Mcintosh tuners - Way overrated?

When I started this thread in 2014 I was still a tuner "fanatic" mainly due to the nostalgia of living in Chicago and the metro area until the 80's. In high school and college I was also an FM DXer which sticks in your blood. I got spoiled being able to see the Hancock Bldg. from the roof of my house. Since then the physical location of my homes in relation to large metro areas, the topology of my surroundings and the quality and variety of receivable stations has constantly gotten worse. My local NPR station in the Akron area is mostly talk until some classical after 8 pm. I recently read that the two big public radio stations in Boston; WGBH and Boston U. are switching to all talk on their main analog channel to increase listeners. More than likely I can see myself slowly thinning down my tuner collection to one piece; my MR78 and experimenting with homemade dipoles. The 78 was gone over by Terry D. a few years ago. I just have to keep from being tempted to buy another bargain off CL.
Our local NPR has also gone largely public affairs talk as well. Some objection but imo a necessary response to events of the last several years, and we'll just leave it there.
For music, there are CDs for the keepers on demand and after hours NPR for the fine music less heard previously. I do miss Performance Today and some of the other daytimers tho' .
 
We had The Deep End, followed by another equally awesome program, then Elwood's Blues Machine on 100.7 on Sunday nights for a long time. No more. All the local stations play the same music over and over again with exception of KBAQ, which is always a great listen.
 
We had The Deep End, followed by another equally awesome program, then Elwood's Blues Machine on 100.7 on Sunday nights for a long time. No more. All the local stations play the same music over and over again with exception of KBAQ, which is always a great listen.
The Deep End with Nick Michaels!! my favourite radio station here used to play his show on Sundays, not sure why they stopped, his station can be streamed on iTunes Radio, but the stream is really compressed and horrible sounding, I complained to them about it, but they couldn't understand what I was talking about......So I don't listen to it any more....
 
Some public broadcasting stations feel they can save money and attract more listeners by getting away from playing music and going to talking heads instead. I quit listening to our local station the moment they changed formats.
 
The Deep End with Nick Michaels!! my favourite radio station here used to play his show on Sundays, not sure why they stopped, his station can be streamed on iTunes Radio, but the stream is really compressed and horrible sounding, I complained to them about it, but they couldn't understand what I was talking about......So I don't listen to it any more....
So, half way around the world and it's the same shit! Crazy.
 
Just got a C. Crane dipole for my apartment. I was shocked to see it give a 12 dB signal increase over a regular wire dipole according to the Sony tuner's internal signal strength meter.

Looking forward to my new-to-me MR77 but I expect it will be October before I get it after the refurbishment by Mike and international shipment. At least I think I have the best possible antenna for it given my physical situation.
Tat C Crane dipole is a great option fr the price. I have had much success with mine.
 
I'm using a RatShak VHF/ UHF midline Yagi for HDTV and FM with reasonably good results at 70 miles.
 
After years of wrangling with IBOC noise on KBAQ Phoenix, my McIntosh MR 71 is my quietest tuner on that station. Based on the writings of Brian Beezley, I believe this can be attributed to the post-detection filter. The MR 71 gives up a little bit of high-frequency detail compared to some other tuners, but only enough to notice when doing A/B comparisons. One of these days I will put the MR 65B back in the system for comparison to the MR 71.

I did briefly own a Sony ST-555ES which is reported to have a post-detection filter but it was noisy on KBAQ, especially on the wider bandwidth.

I had a Nakamichi 430 which sounded great on other stations but not KBAQ. Again narrow bandwidth helped but I ended up selling it. I am experimenting with a DBX 3BX for noise reduction on the other tuners, but I don't need it with the MR 71.

http://ham-radio.com/k6sti/hdrsn.htm
 
Last edited:
One of my lottery fantasies (though I don't actually play the lottery) is to buy a radio station and have it actually play music 24/7. Seems like one of the best things I could do with a pile of money.

Oh, and what's an internet forum post without some pr0n? Seems like this guy retrofitted some modern end caps to his MR78. I kinda like it though doubtless it'll be apostasy to some.

8332e30db3ba4664dae5561ddbe7dc2e.jpg
 
painting with the wide brush today?

I don't currently own any McIntosh equipment, and can say I've never considered people who do to be snobs.

I've been following this thread as a non-Mac owner both because I'm interested in tuners and because my Tandberg keyword search popped it up (reference to the 3001A tuner in one response). For me there's an historical connection; the store where I first worked in the industry sold Tandberg and McIntosh side by side.

That comment just struck me as overly broad and inaccurate, as almost all such comments are.

Another one that raised eyebrows was this one:

"McIntosh tuners are the reference by which all other tuners are judged. Period."

I am fairly sure that isn't true, taking into account other top end pieces from Sequerra, Marantz, Audiolab, Sansui (AU-X1), etc. etc.

It may be true for Mac owners (or certain Mac owners) but likely is not true for the entire universe of FM tuner owners, enthusiasts, and techs.

That said, I think I would personally enjoy owning an MR-77 or MR-78, as those are roughly from the same period I was getting exposed to Mac equipment and they also are generally spoken of fairly well.


John

jdurbin, this broadcast engineer's had a lot of tuners over the years at home and at work. Best sounding SS tuner, with good selectivity and very good sensitivity unmodified, to these ears is the McIntosh MR 74, the radio group's non HD standard air monitor and reference tuner. It performs very well, and has the sound quality to go with it. Yes, the MR 78 is more selective, but the audio stages are no MR 74, we have MR 78 and MR 88 available where they're needed. I know what the audio coming out of the console and out of the air monitor sounds like. I am a fanatic of better Kenwoods and the HH Scott, and Fisher classics. Any of the above, and Tandberg tuners beat Marantz 10B, 20, 20B, and all other Marantz. this is in stock form, with all needed servicing, alignments, optocouplers. And I've had Accuphase tuners in here, not to mention Sequerras. TIC also tends to like tuners modified for selectivity and DX performance and ranks both highly.
 
out of over 100 tuna i have owned, only two sounded worse than the refurb'd aligned mr77 and the mint mr74 i owned. both of which are purported to sound better than the mr78. the other two sonic disasters are the akai atv04 and the sony xdr-f1hd. now, a stephen sank refurb'd and modded to the gills mr65b did sound very nice. but it was significantly sonically (and slightly reception wise) surpassed by a refurb'd sherwood s3000v, as well as mono sherwoods w/a modern mpx decoder. in fact, w/a good signal the sherwoods are in the same group as the best tuna i've ever heard. (which includes modded refurb'd sansui tu-x1, refurb'd stromberg carlson sr443, refurb'd modded hk citation 18, refurb'd modded rotel rht-10 among others. i suspect my philips ah673 and aiwa at9700 would join this group if modded and refurb'd, as they're damned good as-is.)

now, i confess to having gone over to the dark side. fully 90% of my listening is now to internet radio - a grace gdi-irdt200 w/its digital output fed to a highly modded art di/o dac. and >90% of the time, it's tuned to fip-france - easily the best radio station on planet earth. fip france also has ~8 stations that are focused on specific genres, but i prefer the eclectic mix. and "eclectic mix" is a serious understatement. for those inclined, they save their play list for 2 weeks, so you can go back and look up something you may want to know more about..

https://www.fip.fr/

happy listening,

doug s.
 
After years of wrangling with IBOC noise on KBAQ Phoenix, my McIntosh MR 71 is my quietest tuner on that station. Based on the writings of Brian Beezley, I believe this can be attributed to the post-detection filter. The MR 71 gives up a little bit of high-frequency detail compared to some other tuners, but only enough to notice when doing A/B comparisons. One of these days I will put the MR 65B back in the system for comparison to the MR 71.

I did briefly own a Sony ST-555ES which is reported to have a post-detection filter but it was noisy on KBAQ, especially on the wider bandwidth.

I had a Nakamichi 430 which sounded great on other stations but not KBAQ. Again narrow bandwidth helped but I ended up selling it. I am experimenting with a DBX 3BX for noise reduction on the other tuners, but I don't need it with the MR 71.

http://ham-radio.com/k6sti/hdrsn.htm
My Sansui TU-9900 is the best in the house on KBAQ - its Narrow feature really helps to eliminate the noise of which you speak. However, it just doesn't sound as good as other tuners I have heard. My KT-8300 is nearly as good in regard and my MR75 the worst - sometimes I can't even pick up KBAQ with it and it has an ST-2 versus the dipole on the TU-9900. All have been serviced and aligned by the Audio Doctor here in PHX. However, for SQ, it's MR75 > TU-9900 > KT-8300 . . .

I also have a 3BX III that I do use on occasion with the Sansui, but only for its expansion. It's not necessary on KBAQ, but is handy on nearly every other station we have here. Cool little box for sure.
 
out of over 100 tuna i have owned, only two sounded worse than the refurb'd aligned mr77 and the mint mr74 i owned. both of which are purported to sound better than the mr78. the other two sonic disasters are the akai atv04 and the sony xdr-f1hd. now, a stephen sank refurb'd and modded to the gills mr65b did sound very nice. but it was significantly sonically (and slightly reception wise) surpassed by a refurb'd sherwood s3000v, as well as mono sherwoods w/a modern mpx decoder. in fact, w/a good signal the sherwoods are in the same group as the best tuna i've ever heard. (which includes modded refurb'd sansui tu-x1, refurb'd stromberg carlson sr443, refurb'd modded hk citation 18, refurb'd modded rotel rht-10 among others. i suspect my philips ah673 and aiwa at9700 would join this group if modded and refurb'd, as they're damned good as-is.)

now, i confess to having gone over to the dark side. fully 90% of my listening is now to internet radio - a grace gdi-irdt200 w/its digital output fed to a highly modded art di/o dac. and >90% of the time, it's tuned to fip-france - easily the best radio station on planet earth. fip france also has ~8 stations that are focused on specific genres, but i prefer the eclectic mix. and "eclectic mix" is a serious understatement. for those inclined, they save their play list for 2 weeks, so you can go back and look up something you may want to know more about..

https://www.fip.fr/

happy listening,

doug s.
I also own the McIntosh MR74. It was between that and the MR78 and the MR78 was way above my budget. To make comparisons I had the Sansui TU-717. The Sansui is a fine tuner in its own right but in my opinion the McIntosh has better selectivity and sensitivity.
 
i also own a tu717. its sensitivity/selectivity is satisfactory; i can't say how it compares in this regard to the s/s macs, as i had good reception conditions when i owned the macs. but i'm not surprised about your findings; they're known for reception abilities.. but sonically, i find the tu717 a pleasure, while i found the mr74 and tmr77 pretty much unlistenable. if i don't want to listen, the reception ability is not really that important. i have two sony xdr-f1hd's, and they're easily the most sensitive/selective tuna i have. but they get zero use. even the one modded to the gills by xdrguy (ebay modder/seller) i can't use for anything other than background listening. anyone want to buy one? lol!

ymmv,

doug s.
 
Let's put it like this. McIntosh tuners are the reference by which all other tuners are judged. Period. I've owned MR65B MR71, MR73, MR74, and MR77 - all of them excellent. I've also owned MX110, MX112 and MX117 tuner preamps as well as MAC1700 and MAC1900 receivers - again, excellent tuners.

Some will argue that the MR78 is the end all be all in FM tuners. I currently listen to a Kenwood KT-8300. I enjoy it immensely. Yet, I'm not naive enough to think it's an MR78 . . .[/QUOTE

But, of all those tuners, what TOTL tuners from others manufacturers did you do an A-2-B comparison ?? Yes, your espousing the pleasure of owning some mighty fine equipment. But to keep it simple....compared to what ??

There are some exceptional tuners from so many manufacturers, to just say that in so many words that only one company makes the best is like standing on an old soap box letting everyone know your point of view.

just not technical enough without a comparison....
 
Excellent, thanks for sharing that perspective Kent.

John


jdurbin, this broadcast engineer's had a lot of tuners over the years at home and at work. Best sounding SS tuner, with good selectivity and very good sensitivity unmodified, to these ears is the McIntosh MR 74, the radio group's non HD standard air monitor and reference tuner. It performs very well, and has the sound quality to go with it. Yes, the MR 78 is more selective, but the audio stages are no MR 78, we have MR 78 and MR 88 available where they're needed. I know what the audio coming out of the console and out of the air monitor sounds like. I am a fanatic of better Kenwoods and the HH Scott, and Fisher classics. Any of the above, and Tandberg tuners beat Marantz 10B, 20, 20B, and all other Marantz. this is in stock form, with all needed servicing, alignments, optocouplers. And I've had Accuphase tuners in here, not to mention Sequerras. TIC also tends to like tuners modified for selectivity and DX performance and ranks both highly.
 

The TU-9090 is a good piece of equipment, but you’d have to compare the best Accuphase and the best Luxman with a dipole antenna for a close comparison to McIntosh’s best. The 9090 would have to be rebuilt with Nichicon Fine Gold internal components before being a close comparison. Then a comparison of a used piece of equipment without going to the bench for proper alignment and checking for cracked solder connections isn’t much of a comparison. But don’t get me wrong, I’d love to mod some vintage McIntosh tube equipment with Nichicon internal components.
 
The TU-9090 is a good piece of equipment, but you’d have to compare the best Accuphase and the best Luxman with a dipole antenna for a close comparison to McIntosh’s best. The 9090 would have to be rebuilt with Nichicon Fine Gold internal components before being a close comparison. Then a comparison of a used piece of equipment without going to the bench for proper alignment and checking for cracked solder connections isn’t much of a comparison. But don’t get me wrong, I’d love to mod some vintage McIntosh tube equipment with Nichicon internal components.
All of my tuners have always been serviced, aligned, and brought to published specs - as I outlined. Modded stuff isn't my cup of tea.
 
i
The TU-9090 is a good piece of equipment, but you’d have to compare the best Accuphase and the best Luxman with a dipole antenna for a close comparison to McIntosh’s best. The 9090 would have to be rebuilt with Nichicon Fine Gold internal components before being a close comparison. Then a comparison of a used piece of equipment without going to the bench for proper alignment and checking for cracked solder connections isn’t much of a comparison. But don’t get me wrong, I’d love to mod some vintage McIntosh tube equipment with Nichicon internal components.
suspect you man the tu9900.

re: lux, i had what's considered by many their best sounding tuner, the t-12. it was definitely a good sounding tuner. but sensitivity and, noise-free signals were not its strong suit. even a stock tu9900 was signifivantly better in all regards.

as far as accuphase, i had two t101's and a t100 - both stock never refurb'd; both outstanding. i also had a modded refurb'd t109 - excellent - almost as good as my modded hk 18; the closest i'd heard, up to that time. all of these tuners - lux, accuphase, hk - sound so much better than the mc tuna's, it's not even close. as i said prior, to my ears, the s/s macs are unlistenable. the tubed ones are very nice but far from the best.

ymmv,

doug s.
 
Back
Top Bottom