Tuners?

Hi,
I've just renewed my 'log-in' having been 'elsewhere' for a couple of years.
Currently I am using a Linn Kremlin (downstairs) and a Leak Stereofetic in my 'man-cupboard' (small, allegedly 3rd bedroom in a modern house).
I also have:-
Creek T-40
Meridian 504
Quad FM3
Quad FM4 (serviced but unfortunately still in need of further attention)
Sugden R21 x 2 (both in need of a total re-build)
The current 'cupboard' system consists of Quad 44 / Modified 303 / Celestion SL6s / Meridian 200/203 plus 3 turntables.
I haven't had the time to really search this forum yet, but I'm trying to find information regarding the wooden sleeve which I believe was originally supplied as an 'extra' for the 'Stereofetic'. Ideally I would like to find an original, however I would be happy to receive info. / images etc., which would clarify the original sleeves construction details or if the sleeves had any provision for ventilation?
Regards

Mike Kelshaw
 
Hi,
I've just renewed my 'log-in' having been 'elsewhere' for a couple of years.
Currently I am using a Linn Kremlin (downstairs) and a Leak Stereofetic in my 'man-cupboard' (small, allegedly 3rd bedroom in a modern house).
I also have:-
Creek T-40
Meridian 504
Quad FM3
Quad FM4 (serviced but unfortunately still in need of further attention)
Sugden R21 x 2 (both in need of a total re-build)
The current 'cupboard' system consists of Quad 44 / Modified 303 / Celestion SL6s / Meridian 200/203 plus 3 turntables.
I haven't had the time to really search this forum yet, but I'm trying to find information regarding the wooden sleeve which I believe was originally supplied as an 'extra' for the 'Stereofetic'. Ideally I would like to find an original, however I would be happy to receive info. / images etc., which would clarify the original sleeves construction details or if the sleeves had any provision for ventilation?
Regards

Mike Kelshaw
note the dimensions w/and w/o the case, from the manual found here:
http://www.hifiengine.com/manual_library/leak/stereofetic.shtml

images of a troughline cabinet here (same h/w; slightly different depth, according to the manual from hifiengine):
http://s549.photobucket.com/user/davros124/media/LeakTroughlineTuners011.jpg.html
http://s549.photobucket.com/user/davros124/media/LeakTroughlineTuners010.jpg.html

hth,

doug s.
 
note the dimensions w/and w/o the case, from the manual found here:
http://www.hifiengine.com/manual_library/leak/stereofetic.shtml

images of a troughline cabinet here (same h/w; slightly different depth, according to the manual from hifiengine):
http://s549.photobucket.com/user/davros124/media/LeakTroughlineTuners011.jpg.html
http://s549.photobucket.com/user/davros124/media/LeakTroughlineTuners010.jpg.html

hth,

doug s.

Hi Doug,
Thank you for your prompt reply and 'links'.
I had 'looked' on Vinyl Engine previously, but I didn't notice the dimensions 'with / without sleeve' - nor would I even think of subtracting one from the other - DOH!! - a clear sign of the onset of senility!
The images were particularly useful - it would appear that the 'sleeve' was constructed from plywood with a veneer, and they also clearly show the ventilation 'slots'.
Thanks once again.

Regards

Mike Kelshaw
 
Just a quick 'update' regarding my quest for a 'wooden sleeve' for my 'Stereofetic', I recently managed to purchase another 'Fetic complete with a sleeve.
Unfortunately the 'threaded' hole in the rear panel of my original tuner appears to be 'cross threaded' and as a result the sleeve 'securing bolt' from the 'new' one doesn't screw-in.
I assume it would be an 'imperial' size - something similar in size to a 2BA, therefore would one of the 'members' know what the actual thread size & type is, so that I may purchase a suitable 'tap'?
Currently I can't locate either my caliper or 'thread gauge' - they were 'safely' packed away for the 'house move' - Doh!!


Regards

Mike Kelshaw
 
i dunno the size, but you can always take the screw to the hardware store where you're gonna buy the tap, and see what fits it... ;)

doug s.
 
Zenith 9H20LZ1 a surprisingly good performing console pull in a custom made component case
Dynaco FM-3 the people's tuner
Kenwood KT-615 OK I guess
Sony ST-80F I love the looks and the performance
Akai AT-93 Reference Master the smartest tuner ever made
Audio Dynamics T-2000E Now there's a rare bird
Pioneer F-91 in my main system, fantastic sound, superb bass, dead quiet on weak stations
 
Last edited:
In order of acquisition, and currently owned:

Dynaco FM-3 - Very nice, love the tube sound
Proton 440 - nice and quiet
Rotel RT-990BX - my favorite, very musical
Luxman T-240 - our in the garage system
 
can't remember if I responded to this thread already so here's what I have.
Sansui TU-9900
Sansui TU-717
Sansui TU-517
Rotel RT-1024
Setton TUS-600
Pioneer TX-9500ll
 
Presently in rotation is a Fisher Series 80R. A dozen mixed Teles', Mullards and Fisher tubes.
Mono FM radio, as good as it gets. Sunday afternoon Jazz on WBGO 88.3 makes it even better!
 

Attachments

  • image.jpeg
    image.jpeg
    94.2 KB · Views: 12
In no particular order:
Sony ST-S555ES Missing audio output adapter cable; had to mod for RCA jacks out. Nice.
Sony ST-J55 Ok for an unknown cheapie. You cannot turn muting off in Stereo mode, which I dislike.
Yamaha T-85 Bought with known problem; had to fix it. No critical listening yet.
Yamaha TX-900 Like it. The CTS auto-tuning is annoying on weak stations - I store weak stations in memory with CTS OFF.
Yamaha TX-550 Good features for a cheapie mid-line tuner (wide/narrow IF and blend) Bought with display lights burned out. Modded for different voltage replacements. Remote controllable with generic remote from Walmart.
Marantz ST-54 Very sensitive. Styling has not aged well (and I'm being nice).
Sansui TU-717 One of the prettiest ever. Great tuning knob feel.
Technics ST-C04 Very small (narrow) and will fit in places other gear won't. Low-end tuner, but adequate performance - i.e., it's not a toy.
 
Tubes
McIntosh MR65B
Scott 350B
Scott 350C
Bogen FM 50

Solid State
Sansui TU-717
Nikko Gamma 1 (silver)
Dynaco AF-6

I plan on selling off all but the TU-717 and Scott 350B in the near future but I do love that Gamma 1
 
Just cleaned up my Yamaha CT 810. Was in storage for 15 years. Sounds as awesome as it did in the 80's. Picks up signals with dipole in my basement sound room.
 
Okay, I'm in....but these are distributed into systems here and there. I have a few "on the shelf". I've got one on the way-the F-28-I'm hoping to post a new thread about the "sideways" published stats between it and the F-26, a case can be made that neither was meant to be the "first runner up" to the other. I'm surprised nobody's noticed it. Here goes:

In order of preferred quality with RF performance weighted to 52% and SQ 48%. I'm including the receivers....

Pioneer Elite F-93 (Two....both terrific!)
Pioneer TX-9500 II (fed by the same rooftop antenna)
Pioneer TX-9800 (storage)
Pioneer Elite F-91 (with a neat but mysterious mod-a cable exiting the back of the tuner with a six pin plug connection that's not readily identifiable. It's in storage and I need to drag it out and trace the leads back to their contact points.)
Pioneer F-449 (workshop)
Pioneer F-90 (storage)
Pioneer SX-1980
Pioneer SX-1280
Pioneer SX-1080
Pioneer SX-980 (storage-it needs a power switch)

I've bought and sold a bunch of 580's, 680's, 780's for friends and students, back before they started getting pricey. No 880's though. (They don't seem to be common around here unless they're burnt to a crisp. Maybe that means there's a ton that were never cast off in the first place, hard to say...)
I've bought and sold a bunch of other tuners, just to find out what the rest of the field has to offer, and always come back to Pioneer, but I get the attraction for many of them. They include (partial):

Magnum-Dynalab-FT-101A (Great RF, not great sound, at least my sample....)
Carver TX-11a-(bought new, Great RF, decent sound)
H-K Citation Fourteen-I bought it with a return option and it had a very brittle early "transistor" sound that spooked me, so I pulled the rip cord....I doubt it was representative....
Yamaha T-2 (Storage) It sounds really attractive, but not as sensitive as the published specs led me to expect...
Kenwood KT-990-I'm newly appreciative of how much more deeply involved in the transmitter/receiver business KW is, but that said, my sample of this tuner was wretched. I suspect somebody got into it before me and managed to screw up the stereo pilot discriminator. It was mono all the way and nothing I tried could get it back into stereo. Maybe it got modded by a lightning strike.....
Carver TX-2-It was my FIRST component tuner. It was all I could afford at the time in the way back. Not bad....it physically reminds me of the Pioneer TX-1000D with Bob's ACCD strapped on....
 
Last edited:
Yamaha T-2 (Storage) It sounds really attractive, but not as sensitive as the published specs led me to expect...

This tuner should be extremely sensitive. Most of the time a proper alignment including checking the actual IF frequency and resetting the Digital board to match as described in the service manual is required to get the most out of this tuner.
 
Thanks for posting, Mike. I've read many of your posts and it's obvious you're a great asset here. I tweaked it after I got it and that improved it considerably from its "in storage for decades" state. It's just not crazy sensitive, particularly in Stereo, at least by comparison. My T-2 is also just a bit temperature drift prone. I had it hooked up in my workshop for a long time or I otherwise would have never noticed it. The F-90 and 449 are both in the same place (it's not heated or cooled unless I'm there, heat where I am is way worse than cold, but cold affects the Yammie much more than the others...) so the T-2 got rotated out. I had replacing a core or two (where do you find them?) and doing that model car Red touch up of the meter needles on my list of things to do and I've just let it slide by the wayside. Too much to do when the weather's nice.....
 
Got the tuner bug about two years ago while on the quest to replace/upgrade the stereo system I had for 35 years.

Current keepers:
Accuphase T-100 (Punker X refurb)
Mitsubishi DA-F20 (NOS 2015)
Mcintosh MR78 (Mark Wilson refurb)

Accuphase sounds great. I'm constantly amazed by the Mitsubishi DA-F20 which was bought NOS for $300 last year and is unmodded. The Mcintosh is the goto when reception is a challenge and its sound is more than passable to my ears.

Tried out but let go:
Sony ST5000FW (twice)
Onkyo T9
Pioneer TX-9800
Sony ST-A6b (twice)
Sony ST-5130
Mcintosh MR71
Accuphase T-101 (twice)
Accuphase T-107
Luxman T-117

Read good things about the ones that were let go, some were worked on and some weren't but overall the keepers sounded better (Accuphase T-100, Mitsubishi DA-F20) or in the case of the Mcintosh pulled stations, and reduced noise better.

Haven't told the wife but I'm probably not done experimenting. On the lookout for Scott 310E, Sherwood s3000 IV/V, Fisher 200B/1000, Mcintosh MR67, Sansui TU9900/919, Marantz 20/20B, Revox B760, Audiolab 8000T, Philips AH6731.
Any opinions on which of these would best the Accuphase T-100 or Mitsubishi DA-F20 for sound (stereo separation, frequency response, distortion, signal/noise)?
 
Hi!

i have listened to a lot of tuna, including what you have, and what you want to hear. all that you mention i think provide top-notch sound. (except the only fishers i have heard are the earlier mono units w/a relatively modern studio-12 decoder; and the scott i owned was a foster blair modded 310d/335mpx. i also owned a mac mr65b completely refurb'd modded by stephen sank - a thing of beauty; and sounded good to boot! acccording to mr sank, completely refurb'd/modded 65b/67/71 are too close to really say one's better or worse than another.) regarding the tubers, to my ears, the sherwoods - both mono w/modern outboard mpx, and stereo; are the best sounding tubers i have heard. best reception, as well. never heard the marantz 10b, but i have heard the 20 inside an 18 receiver (two iterations, one refurb'd by mike williams). considering some say the 20 is better than the 10, i'd stick w/the sherwoods.

regarding the s/s units, i must first of all state that i find the mac s/s tuna unlistenable. i had a mint mr74 and a completely refurb'd mr77, and they were one of a select few tuna i could not consider a quality listening source. never heard a 78, but since most folk who've compared say the 74 & 77 are sonically better, i have no desire to hear one. regarding the others you mention, i have heard all except the tu919, and i find them all superb. (i still have a marantz 18 receiver and a tag mclaren t20, which is a slightly tweaked 8000t.) i also think the revox b261 is every bit as nice as the b760, in spite of that the tic "shootouts" say about it. and the b260 is also in the same league. re the da-f20 and the tu-9900, i had two of each, one modded, one never serviced. stock, i preferred the da-f20 to the tu-9900 modded, the tu-9900 was better than the modded da-f20. i can't say if unit-to-unit variability played a part regarding the stock units. i do know i did not like the fact that the mitsu doesn't have a blend circuit for less-than optimal signals.

i also have a modded refurb'd tu-x1, which is a fine thing indeed. worth the money for the sonics and reception? honestly, only if you're a collector. in hindsight, i should perhaps have sold the tu-x1 and kept the modded tu-9900 - the sonics were so close, and the looks and size of the tu9900 are far better than the mammoth tu-x1, imo. all the tuna you mention wanting to hear - Marantz 20/20B, Revox B760, Audiolab 8000T, Philips AH6731 - are all fine sounding, imo, (the marantz noticeably less sensitive of that bunch, imo), but would you actually prefer any of them to what you already have? i think you might, but you have to try it and hear for yourself! :biggrin: also depends on the rest of your system, and whether you favor extreme detail, slightly warmer, etc. for example, i found the revoxes to be extremely detailed, a little on the drier side. same w/the mitsu. the philips and the tu9900 and the audiolab less so; and the accuphase 100/101 even less so; perhaps w/a tiny loss of detail.

regarding what you have heard and let go, my st-a6b is a killer, but it's been modded and refurb'd. i loved both the t100 and t101 i had, but i can't really say one was better than the other - both excellent, w/the sound leaning to the organic. i had a modded accuphase t109, but my modded hk 18 was slightly better, w/a taller soundstage; otherwise they were equal.

for my ears, the best bet for the money is a modded refurb'd hk citation 18. (possibly the same goes for the 14 & 15 - same sonic signature and still extremely nice even in stock form.) can be equaled, but not beaten. also in this category - great sonics, reasonable scratch - modded rotel rht-10. and the rotel has the best reception i have encountered - a smidge better than all my good, quality s/s tuna, which i have found to be pretty comparable. except, of course, for the sony xdr-f1hd, which has the best reception of anything. (imo.) too bad it sounds so mediocre. and only ok after extreme mods. regarding the rht-10 - this is a tuna that screams for mods and refurb. stock, it is merely excellent, but not a standout.

best tube sound? any mono sherwood after the s3000ll, w/quality modern s/s mpx. or a stereo s3000 iteration, if my refurb'd mildly tweaked s3000v is any indication. (i've never heard the earlier pre-s3000ll iterations; they may sound as good, or better, w/less selectivity.) easily as good as the best s/s, imo. doesn't sound "tubey"; just extremely smooth, accurate, extended dynamic sound. better than the beautiful totally rebuilt mr65b, better than the mono fishers or scotts. imo, of course!

enjoy your tuna fishin'! :music:

doug s.
 
Doug, thanks for your detailed response.

I went ahead and grabbed one of the tuners mentioned before, the Sherwood S3000IV. You'd listed this as one of your favorite sounding tuners after mods. Can you tell me what is entailed in the mods, a ball park on the cost, and who I might trust to do the work?

Thanks again,
Tom
 
Back
Top Bottom