Any recommendation for a modern FM tuner

Before going out and spending $1K, or more, I'd suggest finding even a modest tuner from the 70's, some to be found for as little as $80-$100. Contact Don Scott (e-mail if you want his e-mail) for suggestions. Then, have Don do a few mods. I'm guessing that for about $400 or less, all told, including shipping to and from Don, you can have the performance you seek and use the $600+ for something else.

I had an modest old Sony 3950 stuck on a shelf. Had Don do $150 of mods (plus $50 shipping), including new caps and an IEC to enable use of an after market power cord and it sounds as good or better than the newer Dynalabs I've heard. Start with a tuner even better and get even better results.

A friend from the local hi fi store did a tuner test with me on a very high quality sound system. This was only for sound not distant station reception. The Revox B760 ($760) and Marantz 20 ($640) were the best and fairly equal with extremely good overall sound and deep bass. A step down was the Sequerra Reference, the next step down was the McIntosh MR-80 and a new Magnum Dynalab 90 brought up the rear. The spread form the Revox to the Dynalab was quit large. I'm sure the more expensive Dynalab tuners would be closer to the Revox. Prices noted are what I paid and fairly reflective of current prices. Good luck in your hunt.

Glad to see you're still looking for more info Howard!

Let me add publicly now a few comments I made to you earlier: Everyone should remember that as good sounding as the Meridian 504 may be, it is extremely limited purpose and very bare bones. There is no narrow IF bandwidth, nor is there the option of gradual high blend, or even standard high blend for that matter. The stock IF bandwidth, as noted by Larry Greenhill in his Stereophile review, is very wide, and while the tuner sounds great fed with an FM generator, in the real world it will work properly primarily on strong local stations, or distant blowtorch stations.

Re: The Halo -- single IF bandwidth with 80dB selectivity. There is simply no way to coax audiophile quality sound from this tuner compared to most any dual-bandwidth tuner. The narrower bandwidth results in excessive group delay in the IF strip which in turn causes excessive IM and THD in the recovered audio. Yes, you CAN do this, but it requires carefully hand-selected filters, prefereably multiple GAXX type with a 110kHz GDT bandwidth, and each with a group delay equalizer. Looks nice, but is blown away by many for about $50.

Regarding Don Scott: I INVITE DON TO REFUTE THIS PUBLICLY. I have been told that Don Scott does not own the Sencore SG-80 signal generator mentioned in one of his Stereophile articles. Further, I have been told that he does his alignments "by ear", which is unacceptable and impossible to do properly. I've been told that one of his "modified" units measured around 10dB channel separation. This is awful. I've never had a unit come in under 40, and have personally achieved up to 80dB separation at 1kHz on select tuners. (This required buying the two best FM stereo generators ever produced in the world, however). Further, I have read that one of the modifications he did completely ruined superb high end tuner. He places an ultra-narrow 110kHz filter in the *WIDE* IF bandwidth running the distortion to heck. Clearly, if he let this outd the door, he is not aligning and measuring his work. If you need modification done commerically, use Ed Hanlon at Antenna Performance Specialites. Ed does the audiophile parts additions right, AND aligns it right. I wouldn't doubt that a Don-modified unit can keep up with a Dynalab. They really aren't that good as tuners. They're essentially a very mediocre tuner coupled with a handful of audiophile parts an a gorgeous chassis. Whoopee. And *TUBE* output stages? EXCUSE ME? This is the dumbest gimmick ever, and in a recent Hi-Fi Magazine article I read on the MD-102, the tuner was specified as having .1x% THD and something like 1.6% for the tube stage. Great concept: Even if your tuner is good, why not put the worlds crappies tube output stage into it to juice up the sound with a little extra THD? Stupid. Why not use an AD797 and be done with it?

I'm sure I've managed to tick off a few more people, but these are just my opinions, and I invite anyone to respond who feels like it.

Regards,

The Halo is single bandwidth

Ryan, some of the information you provide in your always pointed and lengthy, albeit often contradictory (including tuner recommendations), posts is useful. You clearly envision yourself as the very authority on all things FM, what with your propensity to label poster's comments as “categorically incorrect”, products as “garbage”, certain mods as a “ripoff”, approaches to tuner improvements as “stupid”, and chiding one poster’s assessment of a tuner by asking him just how many high-end tuners he’s auditioned while passing judgment on another yourself by employing the tired “or so I’ve heard” evidence. But since you are the FM God, I suppose we should all defer to your omnipotence and assume that length of post equals legitimacy.

And, as to your use of the “so I’ve heard/so I’ve been told” qualifier with respect to Don Scott. I do not know Don personally, but I know that he has performed quite a number of mods for a great many folks and I have yet to hear from anyone who was dissatisfied. To my knowledge, Don does not post in this forum so your “I INVITE DON TO REFUTE THIS PUBLICLY” challenge is cowardly, at best. If you want him to your answer YOUR claims, why don’t YOU contact him yourself and ask? By your own admission you are making claims based on “what you’ve been told” – spurious indeed. If you want to make these near libelous claims, how about providing some actual proof and not mere innuendo? YOU have the responsibility to back up what YOU have said. Don has no obligation to answer your heretofore unfounded accusations.

I don’t know if you have a personal thing going with Don, or not. Your reference in other threads to “we” at the FM Tuner Board implies that this may very well be the case. In any event, I suggest that you refrain from such professional competency assassination unless you are prepared to provide the proof necessary to finish what your mouth has started.

Oh, and this is my considered response, offered at your invitation.

Ryanmh1: "I've been told that one of his "modified" units measured around 10dB channel separation." Although 4yanx has composed a very reasonable response to your opinion, I would like to emphasize that you do not state any real evidence other than heresay for your views. How do you know that Mr. Scott did not specifically design the unit for someone with only 10dB of separation? If a customer lives in a region w/poor reception, he/she may be seeking modifications that are appropriate for distal reception rather than audiophile sound. I had Don modify a unit to my specific requirements, and the end result was ideal (he also guaranteed the work with no strings attached).

Just my opinion.