TX-9500 II vs TX-9800

[Danger Boy]

I have a TX-9500II and i'm very, very happy with the sound.. it's unmodded. I'm looking to add another Pioneer tuner for another set up. I've been thinking of getting a TX-9800. Which do you all think is the better tuner of the two?

I'm only interested in the sound quality. not for DX'ing.

 

[Retro Stereo]

According to the so-called experts here:

http://www.fmtunerinfo.com/shootouts.html

They rank the TX-9800 slightly ahead of the TX-9500II. Owning both of these tuners myself, I would tend to agree with their particular assessment that the TX-9800 is a better sounding tuner. I also own a Pioneer F-90 tuner and totally disagree with their assessment that it is a better sounding tuner than either of the TX's. Just my $.02



Retro

 

[bordeno]

They may rank the 9800 above the 9500II; however, if you read the extensive writeup of the latter, you'll see one opinion that the 9500II is the high water mark for Pioneer tuners. I agree with that assessment but I like the 9500 better because of its looks. Don't like the 9800's meters that much.

Then again, I prefer the TX-9100 to both because of the BLUE dial face. Its hard to beat that look!

 

[Danger Boy]

I did read the info at FMtunerinfo and to me as i understand it.. from a technical standpoint the 9800 does rank above the 9500II. but if you read below that they also mention that the 9800 was "cost reduced" and "parts quality" is worse overall. Wouldn't that mean that it's a slightly lesser made tuner then? Or am I understanding it wrong.

I'm sure they are both outstanding tuners.. and i bet in a side by side test.. there would be very little sound difference. Both have plusses and minuses i'm sure.

I too prefer the look of the 9500II over the 9800. The 9800 looks off center to me for some reason. These suckers were overbuilt that's for dang sure... and built to last a lifetime.

 

[Danger Boy]

shameless bump. anyone else want to chime in on this? vote if you have used both or either.

thanks

 

[Retro Stereo]

I did read the info at FMtunerinfo and to me as i understand it.. from a technical standpoint the 9800 does rank above the 9500II. but if you read below that they also mention that the 9800 was "cost reduced" and "parts quality" is worse overall. Wouldn't that mean that it's a slightly lesser made tuner then? Or am I understanding it wrong.

The steel frame on the 9500 was thicker, and thus heavier, but I don't believe there was too much difference in build quality. The 9800 added quite a few nice amenities like a quartz lock function.

I'm sure they are both outstanding tuners.. and i bet in a side by side test.. there would be very little sound difference. Both have plusses and minuses i'm sure.

I agree. The 9500 is definitely a better DX-er, but I really like the quartz lock and sound better on the 9800.

I too prefer the look of the 9500II over the 9800. The 9800 looks off center to me for some reason. These suckers were overbuilt that's for dang sure... and built to last a lifetime.

I keep seeing "the looks" thing being brought up here, and I'll agree that I like the looks better on the 9500II as well, but your original question and poll had to do with which sounded better. So, I'm still going to have to go with the 9800 on sound and with the 3 to 1 poll so far in favor of the 9800, I guess I'm not alone.


Retro