Magnum Dynalab tuner

Clipdat

@mhardy6647 come express your disdain for Magnum Dynalab tuners.

msg

Kind of a good point here, Drew, do you want to start at a lower level just to see if you're into it?

The MD stuff is obviously on another level, but maybe you'll want to get a sense for general reception before committing to a piece like that?

You guys got me thinking about that MD ST-2 for a B&K TS-108.

mhardy6647

Clipdat wrote: »

How is @mhardy6647 absent from this thread? Shouldn't his spidey sense be tingling?

Doc do we need to adjust your rabbit ears?

Wednesdays are hard for me -- I teach on Wednesdays in the fall...plus we had the 14 month old grandson today. I was a little busy.

I was gonna say lemme check stock and see if I have any decent sounding tuners that I can send you for shipping cost. I might.
The Magnum Dynalab tuners are OK but nothin' special. Not all hat but the hat to cowboy ratio is suboptimal. They're not the worst value for the dollar tuner extant, but they're close.

You want something like a Mac MR-78, or a Sansui TU-9900.
In terms of sheer sound quality, though, dollar for dollar, you won't beat a Sherwood S-3000V. My MR-67 does sound better, but just a wee bit -- and I paid twenty times as much for the MR-67 than I did for the S-3000V I have.

I am amazingly easygoing about antennae -- although you can't beat a good FM Yagi with rotor (or properly aimed, sans rotor, for one station), with as much altitude as possible.

Clipdat

msg wrote: »

Kind of a good point here, Drew, do you want to start at a lower level just to see if you're into it?

The MD stuff is obviously on another level, but maybe you'll want to get a sense for general reception before committing to a piece like that?

You guys got me thinking about that MD ST-2 for a B&K TS-108.

Yeah that's what I was thinking Scott, maybe that Arcam would be a nice option to "wet my whistle".

Plus, it comes with a high quality FM antenna!

jdjohn

We actually an entire thread about FM antennae here: https://forum.polkaudio.com/discussion/181829/what-fm-antenna-s-has-have-worked-for-you/p1

Clipdat

From a functional/performance perspective, what is the difference between using a wire antenna like the one I just posted above, and one like this: https://www.audioadvisor.com/prodinfo.asp?number=MDST2

Assuming that the signal strength of the station is strong and can easily be picked up by the simple wire antenna.

mhardy6647

If you get full quieting from the wire*, none. The M-D antenna is omnidirectional and vertically polarized. That's OK, but being omni limits (reduces) the antenna's gain, and - last I knew - most FM transmissions are circularly polarized (i.e., vertical or horizontal is OK for a receiving antenna). Their claim as to reduced multipath for a vertical "whip" is actually a little puzzling to me, since most multipath is caused by structures or terrain, which I tend to think of as vertical problems.

Impedance matching (which the M-D provides) is certainly nice-to-have, but not essential for receiving antennae (it's much more important for transmitting antennae). One does want the SWR (standing wave ratio) as close to 1:1 as possible -- so it is GOOD to match the FM tuner front end impedance precisely, but that is going to be frequency dependent (i.e., a tuned preselector or tuned antenna matching circuit is the "best case").

* I am assuming that by "wire" you mean typical "T" dipole (the kind that used to be provided with a newly-purchased tuner or receiver). Note that a center-fed "T" dipole is actually a pretty darned good antenna -- it is the reference design (0 dB gain) most commonly used to report gain of more directional antennae (i.e., beams like Yagis or log periodic arrays). The dipole actually has a figure-8 reception pattern, with nodes at the ends of the dipole. This does permit some ability to tune reception and null out interference (e.g., multipath), but not always in an aesthetically satisfactory way.

The OTHER nice thing about a "T" dipole -- if one is only interested in one station, the antenna can be "tuned" (cut) to resonance at the "exact" frequency of the station's carrier (center channel) It is also easy to make one.

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

https://youtu.be/S-Mi6qoMEew
(kind of fancy construction values - notice this one is mounted vertically polarized -- this actually would make a decent transmitting antenna)

C Crane sells a fancy-schmancy one that is expensive (for a dipole!) but said to work well. I think (???) the downlead is 75 ohm coax, which is nice, though.
https://ccrane.com/fm-reflect-2-dipole-antenna/

The current model apparent does not use coax feed cable, but it is also about 5 bucks cheaper than the original.

If you feel like making a custom tuned FM dipole for 91.1 MHz I can send you a hank of good quality 300 ohm twinlead -- or I can make you one if you'd prefer.

mhardy6647

There's a lot of chatter on teh webz about using so-called "J-pole" antennae for commercial band FM reception. I am most tempted to build one, but haven't yet worked up the gumption.

Here's an example:
http://latham.dropbear.id.au/antenna/

The art and science of designing, building, and measuring antennae is actually really, really interesting. Mostly beyond my meager ken, but still very cool.

Clipdat

Thanks for all the info. I can feel my tiny brain reaching it's limit.

Regarding "wire" antenna, I just meant this freebie thing:

audioluvr

audioluvr wrote: »

You want me to pick this up for you???
https://portland.craigslist.org/clc/ele/d/lake-oswego-knight-kn-137m-am-fm-tube/7204730438.html

Hey @ZLTFUL Ryan. Got you a present

mhardy6647

Clipdat wrote: »

Thanks for all the info. I can feel my tiny brain reaching it's limit.

Regarding "wire" antenna, I just meant this freebie thing:

Yeah, that's a center-fed dipole.

Clipdat

Good looking tuner! $700: https://tmraudio.com/vintage/tuners/marantz-model-2110-vintage-stereo-am-fm-tuner-upgraded/



Looks like it's been "upgraded" as well:

This item has the Premium Audio Upgrade by Audio Horizons ($550). Upgrades include:

-Addition of IEC inlet to replace integrated power cable
-Upgraded internal wiring
-Upgraded power supply capacitors
-Upgraded Op Amps
-General service and calibration

maxward

Go for it, Drew. Unless you want to wait for the good Doctor to give his blessing. Nothing like a smooth tuning wheel.

mhardy6647

Those are pretty good. The scope is a nice touch.
You could still get better sound for less money (if that's the end goal... but the aesthetics and signal pulling power may trump sound quality for some folks) -- but the whole package is certainly worth $700* if it is in good tune and good working order. All of those upgrades aren't worth the space they take up (or the money they cost) if whoever worked on it doesn't understand superheterodyne FM tuner service and alignment.

The lesser Marantz tuners of that era (and the ones that came before them, with blackout dials) are horrifically overpriced at this late date.
All this being said, the 2130 would be the one to get, though, if you can find one, but the 2110 is a decent choice.

marantzes by Mark Hardy, on Flickr
__________
* Full disclosure, I came very close to buying a nice looking 2130 for $600 a couple of years ago at a nearby amateur radio (etc.) swapmeet. I chickened out, though.

Clipdat

Thanks Mark.

audioluvr

Here's one in the Seattle area.
https://seattle.craigslist.org/see/ele/d/bothell-magnum-dynalab-ft101a-fm-tuner/7214241866.html

jdjohn

There are some vintage tuners from my dad's collection still waiting to be discovered. Drew, if you can wait awhile, I'll let you know what I find.

Clipdat

Sounds good! I'm not in a rush.

mhardy6647

Did you -- umm -- consider a Mac, @Clipdat?
They have, over the years, made tuners that both sound good and are good radios (so to speak).
As y'all know, I am not a big fan of most things Mac... but I do use a Mac tuner
Just sayin'.

Clipdat

I keep walking around my neighborhood hoping to find a tuner out on the curb.

Closest I've come so far is an old H/K AVR.

audioluvr

mhardy6647 wrote: »

Did you -- umm -- consider a Mac, @Clipdat?
They have, over the years, made tuners that both sound good and are good radios (so to speak).
As y'all know, I am not a big fan of most things Mac... but I do use a Mac tuner
Just sayin'.

I wonder if this one is any good
https://portland.craigslist.org/mlt/ele/d/portland-mcintosh-mr73-am-fm-tuner/7213542187.html

[Deleted User]

Back when DKL Sound Lab was a fledgling audio store we were approached by the McIntosh company to be a potential dealer. Dean, the business manager of our company replied that the only product he would consider carrying would be the MR71 tuner. Needless to say they were not favorably impressed with our cheekiness and we never heard from them again. The ironic thing was that where our store was located, in Silver Spring, MD., was around the corner from where Mac was founded in 1949.

[Deleted User]

The place with a good reputation for restoring tuners in general is Audio Classics.

mhardy6647

Clipdat wrote: »

I keep walking around my neighborhood hoping to find a tuner out on the curb.

Closest I've come so far is an old H/K AVR.

That will -- umm -- have a tuner.
I am currently... and more than occasionally... using a dump-find and quite vintage multichannel receiver. The tuner section of it is... not bad (either sonically or in terms of its performance as a signal receiver).


DSC_0367 (2) by Mark Hardy, on Flickr

mhardy6647

audioluvr wrote: »

mhardy6647 wrote: »

Did you -- umm -- consider a Mac, @Clipdat?
They have, over the years, made tuners that both sound good and are good radios (so to speak).
As y'all know, I am not a big fan of most things Mac... but I do use a Mac tuner
Just sayin'.

I wonder if this one is any good
https://portland.craigslist.org/mlt/ele/d/portland-mcintosh-mr73-am-fm-tuner/7213542187.html

It could be -- depending on what work, and how much, it needs. That's a pretty irresistable price... although I guess there's a chance it would end up being the hifi equivalent of a cheap used Mercedes

KennethSwauger wrote: »

Back when DKL Sound Lab was a fledgling audio store we were approached by the McIntosh company to be a potential dealer. Dean, the business manager of our company replied that the only product he would consider carrying would be the MR71 tuner. Needless to say they were not favorably impressed with our cheekiness and we never heard from them again.

There are, as I've mentioned before, a few Mac pieces here. The only one in regular use is an MR-67. It gets used a lot (although right this second I am listening to the aforementioned Yamaha on a pair of ELAC loudspeakers).

The ironic thing was that where our store was located, in Silver Spring, MD., was around the corner from where Mac was founded in 1949.

In a perfect world -- I wouldn't mind having an MR-78... if only to know if any of the hype around these was/is fact-based.

Clipdat

mhardy6647 wrote: »

Clipdat wrote: »

I keep walking around my neighborhood hoping to find a tuner out on the curb.

Closest I've come so far is an old H/K AVR.

That will -- umm -- have a tuner.

But how do I get it out of there and into my HiFi system?

motorstereo

[quote="mhardy6647;

In a perfect world -- I wouldn't mind having an MR-78... if only to know if any of the hype around these was/is fact-based.

[/quote]

I had a "Dewicked" 78 and my thoughts were it was great at picking up distant stations but not so good to listen to. Even though it matched my other Mac components the 78 left in favor of a Mike Williams Sui TU9900. That Sui had the best of both worlds; a great sounding tuner as well as being very good at picking up distant stations. Not quite as sensitive as the Mac but very good. But that 9900 left when a Mcintosh MR80 arrived which is still my favorite sounding and performing tuner. It easily bests my MR74 and really embarrasses my newer MR7084.

tratliff

You might also consider a Pioneer TX-9800. My dad had one years ago and it is really a looker. I have read some post about how great they pull in stations and the sound quality.

mhardy6647

motorstereo wrote: »

...

I had a "Dewicked" 78 and my thoughts were it was great at picking up distant stations but not so good to listen to. Even though it matched my other Mac components the 78 left in favor of a Mike Williams Sui TU9900. That Sui had the best of both worlds; a great sounding tuner as well as being very good at picking up distant stations. Not quite as sensitive as the Mac but very good. But that 9900 left when a Mcintosh MR80 arrived which is still my favorite sounding and performing tuner. It easily bests my MR74 and really embarrasses my newer MR7084.

Good call on the Sansui tuners -- the best ones are... pretty darned good.
Although I will say that I was disappointed in the TU-717 that I have. It has that typically steely, soul-less sound I associate with solid state FM tuners. It is, of course, not in that top echelon of Sansui tuners, though.


There is (courtesy of my son!) a Kenwood KT-9900 here (basically a bronze- or gunmetal-faced variant of the KT-8300) which is commendably warm and liquid sounding.

Haven't ever encountered an MR-80. I don't think they're too common (??).

tratliff wrote: »

You might also consider a Pioneer TX-9800. My dad had one years ago and it is really a looker. I have read some post about how great they pull in stations and the sound quality.

Or its forebear, the TX-9500(II). It ain't got no wimpy Fluoroscan, neither

DSC_6307 (2) by Mark Hardy, on Flickr

Clipdat wrote: »

mhardy6647 wrote: »

Clipdat wrote: »

I keep walking around my neighborhood hoping to find a tuner out on the curb.

Closest I've come so far is an old H/K AVR.

That will -- umm -- have a tuner.

But how do I get it out of there and into my HiFi system?

Umm, you can leave it in its original packaging... just need a big shelf. Turn off the speakers. Heck, rip out the power amps if you're so inclined! Gotta think outside the box, ol' son! OK, that's a metaphor... since it's in a big ol' box.

There's also a Marantz AVR here (a dump find that someone else found in Dover, NH and passed on to me) with a partially Bjorked borked power amp section. The preamp (and tuner) work fine, though

pitdogg2

Pioneer TX-9800 (1979, $450, photo, block diagram, schematic, alignment guide 1 2 3, ad, Audio review) search eBay
The TX-9800 has 5 gangs and 5 filters, one for the wide IF bandwidth mode and 4 for narrow, and is solidly built. The TX-9800 has exactly the same RF front end as the TX-9100 and TX-9500/TX-9500II, with differences only in the IF and audio circuit areas. From a technical standpoint, however, the TX-9800's complex crystal referenced oscillator sets it apart from those other Pioneers. According to our panelist David "A," although it has excellent bass, "the TX-9800 shows that it was cost-reduced compared to the TX-9500II. The shields for each section that are present on all TX-9100s, all TX-9500s and most TX-9500IIs (ones that I have seen, anyway) are gone in the TX-9800, and the TX-9800's parts quality is worse overall." Chuck Rippel of Audio Video Service Labs describes the TX-9800's circuit that operates the two indicators 'TUNE' and 'LOCKED': "What that circuit is looking for is a null in the discriminator offset. In all tuners, that null should also be coincident with the point of lowest distortion (established, in part, by the adjustment of the discriminator secondary). In this tuner, that circuit works correctly and it's clearly audible. Slowly tune through the station, the red 'TUNE' indicator will illuminate and the 'LOCKED' indicator will illuminate when you release the tuning control. The tuner is then at the point of least distortion. The AFC will maintain lock at that point."

Our panelist Ray, who has owned many tuners, says "When it comes to low end of the band sensitivity, the TX-9800 is my best." Ray did a DXing shootout among his TX-9800, a Kenwood KT-8300 and an Optonica ST-7405: "The TX-9800 won the pure sensitivity challenge, but not by as much as with most [over the KT-8300]. When I tested them for adjacent-channel performance, the TX-9800 and KT-8300 could both ignore the adjacent, but the ST-7405 had lots of interfering hash." And in Ray's shootout between the TX-9800 and the Sony XDR-F1HD, "the Sony would easily find a DX candidate and then, with much tweaking, the TX-9800 would get it also but not as quietly. That is, to a point. If the signal was really weak, i.e., less than 18 dBf, the Sony would be totally deaf and the TX-9800 would know it was there. It seems the Sony has great quieting but more limited ultimate sensitivity."

The TX-9800 has a 3-gang AM section with wide and narrow bandwidth settings, so it may be a good choice for those who listen to AM radio. Pioneer's published specs for AM show selectivity of 50 dB in Narrow mode vs. 20 dB in Wide mode. Our contributor Greg says, "The TX-9800 and TX-9500II have WAY better than average AM sections, both with a TRF section (not common in modern tuners) and good IF sections. The 9800 also has selectable AM IF bandwidth (can't remember if the 9500II has this) which is a great help in DXing on the AM band." Those who want to work on their TX-9800s should read the discussion in our FMtuners group that begins here.

On eBay, the TX-9800 can sell for almost any price depending on condition, fluctuations in demand and whether it has a wooden cabinet, but prices have been trending higher since 2005 and two garden-variety ones sold for $500 and $530 in 10/07 for no apparent reason. On the low side, two sold for $77 and $84 in 7-8/05. Mint TX-9800s can sell for $300-380, the same price range for those with the rare rack-mount tray. See how one stock TX-9800 sounded compared to other top tuners on our Shootouts page, and read David "A"'s Ricochet. Additional information on the TX-9800 is available at classic-audio.com.



Kenwood KT-9900 (1977 or 1978, photo) search eBay
Sold only in Europe when new, the KT-9900 is identical to the KT-8300 in every way except for the 9900's worldwide voltage capability and the color of its front panel, which is usually "gun-metal" (a metallic medium gray) but we've seen it rarely in bronze. The KT-9900 and KT-8300 share the same owner's and service manuals and the circuit boards appear to be as identical as the front panel controls are.

Our contributor Jeff R. did a shootout: "After a few months, we have decided that our KT-9900 is a better-sounding tuner, by a slim margin, than our Sansui TU-717 in our system. I have no way, either by instruments or knowledge of the use of any instruments, to prove that either tuner is operating at peak performance. Except for LED lamps, they are as-found, likely stock tuners. Also our preference of the KT-9900 over the TU-717 has nothing to with the Sansui not sounding good -- it does sound great. When I flip the switch from 1 to 2 and 2 to 1, we all agree the Kenwood has more of a depth of sound. I am not sure what that is called, imaging maybe? There is just something more going on, more like the band is in the room somewhat at various places or centered at different times. The Sansui doesn't seem to do this quite as well, and doesn't seem to expand the sound as deep.

"The Kenwood seems much more sensitive to antenna aiming. I couldn't tell you which is more selective. I live in a hole here in Tulsa, surrounded by stations, and they are all uphill, or over the hill. Having said all that, once either finds another station, the other will tune right into to it, and usually not much difference, other than the quality of the 'soundstage,' imaging, or whatever that depth quality is called. I never recall being able to say this one got 100.5 in OKC and that one didn't. They both did, but neither was very listenable. The one thing that throws it all off for fair is I do not have a dB meter to set the outputs of both tuners the same for a certain volume setting on my preamp. Dialing the Sansui up a bit always seems to catch it up, very close, to the Kenwood sound, but the KT-9900 always has room to go. Again I wouldn't say anything bad about the Sansui, we just think we hear more with the Kenwood. It hasn't one thing to do with measuring anything objectively. Three of us hear it the same, just our humble ears' opinions."

Our contributor Dave N. did a similar comparison and agreed with Jeff's conclusion, while Hank A.'s personal shootout came out the other way, and our contributor doug s. says that his KT-9900 was "one of only a few out of more than 100 tunas I have sampled over the years that I found lacking in soundstage depth enough that I wouldn't want it for serious music listening. It was not refurb'd, but it worked fine - excellent reception." Our contributor János had one and after alignment but without any mods, it had "still worse RF capabilities (a bit worse sensitivity and clearly worse selectivity, although the Revox has only a single IF) than a KT-6040 or the Revox A76." The KT-9900 usually sells for slightly more than KT-8300s on eBay, $160-300 or higher, with a high of $449 in 2/13. To add to the confusion, there's a silver-faced KT-9900 that was sold under the Trio brand name (see the Trio listing).



Marantz 2110 (1978, $380, photo) search eBay
If you must have a Marantz tuner with an oscilloscope but find the 2130 too pricey, perhaps the similarly beautiful 2110 will suffice, but be aware that it is (surprisingly) only a 3-gang tuner! The 2110 usually sells for $220-375 on eBay, but one went for just $167 in 5/04 and $400+ is possible for a mint one (the all-time high was $510 in 2/06 and a more recent high was $438 in 6/09).


More great info at

Fmtunerinfo.com

I always stop the tuner info spot before any purchase.