Tuners ... are they all pretty much the same ?

[andyrlb]

Hi guys , so my tuner is an old Yamaha T-700 that I paid a fiver for at a carboot and I have always had the thought that anything of a decent brand will do the job, am I wrong about this ?
Clearly the source matters as does the amplification and speakers and cables but the tuner ??

[Gordon Steadman]

I would have thought that a tuner was as important as any other part of the system - if you listen to the radio!

I used to have the Yamaha and it was pretty good but not as good as the Troughline or the FM4. I reckon most decent tuners are pretty similar but the bad ones.......yuck. Ronnie, my wife, had a Pioneer tuner with her system. The rest of it is great but the tuner was thin, screetchy with no body to the sound at all. Terrifically sensitive though, a shoelace would have done for the aerial. We tried with a big outside one but it went straight to the dump without passing go!

[andyrlb]

Ah yes the FM4 , I did enjoy mine as I do this Yamaha. Like you said why discount the tuner when we strive for perfection elsewhere. I have a horrible acoustic solutions dab tuner that I haven't even tried ( it was free ) . Some tuners fetch damn good money too though I suspect that it's not because of their sound .

[struth]

Yes you get good, average and shite same as anything else. I think a decent antenna make and breaks most tuners. No point in buying a fancy cd player and playing mp3 on it

[Spectral Morn]

With any FM tuner the aerial is the first part of the chain, suitable good aerial and decent coax cable to it and you are on your way. After that yes different tuners and makes offer something different and improved sound quality.

I used to think the Leak Troughline + an FM decoder was the best out there, I was wrong. Yes its a fabulous tuner but there are so many others that are better. Tuners from Kenwood, Sansui, Pioneer, Sony, etc.

Read through this site http://www.fmtunerinfo.com/index.html particularly the review comparison section. Its possible to pick up fabulous tuners for not much, though since FM got a stay of execution the prices are going up again. My own recommendation re best sound for least money the Kenwood KT3050, or the KT5020. Stunning and up there in the top 6 or so FM tuners. Nothing special to look at, but really nice to listen to.

[jandl100]

The old and venerable Denon 260L was always a favourite of mine - far better sounding than most and probably available for a few tens of £ these days.

[JimC]

FM via Troughline will, IMHO, knock the spots off any other way of receiving the Radio. Let's hope they never turn off Analogue Radio as they have with TV.

DAB is pretty awful but suffices for 'day to day' listening. Not Hi-Fi though.

With a decent DAC, listening via PC is pretty good from sites such as...........
http://www.radiofeeds.co.uk/other.asp (still not much better than MP3 though).
There are also some other good feeds via URL's which were printed in 'What Hi-Fi' (?) or some other such magazine last year. Sorry I don't have details though. I seem to remember the Radio 3 feed was pretty darn good. (Sounded a lot better than MP3! JRiver said it was 48kHz 16 bit, don't know what bit-rate though).
The Freeview feed is not too bad either for listening this way (with a DAC). Better quality (bit-rate) than DAB.

Magnum Dynalab make some of the very best modern FM Tuners but the price tags reflect this!

Pioneer made some exceptionally good Tuners in the 70's and 80's (sorry to disagree with the previous Poster!). But their very best efforts I think were always reserved for their Receivers. So, if you've already got an Amp...............

Get yourself a Leak Troughline, get someone to service it (correctly) for you, spend a decent amount on a proper Aerial and you won't look back. But start petitioning your MP to keep Analogue Radio going!

Jim.

[Arkless Electronics]

and the opposite view..... I really wouldn't recommend the Leak Troughline. A poor tuner. The leak Stereofetic or Delta FM (the same circuitry, completely different styling) are much better tuners in every way.

If you really must have a Troughline then I've got loads of 'em. Hint. Although I have maybe a dozen of these and have the equipment and knowledge to refurb them I don't use one......

The Hitachi FT5500 in either Mk is superb ;)

[Spectral Morn]

FM via Troughline will, IMHO, knock the spots off any other way of receiving the Radio. Let's hope they never turn off Analogue Radio as they have with TV.

DAB is pretty awful but suffices for 'day to day' listening. Not Hi-Fi though.

With a decent DAC, listening via PC is pretty good from sites such as...........
http://www.radiofeeds.co.uk/other.asp (still not much better than MP3 though).
There are also some other good feeds via URL's which were printed in 'What Hi-Fi' (?) or some other such magazine last year. Sorry I don't have details though. I seem to remember the Radio 3 feed was pretty darn good. (Sounded a lot better than MP3! JRiver said it was 48kHz 16 bit, don't know what bit-rate though).
The Freeview feed is not too bad either for listening this way (with a DAC). Better quality (bit-rate) than DAB.

Magnum Dynalab make some of the very best modern FM Tuners but the price tags reflect this!

Pioneer made some exceptionally good Tuners in the 70's and 80's (sorry to disagree with the previous Poster!). But their very best efforts I think were always reserved for their Receivers. So, if you've already got an Amp...............

Get yourself a Leak Troughline, get someone to service it (correctly) for you, spend a decent amount on a proper Aerial and you won't look back. But start petitioning your MP to keep Analogue Radio going!

Jim.

That's fine Jim, I have well over 25 tuners, I have compared them and I am solid on my thoughts regarding this.

The Troughline I used to use regularly is a mk 2 with a Tim De P FM decoder, its set up right and the likes of the Kenwood 3050 eats it for breakfast.

Magnum Dynalab are good, but one needs to go up their model range to get best, and frankly the cost is so crazy high that compared to the best vintage FM tuners... well in my view they don't represent good value for money.

Re Pioneer the 9100, 9500 mk2 and 9800 are very good tuners. I also own most of the Sony highend tuners too. The A6 is very good, as is the much older ST5000 FW. I have Accuphase too, Audiolab, Revox, Sansui, and I could go on.

[m10]

With radio being digital most of the way across the network, surely there's little point in remaining 'analogue' unless it's for the pleasure of using a vintage tuner? (Rather like playing vinyl versions of modern digital recordings as there is pleasure in the medium.) I liked my Denon 260L a lot, but it languished in the box for years. Nowadays, when I do radio, it's from my Mac Mini feeding the DAC of the Cambridge StreamMagic - or, for speed and convenience, the Freeview tuner. (Both these sound better than the 'Internet Radio' as streamed by the Cambridge itself.)

[Arkless Electronics]

Yeah pretty much any high end Japanese tuner from the late '70's to early '80's will be very good. These still represent the state of the art.
Tandberg and Revox very good as well.

As an aside, Valves in tuners make no difference to sound... unless there is a valve audio output stage of course. The radio frequency signal is first converted to an intermediate frequency (usually 10.7MHz but 12.5MHz in Troughline) and only becomes audio at the very last stage of the tuner, the discriminator/detector, which in vintage tuners is usually passive. A Foster-Seeley discriminator is used in the Troughline and many other valve era tuners, the other common circuit being the Ratio Detector (a circuit called a quadrature discriminator is used nowadays). In some cases, including the Leak, an audio output is taken directly from the discriminator to the multiplex output socket and so there is no valve in the audio signal path ;)

[hifi_dave]

Back in the late 80s and the 90s we had a waiting list for Leak Troughline tuners. We had them re-furbed and some had EAR stereo decoders fitted. Once fettled, they sounded great, amongst the best.

Jez should be offering to service, set up and sell these great tuners rather than running them down.

Best tuner we ever sold was the McIntosh MR71. Sound and performance was head and shoulders better than anything else and the build was in a different league. These we had serviced and set up for a long list of prospective buyers. I still have a couple of them here and will be flogging them off in a few weeks.

[RobbieGong]

Yeah pretty much any high end Japanese tuner from the late '70's to early '80's will be very good. These still represent the state of the art.
Tandberg and Revox very good as well.

As an aside, Valves in tuners make no difference to sound... unless there is a valve audio output stage of course. The radio frequency signal is first converted to an intermediate frequency (usually 10.7MHz but 12.5MHz in Troughline) and only becomes audio at the very last stage of the tuner, the discriminator/detector, which in vintage tuners is usually passive. A Foster-Seeley discriminator is used in the Troughline and many other valve era tuners, the other common circuit being the Ratio Detector (a circuit called a quadrature discriminator is used nowadays). In some cases, including the Leak, an audio output is taken directly from the discriminator to the multiplex output socket and so there is no valve in the audio signal path ;)

The flagship Sansui TU 919 of the time, for example was said to be a superb tuner and still regarded and sought today https://www.hifiengine.com/manual_library/sansui/tu-919.shtml

[walpurgis]

Just get yourself one of these:

http://i64.tinypic.com/qzluh1.png

If you know tuners, you'll know what it is! :)

[Spectral Morn]

Just get yourself one of these:

http://i64.tinypic.com/qzluh1.png

If you know tuners, you'll know what it is! :)

Sadly not the best sounding, an overpriced collectors item. Ohhh yes a Day Sequera.

[Spectral Morn]

The flagship Sansui TU 919 of the time, for example was said to be a superb tuner and still regarded and sought today https://www.hifiengine.com/manual_library/sansui/tu-919.shtml

Nice tuner, number 4 in the Tuner Info Networks comparison reviews.

[walpurgis]

Sadly not the best sounding, an overpriced collectors item. Ohhh yes a Day Sequera.

I have heard one and thought it sounded extremely good. But not listened to a comparison with others.

[Spectral Morn]

I have heard one and thought it sounded extremely good. But not listened to a comparison with others.

Comes in at 56 on the Tuner Information Network review comparison. Only thing I would say is it wasn't a newer model, so that might well do much better. Having done similar comparisons I find their ratings to be pretty accurate.

[Arkless Electronics]

Back in the late 80s and the 90s we had a waiting list for Leak Troughline tuners. We had them re-furbed and some had EAR stereo decoders fitted. Once fettled, they sounded great, amongst the best.

Jez should be offering to service, set up and sell these great tuners rather than running them down.

Best tuner we ever sold was the McIntosh MR71. Sound and performance was head and shoulders better than anything else and the build was in a different league. These we had serviced and set up for a long list of prospective buyers. I still have a couple of them here and will be flogging them off in a few weeks.

Nope... I consider them really poor and totally over rated... why do you think I don't use one myself even though I've got loads of them? I would take pretty much any tuner at random in preference to the Troughline. They have lousy sensitivity, selectivity and capture ratio (by modern standards) and so need a fantastic aerial and sympathetic terrain to get a half decent sound without hiss and obvious multipath distortion. I don't offer a refurb service as I would have to charge many times the value of the tuner. The later solid state Leak Stereofetic is very good, in a different league to the Troughline. It is similar in design and performance to the likes of the A&R T21, Sugden R51 etc. The top of the range Japanese stuff from the late 70's really is still the best ever made though.

I rate the McIntosh MR71 very highly, one of the best yes.

[Arkless Electronics]

I once had in a Scott tuner which had digital read out with LED display and took punched cards with station details... interesting 70's tech....

[Michael loves music]

I have a Pure dab 701drx and a 702 DRX both sound fantastic I've had many tuners Nad Yamaha But the pure Dab sound is amazing

[andyrlb]

Overwhelming!!! I think my Yamaha will do . But what an eye opener

[hifinutt]

had quite a few tuners , I rather like the denon tu 260L which is super cheap s/h

http://www.hi-fiworld.co.uk/index.php/radio-tuners/76-radio-tuner-reviews/241-tuner-group-test-2.html

better by far is my bel canto FM1 which has a separate psu and gives very holographic sound in good reception

http://www.tonepublications.com/review/bel-canto-e-one-fm1-tuner/

[Wakefield Turntables]

I have a Magnum Dynalab FT101A paid £150 for it. Fantastic.

[danilo]

Really? I'm envious.
Local FM broadcasts "here" are too shite to tolerate. 'Personalities' and repetitive dross dominates. Silence is preferable.
I can get better tunes out of my TV service's 'radio' feeds
Radio in my part of the world seems as dead as 8 tracks .
0oops... just saw that some nutters are trying to revive that though.
Must have $$ in that race.

[User211]

I'm on my second Scott 350B decked out with a very nice set of valves.

Murders the Sansui TU-9900 I had for tone. That's where it wins as technically the Sansui murders the Scott.

That Sansui had the best FM sensitivity I have come across. But it is useless, really. Being able to pick up weak signals isn't useful as you don't want to listen to it in a hi-fi system. Whistle. Chirp.

I also think that a proper aerial is a complete waste of money in decent reception areas.

So basically the Scott is really quite coloured but in a very good way. The Sansui clinical and sterile. I'll take the former.

I expect this is why people like Leak Troughlines. Never heard one so just guessing.

I have owned a few other tuners. The 1963 Scott is the best on the ears but the tech performance isn't good.

[User211]

BTW www.fmtunerinfo.com well worth a read.

[Light Dependant Resistor]

I also think that a proper aerial is a complete waste of money in decent reception areas.

Interesting, my guess would be that a tuner is totally reliant on its antenna, I would have thought the better that is, then the better the tuner gets,
and that has been my experience. :)

[Michael loves music]

My two pure tuners get maximum 100 strength on display with wire hanging from the Dab Ariel both sound amazing to me I love listening to radio 2 etc also have Dab in my new VW golf that's crystal clear as well

[Infinitely Baffled]

The flagship Sansui TU 919 of the time, for example was said to be a superb tuner and still regarded and sought today https://www.hifiengine.com/manual_library/sansui/tu-919.shtml

+1
I have one of these and it's an absolute delight in every way.
It opened my mind to Japanese hi-fi, which I'm sorry to say I had previously been rather sniffy about.
IB.

[Ronksley]

Interesting, my guess would be that a tuner is totally reliant on its antenna, I would have thought the better that is, then the better the tuner gets,
and that has been my experience. :)

Where I get good reception this is true but my house is in a very awkward spot for reception and depending on the weather different antenna picking up the signal from different transmitters work better. In Foggy or stormy weather when the reception can get pretty dire a little bit of wire in doors is best.

The most use I get out of FM tuners these days is as clocks ! In my bedroom I use a Teac T-H500, wouldnt want to listen to it I have a Sony ST-SB920 QS which is my preferred tuner for what little I do listen to the radio these days, its great for radio 3 in the night and has terminals for two antennas. The clock in my living room is a Sony ST-SE520, I do use a Sony AV Receiver STR-DB795 QS for most of my radio listening but this is normally while cooking or washing, sometimes it wont get a stereo signal and I have to faff about retuning it and changing antennas over or I dont bother and put a CD on instead. Soundwise I have a Rotel and a Denon which I prefer but the Sonys work so much better with the varying reception, ST-SB920 QS and STR-DB795 QS do both sound great anyway.

Amazes me that FM is still going, glad it is as I wouldnt know what time it is otherwise

[User211]

Interesting, my guess would be that a tuner is totally reliant on its antenna, I would have thought the better that is, then the better the tuner gets,
and that has been my experience. :)
It hasn't been mine. If the tuner reads max signal no expensive antenna improves it. It has enough signal.

[Macca]

That is assuming the signal strength meter is telling the truth and a lot of them don't because people want to see max quieting all the time as it is re-assuring. Like having amps where the output is at full with the volume knob at 11 o'clock.

[struth]

A lot of trouble can be caused by multipath signals. You get a ghost signal entering the tuner just after the main one and causes distortion. One of the hazards of this type of thing and why a good high attenna is helpful as its less likely to catch the multipath strays.

[User211]

A lot of trouble can be caused by multipath signals. You get a ghost signal entering the tuner just after the main one and causes distortion. One of the hazards of this type of thing and why a good high attenna is helpful as its less likely to catch the multipath strays.

Then again if it ain't broke don't fix it.

[Michael loves music]

Which magazine says government switching FM signal off in 2017

[Arkless Electronics]

A lot of trouble can be caused by multipath signals. You get a ghost signal entering the tuner just after the main one and causes distortion. One of the hazards of this type of thing and why a good high attenna is helpful as its less likely to catch the multipath strays.

Spot on. Which is why you need a good and highly directional AERIAL (not antenna... and it's valves not tubes... we're not quite the 51st state yet!). The more elements the aerial has the greater the directivity and signal strength.

[eisenach]

I've had a few. The Audiolab 8000 sounded very good but rather quickly needed work doing on it. Around the same time I found a Tag Mclaren T32 with DAB module. It doesn't sound bad on DAB, though it needed a proper external aerial to work here in the rural Welsh Marches, but its FM peformance is great and I still think it's the best source I've got. It does rather shew up when the compressors cut in, though. A big Ron Smith Galaxie pointed at Sutton Coldfield over 50 miles away gives it the cleanest signal, even though it needs amplifying, better than the more local but lower powered Ridge Hill between Hereford and Ross-on-Wye/Gloucester.

If I were starting out again, though, I don't think I'd bother. Satellite TV (AtlanticBird 3 5°W / Astra 19.2°E) gives me all the French and German (classical) radio stations I could want in good sound quality, and then there's the internet ...

[Arkless Electronics]

That is assuming the signal strength meter is telling the truth and a lot of them don't because people want to see max quieting all the time as it is re-assuring. Like having amps where the output is at full with the volume knob at 11 o'clock.

Yep.... it's surprisingly common to see tuners in which when full signal is shown on the meter you actually need 10 X more for best results!

[struth]

Spot on. Which is why you need a good and highly directional AERIAL (not antenna... and it's valves not tubes... we're not quite the 51st state yet!). The more elements the aerial has the greater the directivity and signal strength.

Twas my meaning. Aerial similar to tv ?. Suppose an attenna is a dipole really?

[Arkless Electronics]

Then again if it ain't broke don't fix it.

Most of the time it is "broke" , as in nowhere near optimum, and people don't realise...

[Arkless Electronics]

Twas my meaning. Aerial similar to tv ?. Suppose an attenna is a dipole really?

It's an Americanism for aerial....

[struth]

Just they call insects thingies attennae to and they are dipoles so thought that was the name for em. I usually use aerial excludively but was having a senior moment and couldnt remember the damned spelling for some odd reason and couldnt be bothered looking it up. Old age creeping closer to brain death i guess.

[JimC]

Which magazine says government switching FM signal off in 2017

If this is in relation to my post on page 1 of this thread, the article in the magazine was giving details of URL's with decent quality streams of some of the BBC's Radio O/P. No mention was made (by the magazine or by me in the post) of FM being turned off in 2017.

As far as I know it has been 'put back' now to the 2020's. No definite dates set.

Jim.

[Spectral Morn]

If this is in relation to my post on page 1 of this thread, the article in the magazine was giving details of URL's with decent quality streams of some of the BBC's Radio O/P. No mention was made (by the magazine or by me in the post) of FM being turned off in 2017.

As far as I know it has been 'put back' now to the 2020's. No definite dates set.

Jim.

Good because DAB is very, very poor - in my opinion.

[Clifford.T Ward]

In my part of the world and excellent FM radio service is avaliable through cable and as such a good tuner is a good thing to have.The cable takes away the need for a good ariel .

[dave2010]

I would have thought that a tuner was as important as any other part of the system - if you listen to the radio!
Absolutely agree with this, if it matters. I do still listen to FM on cheapo radios - e.g in the bedroom, though now we mostly use iPads and stream, and actually for going to sleep the iPad speakers themselves are good enough.

I have a couple of FM tuners - one is an expensive first generation DAB with and FM section, and the other is a JVC TX55. With a good input both are good, though I've always preferred the sound of the JVC. I could never get rid of all the problems of FM though, but someone sent me some CDs he'd made from broadcasts - somewhere around Dundee I think. Whatever kit he was using to receive was amazing - I just could not believe the quality of the audio from his CDs. I asked him if he'd cheated in any way, or used digital, but I was assured the results were from his FM receiver.

Without a good signal though, which often means a decent roof or at least loft installed aerial, don't expect miracles from any FM tuner.

Re DAB - that is fundamentally limited now by the broadcasters, and the codecs used. I think some broadcasters may be using DAB variants - with different codecs - which may sound OK, but the BBC is still using plain DAB (not any form of updated DAB used by broadcasters in some other countries), and I think the max bit rate is still 192kbps for radio 3, which is not as good as some of the audio channels on digital TV. Some of the BBC's channels are still at 128 kbps, while some go even lower and are mono only I think.

However, if checking out tuners, it may be worth looking at some of the better DAB+FM models. DAB also benefits from having a good aerial - there will be "bubbling mud" noises or nothing at all if the signals are weak or variable.

[Arkless Electronics]

Indeed a good roof mounted aerial is essential to getting really good reception from FM for most people. It's not just signal strength but directionality that matters as it can help massively with rejection of multipath. Low loss high quality coax must be used as well as it is easy to lose half the signal in the coax... yes literally.
For the really keen a rotator is useful and a variable RF attenuator. Yes attenuator. Too much signal from a different station to the one you want can cause all sorts of problems due to a phenomenon called cross modulation...

[mikmas]

However, if checking out tuners, it may be worth looking at some of the better DAB+FM models. DAB also benefits from having a good aerial - there will be "bubbling mud" noises or nothing at all if the signals are weak or variable.

Would agree with this.
When I was looking out for a reasonably priced tuner 2nd hand, most of the ones listed on the 'fmtuner' site were either unobtanium or fetching daft prices on eBay (doubtless a victim of their reputations). In the end I found a Creek 3140 for £40 in good nick. This has a very good reception even when coupled with the Screwfix £10 aerial I use in the shed were it ended up.
Details here:
http://www.hi-fiworld.co.uk/index.php/radio-tuners/76-radio-tuner-reviews/191-creek-cas3140.html

Downside to the Creek is the lack of remote or presets which entails twiddling up and down the dial to change stations but as I mostly listen to late night Radio 3 this was not a big deal. The biggest issue was the lack of Radio 6 on FM which I do listen to during the day and for that I had to switch to my Mac/DAC combo.

Currently I'm using a Cambridge 640T DAB/FM combo in the house (cost £110 used) and I have to say the performance is outstanding and better than the Creek - in fact I use DAB over FM finding little real difference to speak of - despite all the negativity DAB attracts. Added bonus to this set up is the quick switch via remote from 3 to 6 plus the very useful set of digital and analogue outputs offered by the 640T (currently outputting to my DAC). I had a DAB/FM roof aerial fitted by a reputable local guy to replace the ageing FM one and this turned out to be possibly the best upgrade of all.

Good, and in my view accurate, review in this Tuner Shootout:
http://www.hi-fiworld.co.uk/index.php/radio-tuners/76-radio-tuner-reviews/241-tuner-group-test-2.html?start=3

Edited to add that I disagree with their opinion of the display which I find perfectly readable - even from a few feet away.

[sq225917]

An aerial is one physical item, antenna are more than one physical items joined together via signal path. So tv/radio aerial, radio telescope antenna... Its more than just an over the pond thing.

[User211]

If this is in relation to my post on page 1 of this thread, the article in the magazine was giving details of URL's with decent quality streams of some of the BBC's Radio O/P. No mention was made (by the magazine or by me in the post) of FM being turned off in 2017.

As far as I know it has been 'put back' now to the 2020's. No definite dates set.

Jim.
They can't switch it off. Too many cars don't have DAB. Majority of radio listening is done in the car I'd guess.

Note cars don't have house roof aerials and reception is generally fine. Most portable sets also manage well without one unless you are in the sticks.

I had a Mission tuner once, spent a fortune on a good aerial and it made no practical difference. Be careful. Don't waste your money.

[JimC]

This dates from 2008 and is by no means what is going to happen.

http://webarchive.nationalarchives.gov.uk/20121204113822/http://www.culture.gov.uk/images/publications/DRWG_Final_Report.pdf

Page 24 makes interesting reading.

It is just a report prepared for the Government.

Jim.

[Arkless Electronics]

They can't switch it off. Too many cars don't have DAB. Majority of radio listening is done in the car I'd guess.

Note cars don't have house roof aerials and reception is generally fine. Most portable sets also manage well without one unless you are in the sticks.

I had a Mission tuner once, spent a fortune on a good aerial and it made no practical difference. Be careful. Don't waste your money.

This is the general theory I've seen in a few places, including things from "they" who would like to switch it off... It won't happen until nearly all cars have DAB radios installed and probably till some time in the 2020's.

As to the aerial comment I obviously say the exact opposite... and the worse the tuner the more important the aerial! For a Troughline to give good results you need a seriously good aerial. I use just a simple dipole here as I'm not that serious a radio listener (loads for background but rarely as a primary source in my main system), with a Hitachi FT55000 the sound is still pretty good.. hiss is noticeable but not in yer face and distortion is generally not audible. If I drag a Troughline and decoder out and use the same aerial the hiss is awful and distortion is present on most stations.
Much does depend on your location though and it is possible to be in such a favourable one that any modern tuner with "up to par" specifications will give as good as it's going to get on a fairly modest aerial such as a 2-3 element Yagi.

As I mentioned earlier, too much signal is a common problem as well.. but not always too much of the channel you want... cross modulation can mean a very strong signal elsewhere on the band can overload the front end (yes the technical term is "front end" believe it or not) and cause hiss and distortion on the channel you want to listen to. In bad cases one may need a very directional aerial to get the multipath low enough, preferably with a rotator, and then attenuate the signal to avoid cross modulation issues.... if really keen a high "Q" preselector can be used as well but we're getting into the realms of the radio ham and "DX'er" now:)

In radio circles cross modulation is pretty much the most important and talked about parameter BTW.... the keen could look up "IP3 intercept point"...

[Barry]

Late to the party, but I would like to confirm that the Leak 'Troughline' tuner is a highly over-rated design: a very warm, sweet and 'cuddly' sound, making speech far too deep in tone to sound realistic. It was an interesting design using an original idea to avoid the tuner drifting out of tune with time as it 'warmed up'.

Contemporary UK tuners of the time, such as the Quad FM2 were better in that respect. However whilst they were adequate as regards sensitivity and sensitivity for the broadcast conditions of the time; the UK then only having a few broadcasing stations, they are not best suited for current UK broadcasting with the greatly increased number of stations to choose from. So if one wishes to choose to use a vintage tuner, it would be better to look at American designs from Scott, Fisher, Marantz and McIntosh. These were designed to have higher sensitivity and selectivity to cope with the plethora of low power FM broadcast stations. Many of these now command ridiculous prices today, so it is worth considering '70s Japanese tuners from say Trio (Kenwood), and Yamaha instead. These are very well built and have a similarly high specification to their American cousins.

If you are only interested in listening to a few powerful UK stations and want a 'vintage' design from a British manufacturer, I would consider Quad FM2 and FM3, Sugden R51, and Rogers (as well as the Leak 'Stereofetic' design).

I'm not familiar with more recent FM tuners, but if I wanted a European design, I would look at Revox, B&O, as well as the Linn 'Kremlin'.


Since I only listen to BBC Radio 3 and Radio 4, and occasionally Jazz FM, I'm quite happy with the Quad FM4 for both performance and sound quality.



Also I would agree a good rooftop mounted antenna/aerial (both terms are acceptable) is essential if you are serious about FM reception. It needn't be elaborate: I use a simple 3-element Yagi and can easily pick up the local radio stations that are only intended to be received in London.

[Arkless Electronics]

I would disagree that the Quad FM2 beats the Troughline. There's not a load in it but I reckon the Leak to be better in most areas. It was about the best UK tuner at that time. For best results you need to do the conversion of the front end RF amp to an ECC88 as was done as standard in the stereo version (Troughline 3).
When correctly aligned and when using the multiplex output straight into a good decoder they sound much better than the over warm lush sound which you rightly describe as the sound of a standard one. Still not quite as good as a modern tuner though and still with a need for a serious aerial.

The best sounding old UK tuners I've come across are probably the Rogers ones... but they're far worse than any of the above for anything but absolute sound quality under perfect reception conditions! No good for more than one station as well as they have only 3 pre tuned channels!

[Barry]

I would disagree that the Quad FM2 beats the Troughline. There's not a load in it but I reckon the Leak to be better in most areas. It was about the best UK tuner at that time. For best results you need to do the conversion of the front end RF amp to an ECC88 as was done as standard in the stereo version (Troughline 3).
When correctly aligned and when using the multiplex output straight into a good decoder they sound much better than the over warm lush sound which you rightly describe as the sound of a standard one. Still not quite as good as a modern tuner though and still with a need for a serious aerial.

The best sounding old UK tuners I've come across are probably the Rogers ones... but they're far worse than any of the above for anything but absolute sound quality under perfect reception conditions! No good for more than one station as well as they have only 3 pre tuned channels!

To my ears it does, and my Leak is a Troughline 3 with an ECC88 front end (and here tube 'rolling' helps a little to ameliorate the problem). The only thing I prefer about the Leak over the FM2 is the flywheel tuning.

[Arkless Electronics]

To my ears it does, and my Leak is a Troughline 3 with an ECC88 front end (and here tube 'rolling' helps a little to ameliorate the problem). The only thing I prefer about the Leak over the FM2 is the flywheel tuning.

Are you using the original Mullard OEM stereo decoder though? With this fitted it sounds bloody awful!! A muddy wool fest!

I like the neon tuning indicators on the Quad but prefer the magic eye on the Leak...

[Barry]

I don't know - I'll have to check, but most likely 'yes'. Haven't listened to either for years though.

I did find changing the ECF80 cathode follower in the Leak greatly helped improve the output level, as well as lessening the unaturally chesty sound of voices.

[dave2010]

.
For the really keen a rotator is useful and a variable RF attenuator. Yes attenuator. Too much signal from a different station to the one you want can cause all sorts of problems due to a phenomenon called cross modulation...You are taking this to the stratosphere! My JVC tuner has inbuilt attenuators, several, switchable, to help people living next to transmitters, and also a switchable IF to give a narrower bandwidth for some difficult situations. As I recall it also has a stereo blend for low signals to minimise hiss on very weak signals. It doesn't correlate with a rotator, though.

Largely irrelevant now, as most stations can be picked up over digital networks on the internet.

[JimC]

.....For best results you need to do the conversion of the front end RF amp to an ECC88 as was done as standard in the stereo version (Troughline 3)...............

What was in there originally and what benefits does this give?

J.

[Gordon Steadman]

Too much 'this one is better than that one' as fact!

At one time, I had the Troughline, FM4, Sugden and Rogers tuners along with a few Japanese tuners including the Denon 260, Yamaha and Pioneer - that is, I had them all at the same time and could compare them directly. In Suffolk, we had a huge rooftop rig with a motorised tower.

The Denon is with a friend as is the FM4. The Sugden and the Rogers are going nowhere. The Troughline went to help fund most of a OneThing rebuild of the 57's.

If it weren't for the fact that it was a pain in the bum to use, I would choose the Leak (with Tim's decoder - he set it all up when I was with him) over all the others for sound quality in MY system (Stereo20/57s and my ears) The sound was very even and certainly wasn't didn't have excessive bass but was great on R3 and 4.

Both the Sugden and Rogers are also a pain but the price for no push button tuning is that they sound terrific. Yes there are some great Japanese tuners. Along with their amps and TTs, many people missed out during the flat earth years.

However, whilst there may well be a difference on the scope and technically, our ears seem to be so different that, as ever, there is only one way to check which sounds best to you. When it comes to reality, I would rather choose the one that suits me, as does everyone whether they are aware of it or not.

[spendorman]

Which Rogers is this? I have always liked the Ravensbourne FET2.

[Gordon Steadman]

Which Rogers is this? I have always liked the Ravensbourne FET2.

An old Ravensbook. I have the amp too. I do prefer both of them to the Ravensbourne alternatives.

[Clifford.T Ward]

I have three tuners but the one that I like the sound of most is the Proton 440 that I have .

[Arkless Electronics]

I don't know - I'll have to check, but most likely 'yes'. Haven't listened to either for years though.

I did find changing the ECF80 cathode follower in the Leak greatly helped improve the output level, as well as lessening the unaturally chesty sound of voices.

That explains everything!

[Arkless Electronics]

You are taking this to the stratosphere! My JVC tuner has inbuilt attenuators, several, switchable, to help people living next to transmitters, and also a switchable IF to give a narrower bandwidth for some difficult situations. As I recall it also has a stereo blend for low signals to minimise hiss on very weak signals. It doesn't correlate with a rotator, though.

Largely irrelevant now, as most stations can be picked up over digital networks on the internet.

It's all relative... these are the lengths one may need to go to in order to get hiss free, distortion free top quality FM reception with an older tuner and especially in awkward reception areas.

[Arkless Electronics]

What was in there originally and what benefits does this give?

J.

ECC84 originally. ECC88 is an improved frame grid replacement for it. Both were very widely used as cascode RF amplifiers in mainly TV tuners but in the case the same job in an FM tuner. The advantage is greater sensitivity. IT IS NOT A STRAIGHT SWAP. Changes are made to the circuitry and a small inductor added IIRC.

As I said earlier, there is no "valve sound" to a Troughline. The signal is at RF whilst passing through the valves and is demodulated to baseband audio in the Foster Seeley discriminator.

To put things into perspective with the Troughline, if properly aligned and with a good set of valves, with the ECC88 mod (or best of all a Troughline 3 which has all mods), with a separate stereo decoder (the only stereo capable version is the 3 but as I said the original decoder is truly awful and they're like listening with cotton wool in the ears!) and a really serious aerial they can sound very good.... but it's a hell of a lot of bother to go to and will still be beaten by a good modern tuner. The separate decoder also needs it's own power supply as the built in one is too weedy.... I even built a RF pre amp with band 2 passband for my modded ones to get the best possible sensitivity and a completely separate stereo decoder in it's own box with built in PSU. The result? Good but still not as good as FT5500....

If anyone is daft e.. I mean interested enough to want Troughlines modded to the ECC88 spec, or external outboard decoders building then I can provide this service.... but it will cost far more than the value of the tuner....

[Arkless Electronics]

An old Ravensbook. I have the amp too. I do prefer both of them to the Ravensbourne alternatives.

I have those too...the Ravensbrookes still now but IIRC I sold on the Ravensbournes... I preferred the Ravensbournes by a big margin and they were indeed the top of the range. Both tuner and amp were good but I particularly recall the tuner being built in modular form and high tech for its day...

[dave2010]

It's all relative... these are the lengths one may need to go to in order to get hiss free, distortion free top quality FM reception with an older tuner and especially in awkward reception areas.I agree. We used to live in a poor reception area, but I had a loft aerial installed which made things a lot better. At least we lived at the top of a hill. The people further down in a valley needed very long poles on their roofs to get a reasonable signal. Then we moved.

Do many people still listen to FM? What's the quality like these days - say on R3? In all honesty, I'm not sure that it's going to sound any better than what I heard a few weeks before Christmas down at the RFH, where the BBC had set up a booth and a listening area with "live" equipment. I wonder if they balance the sound in ways which I don't always find pleasing. Perhaps they like it that way, or think that on average most listeners do.

[Ninanina]

I rather like the denon tu 260L which is super cheap s/h

Do you know if the Denon 260L MK II is as good as the MK I version as I like the tuning knob on the MK II

Thanks

[Ninanina]

Sorry to post again but I have an option to purchase a 260L MK II from a local chap for about £30 but I just wanted to make sure it is at least as good as the MK I ;)

[struth]

think it was better

[Ninanina]

Oh great thanks Grant... :)

[Arkless Electronics]

The vast majority of modern Japanese/far east tuners use the same IC's (Sanyo, Toshiba and Hitachi usually, no matter what make the tuner) and coils (Toko, Murata) from the same manufacturers and so can be regarded as similar enough to not worry about it.

[jandl100]

Oh great thanks Grant... :)

Yup. The mkii is the one to go for.

Despite what Jez says, that Denon tuner was a bit special. ;)

[alphaGT]

I have a Magnum Dynalab FT101A paid £150 for it. Fantastic.

I've got one too! I got it used for roughly the same price, and it's the one piece of my stereo that I will never replace. The best sounding tuner I've ever heard. And Ive had an old Technics, Pioneer, and Marantz from back in the day, and this Magnum Dynalab beats them on all counts. Better reception, better filtering, and better sonics, bass to die for! A local classical station is truly a high end source.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[09mike69]

great thread, i've never really compared tuners, well not like i would TT's, amps, speakers and cd players.. i've got an old marantz 2020 tuner i'll have to check it out see how it compares to the in-built tuner im using.
cheers
Mike.

[Beobloke]

To go right back to the start of the thread, I have a Yamaha T-700 and it's a very nice thing although, admittedly, probably fourth in the rankings of my own tuner pile!

[Reffc]

Another Denon TL260 Mk2 owner here. Best bang for buck tuner I've ever come across.

[Ninanina]

I have just picked up a Denon TL260 Mk2 locally

Not tried it yet... it came with the original loop aerial thingy which I guess is just for AM but I will need an aerial for the FM... I guess one of those cheap ribbon ones will do for now

As I cleared out much of my unused gear I also need to find some phonos for it, I have a pair 'somewhere' :doh:

[walpurgis]

Bev. Where you are, the FM reception is probably quite decent. Try just a reasonable length of wire to get you started.

[Ninanina]

Bev. Where you are, the FM reception is probably quite decent. Try just a reasonable length of wire to get you started.

Thanks Geoff... I have no idea if Portsmouth has a decent FM reception or not but the car FM seems pretty good.. I just need to find a coax plug somewhere and as you say a length of coax wire might be enough to start with ;)

[walpurgis]

Poke the wire into the hole in the middle of the socket where the centre pin of the coax plug goes. Should work! :)

[Ninanina]

Poke the wire into the hole in the middle of the socket where the centre pin of the coax plug goes. Should work! :)

Thanks Geoff I will give that a go.. :)

[Infinitely Baffled]

If you PM me with your address, Bev, I'll pop a 300 Ohm aerial (that's the plastic "T" ribbon) in the post to you. I have a spare, so you may as well have it. I don't think you will get anywhere using a length of coax wire as a makeshift aerial, unless you remove it from its braided wire sheath first. I think that sheath is designed to stop the wire picking up any airborne signals from outside. Cheers. Gary.

[Light Dependant Resistor]

Bev. Where you are, the FM reception is probably quite decent. Try just a reasonable length of wire to get you started.

If just using wire make a dipole with dimensions depending on frequency of reception calculated here: http://www.procato.com/calculator-wavelength-frequency/
good result is had with either a 5/8th or 1/2 wavelength dipole - because you are maximising reception of the voltage leaving the transmission antenna
A dipole with 852mm in each half provides the lowest frequencies - as well as higher ones, but follow the calculator if you have a favorite station you
want to specifically receive.

A 300 ohm antenna follows a stated distance of one conductor to the next over the length of cable not spread out, vs a 50 or 75 ohm coax
that has a smaller dimension from inner to outer. The length not spread out then assists getting the signal from the section of antenna spread out
to your tuner. You can help by placing this cable on the right labeled antenna connection at the rear of your tuner.

Next,ideally you need to also know the stations polarity of transmission. in fairly flat areas it is likely to be horizontal, and hilly areas vertical. Some stations
waste enormous power trying to cater for both with what is called circular polarization . Accordingly orientate your antenna to suit their polarity.

If wanting many frequencies and omnidirectional reception and importantly an antenna with good impedance matching - which then maximises transfer across a
coax cable with stated impedance a discone is a good all round ( excuse the pun ) answer. Invented by Armig Kandoian they have many much needed
properties including dimensions less than 1/2 wavelength , 10 to 1 bandwidth and excellent impedance matching to 50 ohms which is the broadcast impedance standard.
Accordingly if using this antenna use 50 ohm coax not 75 ohm.

But for now a wire dimensioned correctly will do. :)

Cheers / Chris

[Ninanina]

If you PM me with your address, Bev, I'll pop a 300 Ohm aerial (that's the plastic "T" ribbon) in the post to you. I have a spare, so you may as well have it. I don't think you will get anywhere using a length of coax wire as a makeshift aerial, unless you remove it from its braided wire sheath first. I think that sheath is designed to stop the wire picking up any airborne signals from outside. Cheers. Gary.

You are so kind Gary.. PM sent :)

[Macca]

Next,ideally you need to also know the stations polarity of transmission. in fairly flat areas it is likely to be horizontal, and hilly areas vertical. Some stations
waste enormous power trying to cater for both with what is called circular polarization . Accordingly orientate your antenna to suit their polarity.

If wanting many frequencies and omnidirectional reception and importantly an antenna with good impedance matching - which then maximises transfer across a
coax cable with stated impedance a discone is a good all round ( excuse the pun ) answer. Invented by Armig Kandoian they have many much needed
properties including dimensions less than 1/2 wavelength , 10 to 1 bandwidth and excellent impedance matching to 50 ohms which is the broadcast impedance standard.
Accordingly if using this antenna use 50 ohm coax not 75 ohm.



That's interesting. When I had an aerial out up I wanted a full element thing but the installer recommended a circular array due to the way stations are broadcast in this area. Which has a lot of hills and ridges. That must be why. He did explain but his explanation made no sense to me.

[Macca]

Next,ideally you need to also know the stations polarity of transmission. in fairly flat areas it is likely to be horizontal, and hilly areas vertical. Some stations
waste enormous power trying to cater for both with what is called circular polarization . Accordingly orientate your antenna to suit their polarity.

If wanting many frequencies and omnidirectional reception and importantly an antenna with good impedance matching - which then maximises transfer across a
coax cable with stated impedance a discone is a good all round ( excuse the pun ) answer. Invented by Armig Kandoian they have many much needed
properties including dimensions less than 1/2 wavelength , 10 to 1 bandwidth and excellent impedance matching to 50 ohms which is the broadcast impedance standard.
Accordingly if using this antenna use 50 ohm coax not 75 ohm.



That's interesting. When I had an aerial put up I wanted a full element thing but the installer recommended a circular array due to the way stations are broadcast in this area. Which has a lot of hills and ridges. That must be why. He did explain but his explanation made no sense to me.

[Beobloke]

Thanks Geoff... I have no idea if Portsmouth has a decent FM reception or not but the car FM seems pretty good.. I just need to find a coax plug somewhere and as you say a length of coax wire might be enough to start with ;)

You're just across the water from the transmitter at Rowridge. You should get pretty much full signal with a piece of wet string stuck in the aerial socket!

[Ninanina]

You should get pretty much full signal with a piece of wet string stuck in the aerial socket!

:rfl::rfl:

Well Adam I found a 10' length of coax and did as Geoff suggested and just pushed the centre wire into the socket and it works :D

It will be even better with the aerial that Gary is sending, so very nice of him ;)

I am amazed by the sound of this little tuner even with my bit of coax... It is definitely the cheapest bit of hifi I have ever purchased in more than 30 years but it really is good.. Classic FM playing at the moment

Thank you to all that recommended the Denon

[walpurgis]

It would probably work even better if you'd used ordinary single fine multicore wire. The screen on the coax will probably reduce the signal you are getting.

You could try twisting the screen around the inner core at the opposite end though.

[Barry]

When I loaned my Leak 'Troughline' tuner to a friend of mine, we used the roof-mounted TV aerial to excellent effect.

The Rowbridge transmitter is only about 30km from Portsmouth, and with an ERP of 60kW you would probably find a screwdriver stuck in the aerial socket would work as well!

[Ninanina]

When I loaned my Leak 'Troughline' tuner to a friend of mine, we used the roof-mounted TV aerial to excellent effect.

The Rowbridge transmitter is only about 30km from Portsmouth, and with an ERP of 60kW you would probably find a screwdriver stuck in the aerial socket would work as well!

Maybe I will try the 'screwdriver' method later :eek:

Yes the 'Rowridge' transmitter, on the Isle of Wight, is very close

ps.. what does ERP mean?... or am I being a thicko..:doh:

[Light Dependant Resistor]

Maybe I will try the 'screwdriver' method later :eek:

Yes the 'Rowridge' transmitter, on the Isle of Wight, is very close

ps.. what does ERP mean?... or am I being a thicko..:doh:

ERP refers to Effective Radiated power. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Effective_radiated_power
You are always better dimensioning and orientating antenna for the frequency being received.

This then improves the signal to noise ratio which directly equates to audio quality. You should notice
stereo separation improves as well as depth. The difference between tuners will also be more apparent.

A signal strength meter if installed on your tuner, is very handy to see when reception for the desired channel is best.


Cheers / Chris

[Light Dependant Resistor]

No tuners are very different - replying to the threads question. It is in how they portray instruments depth and separation

Tonight I am comparing a Yamaha CT1010 vs Marantz ST50 - the Yamaha excels in depth and separating instruments
the Marantz is appealing but lacks the refinement and correct portrayal of sound the Yamaha effortlessly provides.

Antenna is a 88-108Mhz dipole connecting to each tuners 75 ohm fitting with good signal strength on each. Radio station Concert FM NZ
I will try a Pioneer TX9500 next.

Cheers / Chris

[dave2010]

You're just across the water from the transmitter at Rowridge. You should get pretty much full signal with a piece of wet string stuck in the aerial socket!Agree about the rofl comment earlier.

This page suggests a better approach - http://www.wikihow.com/Make-an-FM-Antenna

In my experience it is much better to use a proper roof or loft mounted aerial. They may be costly though, both for the kit, and also the installation. You have to decide whether it's worth it or not, or whether to stick with DAB or use internet delivered channels - or put up with some signal degradation. I wanted aerials for our new home when we moved into it, and I was quoted about £800 for several, to be put up on the roof (TV, DAB, FM). I didn't bother.

Last time I tried to make an aerial I used wire strapped to a garden cane. It was better than the silly little things which sometimes get supplied with tuners. Also the orientation of the aerial matters - both in the horizontal plane, and in the vertical plane. This depends to some extent on the transmitter which it is desired to pick up. I think - IIRC - that 45 degrees is the best compromise for different transmitters, to pick up both horizontally and vertically polarised (even circular?) signals - but if one knows the polarisation of the transmitter then the best results should be obtained by matching that as well as possible.

Here is another design - http://mikestechblog.com/ubuntu-antenna/build-an-indoor-fm-antenna-with-these-plans/2/ - bit ugly, and takes up space, though later on in the article it is hidden behind a picture. Not sure that would be a very good design, though.

Here is another - https://www.electronics-notes.com/articles/antennas-propagation/dipole-antenna/fm-dipole-antenna.php

These cheap DIY designs do get one's kit going, but are nothing like optimal.

[Ninanina]

I am loving having a second source after years of cd only

I think the Denon tuner is excellent

I actually purchased two of them :doh: just in case

I will probably sell one of them but as they are identical it doesn't matter which one

[Nick_G]

I've only just found this thread. I can see where Neil is coming from regarding the Kenwoods. I have a Kenwood L-1000T bought a couple of years ago and I think this is probably the best I have ever used overall. Sound quality from a good live feed really can be amazing. It was their TOTL model in the early 90s, and was their best 'modern' tuner i.e. with PLL tuning, presets etc.

[Spectral Morn]

I've only just found this thread. I can see where Neil is coming from regarding the Kenwoods. I have a Kenwood L-1000T bought a couple of years ago and I think this is probably the best I have ever used overall. Sound quality from a good live feed really can be amazing. It was their TOTL model in the early 90s, and was their best 'modern' tuner i.e. with PLL tuning, presets etc.

You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make it drink.

I haven't heard every tuner made, but I have played with over 30 in my own set up (most regarded as being among the very best ever made) and among those I can say what I think is good value for money having compared them. I was originally planning on writing a comparative review, but the Tuner Info Network gets it pretty close to what I have heard, so I didn't see the point anymore in doing it.

I may at some point sell of some of the tuners, the ones I don't feel attached to.

[Nick_G]

Thanks Neil. Did you find the Kenwoods the best for sound overall? IIRC you had the KT-3050 and 5020.

I bought my L-1000T for £101 including free postage (lucky that as the tuner weighs about 10 kg). I'm hoping to get it serviced and aligned this year but I'm also after a Marantz CD player to complete the system. Decisions decisions...

[Spectral Morn]

Thanks Neil. Did you find the Kenwoods the best for sound overall? IIRC you had the KT-3050 and 5020.

I bought my L-1000T for £101 including free postage (lucky that as the tuner weighs about 10 kg). I'm hoping to get it serviced and aligned this year but I'm also after a Marantz CD player to complete the system. Decisions decisions...

For the very modest price they sell for - yes. I found a 7020 as well. You want silver period looks and VU meters then they are boring black boxes but sound excellent for the money. If you want a smidge more, but at much greater cost then Audiolab 8000T, Revox B760 etc - pretty much as Tuner Net work list them - then they are better but at £30 to £50 vs hundreds then its really no contest re the Kenwoods being biggest bang for the least amount, in my view.

I haven't heard the top Kenwoods, or the top Accuphase, or top Sansui, but despite that I have no doubt they are better again, but its going to be a small improvement, but at what ? £1000 + for some of those, particularly if sourced in Germany. To my mind unless you are a totally anal collector with more money than sense, then its not worth it - in my view.

There was a Sansui 919 listed on AoS for sale a few months ago - I didn't buy it or ask. Once upon a time I might have but not these days.

Of course other folks mileage may vary.