Bob's Tuner Tales

[nailer]

Bob's Tuner Tale

PROLOGUE

After owning only a single tuner at any given time for most of my life, I have somehow managed to go from one to five in the past 1.5 years. Before I started collecting tuners - having three or more of any adult toy makes one a collector - I listened to the same tuner for 11 years, and it's still my favorite. However, the KT-8300 I'm listening to at this very moment demonstrates that a tuneful tuner with a great RF section can be had for less than $300.

In audiophile terms there is a significant sonic difference between the high-end tuner I've been listening to since 1994 and the KT-8300. However, I'm an audio nerd and see the equipment as a cool toy for playing music. In other words, I like audio equipment because I like music. If I could only have speakers, receiver, and CD player I'd be listening to music just as much as I do now. To this end, FM (free music) has always been one of my major music sources. Now it is my primary source, with CD being a distant second, and LP an even more distant third.

Enough about music, this post is about tuners. For 10.5 years my sole tuner was a Day Sequerra Studio. I remember when the original Sequerra came out and thought it was one of the coolest pieces of equipment I'd ever seen. The Sequerra, hence my Day Sequerra, is still one cool looking tuner. The Studio was a smooth sonic mesh with my system at the time - ML Sequel II, Berning TF-12, and AR D-75 MKII. Today only the amp has changed - Music Reference RM-9.

Prior to the Studio I was listening to an MR-65B. It was very musical, but could not acquire my favorite station with the MD Silver Ribbon. Being an apartment dweller my antenna choices were limited. From 85-92 I listened to a Magnum FT-101 followed by an FT-101a (I was a Magnum dealer). My original tuner was an ST-5000FW, which was paired with my first set of separates - Crown D75 and Hafler DH-101. The Sony was replaced by the FT-101a when I started selling equipment as Audio Abode.

To be continued ... whether you want it or not.

 

[Vinyl Rules!]

PROLOGUE

[big snip] My original tuner was an ST-5000FW, which was paired with my first set of separates - Crown D75 and Hafler DH-101. The Sony was replaced by the FT-101a when I started selling equipment as Audio Abode.

To be continued ... whether you want it or not.

I'm curious: Did you like the FT-101a better than the Sony ST-5000FW, or do you wish you'd kept the Sony?

 

[nailer]

Vinyl Rules

Have slept many times since then, but I do recall that after a while I did miss the Sony, but not that much. Back then LPs were by far my primary listening source and the tuner was used for background music. Also, I actually sold more than a few Magnums during my Audio Abode phase. With it's three big meters and toggle swithces the FT-101 was a cool looking piece. Both the Sony and Magnum were non fatiguing.

If I were choosing between them today, I'd go with the Sony. Can't tell you why though, just based on my missing it for a short time and that it is about 50% the cost of an FT-101a. Also, never had the urge to replace the FT-101a with another ST-5000FW.

 

[L'wood]

Edited..... no sales on this forum..

 

[nailer]

The Magnum Dynalab MD-108

As our tale unfolds I had been happily listening to the Day Sequerra Studio for over a decade. But another tuner, the Magnum Dynalab MD-108, had been calling to the audio nerd within me for a few years . The MD-108 was cool looking (the tuning eye was the biggest draw), had a tube audio stage, and most of all a claim of better performance.

In September 04 I found one at a price I could not afford, but being a well conditioned consumer I went ahead and bought it anyway. First the positive, the MD-108 looks as good as it's picture (the tuning eye is very cool), but it's not as cool looking as the Studio.

Sonically the MD-108 is too forward sounding for me. It is also not as smooth sounding as the Studio. The Studio sounds more like a tube tuner than the MD-108. The Magnum's audio stage appears to be a solid state circuit with tubes added. The MD-108's sound is non fatiguing.

My highest priority is a tuner's ability to provide high quality sound from the three stations I listen to. One station, 101.1 WRR, has a strong enough signal that the MD Silver Ribbon dipole antenna pulls in a more than adequate signal for any tuner I have owned. The other two stations, 88.1 KNTU & 88.9 KETR, are a bit farther away and are too weak to be pulled in by the Silver Ribbon. If I had an outdoor antenna reception of these two stations would not be problematic, but I am am limited to using an APS Attic InTenna.

Both KNTU & KETR broadcast a 100KW signal and KETR is about 20 miles farther away from my antenna than KNTU. The Studio never has a problem holding onto a clean stereo signal from KETR. The MD-108 is rarely able to hold onto a stereo signal, but the mono signal is clean.

Both tuners are are always able to acquire KNTU in stereo. However, KNTU's signal has a background static hiss underlying it fairly often (typically on weak signal days). The Studio is plagued by this problem much less than the MD-108, and engaging the Studio's stereo contour circuit always eliminates the hiss. The adverse impact of using the contour circuit is a minor drawing in of the soundstage. The MD-108's stereo blend circuit is not nearly as effective as the Studio's contour circuit. On days when the MD-108 is hissing and the Studio is not, the MD-108's stereo blend switch is effective. However, if the Studio is hissing the MD-108 is only listenable in mono.

Deciding which of these tuners is better was a no brainer, the Day Sequerra trounces the Magnum. The MD-108 cannot reliably pull in my two favorite stations and it does not sound as good as the Studio.

Next up is the Sansui TU-9900.

 

[doug s.]

hi bob,

go to fmtunerinfo.com for info on a *lot* of tunas that you can get for $500 or less that will outperform the md108 *and* the sequerra. the kt8300 is one of 'em - but only if you spend another $300 or so on it for a thoruogh refurb & mods. stock, it is one of the most average tunas i have had the pleasure of owning over the past several years. right there w/the adcom gft1a, md ft101, & mcintosh mr77. these few tunas are about it for tunas i wouldn't wanna be listening to, of what i have owned. and, i have owned ~60 tunas; i still own over dozen, even w/the three i have recently sold.

enjoy your tuna journey - i think you will like that tu9900.

doug s.

 

[Vinyl Rules!]

hi bob,

go to fmtunerinfo.com for info on a *lot* of tunas that you can get for $500 or less that will outperform the md108 *and* the sequerra. the kt8300 is one of 'em - but only if you spend another $300 or so on it for a thoruogh refurb & mods. stock, it is one of the most average tunas i have had the pleasure of owning over the past several years. right there w/the adcom gft1a, md ft101, & mcintosh mr77. these few tunas are about it for tunas i wouldn't wanna be listening to, of what i have owned. and, i have owned ~60 tunas; i still own over dozen, even w/the three i have recently sold.

enjoy your tuna journey - i think you will like that tu9900.

doug s.

Doug is 100% correct: There are many tuners that trounce M/D's best for significantly less $$$.

I personally have mixed feelings aboutg M/D: I am glad they are still supporting the tuner market by designing and manufacturing separate tuners, but I don't like how they run their business and manufacture their tuners. But even though I don't like this aspect of how they run their business, they do have a very good reputation for providing excellent after-sale customer support for all of their current and vintage products.

To elaborate, for a very long time, M/D did not have an RF engineer on staff and they out-sourced the design of many of their tuners to a variety of RF engineers under contract to M/D - I've always believed a serious tuner company should always have a good RF engineer on staff. To their credit, M/D has finally hired a full-time RF engineer.

But M/D is a company that also makes many running design and production changes to their tuners without giving them new model numbers. Now, it is not uncommon for many manufacturers to make running changes to their product line when it is in production, but they usually assign different model numbers or assign suffixes when they make a significant change to a product. M/D did not with many of the changes they made. Some of these running changes are discussed in the M/D section in the FM Tuner Group page at www.fmtunerinfo.com

 

[nailer]

TU-9900, KT-8300, and SAE Mark Six

When we last left our intrepid audio nerd - that would be me - I was suffering major cognitive dissonance over my purchase of the MD-108. I was hoping for an improvement over my Day Sequerra Studio, but as described above the Studio was better in every category.

Around this time - late fall 2004 - I saw a really cool tuner on Audiogon, the Sansui TU-9900. I began exploring the WWW to find out more about the TU-9900 and came across Tuner Information Center and eventually Audiokarma (at this time AK did not have a tuner forum). Base on the information available I narrowed my vintage tuner choices to the Accuphase T-100, Kenwood KT-8300, and Sansui TU-9900. I decided to go with the TU-9900 and have it modified based on its look, what I had read, and what a couple of modifiers told me.

The stock TU-9900 was a pleasant surprise after the disappointing MD-108. However the TU-9900 was not competitive with my Day Sequerra Studio. The TU-9900's fatal flaw was its fatiguing sound. In addition, on bad signal days it was unable to obtain a clean signal from 88.1 and its noise reduction circuit had a minimal impact. The Studio sounded significantly better and did a better job of pulling in a clean signal from my favorite station (88.1).

Overall I would say that the TU-9900 and MD-108 sounded more alike than either sounded like the Studio, however the MD-108 was not fatiguing. In addition, the MD-108 did a marginally better job than the TU-9900 in capturing a clean signal from 88.1 and its noise reduction circuit was slightly better too. I should point out here that this comparison was conducted over a nine month period.

Having got a handle on the stock TU-9900's performance it was now time to send it off to Radio X Tuners.

This brings us up to the time of my initial post on this thread. In addition to the TU-9900, I had also picked up a KT-8300 and a SAE Mark Six. The SAE is very cool looking, but that's all it is - a piece of eye candy, although it's sound is not bad.

The stock KT-8300 is not even close to the Studio, but it's a nice tuner nonetheless. Its sound is smooth, but uninvolving. It also has no problem pulling in a clean signal from 88.1, but only with its narrow band width.

Next: TU-9900 modified & tube intervention.

 

[Vinyl Rules!]

When we last left our intrepid audio nerd - that would be me - I was suffering major cognitive dissonance over my purchase of the MD-108. I was hoping for an improvement over my Day Sequerra Studio, but as described above the Studio was better in every category.

Around this time - late fall 2004 - I saw a really cool tuner on Audiogon, the Sansui TU-9900. I began exploring the WWW to find out more about the TU-9900 and came across Tuner Information Center and eventually Audiokarma (at this time AK did not have a tuner forum). Base on the information available I narrowed my vintage tuner choices to the Accuphase T-100, Kenwood KT-8300, and Sansui TU-9900. I decided to go with the TU-9900 and have it modified based on its look, what I had read, and what a couple of modifiers told me.

The stock TU-9900 was a pleasant surprise after the disappointing MD-108. However the TU-9900 was not competitive with my Day Sequerra Studio. The TU-9900's fatal flaw was its fatiguing sound. In addition, on bad signal days it was unable to obtain a clean signal from 88.1 and its noise reduction circuit had a minimal impact. The Studio sounded significantly better and did a better job of pulling in a clean signal from my favorite station (88.1).

Overall I would say that the TU-9900 and MD-108 sounded more alike than either sounded like the Studio, however the MD-108 was not fatiguing. In addition, the MD-108 did a marginally better job than the TU-9900 in capturing a clean signal from 88.1 and its noise reduction circuit was slightly better too. I should point out here that this comparison was conducted over a nine month period.

Having got a handle on the stock TU-9900's performance it was now time to send it off to Radio X Tuners.

This brings us up to the time of my initial post on this thread. In addition to the TU-9900, I had also picked up a KT-8300 and a SAE Mark Six. The SAE is very cool looking, but that's all it is - a piece of eye candy, although it's sound is not bad.

The stock KT-8300 is not even close to the Studio, but it's a nice tuner nonetheless. Its sound is smooth, but uninvolving. It also has no problem pulling in a clean signal from 88.1, but only with its narrow band width.

Next: TU-9900 modified & tube intervention.

Your TU-9900 should come back greatly improved from Radio X but all 9900's suffer from an inherent level of a slight bit of noise even the best modders cannot get rid of.

For DX'ing, not much can touch a Richard Modaferri-modded McIntosh MR78, but I personally think the MR74 is a better sounding tuner though not quite as "hot" as the MR78.

However, you've not said what kind of antenna rig you are using to try and pull in 88.1, and the antenna is the most important component of all. For ultiimate DX'ing, I'd recommend an APS-13 used with a Winegard AP-8275 antenna amp, with the amp attached to the antenna rotor. This combo will deliver the strongest possible signal to your tuner unless you want to spend silly money and put up a HAM tower with a phased array of say six APS-13 antennas. This combo will give you significantly more gain than a single APS-13 and it will also put a significant dent in your budget, but Ed Hanlon at APS will gladly have his engineering staff work with you on a solution if this is an avenue you wish to pursue.

Another really good tuner is a mint refurbished Accuphase T-100: Not much out there beats it, including your Sequerra, so you may want to give one of these a try as well. And don't overlook the Kenwood LO-2T that rates so highly in at the Tuner Information Group: It really is a superb tuner.

But your antenna is really the most important component for quality FM listening.

 

[nailer]

Your TU-9900 should come back greatly improved from Radio X but all 9900's suffer from an inherent level of a slight bit of noise even the best modders cannot get rid of.:

Have had the modified TU-9900 for a couple months, not yet ready to write about it .

However, you've not said what kind of antenna rig you are using to try and pull in 88.1 ...

Yes I did, in my MD-108 post above - an APS Attic InTenna.

 

[nailer]

Final Chapter

Mike did a great job on my TU-9900. It now sounds great and I would whole heartedly recommend his work to anyone wanting to significantly improve the sound of their vintage tuner. However, my Day Sequerra Studio has better sound top to bottom and does a better job pulling in a clean signal from 88.1.

About the same time I got my TU-9900 back from Radio X I purchased the tube tuner I have always wanted - a Scott 4310. The sound of this tuner is amazing, especially on string instruments. It also is no slouch when it comes to obtaining a clean signal from 88.1. It is not quite as good as the TU-9900 in this regard, but its pulls in a clean signal most of the time. I have not reached an overall conclusion regarding the overall sound of the 4310 versus the Studio. The Studio bests the 4310 in the upper treble, the 4310 sounding a little rough in comparison. However, the 4310 is definitely superior in reproducing the acoustic bass, guitars, and cello.

Rating my tuners, the Studio remains my favorite with the Scott coming in second. Further, I'd rate the modified TU-9900 over the MD-108 primarily because a used MD-108 costs about three times as much as a modified TU-9900. However, the TU-9900's and MD-108's signal capturing abilities are pretty darn close and even though the MD-108 is a little too forward sounding for me its resolution level betters the Sansui. If I could only have one tuner, and had to choose between the modified TU-9900 and MD-108, I'd go with the MD-108; however since I have yet to directly compare the modifeid Sanusi with the Magnum take this gut feel with a grain of salt. I will post the result of this head-to-head comparison shortly.

This tale began with my acquiring an MD-108 hoping to better the performance of my Studio. Modifying a TU-9900 was done to the same end. So where to go from here? Based on discussions with a couple of modifiers and what I have read on the web I would put the TU-9900 in the second tier of vintage tuners, along with tuners e.g. the Accuphase T-100, Sansui TU-919, Kenwood KT-917, etc. Based on this and my experience with the TU-9900 I think I would have to try a first tier tuner (T-109V, TU-X1, or L-02T) to better the Studio. However, I need a breather and to sell some stuff - anyone want to buy a tuner? - before going down this path.

Well as Douglas Adams said, "so long and thanks for all the fish."

 

[Vinyl Rules!]

[snip]
This tale began with my acquiring an MD-108 hoping to better the performance of my Studio. Modifying a TU-9900 was done to the same end. So where to go from here? Based on discussions with a couple of modifiers and what I have read on the web I would put the TU-9900 in the second tier of vintage tuners, along with tuners e.g. the Accuphase T-100, Sansui TU-919, Kenwood KT-917, etc. Base on this and my experience with the TU-9900 I think I would have to try a first tier tuner (T-109V, TU-X1, or L-02T) to better the Studio. However, I need a breather and to sell some stuff, anyone want to buy a tuner, before going down this path.

Well as Douglas Adams said, "so long and thanks for all the fish."

Sounds like you are happy, overall, with your TU-9900.

Now, there are 3 new tuners you have not mentioned that could possibly be competitive with the 3 you list in your first tier and they are the new MD-109, the new Accuphase T1000 and the new Sequerra that's both analog FM and HD Radio on the same chassis. And I think the Accuphase may be the least expensive of the three.

The only review I've seen on any of the 3 above was the just published review in Hi Fi+ on the MD-109 and they loved it and proclaimed it the best FM tuner, ever. My only concern about this particular tuner is that it uses a colour LCD screen in the middle of the tuner as both a display and controller, and M/D gives it an expected life of 10,000 hours. So how easy will it be to get a replacement when you need one? You cannot operate the tuner without this display.

 

[Negotiableterms]

Bob-

What a great thread!

The D-S Studio is supposed to be either the best or second-best sounding of the D-S line, with only the Broadcast Standard as competition. So, it's no surprise that you haven't found anything to beat it. I've been looking for a Broadcast Standard for a loooooong time.

I have a T-109V, and it is my favorite tuner. It gets the best reception and has the best sound of anything I've heard. I have an TU-9900 and TU-919, both APS-modded. I'm about to send a KT-917 to RadioX. I'd happily trade them all for a Broadcast Standard in mint condition.

I don't know anyone who has any of the three newcomers, but of the three, I'd put my money on the T-1000. Now, there are vague rumors that Mc is working on a new tuner to replace the venerable MR-85. I'm not willing to spend the $ for anything until that comes out... except a Broadcast Standard.

 

[Yamaha B-2]

Nailer - to recycle back to your original comments concerning the ST-5000FW, I will say that the Radio X refurb'd ST-5000FW that I've been listening to for about a month is, without a doubt, the best sounding/performing tuner I've owned (~30 over that past 7-8 years). This is the first one I've had fully refurb'd (recapped, aligned, etc. - although I have an ST-J75 out for the full treatment at the moment). The ST-5000FW is simply dead-quiet, wonderfully sensitive and selective, and, has the best top-to-bottom sound of anything I've listened to. A terrific investment in great sound being fed from one of Radio Shack's FM specific yagi. You might want to try another one. :thmbsp:

 

[doug s.]

...Based on discussions with a couple of modifiers and what I have read on the web I would put the TU-9900 in the second tier of vintage tuners, along with tuners e.g. the Accuphase T-100, Sansui TU-919, Kenwood KT-917, etc. Based on this and my experience with the TU-9900 I think I would have to try a first tier tuner (T-109V, TU-X1, or L-02T) to better the Studio....

fascinating reading, for tuna freaks, for sure! i agree w/your comments about the tu-9900 being an excellent "second-tier" tuna. but, i would consider the accuphase t100 a "1st-tier" tuna, both from my own personal experience, & from the fact that joseph chow, of components plus usa considers a modded t100 to outperform a modded t109 or t109v. i had a chow modded t109 & it *was* supurb. but my stock but aligned t100 was right there w/it - only a slightly wider soundstage of the t109 differentiated the two. and i am talking *wery* slight. joseph says mods help the t100 a *lot*. but he also says a modded sansui tu-x is better than the lot. i will find out shortly! another tuna to consider getting modded is the rotel rht-10. i am presently listening to one, & i am amazed at how good it is, bone-stock, & never serviced. easily in the 1st-tier class, imo.

doug s.

btw, yust based upon my knowledge of tunas, & upon my gut instincts, if i had the opportunity to choose one of the three new "super-tunas" w/o an audition, from m-d, sequerra, or accuphase, i would choose the accuphase t1000 w/o hesitation. unless immediate re-sale were allowed.

 

[Vinyl Rules!]

fascinating reading, for tuna freaks, for sure! i agree w/your comments about the tu-9900 being an excellent "second-tier" tuna. but, i would consider the accuphase t100 a "1st-tier" tuna, both from my own personal experience, & from the fact that joseph chow, of components plus usa considers a modded t100 to outperform a modded t109 or t109v. i had a chow modded t109 & it *was* supurb. but my stock but aligned t100 was right there w/it - only a slightly wider soundstage of the t109 differentiated the two. and i am talking *wery* slight. joseph says mods help the t100 a *lot*. but he also says a modded sansui tu-x is better than the lot. [snip]

Have to agree that the T-100 may be better than the T-109V - Several others who's ears I trust tell me a freshly refurbished, aligned T-100 actually sounds better than a new T-109V.

Think of the pressure the Accuphase founders were under: They had just left Kenwood back when a job with a Japanese company was a job for life to begin a start-up company because they thought they could make better stereo equipment than Kenwood. The first 3 pieces they came out with, the T-100 tuner, the C-200 preamp and the P-300 power amp were all built like the proverbial brick sh#thouse and performed accordingly, and they still sell for close to or more than their original selling price on eBay and Audiogon. :ntwrthy:

I worked in a really high-end store from 1972 through 1979 and we sold both the Accuphase T-100 and the first Sequerra and all of us thought the T-100 sounded better AND was more sensitive. But the Sequerra was much cooler to look at because of the unique display. YMMV, of course.

As for the rumours about McIntosh redoing their MR85 tuner, I suspect they're looking at designing either an HD Radio module or satellite radio module to go into the extra slot in the existing MR85 tuner. The MR78 and MR80 were the two best tuners they ever made, spec wise, and virtually all their tuners after these two had lower selectivity and didn't sound as good because they had to compromise on a single IF bandwidth when they eliminated the ability to choose between "wide" and "narrow" selectivity.

So IMHO, it would simply make good business sense and not be terribly expensive to McIntosh to work on either an HD Radio module or a satellite radio module for that extra tuner module slot in the MR85.

Ron Cornelius, McIntosh's product manager has previously posted in the McIntosh forum here that McIntosh feels there is simply not enough demand for them to try and make a current version of the MR78 or the MR80. He noted in one posting if McIntosh were to try and make a commemorative MR78, for example, they would have to build almost all the parts for it because the sources for many of the MR78 parts were gone and a commemorative MR78 would be prohibitively expensive. I don't personally agree with him: I believe if McIntosh were to do a production run of say, 500 commemorative MR78's and pay Richard Modaferri to sign them on the back, they could probably sell all of them via pre-orders even in the $7,500 to $8,500 range.

 

[nailer]

... I worked in a really high-end store from 1972 through 1979 and we sold both the Accuphase T-100 and the Day-Sequerra and all of us thought the T-100 sounded better AND was more sensitive. But the Day-Sequerra was much cooler ...

Can I buy a ride in your time machine? Day Sequerra didn't start making tuners until around 1987. I remember when the Sequerra Model 1 came out in the mid 70s, maybe this is the tuner you are thinking of, and a lot of people didn't think it sounded that great. I wouldn't be suprised if many well designed tuners with a discrete audio stage sounded better than the opamp driven Sequerra Model 1. I owned an ST-5000FW back in the day and there's a good chance it was a better sounding tuner than the Model 1, but I'll never know.

 

[Vinyl Rules!]

Can I buy a ride in your time machine? Day Sequerra didn't start making tuners until around 1987. I remember when the Sequerra Model 1 came out in the mid 70s, maybe this is the tuner you are thinking of, and a lot of people didn't think it sounded that great. I wouldn't be suprised if many well designed tuners with a discrete audio stage sounded better than the opamp driven Sequerra Model 1. I owned an ST-5000FW back in the day and there's a good chance it was a better sounding tuner than the Model 1, but I'll never know.

You are correct.

I didn't edit out the word "Day." And I think most reading the post probably understood that. And I appreciate you pointing out my mistake. Just for you, I've edited out the word "Day" in my original post so the historical record will be correct.

But it still looked cool and the audio rags at the time gave it superb reviews.

And we still thought the Accuphase T-100 was the top tuner in our store even though only High Fidelity bothered to review it.

 

[Negotiableterms]

Ron Cornelius, McIntosh's product manager has previously posted in the McIntosh forum here that McIntosh feels there is simply not enough demand for them to try and make a current version of the MR78 or the MR80. He noted in one posting if McIntosh were to try and make a commemorative MR78, for example, they would have to build almost all the parts for it because the sources for many of the MR78 parts were gone and a commemorative MR78 would be prohibitively expensive. I don't personally agree with him: I believe if McIntosh were to do a production run of say, 500 commemorative MR78's and pay Richard Modaferri to sign them on the back, they could probably sell all of them via pre-orders even in the $7,500 to $8,500 range.

Personally, if I'm going to dream of things that make Ron-C laugh, what I'd really like to see as a commemorative is a completely modern MR-79, with XM and FM-D digital technology (and digital outputs) and the functions of a modernized MPI-4. $10-15,000 and they'll sell every one they can make.

 

[Negotiableterms]

Have to agree that the T-100 may be better than the T-109V - Several others who's ears I trust tell me a freshly refurbished, aligned T-100 actually sounds better than a new T-109V.

I have both, neither modded. The 109V is much superior to the 100. If I can ever get my act together with the KT-917 mod, maybe the next trick would be to send the 100 and the 109V to RadioX at the same time. Head-to-head competition pre and post mods.

This isn't the first time I've heard that the T-100 is something special after mods, but I've heard even more about the KT-917, so that's going out first.