool looking. And certainly dont cost the likes of mac.

One interestng thing i noticed (at least to me) on the 5000 integrated series as that the early ones have a headphone jack. Does anyone know how that circuit is designed. Will the jack output have the same sound as the regular out put or is it driven by another section. In nay event i think it could be neat headphone amp.....

mhardy6647
11-07-2005, 04:42 PM
The audio quality of the Sherwood tube gear I have heard and/or owned to date is very good... especially considering the prices that these units fetch (still relatively modest). I love my S-3000... which is why I bought an S-2000.

However, I'd call the esthetics 'an acquired taste' (at best)! :-)

Kegger
12-05-2005, 07:01 PM
Just curious if you guy's had a sherwood s3000V or a s2000II with an external fisher
mpx unit which would you use.

At the moment I'm truly ecstatic about the sound and station grabbing ability of my
s3000V but do wonder about the s2000 with the fisher mpx. I'm sure I will try it in
my system anyway then form my own oppinions which I'll list after I do, but just am
interested in what the "in the know" have to say, plus or minus for each unit.


Any and all thoughts much appreciated! This sherwood stuff is very cool I also have a
s8000IV reciever that is very nice, sounds great excelent phono section.

doug s.
12-06-2005, 08:51 AM
Just curious if you guy's had a sherwood s3000V or a s2000II with an external fisher
mpx unit which would you use.

At the moment I'm truly ecstatic about the sound and station grabbing ability of my
s3000V but do wonder about the s2000 with the fisher mpx. I'm sure I will try it in
my system anyway then form my own oppinions which I'll list after I do, but just am
interested in what the "in the know" have to say, plus or minus for each unit.


Any and all thoughts much appreciated! This sherwood stuff is very cool I also have a
s8000IV reciever that is very nice, sounds great excelent phono section.

i have a sherwood s-3000-III that i have used w/warious mpx's, including the fisher mpx100. the sound *is* fantastic - right up there w/my best vintage s/s tunas. no, it's not as sensitive as the best, but it is still quite respectable, & will likely be satisfactory for all but the most difficult reception conditions.

i have never heard the s-2000, but folk i trust say it is even more sensitive than the 3000-series, but at the expense of sonics... i, too, would like to hear more feedback about this...

doug s.

Kegger
12-06-2005, 04:17 PM
Yes I wonder if the sonics has anything to do with the tuner it'self or if you use a good
quality mpx unit like the fisher's does it raise the sound quality. HUMM!

I will try and find out here soon, thanks for the info.

doug s.
12-07-2005, 02:01 PM
Yes I wonder if the sonics has anything to do with the tuner it'self or if you use a good
quality mpx unit like the fisher's does it raise the sound quality. HUMM!

re: mpx, well, it's really hard to know for sure. i have three other mpx's - the most recent acquisition a scott 335. i have only listened to it for a few hours, w/a scott 310d tuna. also great sound. the other mpx's i have also give excellent results - a slightly modded studio-12 decoder & a onething audio decoder. but, neither of these work optimally w/the sherwood - impedance mismatch. i have the same issue w/my fisher fm90-r - it doesn't like the s/s decoders. but, i do know the sherwood sounds better w/the fisher decoder than the fm90-r does. this *still* doesn't tell me a lot, tho - the fm90-r *does* sound good, yust not as detailed as the sherwood. and, i *know* it's seriously in need of adjustment - to listen to 89.3, the dial reeds 88.5. the sherwood may need a service too, but at least its dial is not off.

and, re: different decoders, i have two mono tunas that will work w/all my decoders - a stromberg carlson sr445 & a leak troughline 3. they both sound superb w/any of the decoders. i am not sure - closer scrutiny would be required - but i suspect the lowly sr445 to be the best sounding mono tuna of the bunch. it's also *extremely* insensitive. this leads me to believe that ultimate sensitivity & selectivity comes at the expense of sonics. modern technology has obviously come a long way here, as some s/s tunas i have that are *only* 30 years old or so, sound fantastic *and* have excellent reception. but the sr445, w/any of my decoders, sounds as good as my best, with a strong, uncompressed signal. as do all my old mono tubed tunas, really...

ymmv,

doug s.

Owens84QV
02-19-2006, 09:25 PM
While cleaning out a closet upstairs in the office, I uncovered a Sherwood 2100 AM/FM Tuner and a S-5000 II 80W Integrated Amp. These were given to me back in 1993. The covers need to be removed so the insides can be cleaned, but they have not been turned on for ~12 years. Otherwise, they look to be in great shape. I had intended to retube them and get them completely refurbished, but this plan slowly got replaced by other must-do's.

I've seen the 2100's go for anywhere from ~$50 (low price) - $199 (excellent condition) and the S5000-II anywhere from $199 (low price) to $699 (excellent condition). I don't need them as I have Audio Research tube components in my system. Any ideas where to find a good home for these well-cared-for Sherwood components?

Appreciate anyone's help.

radioactive
02-19-2006, 11:21 PM
Any ideas where to find a good home for these well-cared-for Sherwood components?

you could try posting them in the ak classifieds and see who bites.theres alot of sherwood fans here so chances are you might get a nibble or two on them.

Owens84QV
02-20-2006, 05:59 AM
you could try posting them in the ak classifieds and see who bites.theres alot of sherwood fans here so chances are you might get a nibble or two on them.

Appreciate your help!

spaceman
02-28-2009, 03:34 PM
Hi guys, not many threads about Sherwood tuners, so I thought I'd post here about my S2000II. Just got this today from FedEx, bought it from an AKer in the Barter Town forum. It was well packed, but somehow the EZ80 tube came out of it's socket, bending some pins, so I'll give her a good checking before trying her out. Otherwise, it looks very good, just minor cosmetic blems. I love the leatherette & gold on the case. :smoke:

Brian
03-02-2009, 05:16 PM
I had a pair of ARC D-76a amps when I owned my S5000II and in some way preferred the Sherwood to the AVA SuperPas3X mated to the ARCs. I'd suggest getting the amp refurbed before disposing of it. You may be surprised.

When I decided to downsize my collection, I had less hesitation about disposing of the AVA and ARCs than the Sherwood.

doug s.
03-02-2009, 05:21 PM
Hi guys, not many threads about Sherwood tuners, so I thought I'd post here about my S2000II. Just got this today from FedEx, bought it from an AKer in the Barter Town forum. It was well packed, but somehow the EZ80 tube came out of it's socket, bending some pins, so I'll give her a good checking before trying her out. Otherwise, it looks very good, just minor cosmetic blems. I love the leatherette & gold on the case. :smoke:
i have heard that the sherwood tunas prior to the s3000ll are a bit more sensitive, at the expense of a bit of sound quality. but they're still supposed to sound fantastic. i can state w/o hesitation that a properly serviced s3000ll or newer, will sound as good as any tuna out there, regardless of cost. (imo, of course! :smoke: ) if you have a mono iteration, get a good modern s/s mpx decoder for stereo...

doug s.

Bill K
03-20-2009, 01:39 PM
I have a Sherwood 2100 in my basement system that I always felt sounded pretty good and did a good job of pulling in stations considering I'm only using an amplified Radio Shack indoor antenna which is effectively only about 2 feet above ground level. I recently did a shootout in my main system of tuners that I have acquired. Strictly on sound quality for now, didn’t do any DXing comparisons. My main tuner is a McIntosh MR74. I also have a Scott 310E and a Scott 330C along with a Scott and a Fisher MPX adaptor. To this point none listed here have had alignments since I’ve owned them nor any hotrodding. Only required servicing to assure they are in good working condition.
On the initial tests the Scott 310E left everything else in the dust. It was much more open sounding with better top end extension and the sound stage is incredible. The MR74 had better bottom end than the rest but the soundstage was more closed in and it was a bit veiled sounding compared to the Scott 310E. The Sherwood did well but was less dynamic overall loosing a little on both the top and bottom ends. Stereo separation was less than either the 310 or MR74. The Scott 330C with the Scott MPX adaptor was close to the Sherwood and lost a little through the Fisher adaptor.
I have since done a little work on the McIntosh replacing the output coupling capacitors with Blackgates as well as some of the supply filter caps. The main 4 section cap in the power supply is still original but measures perfectly good. I also replaced the coupling caps from the MPX circuit to the output amp with polypropylene. I burned the tuner in for 100 hours and now the sound quality is very close to the 310E. The McIntosh now has even better tighter bottom end with a greatly improved soundstage. The 310 still has the edge on the top end by just a bit.
My next step is to do alignments on all tuners and see what improvements I can make there. I very recently picked up a mint Sound Technologies 1000A generator to use for the task. I’ll post an update when I have a chance though it may be a while as I only have alignment procedures for the 310 and MR74 so far and have to gather the service manuals for the other pieces not to mention the time to do it all.

doug s.
03-20-2009, 04:41 PM
I have a Sherwood 2100 in my basement system that I always felt sounded pretty good and did a good job of pulling in stations considering I'm only using an amplified Radio Shack indoor antenna which is effectively only about 2 feet above ground level. I recently did a shootout in my main system of tuners that I have acquired. Strictly on sound quality for now, didn’t do any DXing comparisons. My main tuner is a McIntosh MR74. I also have a Scott 310E and a Scott 330C along with a Scott and a Fisher MPX adaptor. To this point none listed here have had alignments since I’ve owned them nor any hotrodding. Only required servicing to assure they are in good working condition.
On the initial tests the Scott 310E left everything else in the dust. It was much more open sounding with better top end extension and the sound stage is incredible. The MR74 had better bottom end than the rest but the soundstage was more closed in and it was a bit veiled sounding compared to the Scott 310E. The Sherwood did well but was less dynamic overall loosing a little on both the top and bottom ends. Stereo separation was less than either the 310 or MR74. The Scott 330C with the Scott MPX adaptor was close to the Sherwood and lost a little through the Fisher adaptor.
I have since done a little work on the McIntosh replacing the output coupling capacitors with Blackgates as well as some of the supply filter caps. The main 4 section cap in the power supply is still original but measures perfectly good. I also replaced the coupling caps from the MPX circuit to the output amp with polypropylene. I burned the tuner in for 100 hours and now the sound quality is very close to the 310E. The McIntosh now has even better tighter bottom end with a greatly improved soundstage. The 310 still has the edge on the top end by just a bit.
My next step is to do alignments on all tuners and see what improvements I can make there. I very recently picked up a mint Sound Technologies 1000A generator to use for the task. I’ll post an update when I have a chance though it may be a while as I only have alignment procedures for the 310 and MR74 so far and have to gather the service manuals for the other pieces not to mention the time to do it all.
i find this interesting. i owned a mac mr74. i only got it cuz of the experience i had w/a refurb'd and aligned mr77, done by a mac tech w/35+ years experience, recommended by the factory. of the 100+ tunas i have owned over the past ten years or so, the mr77 easily ranked in the bottom three. this, and the mr74 are supposed to be mac's best sounding s/s tunas. so, at the prodding of the folks over at the yahoo tuna forum, i tried another, on the off chance that, perhaps, even after refurb and alignment, the mr77 i owned was a dud. well, the mint but never serviced mr74 i picked up was better than the mr77, but not by a lot. still ranks near the bottom of the heap of all the tunas i have had thru my system.

i have also owned two sets of scott 310d/335 mpx decoders, which are supposed to be a hair better than the one-box 310e. one set was stock, the other refurb'd and modded by scott guru foster blair. both blew the mr74 into the weeds sonically. in all areas - detail, soundstaging, extension, you name it. (but the 310d's sounded better w/a one thing audio mpx decoder than w/the scott mpx's.)

now to the sherwoods... i have a slightly modded, refurb'd s3000v, a stock never serviced s2100ll, and a stock never serviced mono s3000lll. all sound even better than the scotts, the mono s3000lll w/the above-mentioned one-thing audio mpx decoder... the sherwoods give any tuna extant a run for the money when sonics are considered, imo. including my modded refurb'd sansui tu-x1, modded refurb'd sansui tu9900, and modded refurb'd hk citation 18, modded refurb'd heathkit aj1600, aiwa at9700u, rotel rht10, philips ah6731, accuphase t100, modded refurb'd mitsubishi da-f20. these are about the best s/s tunas i have had the pleasure of owning... i have not had the pleasure of auditioning the accuphase t1000, which some folks say put all other tunas on a lower tier, when it's run thru a dac...

ymmv,

doug s.

Bill K
03-23-2009, 03:59 PM
""and the mr74 are supposed to be mac's best sounding s/s""


Actually I've always heard the MR78 is supposed to be the best sounding SS. I've as yet not had the privilege to hear a 78 so I can only go with what I have heard. I’m not close to the 100+ tuners you’ve had available. Wish I had time and room for more for more comparisons but barely have time for what I’ve got.
As for the Sherwood 2100 I didn’t compare that to the MR74 before I upgraded the 74’s coupling and filter caps so the 2100 may have bested the 74 in some areas prior to the mods. However as it sits now the 74 sounds better being fuller and more open sounding. Again nothing I have has had an alignment as of yet and aside from what I’ve changed in the 74 nothing has been modified on any of the other tuners or MPX adaptors. It very well may be that the Scott 330 that I used to drive the MPX adaptors may be in big need of an alignment itself thus not allowing the adaptors to reach their full potential. Also part of why the Scott 310 did so well is that it may have had a recent alignment though not by myself. I purchased that one at a radio show from a guy who seemed technically adept and knew the condition and value of what he was selling. It may be that he had done an alignment at some point.
I have not compared the tuners in mono mode as my quest is for stereo reproduction. However I do also have a Heathkit and a Rauland tuner in my collection I have not even checked either of these out as yet. After servicing them it might be interesting comparing them with the Scott 330 and trying them through the MPX adaptors. I also have a Knight MPX adaptor that I picked up cheap but it seems to be in mint condition cosmetically. I don’t expect it to keep up with the Fisher or Scott adaptors but will eventually check it out and see how it does.
As far as other tuners I have had, My first was a Royal (private branded from Electrovoice) which I bought mail order in high school for $55 from Dixi HiFi. Nothing particularly special sound quality wise but fairly sensitive for an inexpensive tuner and has been a workhorse being in continuous use currently serving in my garage stereo. . I had a NAD digital tuner which I thought was junk as the front end had problems overloading from a station that was a bout a mile from me and sonically mediocre. I purchased a late 70s Pioneer for a $100 to replace it that blew the NAD away in every way. I A-B the Pioneer against the MR74 when I first bought that about 10 years ago. The Pioneer had been my main tuner until then and has now gone into my bedroom system. My recollection was that the Pioneer was decent sounding but 74 sounded better sonically in most respects. The Pioneer was close as far as sensitivity when it came to DXing. I have also a handful of other tuners but don’t think they’ll compete here.

doug s.
03-23-2009, 04:30 PM
one last point about the mac tunas - it is only those who are not into tunas that say the 78 is mac's sounding s/s tuna. the 78 is known to be the sensitivity king, not the sound king. even richard modafferi, the 78's designer, will tell you that a well-sorted 77 will sonically out perform even a modaferri-modded 78.

my experience w/my stock but refurb'd/aligned mr77 and stock never serviced mr74 were that they had a flat 2-d soundstage, and average at best detail/dynamics/extension. reception and quieting on both were wery nice.

of course, as always - ymmv...

doug s.

Bill K
03-24-2009, 11:17 AM
Now that you mention it I have read elsewhere as well that the 77 was supposed to have better sound quality. Due to their short run I almost never see a 77 for sale though.
I also agree about the 74's soundstage being rather flat in stock form. That's what started me off on all this. Up until 2 weeks ago the MR74 in stock form was the best I had heard in my main system. It's only the 4th I've had in my main system since I first started a system back in high school. My original tuner was the Royal bought about 1975. I replaced it with the NAD tuner bought new in the mid 80s. Sold the NAD and bought the late 70s Pioneer tuner which sounded much better than the NAD and was much more sensitive. I bought the MR74 about 10 years ago and moved the Pioneer to the bedroom. The 74 was again an improvement in sound quality and pulled in stations better than anything I had tried to date. For 10 years I was happy until I tried the Scott 310E and realized what I was missing.
It is amazing though how much better the McIntosh is in both dynamics and sounstage since the capacitor upgrades. I would love to hear what a fully Modafferi modified unit would sound like but donít want to part with about $700 at this time and want to explore what I can wring out of all my tuners working on them myself. Besides there are only about 3 stations with a decent sounding signal in the Chicago area that I listen to but fortunately it gives me a good variety. WDCB jazz, WFMT classical and WXRT rock.
Restoring and hotrodding old equipment is almost as much fun as sitting back and listening to it and Iím often doing both at the same time!

Brian
03-24-2009, 11:41 AM
When the 74, 77 and 78 were new - yeah, I'm that old, the 78 was for pulling and the 77 for listening. The 77 bettered the 78 soundwise. Thet said, probably 80+ of listeners could not hear the difference. The 74 and 77 were closer, the 74 has less od a cutoff slope b/c of the filters and there was a split of opinion at the time which did better. It almost got to a point where it depended more on the 2 particular tuners being compared than the design. A hot 74 was better than a 77 meeting the lower end of its spec, etc.

As for the tuners being 2-dimensional, I'd suggest that while they may not have the soundstage of some of the later tuners if worling within spec they are far from being 2-dimensional in my experience.

I'm not sure if a RM modded 78 would better an in-spec 77. I'd leave that to RM's opinion. My limited experieince with him involved a MX110 I bought from Audio Classics and he had worked on it to make sure it was in spec. At the time we spoke, I asked about the mods and he told me he could do it but in the case of the unit I was buying there would be no sonic improvement as it was an excellent unit. Anyone telling a customer not to spend some $700 in the late '80s gets my respect.

It would hard to imagine, though that in all the years since the design of the 77 and 78, he's not learned a trick or 2 to kick up the 78 a notch but it still would be limited by the # of filters. I seem to remember the wide setting on the is narrower than the 77.

The Mc tuner, like their preamps and amps, at least the older designs, do not follow the average sonic signature of their SS competition. The company was consistent in desiging to the Mc voicing of its tube units rather than the voicing of transistor based designs. Like any Mc unit some will like them and some will not.