Sort of tuner shootout

Brian

An Old Geezer
I've been running my Klipsh Heresys for a bit of time cycling through some inventory. I have a Fisher TX300/TFM300 amp and tuner as well as a Yamaha CA610II/CT610II set. I have been working through the Yamaha's issues related to noisy controls and channel dropout and finally got them ironed out. Only remainig thing is dial/pointer lights on the tune and meter lights on the amp. I have been using the Fisher for a couple of weeks and surprisingly to me I found the set does very nicely with the Heresys. The tiner is a hybrid tube/ss and the sound is amazingly good for my ears. The tube front end sets the overall sound of the unit. Has very good quieting slope, detail is very good without being thin or being bleeding with the Klipsch. With some tuning, the setup could be a serious long term listener. I pulled the TFM and subbed the CT610II on the Fisher/Klipsch and immediately noted that there was less dynamics and detail. Almost sounded bloated. I decided to compare the tuners and found overall the Fisher just overall sounded more balance and presented a better presentation. I then subbed the TX300 for the CA610II to see if it made a difference in favor of the CT610II. Whoops, the sound was more bloated with both tuners. Detail though decent was compared to the TX300 lacking and bass lost a good deal if instrument identity. Now on a previous trial I had actually thought the Yamaha did well with te Klipsch which it does but the Fisher is simply better. Most surprisingly was how much better the TX300 is given it is such an early SS design.

Thinking the speakers may be a cuprit in this, since my set is 4 ohms andmay the Yamaha is not at its best with them, I swapped them for my original Advents but after going through the testing again, my results did not change. Fisher trumps Yamaha both as to the tuners and as to the amps.

I then decided to thow in my MR77 against the TX300 trough the TX300/Advents. Never really tried these together before. The Fisher comes reasonably close to the 77 overall. Surprisingly, on violin and cello solos the Fisher had more of the correct interpretation. Thinking something odd, I then compared it with my Sherwood 3000IV and here, the Sherwood and Fisher were closer sonically. Appears the Fisher's tube front end gives it a signature closer to a tube tuner than ss tuner. Going back to the 77, the 77 gets more stations and has a steeper quieting slope. Bass and lower midrange is bettered by the 77 but the difference is less as the frequency moves up.

Overall, this 1st generation Fisher ss (well hybrid) is neither in the tube nor ss sound camp but seems to have the positive charactoristics of each. Construction is excellent but repairs related to components on the boards can be a challenge I understand. May be a contender for someone looking for a decent tuner without shelling out big bucks and does not need super specs (sensitivity, selectivity, etc.) but looking for a good overall listener.
 
Good info and write up Brian. Thanks! What is it with that early Fisher equipment? I think I need to start looking at Fisher for my wish list.
 
The early Fisher (US designed and produced) seems to have been sort of forgotten; overshawdowed by the early tube equipment. Other companies like Scott have a sililar issue, though Sherwood seems to have actually fared better in this regard with vintage persons. I think to some extent it may be somewhat related to the lack of information available and at least with FIsher the numerosity of models during this short period. Seems, like the tube units, they assigned the same unit different model #s based on where it was to go, possibly whether it had the faux woodgrain on the faceplate and maybe other factors.

The units are not loved by the repair crowd, having many issues related to the board mounting making repairs time consuming, the number of electrolytics in the signal path that should be looked after resulting in more of a cost of a restoration even for a typical tlc repair which is more than the resale value.

These units even when in production were rejected by the majority of buyers who saw them as their dad's Oldsmobiles and also for less money could buy the in thing i.e. imported receivers. Avery was still building a Packard (hey, these were amongst the best autos) while the world was looking for flat head Fords which were faster. He saw that he either had to compromise his values and build quality to compete, move over to limited production and compete with Marantz (still owned by Saul) and McIntosh, go out of business or sell off. He chose to sell and it was the first foreign takeover of a US audio maker and the most successful and pricey.

The tuners are a bit of a repair problem since I understand the front ends are form Germany and were about the best at the time but can not be repaired any longer. I suspect that is really true of most vintage front ends. Also, his use of varactors vs FETs went against the industry trend though it gave the added benefit of the push button tuning which was decades ahead of all others.

Also, the early units used germanium transistors which are difficult to source today. But many other early companies also used them. Considering the # of these units available vs the competitions' today and still working show that his people knew how to make a good unit.

I am not a Fisher person by any means and it seems no one is, if you ever talk to Doc Fisher - he will not go near them for a repair. The only person who seems to be getting to know them and willing to dig is a guy on AA going by the name jimmydee. Other techs who have had some experience with them who I have spoken with start with the cost issue to discourage repairs all the way to just plain will not touch them so this means they are a labor of love compared to an inexpensive alternative to buying new.

One of my forst SS tuners was the TFM-1000 that was going head to head with Mc, Scott and Marantz in the spare no cost catagory then. Except for the problem with signal overload, the 1000 was easily equal to the others. My current TFM300 was their first tuner with ss and has the tube Golden Cascade front end from the 500-C. This tuner was also used in the 600 reciever, again their first receiver with SS. Where Mc came out with the 1500 that used a tube tuner and amp with a ss preamp and then the 1700 with the tube tuner and then ss preamp and amp, Fisher went with the same configuration as the 1700 BUT unlike Mc it uses output transformers which Mc only used in the power amps in the guise of their autoformers.

Another issue with the early Fishers is cold solder joints. Fisher was 1 of the first if not the first to use PC boards which was developed during WWII and there were problems associated with soldering systems that came back to haunt them and still haunt owners. I suspect that is 1 reason why for years Mc advertied and showed it hand soldered its equiment as a caption to an assembly person holding a soldering iron and PC board.
Currently there are a couple of 600s on eBay. I've contacted the owners and after corresponding, each receiver appears in need of the cap replacement at a minimum. The LEAST I've been quoted to perform this on my amp, that is the amp portion of the 600, is $300. I understand the receiver is more costly due to the tuner and more difficult layout. Therefore, the 600, TFM300, TMF1000, TFM200, TX100, TX300, TX1000 and TX2000 are probably not for those looking for cheap plug & play.
 
Overall, this 1st generation Fisher ss (well hybrid) is neither in the tube nor ss sound camp but seems to have the positive charactoristics of each. Construction is excellent but repairs related to components on the boards can be a challenge I understand. May be a contender for someone looking for a decent tuner without shelling out big bucks and does not need super specs (sensitivity, selectivity, etc.) but looking for a good overall listener.
thanks brian for the review but you could have waited until i at least got a 300 or 1000 before you posted it(now the prices are going to go up) :D mabe you could do a review of the r-200-b which also had a nuvistor front end?oh ya i forgot your still looking for one :yes: .anyways all kidding aside thanks for the review and it makes me all the more determined now to get a tx300 & tfm300 setup.
chris
 
Oh, sorry all. I mistook the my Sherwood tube set for the Fisher set. Actually the Fisher pair is a POS!!!! Stay away at all costs including the 600 receiver. If you have any of these better send them to Chris so he can see for himself how terrible they really are and won't have to pay for them. (Private to Chris: Hope this undoes the damage and prices won't go up. Or, am I only in more trouble b/c you also want a Sherwood pair?)
 
Oh, sorry all. I mistook the my Sherwood tube set for the Fisher set. Actually the Fisher pair is a POS!!!! Stay away at all costs including the 600 receiver. If you have any of these better send them to Chris so he can see for himself how terrible they really are and won't have to pay for them.
no need to go that far brian,i'll gladly pay for them.besides the prices havnt crossed into the stratosphere on those units yet (at least the last time i looked they werent)
(Private to Chris: Hope this undoes the damage and prices won't go up. Or, am I only in more trouble b/c you also want a Sherwood pair?)
no,your not in anymore trouble brian :no: everyone knows already that the sherwood setup with the the s3000v is a winner. as much as i would love to have this setup i think i'll just make due with my s1000 II and s2000 mono setup.ive actually cut down on my buying and have stayed away from ebay and the only thing im really interested in at the moment are the old hi-fi mags to build up my collection.also with the pile of gear around here i dont think i have room for anymore until i cleanup and liquidate some of it. perhaps i could interest you in some of it ?:D
chri
 
I too am trying to reduce the buying. Am moving the money towards getting some of the collection, well actually the Sony 6060s back to spec. Project of love since there is no way I'll recoup the $s. But, it is like going on a diet, every time I swear off, the deals start to surface.
 
Back
Top Bottom