Philips 6731 vs. McIntosh MR77 and Philips preamp first look.

[Brian]

Had agreat oppurtunity to compare the two (2) last night since for male and female vocals. The CBC had a reading for about an hour last night. I ran them through my McIntosh C28/Philips 572 and the Bozak Symphony speakers. I carefully matched the tuner levels to each other. Reports are that the Philips is better in the midrange than the MR78. I purchased the MR77 after comparing them against the MR78 when I sold them new. I decided on the 77 because the midrange seemed better.

The 2 were so very close that only after listening for the entire time was I able to discern VERY subtle differences. The Philips is slightly more neutral and detailed throughout the frequency range. Male voices have very slightly more authority with the Mc while female voices have slightly more air and sibilence. I used the same antenna on both and the signal strength meter read higher with the Philips. I think the Philips was quieter on dead spots than the McIntosh but they both were so low I really can not be certain I actually was not hearing ambient noise background noise from something in the house.

I did not have time after to try instruments but tonight I'll listen with some jazz for single instruments. Later in the week I'll move to multi-instrument jazz and then to classical. By the end of the week I hope to have a good feel for the differences between the tuners.

The Philips preamp phono section seems to get confused on music with massed instruments. The McIntosh handled it better. I'm going to swap out cartridges to see if that makes a difference. I opened the preamp briefly and it is well laid out. All the boards plug into chassis connectors and wiring harnesses. It would be a snap literally to change out a board. volume and tone controls are stepped Alps and the selector switches have gold traces and contacts.Boards are above and below a chassis which seems to be constructed for both shielding and structural integrety. The input/phono preamp board is a single board located at the back of the unit and as far from the power supply as possible and has a shield plate between them, though I'd like to have seen copper as opposed to the steel. It looks like it would be easy to attack the board for updates or upgrades. Wiring is well laid oiy and the harnesses very neat. The unit looks almost empty when compared to the Mc C28 but still looks well made with very good components.

[grumpy]

Brian

So far that's a pretty promising review of the Philips. My kid loves his Philips amp and tuner. For being a bit on the cheesy side his are actually quite good compared to other popular makes. Course I don't think his would hold a candle to your Philips.

Let me ask ya have you ever listened to the MR-75. I have been searching for one for a while now with no luck. I am just to damn cheap to spend the money for the MR-78. That's not to say if I were to find a great deal on a 78 ( unlikely ) I would pass it up.

Grumpy

[atuque]

Grumpy:

I've had the same MR 75 for almost twenty years and I've been very pleased with it. My original pairing was the MA 6200 and the MR 75. It now works with my C32 and MC2255.

I have only one other tuner and that is a Marantz 115B. The Mac is a better tuner.

In my receiver collection,and again, this is only my opinion, only the Mac 1900 comes close.

( I can see the worm can opening now )

atuque

[Brian]

In all honesty, I've yet to find a McIntosh analog tuner or tuner/preamp that was a dog. The MR75 is a really good sounding tuner though not really noticed much. My least favorite for sound quality actually is the MR78. It was designed to knock the socks off in pulling stations and in that it is the best of the lot but, I think sound was sacrificed in exchange.

[grumpy]

Brian

Actually I am looking for a tuner that can pull em in and block out all the other stations. Sound is seconday to me but still very important.

atuque

I am all with ya about the 1900. It was prolly the most sensitive tuner I owned and i have had a few ;)

Grumpy

[Brian]

I only had a short time last night to listen. The local jazz station was playing some multi-instrumentals without voices. Since I have never listened to the original music live I can not compare the sound of either to the original. The overall impression was that the Philips has a larger soundstage, and more (note I do not say better) resolution in the bass and high end. The piano on the Philips is a bit harder with the hammer strokes possibly indicating a bit of overshoot on the front of the frequency and maybe only hearing digital. The tubular bells had more of the reverb from the inside of the bell and was slightly more metal sounding. The overall sound was akin to listening to a set of Klipsch or sitting a couple of rows in front of where you are sitting when listening to the McIntosh. An extreme comparison would be that of listening to Advents and Heresys. Which is right, which is better? The reality is the better is what the listening preference is. Since I like to listen to the music and not instruments for pleasure, the McIntosh with is sound from further back does "better". The Philips is only maybe a couple of rows more forward and therefore the differences are slight but noticable.

Tonight I will switch to my Klipsch Heresys for the balance of the testing since they are more analytical than the Bozak. I may also swap back in the Philips preamp since on initial listening it too has more resolving power than the Mc C28 (again similar to the differences between the 77 and 6731 tuners).

[rhinofly]

Did you compare the two tuners for adjacent channel selectivity? There is no point in having it sound good if you cant get the channel in at all, IMHO.

Later this week I will do a shootout between some tuners I have and an MX113 that I just picked up. Should be interesting.

[Brian]

Yes, I have and in my area, both are doing equally well. But, I have not tried doing it with 2 stations 200 miles out on adjacent channels, etc. I listen only to a couple of jazz and classical stations. All are on the low end of the band and not much around them. I suspect, that the Phillips would be the winner since it was designed when this had become more of an issue. Remember in the late 50s to 60s, band crowding was not a real issue and that is why older tuners don't have the numbers on their side. If it were to become an issue, I'd more than likely go hog wide with the antenna.