Tom_r
Well-Known Member
Just leave it in the closet ... some of the caps and one of the PEC boards are a PITA to get at!
LOL.
What would be a step up from a Sherwood tube tuner?
- Thread starter vagust
- Start date
Just leave it in the closet ... some of the caps and one of the PEC boards are a PITA to get at!
LOL.
Opinion on Dynaco FM-3 vs. Updated Citation III-X
From my post on the Citation forum:
Citation III-X update after refurbishing; a rather long post
FYI, a while back I picked up one of these from the son of the original owner.
In totally original condition, it was comparable in sound to my updated (tube)
Dynaco FM-3, which is quite respectable. Both of these tuners had more
realistic drum sound and better bass than my McIntosh MR 77, but the imaging
from the MR 77 was superior. I suspect the stereo separation drives this, but I
don't have measurement equipment.
The Citation has a switchable SCA filter which is effective; the Dynaco does
not. The Citation has more flexible controls; going from the FM-3 to the
Citation is like going from your brother's VW beetle to your dad's Oldsmobile
.
The tuning meter and conventional dial-string arrangement on the Citation are
much less fussy than the direct-tuning knob and "magic eye" on the FM-3.
This may sound like a slam on the Dynaco but it's not; it's a good,
cost-effective tuner, easy to find and easy to work on. It was my gateway drug
to tube tuners.
One weakness of these two (and many other tuners) is a high noise level on some
stations that also broadcast HD radio. Both are shockingly noisy on my local
classical station. The noise goes away in mono on every tuner I've tried.
Since my purchase I had all the electrolytic capacitors and coupling capacitors
replaced and a full alignment.
The III-X is a delight on my favorite jazz station. It has more high-frequency
detail, especially on drums, than the MR 77 yet is quiet. The overall drum
sound is more lifelike.
The difference in imaging is surprising. The stereo image from the MR 77 is
wider and has excellent right-to-left resolution of detail. The image from the
CIII-X is narrower but gives the illusion of front-to-back layering.
The Citation has a trace of sibilance on female voices which I suspect is
distortion but it's tolerable. If I listened to the same tuner all day, I might
find it fatiguing.
Also the CIII-X has a multiplex out jack and can be used with an external
decoder. I've had good results with the Tunesgear decoder described here:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/fm-mpx/
On my noisy classical station the Citation decoder is very noisy but the
solid-state decoder described above is dead quiet.
I went into this with low expectations for tube tuners but now I'm hooked. My
conclusions:
1. If you see a Citation III at a garage sale and are willing to refurbish it,
it
can sound very pleasant.
2. If you have a mono Citation III or other mono tuner, consider a Tunesgear
decoder.
3. If your current tuner is unusually noisy on a station that also broadcasts HD
Radio, neither the FM-3 nor a tube Citation will be quieter. The only all-tube
tuner I've heard without this problem is a modified Scott 370.
4. If you've never heard a tube tuner and you see a working FM-3 on Craiglist,
check it out!
Now if I can just find a case for the CIII-X....
Have fun!
I have used a Foster-Blair-modified Scott 370 and it is quiet on my IBOC nightmare station but I felt it was lacking high-frequency extension compared to the Citation. Right now I am getting acquainted with a McIntosh MR-65B updated by Stephen Sank. It also handles the IBOC problem. Planning lots of head-to-head shootouts with my too many tuners!
From my post on the Citation forum:
Citation III-X update after refurbishing; a rather long post
FYI, a while back I picked up one of these from the son of the original owner.
In totally original condition, it was comparable in sound to my updated (tube)
Dynaco FM-3, which is quite respectable. Both of these tuners had more
realistic drum sound and better bass than my McIntosh MR 77, but the imaging
from the MR 77 was superior. I suspect the stereo separation drives this, but I
don't have measurement equipment.
The Citation has a switchable SCA filter which is effective; the Dynaco does
not. The Citation has more flexible controls; going from the FM-3 to the
Citation is like going from your brother's VW beetle to your dad's Oldsmobile
.The tuning meter and conventional dial-string arrangement on the Citation are
much less fussy than the direct-tuning knob and "magic eye" on the FM-3.
This may sound like a slam on the Dynaco but it's not; it's a good,
cost-effective tuner, easy to find and easy to work on. It was my gateway drug
to tube tuners.
One weakness of these two (and many other tuners) is a high noise level on some
stations that also broadcast HD radio. Both are shockingly noisy on my local
classical station. The noise goes away in mono on every tuner I've tried.
Since my purchase I had all the electrolytic capacitors and coupling capacitors
replaced and a full alignment.
The III-X is a delight on my favorite jazz station. It has more high-frequency
detail, especially on drums, than the MR 77 yet is quiet. The overall drum
sound is more lifelike.
The difference in imaging is surprising. The stereo image from the MR 77 is
wider and has excellent right-to-left resolution of detail. The image from the
CIII-X is narrower but gives the illusion of front-to-back layering.
The Citation has a trace of sibilance on female voices which I suspect is
distortion but it's tolerable. If I listened to the same tuner all day, I might
find it fatiguing.
Also the CIII-X has a multiplex out jack and can be used with an external
decoder. I've had good results with the Tunesgear decoder described here:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/fm-mpx/
On my noisy classical station the Citation decoder is very noisy but the
solid-state decoder described above is dead quiet.
I went into this with low expectations for tube tuners but now I'm hooked. My
conclusions:
1. If you see a Citation III at a garage sale and are willing to refurbish it,
it
can sound very pleasant.
2. If you have a mono Citation III or other mono tuner, consider a Tunesgear
decoder.
3. If your current tuner is unusually noisy on a station that also broadcasts HD
Radio, neither the FM-3 nor a tube Citation will be quieter. The only all-tube
tuner I've heard without this problem is a modified Scott 370.
4. If you've never heard a tube tuner and you see a working FM-3 on Craiglist,
check it out!
Now if I can just find a case for the CIII-X....
Have fun!
I have used a Foster-Blair-modified Scott 370 and it is quiet on my IBOC nightmare station but I felt it was lacking high-frequency extension compared to the Citation. Right now I am getting acquainted with a McIntosh MR-65B updated by Stephen Sank. It also handles the IBOC problem. Planning lots of head-to-head shootouts with my too many tuners!
charles 1973
Super Member
You gota Love that Sherwood S-3000 Tuner with the Sherwood Seperate Multiplex unit. I haven't heard one, but have no doubt it sounds great when it's up to spec. Here is another suggestion since you asked.
FM is my Primary source of music too and as such I wanted Good FM Tuner. My search for the best value in New analog FM Tuners led me to Magnum Dynalab. I bought their MD100T Hybred Analog FM Tuner and have to say it sound's Great too with a pair of 6922 Tubes in It's Audio section, better than the most optimistic reviews. It's my best sounding source, and I have a good DAC for my CD Transport. It's very quiet and creates a soundstage with Solid Imaging that goes beyond the speakers and foward into the room to envelop the listener. Insturment's sound very Real no matter how congested the music is.
At $1,100 their Certified Pre ownded MD 90T, which is very close in sound to the MD100T is $200 over you budget but I believe it to be your best value. They have other's for less. Check out the Reviews for yourself. There Certified Pre-owned Tuners meet all original specifications, with all critical components replaced including tuning potentiometers and Tubes. Any cosmetic abrasions to the faceplate and/or tuning knobs are fixed, and best of all it's covered by a Lifetime Service Policy and carry a one-year warranty.
FM is my Primary source of music too and as such I wanted Good FM Tuner. My search for the best value in New analog FM Tuners led me to Magnum Dynalab. I bought their MD100T Hybred Analog FM Tuner and have to say it sound's Great too with a pair of 6922 Tubes in It's Audio section, better than the most optimistic reviews. It's my best sounding source, and I have a good DAC for my CD Transport. It's very quiet and creates a soundstage with Solid Imaging that goes beyond the speakers and foward into the room to envelop the listener. Insturment's sound very Real no matter how congested the music is.
At $1,100 their Certified Pre ownded MD 90T, which is very close in sound to the MD100T is $200 over you budget but I believe it to be your best value. They have other's for less. Check out the Reviews for yourself. There Certified Pre-owned Tuners meet all original specifications, with all critical components replaced including tuning potentiometers and Tubes. Any cosmetic abrasions to the faceplate and/or tuning knobs are fixed, and best of all it's covered by a Lifetime Service Policy and carry a one-year warranty.
Last edited:
Sherwood S3000-V
FWIW I'm listening to a totally stock S3000-V and doing A/B comparisons to a freshly updated MR-65B. Yes the McIntosh is better but the Sherwood is quite enjoyable; some other tuners would make me flip back right away but not the 3000-V. I'm looking forward to hearing the 3000 after a recap and alignment. Right now it has less resolution and more IBOC noise than the Mac but good soundstaging and pretty good tonal balance. Keep your eye on Craiglist...
FWIW I'm listening to a totally stock S3000-V and doing A/B comparisons to a freshly updated MR-65B. Yes the McIntosh is better but the Sherwood is quite enjoyable; some other tuners would make me flip back right away but not the 3000-V. I'm looking forward to hearing the 3000 after a recap and alignment. Right now it has less resolution and more IBOC noise than the Mac but good soundstaging and pretty good tonal balance. Keep your eye on Craiglist...
Am I missing something or what? The Marantz 10, Marantz 10B, Mcintosh MR67, McIntosh MR71, Sherwood S3000V, Dynaco FM3, KLH18, Harman Kardon Citation III-X, Eico ST97 all have the LC IF circuits and the diode matrix MPX decoders. They all sound terrific but some sound better than others. After modifications they all sound better.
A Corvette and a Yugo both have 4 wheels and a seat, but they aren't exactly equals either. They may all have a basic topology in common but that doesn't mean they are identical. The specifics of the IF curve, exactly how linear the detector is, how well its aligned, the quality of the passives, it all plays into the overall performance to some degree.
Wow, a bump on an 8-year-old thread! I had my 3000-V refurbished by Stephen Sank at Talking Dog Studios in Tucson, who also did my McIntosh MR 65B. The McIntosh was still better, with deeper bass and more dynamic range. The MR 71 I am using now is also better in the same ways; I suspect Doug Sedon might disagree but that's okay . I had to spend a lot more for the McIntosh tuners.
. I had to spend a lot more for the McIntosh tuners.Yes the polypropylenes help a lot, but the basic topology is the framework!
A23gt
Nobody special
It’s weird that you say the S-5500 sounds thin and bass shy. Most complain that the bass has too much emphasis. Mine certainly had more bottom end than the Scott 299c that passed through my hands.
Lol just say this was a necro thread rising from the dead. I’m sure any comments I made are of no benefit to the OP. I imagine they have done whatever they were going to do. Just in for the tuner update
