I have to admit that some of my opponents might consider my organizational views on high-end audio too socialistic and will recognize in my view some residues of me growing up in socialistic society. Leaving aside the prejudicial and completely foolish visions of Americans about socialistic ways (actually Americans mostly have no views of own but they rather like monkeys repeat the BS that was pre-chewed and pre-sold for them by nation’s military-industrial complex) I have to admit that the opponents might have a point. I do proposed that the True High-End Audio should not be subject of a freaks doing alchemy in basements but it should be a chain of live broadcasting networks:

http://www.romythecat.com/Forums/ShowPost.aspx?postID=6917

I proposed years ago the “Opened Doors” concept according to which any explicit professional assessment of audio products should be banned from Truly High-End Audio… I can go on and on….

For those very few lucky bustards who live in the cities with good FM “live broadcasting” stations and with good cultural life the True High-End Audio have already exist in the air. However, what kind of surprise and disappoint me is absolutely neglecting attention from High-End Audio industry AND from the individual High-End Audio practitioners to the subject FM radio and using of FM as a primary High-End audio medium. Here is the subject for example: where are out good tuners.

The industry offers perhaps a hundred different turntables and tonearms. The LP culture is flourishing but there is no visible movement in tuners world. The industry offers hundreds and perhaps thousands of SET amplifiers and there is an army of DIYer who make countless own single-ended amps but compare it with amount of industry and DIYer efforts to make better sounding tuners available. No one make good analog FM tuners seriously and there is practically no DIY movement that would chance an idea of “Perfect Tuner”

The very few surviving companies that still do tuners today: Magnum Dynalab and Day Sequerra pretty much do not face any competition and do whatever they want, that in many instances very little relates to better Sound. So, the FM users who wish to get better quality are forced to go for 30 years old mass-market commercial tuners. This is kind of radicals. No one would use for today high-end audio application a preamp, a phonostage of an amp that was made in 70s. However we buy those mass-market tuners from 70 and feel that it is what FM is capable of…

What I would like to see, purely for egotistic reasons, is serious High-End Audio companies, along with an army of DIY hoodlums to attack the idea of better FM reception. Last year Accuphase hit market with high end tuner T-1000, it was digital. I know about another High-End Audio company that will come with high-objectives analog tuner to the end of the year. Who else? I would like to see many contemporary well-made tuners and I would like to people be aware about the huge absolutely unexplored by the idiots-audiophiles domain of super high fidelity sound reproduction. I would like even tuners to have A/D options on board and have ability to write live stream to hard drive…

I clearly recognize the Utopia-sness of my wish but the sad irony is that my wishful idealization is not necessarily the result of my inflated imagination but rather the result of restrictive and preventive thinking on the part of the industry and on the part of the audio practitioners who prefer to do audio by listening the sounds of the dead audio cans…

My mind turned back recently to the subject of tube tuners – there were some even that made it happen. I have to admit that I have general difficulties with tube tuners. My past experience with then was not so great.

When we are talking about quality of tuners we imply two not necessary related characteristics: the quality of reception and quality of sound. It is unquestionably that there are a few purely technical arguments why it is possible to get superior quality of reception with tubes: higher impedance, lower intermodulations, better resistance to overload, lower noise with small signal and many others reasons. (At least what we are looking at the SS devised in 1970 when all SS tuner were made) However, when we are taking about the quality of sound then the advances in reception not necessary reflect itself in better quality, and in my experience most of the tube tunes do not sound right. Do not give me those Mac, Heathkit, Fisher, Leak, Maranz, Scott, and many others - the Sansui TU-X1 will eat then in breakfast in term of sound quality.

So, if the tube-made front ends, mixers and IM sectors might be superior with tube tuners then why it does not always lead to better sound? I do not know. One of the explanation might be that the tube tuners were made 50 years ago, what the quietly of build was very much different then we have today and the superiorly destined tube tuner were not just built as good as then might? Well, I would like to see in such case a contemporary rebuild of good tube topology.

There is another problem that I have with tube tuners – people. It is kind of hard to generalize but commonly the people who use tube tuners are kind of strange folks. It is impossible to talk to them about sound of tuner as then ether dive into pissing contest or they dive into hysteria about their tube tuners – both of the behaviors are equity contra-productive and non-informative. It is not to mention that most of the people who love to talk about the “stupendous bass” and “endless depth” from their Maranz 10B or REL Precedent in the end turn out are listening bookshelf mini-monitors, or use Sony receiver driving their “full range” ESL-57 or juts live in the regions where there is nothing but rock stations. I do not mean to discredit others but I was looking the opinion that would be based upon worthy and sane experience projected to more or less evolved level of demands. I did not see a whole lot of it in tuber tuner world.

So, being comfortable with my SS tuners I still have my mind open for tube tuners. I do not know what to expect. I use to bring home a few tube tuners but they were borrowed tuners and I did nothing with them beside just plug-in them in and out. The sound was not good but it does not mean that it would be the same if to “work” on the subject.

So, if any of my site readers around Boston who have from your point of view a seriously sounding tube tuner would like to lend me your tube tuners, perhaps with you in presents, then I would be very opened to this opportunity. It might be an educational experiment as I think I do have a quite reasonable performance of SS tuners in my listening room. It is a standing offer; contact me directly for further arrangements.

Well, Nerone, the differences between any tuners would greatly vary with signal, not even with the strength of signal but rather with the specific location and surrounding of a given station.  To make the things conceptually right it would be necessary to make built/pick a custom tuner with own set of topological decisions for each station and each recipient location. I kind of slowly move to thin direction as I have only 3 stations that I ever worry, WCRBH, WGBH and WHRB. The “weak signal” is not a sufficient characteristic in my view, I would rather use a phrase the “complexity of signal”, I am sure you know what I mean.

Regarding the tube tuner vs. SS tuner. It is more complex and I do not think that it is only due to “week signals”. Many best tube tuners were made what there were no demands for contemporary high quality of sound and contemporary complexity of FM broadcasting. They have very crappie multiplex decoders, extremely horrible output stages, no post-detection filtration, very high noise, limited IR bandwidth, difficulties to deal with overload and many other might that might be improved. The SS tuners are juts “newer” and it is in a way more useable. I certainly do not want to pass myself as some kind of expect or tube tuner or tuners generally. I am very rational person and try to abbey empirical reasons.

If tube tuners are “better” (and the might be as tubes have lower inner-modulation in RF) then why do not get the most evolved tube tuner and see what happen. I took REL and looking at the tube tuners schematics any other tubers was made to brainlessly imitate the way in which REL was designed. Pay attention: my REL has no “sound” as it has only a front- end, IR, limiter and detector. The audio sound it born right after detector – everything before is RF. The sound after detector is IC buffers and sent to external MPX decoder. The same MPX decoder is driven also from SS turner.

So, I think the environment I set up is methodologically honest framework to evaluate the Tube vs. SS debate – we do not compare the output stages of multiplex decoders.  Furthermore, I have the composite signal from SS and tube tuner match marched to a fraction of db and I have an ability to flip the MPX decoder’s input and here the instant difference. From my currant view the tube tuners (at least my tube tuner) is the deep ass.  The SS tuners have some conics advantage and they are way quieter. At this moment I  would not even to talk about sound as my tube tuner has too high own noise that pretty much disqualifies it from any further consideration. I have my REL to review by a tuner serving technician but he did not address the noise.  It is not the noise from air but the internal noise. I have bought a crystal oscillator and drove via attenuator my tuners to see what external nose my tuners have. To my astonishment the Sansui TU-1X show 78dB signals to noise ratio – that is beyond any expectations in my view. Pay attention – this is not the bogus numbers from add booklets but the actual number that I measured with my scope. My “worse” Rohde & Schwarz showed 75dB but slightly more noise texture of noise – with Sansui is it a pure white noise but the Schwarz has some harmonics. (I did not measure my “better” Rohde & Schwarz).  With 78dB signals to noise ratio I have silence from speaker. With REL I have an ocean of MF noises with no modulation in antenna – who can listen it and who cares how it sound with the signal? I wonder how quiet your tube tuners sound. Flip them to Mono, take a headphone on and listen some newscast “from studio”. Do you have absolutely back background with no noise of any kind between the words? If you do then it is the problem of my REL and I need to look more on it. Otherwise it how the tube tuners sound - with noise - and I do not like it.

Interesting, if not for your personal contacts with Yoshi, how many Morons (TM) will "world shortest feedback" receive ?

Romy the Cat wrote:

You have to have guts (or stupidity) to introduce new FM tuners nowadays but as you understand this fact is very welcomes at my site. So, it comes: http://47labs.co.jp/4730.html I have no idea what it is and what is inside.  Yoshi ld me that FM was the 47 Lab’s designer original expertise, so he might come up with something interesting.   The Cat

I know FM is great, (especially in the cities where you guys live), yes I lived in a "city" for many years, tuner was packed with very special dj's with musical mission back in the day, but get out of the good dammed stone ages, and please embrase somethime soon, perhaps internet technology and the generousnous of internet radio stations? God damn it, you are starting to bore the hell out of me. And you Romy, an internet Microsoft guy, for good ness sakes. Let's take this into the future, (it is the "right now thing"  for the kiddies out there, they will inherit his earth, and this is a reality, FM was the greatest in the 70's with dj's "mooding" the airwaves with "concept programs", well it is being done on the "internet radio" guys, -RADIO PARADISE, OTTOS BAROQUE CLASSICAL, MANY OTHERS, please let us wake the tuner up).

Start discussing for example,

Ranting and raving, regards, j.

p.s. I get like this sometimes, no big deal, as I am j.sharkie, also, not just mjloudspeaker, don't talk to me about the limitations of internet it, I know already, and because this is one of the best sites of audio development in the world, it needs to move forward, with "continuous learning" principles, based on very current and very immediate popular technology, because as it is, we are very much dinosaurs we STEREO guys, see any kids here lately? and shall I mention class d amps, ? perhaps? 

This is my specific rant Quote right now- "you are most severe in reprimand on your most loved child, the one that holds the most talent and promise", love ya, j.

ban me if you must. Old enough to go away, care about it, but not enough to be wounded by it.

THIS IS FACT OF LIFE OF SOUND, let us intergrate the new, the old, to forge a vision of what could be. It can be done on Romy's great site?

A Fan Always, j.

Let me start to list some of these devices.

Compressors,

Dynamic Expandors,

Aphex Oral Excitors,

Echo Devices,

Spatial Excitors,

Etc....................

I know, my friend is a FM guy, with stuff that would make Romy the CAt, spit up a FUr BaLL of HuGe Porportionss!

Romy the Cat wrote:

A2A, at this site only I have permission to write posts that no one, including myself, can understand. :-) So, might I ask you: what were you trying to say? Mjloudspeaker, This is a thread is about a current production of FM tuners. What are you writing about? The Cat

please delete my post now. you do not understand my post, it is your site delete this post now.

mjloudspeaker wrote:

Romy the Cat wrote: A2A, at this site only I have permission to write posts that no one, including myself, can understand. :-) So, might I ask you: what were you trying to say? Mjloudspeaker, This is a thread is about a current production of FM tuners. What are you writing about? The Cat please delete my post now. you do not understand my post, it is your site delete this post now.

I have nothing fethermore to say in your site, Romy I am completely done here, an dplease, have a great day!

Romy the Cat wrote:

I have to admit that some of my opponents might consider my organizational views on high-end audio too socialistic and will recognize in my view some residues of me growing up in socialistic society. Leaving aside the prejudicial and completely foolish visions of Americans about socialistic ways (actually Americans mostly have no views of own but they rather like monkeys repeat the BS that was pre-chewed and pre-sold for them by nation’s military-industrial complex) I have to admit that the opponents might have a point. I do proposed that the True High-End Audio should not be subject of a freaks doing alchemy in basements but it should be a chain of live broadcasting networks: http://www.romythecat.com/Forums/ShowPost.aspx?postID=6917 I proposed years ago the “Opened Doors” concept according to which any explicit professional assessment of audio products should be banned from Truly High-End Audio… I can go on and on…. For those very few lucky bustards who live in the cities with good FM “live broadcasting” stations and with good cultural life the True High-End Audio have already exist in the air. However, what kind of surprise and disappoint me is absolutely neglecting attention from High-End Audio industry AND from the individual High-End Audio practitioners to the subject FM radio and using of FM as a primary High-End audio medium. Here is the subject for example: where are out good tuners. The industry offers perhaps a hundred different turntables and tonearms. The LP culture is flourishing but there is no visible movement in tuners world. The industry offers hundreds and perhaps thousands of SET amplifiers and there is an army of DIYer who make countless own single-ended amps but compare it with amount of industry and DIYer efforts to make better sounding tuners available. No one make good analog FM tuners seriously and there is practically no DIY movement that would chance an idea of “Perfect Tuner” The very few surviving companies that still do tuners today: Magnum Dynalab and Day Sequerra pretty much do not face any competition and do whatever they want, that in many instances very little relates to better Sound. So, the FM users who wish to get better quality are forced to go for 30 years old mass-market commercial tuners. This is kind of radicals. No one would use for today high-end audio application a preamp, a phonostage of an amp that was made in 70s. However we buy those mass-market tuners from 70 and feel that it is what FM is capable of… What I would like to see, purely for egotistic reasons, is serious High-End Audio companies, along with an army of DIY hoodlums to attack the idea of better FM reception. Last year Accuphase hit market with high end tuner T-1000, it was digital. I know about another High-End Audio company that will come with high-objectives analog tuner to the end of the year. Who else? I would like to see many contemporary well-made tuners and I would like to people be aware about the huge absolutely unexplored by the idiots-audiophiles domain of super high fidelity sound reproduction. I would like even tuners to have A/D options on board and have ability to write live stream to hard drive… I clearly recognize the Utopia-sness of my wish but the sad irony is that my wishful idealization is not necessarily the result of my inflated imagination but rather the result of restrictive and preventive thinking on the part of the industry and on the part of the audio practitioners who prefer to do audio by listening the sounds of the dead audio cans… Rgs, Romy the caT

I refuse for ward of this manoeuevere as I believe you owe me an apology>

j.

mjloudspeaker wrote:

Romy the Cat wrote: I have to admit that some of my opponents might consider my organizational views on high-end audio too socialistic and will recognize in my view some residues of me growing up in socialistic society. Leaving aside the prejudicial and completely foolish visions of Americans about socialistic ways (actually Americans mostly have no views of own but they rather like monkeys repeat the BS that was pre-chewed and pre-sold for them by nation’s military-industrial complex) I have to admit that the opponents might have a point. I do proposed that the True High-End Audio should not be subject of a freaks doing alchemy in basements but it should be a chain of live broadcasting networks: http://www.romythecat.com/Forums/ShowPost.aspx?postID=6917 I proposed years ago the “Opened Doors” concept according to which any explicit professional assessment of audio products should be banned from Truly High-End Audio… I can go on and on…. For those very few lucky bustards who live in the cities with good FM “live broadcasting” stations and with good cultural life the True High-End Audio have already exist in the air. However, what kind of surprise and disappoint me is absolutely neglecting attention from High-End Audio industry AND from the individual High-End Audio practitioners to the subject FM radio and using of FM as a primary High-End audio medium. Here is the subject for example: where are out good tuners. The industry offers perhaps a hundred different turntables and tonearms. The LP culture is flourishing but there is no visible movement in tuners world. The industry offers hundreds and perhaps thousands of SET amplifiers and there is an army of DIYer who make countless own single-ended amps but compare it with amount of industry and DIYer efforts to make better sounding tuners available. No one make good analog FM tuners seriously and there is practically no DIY movement that would chance an idea of “Perfect Tuner” The very few surviving companies that still do tuners today: Magnum Dynalab and Day Sequerra pretty much do not face any competition and do whatever they want, that in many instances very little relates to better Sound. So, the FM users who wish to get better quality are forced to go for 30 years old mass-market commercial tuners. This is kind of radicals. No one would use for today high-end audio application a preamp, a phonostage of an amp that was made in 70s. However we buy those mass-market tuners from 70 and feel that it is what FM is capable of… What I would like to see, purely for egotistic reasons, is serious High-End Audio companies, along with an army of DIY hoodlums to attack the idea of better FM reception. Last year Accuphase hit market with high end tuner T-1000, it was digital. I know about another High-End Audio company that will come with high-objectives analog tuner to the end of the year. Who else? I would like to see many contemporary well-made tuners and I would like to people be aware about the huge absolutely unexplored by the idiots-audiophiles domain of super high fidelity sound reproduction. I would like even tuners to have A/D options on board and have ability to write live stream to hard drive… I clearly recognize the Utopia-sness of my wish but the sad irony is that my wishful idealization is not necessarily the result of my inflated imagination but rather the result of restrictive and preventive thinking on the part of the industry and on the part of the audio practitioners who prefer to do audio by listening the sounds of the dead audio cans… Rgs, Romy the caT I refuse for ward of this manoeuevere as I believe you owe me an apology> j.

screw your whatever language of whatever to word this stuff, don't care, sue me.

Returning back to 47 Labs new tuner.

There is some buzz here and there about it, nothing solid:

http://www.stereo.net.au/forums/showthread.php?t=17033

http://www.pinkfishmedia.net/forum/showthread.php?t=66861

http://www.avreview.co.uk/news/article/mps/UAN/2318/v/1/

It looks like is has external PS and according to Yoshi the front-end is done with LC where the coils are adjustable not the caps, the same what REL did. There is no further information about design or sound. If someone has any information then, please, post it.

Romy the Cat wrote:

I would leave the bitching about the FM quality of today to other threads. In thins there I more interested about the today’s tuners. It might be said that no on need a good tuner if we listed the stations broadcasting MP3 crap from computer. I would argue it but even that is not my point. There are always live broadcasts with very different sound quality than what we have from computerized CD playing…. The point is that now is 30-40 years after the best commercial tuners were made and nowadays there are a lot of ability to make the tuner WAY better then when it use to be. I do not think that FM is very lucrative direction for companies to be nowadays but look at the 47 Lab – they said “fuck it” and released a new tuner. I feel that juts because any company that make tuners nowadays are NOT target to make a lot of money then the quality of the today’s tuners might be very high. Today there are semiconductors’ with tremendous gain and ultra-low noise, today decoders can take advantage about all post detection filtrations of the HF noised that did not exist 30 years back.   What I would be very welcome if some have balls to build into MPX decoder some like of dymick expender – who knows it might work very well… The Cat

IPROMISEDMYSELF,

I always deceive myself, posting to you again, but you must learn also, In CAnada, 80% of people live in cities, the rest in country, so I am not representative of "normal", but now, my very good friend, Romy, XMradio, SiriusRadio is IT, Fm is dead, kind of, with commercial garbage, but "internet radio" is the new kid on the block, the new frontier of listening experience, Romy, where is innovation present? Always in the front of commercial interests! ALWAYS! this is a fact.

Now, I ask you to explore other things, for your future, and of this site, I know it is hard to reach out into this new tech stuff, but, my friend, you will end up doing it, (my Dad who is 76, won an MP3 player, and I will load it up with "his music" off the net, REALITY IS HERE.) My dad played sax, now deaf as a door, but a great guy anyway.

Romy the Cat wrote:

The point is that now is 30-40 years after the best commercial tuners were made and nowadays there are a lot of ability to make the tuner WAY better then when it use to be. I do not think that FM is very lucrative direction for companies to be nowadays but look at the 47 Lab – they said “fuck it” and released a new tuner. I feel that juts because any company that make tuners nowadays are NOT target to make a lot of money then the quality of the today’s tuners might be very high. Today there are semiconductors’ with tremendous gain and ultra-low noise, today decoders can take advantage about all post detection filtrations of the HF noised that did not exist 30 years back.   What I would be very welcome if some have balls to build into MPX decoder some like of dymick expender – who knows it might work very well… The Cat

A visitor sent me information that British company BW Broadcast 

http://www.bwbroadcast.com

…released this month a new tuner.

http://www.broadcastequipmentguide.com/BW-Broadcast_09_03_09.php

http://www.goodsoundclub.com/PDF/RX1.pdf

Hey, European folks, can you sniff out what it and perhaps to try it? Will this thigh thing to have a digital output?

Romy the Cat wrote:

A visitor sent me information that British company BW Broadcast  http://www.bwbroadcast.com …released this month a new tuner. http://www.broadcastequipmentguide.com/BW-Broadcast_09_03_09.php http://www.goodsoundclub.com/PDF/RX1.pdf Hey, European folks, can you sniff out what it and perhaps to try it? Will this thigh thing to have a digital output? The Cat

Hi Romy this is from their site. 

• Adjustments are provided for over 50 parameters, including audio bandwidth, IF bandwidth, de-emphasis, stereo, HF and ultrasonic noise blending, and blending attack/release times. All adjustments, plus factory presets and user-stored settings, can be accessed via Ethernet and serial connections.
  
  “We love listening to analogue FM,” said BW’s president Scott Incz, but we could not find an FM tuner to match the performance of our transmitters. So we designed it! The great looking OLED and Cap-touch front panel interface of the models includes comprehensive metering plus a headphone jack.”
  
  For retransmission applications, the RBRX1 version adds DSP-enhanced MPX output that reconstructs a clean, peak-level and bandwidth limited waveform, eliminating worries about studio-transmitter link overshoots. RDS PI code checking prevents translators and repeaters from being hijacked or jammed.
  
  Plan B silence detection technology automatically switches from to either of the analogue and AES/EBU digital inputs, or to the built-in flash memory to keep broadcasting in the event of reception loss.

Reminds me of communication receivers in my day, completely obsolete now and even 20 years ago, except for the romantic and nostalgic fan.

I say I can do better for $50 dollars with this device, tested by me, and it will wake you up in the morning with built in alarm capabilities.

High end is where you find it! 

I have 2 of these now, seriously! Maybe not for you Romy, but I like simple things now. because I had high end tuners that died, I am not in love with this any longer, prefer asian girl with big bosom and friendly personality.

I LIKE DEGEN RADIO. 1.8 inch jack into class d amp capability. wow.

From: http://www.belcantodesign.com/pdfs/bc_ces10_source_web.pdf

24-bit/48kHz Digital Outputs • Patented Digital IF Analog Tuner Front End

A tuner’s delight! The FM1 features patented analog FM receiver architecture, delivering superior RF performance and rejecting interference with digital IF processing. The FM1 includes advanced seek algorithms, adjustable soft mute, stereo blend, auto-calibrated digital tuning, and FM stereo processing. Digital processing allows precise pilot rejection, selectivity, and unmatched audio quality. The advanced digital IF section operates at 24-bits and 48Ks/s data rate. Run the digital output into your favorite Bel Canto DAC or choose the FM1’s analog outputs derived from our High Dynamic Range Bel Canto DAC architecture.

The FM1 also incorporates a digital processor for the European Radio Data System (RDS) and the North American Radio Broadcast Data System (RBDS) for station identification and performance information displayed on the 8-digit alphanumeric display. The FM1 delivers unprecedented functionality and performance in a compact, easy to use package. It’s a perfect system companion for a Bel Canto DAC Control Center or preamp-based system.

Features :

Internal DAC with 122dB dynamic range
24-bit/48kHz digital output
High dynamic range 24/192 DAC analog section
RDS/RBDS Function
8-digit alphanumeric green LED display
10 station preselects and Remote control
Green, eco-friendly, low-heat, low noise, low power consumption

Also, information is available at:

http://www.belcantodesign.com.au/index.php/sources/fm1

I do not see any”unprecedented functionality” in this description. Apparently the marketing idiot who wrote it was… an idiot, which would not be difficult to guess. The digital IF section that runs at 48K - interesting… I guess then have digital stereo decoder as well.

The tuner outputs 24-bit/48kHz, that is better then foolish 16-bit/48kHz from Accuphase.

I am not a bit fun of Bel Canto Company but who knows – might be they did a good tuner, you never know. I really would like to have more information about the front end, the sensitivity numbers, IF window and so on but I presume it would be too much to ask.

Romy the Cat wrote:

A visitor sent me information that British company BW Broadcast  http://www.bwbroadcast.com …released this month a new tuner. http://www.broadcastequipmentguide.com/BW-Broadcast_09_03_09.php http://www.goodsoundclub.com/PDF/RX1.pdf Hey, European folks, can you sniff out what it and perhaps to try it? Will this thigh thing to have a digital output? The Cat