The T9090II was the most sensitive, somewhat dry sounding, the FM3 the least sensitive, with a bloated mid bass and rolled down treble. The I owned an MD105 for a while and thought it was quite good, and now I have the MR78 which so far I would say is the best tuner overall I've owned. I find its multiple filters and selectivity are genuinely useful. Note that the MR78 has been recapped.
Fm tuner
i listen mainly to classical,wfmt in Chicago and listen to that station as much as I do my vinyl and cds.
as I live close to Chicago receiving weak stations is not an issue.
i have recently upgraded to a Rogue Sphinx v2,kef LS50s and a rega p6.
im not really up on the latest technology so I think an fm tuner is all I really need.
any suggestions or thoughts will be appreciated.
allan
- ...
- 41 posts total
I've owned the following tuners- Onkyo T9090II, Dynaco FM3, Magnum Dynalab MD105 and McIntosh MR78. I also had an MR71 in my home for a few days but it wasn't working right. The T9090II was the most sensitive, somewhat dry sounding, the FM3 the least sensitive, with a bloated mid bass and rolled down treble. The I owned an MD105 for a while and thought it was quite good, and now I have the MR78 which so far I would say is the best tuner overall I've owned. I find its multiple filters and selectivity are genuinely useful. Note that the MR78 has been recapped. |
vtvmtodvm06-24-2017 6:45pm For those of us who prefer classical music and, like me, live within range of a good FM station that broadcasts such music, high quality FM reception is essential. And, while the advice that you’ve received is well intended and basically sound, it is certainly NOT technically current ..."HD Radio" is digital radio technology, but it isn’t "high-definition" and developer iBiquity always insisted that the "HD" designation didn’t stand for "high-definition." That’s a good thing, when you consider you’re listening to 96 kpbs bandwidth at best, which is far short of CD quality, which is 1,411 kbps. If you are close enough to the transmitter, HD can deliver a low noise signal which will be much quieter than a conventional signal received by cheap FM tuner. But if you use a quality FM tuner connected to a proper directional antenna, there’s no comparison at all. That is one of the many reasons that HD radio has failed in the marketplace. |
My post of yesterday had some broken and duplicated links. I'll try to do better now, see below. In response to Cleeds' accurate comment, let me add that I merely intended to refer to "HD Radio" as hi-def because that is what it is named; the HD handle stands for hi def. And the implicit benefits of HD radio do work well FOR ME, but I'm located within 5.4 miles of my KUSC repeater, and I use a good antenna. If you are in a more distant reception area and find that conventional analog FM reception might work better than HD mode, the modification work performed by the cited source includes an optional HD lockout switch that gives you that option. For those of us who prefer classical music and, like me, live within range of a good FM station that broadcasts such music, high quality FM reception is essential. And, while the advice that you’ve received is well intended and basically sound, it reflects “old school” design; it’s NOT technically current. To appreciate this see… |
"And now I own the finest FM tuner ever produced. There’s nothing better, at any price." vtmtodvm- you found something that agrees with your ears. Have you owned one a Marantz 10B, REL Precedent,Scott...etc? I wasn t aware Sony produced such a product that can match and exceed the performance of these tubed classics. Im a KUSC listener in SoCal, and yes that and our Jazz station can sound great on a decent tuner with a good antenna. I'm using a 65' tubed Mac MR71. |
- 41 posts total