Top Tube Tuner HH Scott 4310

There was a handful for sale in the past 7-8 years and prices are going up and up.
All / most of those were in nicer condition though than this one. Very rare and some would argue better tuner than the Marantz 10b....
 
True, I think the first one I saw was around 2000 and then 2700, 3000, and 4000

There was a handful for sale in the past 7-8 years and prices are going up and up.
All / most of those were in nicer condition though than this one. Very rare and some would argue better tuner than the Marantz 10b....
 
I believe the "diversity" function was supposed to automatically select between the two antennas for the strongest signal.
 
I believe the "diversity" function was supposed to automatically select between the two antennas for the strongest signal.

funny names! I guess that's because there's L & R S meters?
on my TX1000 its ant A & ant B and they're manually selected OR choice programmed into each preset.
 
Wow, thankfully I did nto se the second one. That was actually pristine with very nice after market cabinet.
I think many of us spent/will spend that amount this year on a ton of junk gear (at least comparatively).
 
22 tubes at least? Wow. You don't see that kind of tube count. I have an Ampex with 17.

I would not put this in a cabinet, it's eye candy on the level of the EH Scott chrome plated radio chassis of the 30s.

Surprised no tuning eye tubes.
 
Well,I don't know what the broadcasting situation is in the US,but I can tell you that there isn't a damned thing going on up here that would ever merit a tuner of that quality,let alone price!
 
A ton of great stations here - i get local NJ, NYC and Philly with a $10 Ratshack antenna with my Mc71
 
For posterity, photos of the first one:
 

Attachments

  • s-l1600.jpg
    s-l1600.jpg
    81.6 KB · Views: 93
  • s-l1601.jpg
    s-l1601.jpg
    80 KB · Views: 86
  • s-l1602.jpg
    s-l1602.jpg
    67.2 KB · Views: 86
  • s-l1603.jpg
    s-l1603.jpg
    79.4 KB · Views: 82
  • s-l1604.jpg
    s-l1604.jpg
    106.9 KB · Views: 83
  • s-l1605.jpg
    s-l1605.jpg
    88.5 KB · Views: 79
  • s-l1606.jpg
    s-l1606.jpg
    112.9 KB · Views: 79
  • s-l1607.jpg
    s-l1607.jpg
    98 KB · Views: 80
  • s-l1608.jpg
    s-l1608.jpg
    94.9 KB · Views: 81
  • s-l1609.jpg
    s-l1609.jpg
    95.3 KB · Views: 79
Additional photos of the first, which is photographed better than the second:
 

Attachments

  • s-l1610.jpg
    s-l1610.jpg
    79.7 KB · Views: 29
  • s-l1611.jpg
    s-l1611.jpg
    83.5 KB · Views: 26

Attachments

  • s-l1600.jpg
    s-l1600.jpg
    96.5 KB · Views: 58
  • s-l1601.jpg
    s-l1601.jpg
    96.9 KB · Views: 62
  • s-l1603.jpg
    s-l1603.jpg
    100.4 KB · Views: 54
  • s-l1604.jpg
    s-l1604.jpg
    104.6 KB · Views: 55
  • s-l1605.jpg
    s-l1605.jpg
    49.8 KB · Views: 54
  • s-l1606.jpg
    s-l1606.jpg
    106.6 KB · Views: 52
  • s-l1607.jpg
    s-l1607.jpg
    105.2 KB · Views: 55
Back
Top Bottom