Tuner quality in modern receivers

L

lucid

New Member
I'm looking for a new receiver for 2 channel use and I need it to have a really good tuner section.

I have a 5 year old Marantz AVR that I was going to swap around and use for my 2 channel system, but I discovered that the tuner seems to be poor compared to the (failing) NAD receiver currently being used in my 2 channel setup. Both sensitivity and selectivity seem to be poor and I don't know what it is, but it just doesn't sound as good as my old NAD.

I'd really like to use a receiver rather than separates to keep things as simple as possible for my better half. Also I need a remote, so I can't go vintage.

What manufactures are still putting good tuners in their receivers? I'm sort of eyeballing Rotel right now, but it's hard for me to audition.
 
Register to hide this ad
they all use the little silver shitbox digital tuner inside connected with a ribbon cable to a processor with really low-grade op amps. This is true even for marantz,denon,yamaha. These companies do not think anyone gives a hoot about FM anymore, and really skimp in the tuners/phono pre-amps nowadays. I amp looking inside a denon avr-5700 ($3k 5 years ago) and it has the same little piece o **** tuner in it. even in that price range. IMO, go get an external analog tuner, and use the aux in's (will be a major upgrade)
 
Present receiver tuner sections are very, very lacking in quality. Their RF sections fail miserably. Get thee a classic receiver from the era when folks cared about their FM/AM reception. A vintage Sansui, McIntosh, Marantz, H-K, HH Scott (pre 1973), Fisher (Pre-1971), Tandberg, Pioneer (pre 1982), Kenwood (pre 1982) and more all have fine tuner sections. The only receiver with a remote control which really has a decent tuner section is the redoubtable McIntosh MAC 4100V or MAC 4300. However, a nice example is pricey. They hold their value very well.
 
Last edited:
That synopsis is worse than I feared. Why does everything suck these days? :tears: It looks like I'm headed toward separates. I found http://www.fmtunerinfo.com. I can live w/o a remote for tuner functions since it's on the same station 90% of the time anyway.

I'd still be interested in recommendations for modern receivers with passable tuners.
 
I think you have to go with a separate hi-end tuner to get better FM sound. FM circuity in receivers made nowadays IMO have very poor tuner sections. Manufacturers worry more about 5.1 and 7.1 surround sound rather than AM and FM sound.
 
Last edited:
keep your eyes posted up on the bay and watch for a YAMAHA T-1... man that was the best sounding tuner with the best reception that I have used currently, and deserve and major AK ass-kicking for giving it away to the pawn shop. damn I make myself mad sometimes. "I only keep, what I give away" -Trapt
 
I have an HK3385 in my bedroom. The tuner works very well for me. Pulls in all available stations clearly with just a speaker wire being used for an antenna. It sounds great as well and has a nice remote.
By the way, I also have a Sherwood RX-4109 that I did not like at all. The tuner works poorly for me. I gave the Sherwood to my 10-year old daughter. For about $50 more, imo, it pays to go with the HK.
 
I've only played with the Magnum Dynalab for any time and will say the tuner in it is equal to the better receiver tuners during the peak of the golden receiver years. The only negative about it is the lack of a phono pre-amp hence, needing an outboard.
 
I have a 2002 HK AVR225 receiver with a very good tuner in it. No phono stage, though. You might check out HK's new models. Here are the tuner specs:
FM Tuner
Frequency Range : 87.5 – 108.0MHz
Usable Sensitivity : IHF 1.3µV/13.2dBf
Signal-to-Noise Ratio (Mono/Stereo) : 70/68dB
Distortion (Mono/Stereo) : 0.2/0.3%
Stereo Separation : 40dB @ 1kHz
Selectivity : ±400kHz, 70dB
Image Rejection : 80dB
IF Rejection : 90dB
AM Tuner
Frequency Range : 520 – 1720kHz
Signal-to-Noise Ratio : 45dB
Usable Sensitivity : Loop 500µV
Distortion : 1kHz, 50% Mod 0.8%
Selectivity : ±10kHz, 30dB
 
AnalogDigit said:
FM circuity in receivers made nowadays IMO have very poor tuner sections. Manufacturers worry more about 5.1 and 7.1 surround sound rather than AM and FM sound.
Click to expand...

I agree 100 percent. I live some 40 miles from most of the FM stations serving Cleveland, and the AM/FM digital tuner in my Aiwa bookshelf stereo system does a very poor job of receiving any of them with a wire T-dipole antenna. I bought a Terk amplified AM/FM tower antenna shortly after moving to this area, however, and my FM reception on the stereo system improved dramatically. I can only conclude that the tuner in my system was not made for use in far-suburban or fringe areas.

My other FM radios, however, receive every one of the stations in Cleveland as well as when I lived in the suburbs. I had a Zenith 4-mode integrated stereo system at my former home that had a much better FM tuner than my Aiwa system has, although the AM tuner in the Zenith stereo was not much better, IMHO, than a crystal set. It was so poorly designed, in fact, that--I kid you not--I could hear shortwave in the middle of the band (1100-1150 kHz or thereabouts) after dark.
 
While I respect H/K for continuing to post specs for their units (which in and of itself is now rare, sadly), those specs still are far off what they themselves used to offer. What I've noticed on 'modern' receivers they quote their sensitivity measure for 75 ohms, whereas the 'classic' receivers were quoted for 300 ohms. Still, of the modern crop, the H/K at least specs out as an adequate tuner, I guess...
 
Some have doubts about HK's reliabiity. My HK3385 has been problem free for two years now. Just recently, I took the kids to a carnival. I heard an awsome sounding stereo coming from a fast food trailer. I walked up to the counter and saw the most grease covered receiver I have ever seen. It was so filthy that it was almost unrecognizable. It was an HK3385. I asked the Carni how long he had it here. He told me he got it used and its been operating daily for two plus years without any problems.
 
Thanks, Reggaenaut, for that vote of confidence, but I can't give a review of the Sherwood RX 4109's tuner, although I like the receiver very much.

I live way out on the east end on Long Island with very few decent local FM stations. My nearest FM classical station 103.3 has a very weak signal and I can just barely get it in with my FM attic antenna. I primarily listen to internet and cable stations now. The Sherwood tuner might be fine, but I have no real way of finding out how good it is.:dunno:
 
The 'astonishing' Sony HD tuner might be a good choice for you for a seperate tuner, with its small size, and performance that will beat (by far) the tuner sections of today's receivers. Plus, it's remote-controlled, and less than a c-note.
 
Boston from Sag Harbor

johnda said:
Thanks, Reggaenaut, for that vote of confidence, but I can't give a review of the Sherwood RX 4109's tuner, although I like the receiver very much.

I live way out on the east end on Long Island with very few decent local FM stations. My nearest FM classical station 103.3 has a very weak signal and I can just barely get it in with my FM attic antenna. I primarily listen to internet and cable stations now. The Sherwood tuner might be fine, but I have no real way of finding out how good it is.:dunno:
Click to expand...

xxxxxxxxx

I used to listen to Boston college stations on my Nakamichi TD1200 II in my 1989 jetta, sitting in Sag Harbor waterfront. That rig was primarily a tape deck and preamp, but I surely loved the tuner and used it more than the deck.

I would be surprised if you couldnt pick up Boston with an external directional antenna. Fully half a dozen stations worth listening to low on the dial.

I believe content is the weak point of FM and thats why its slowly being abandoned country wide. A negative loop catalysed by internet downloads and ipods.

FM is best near colleges. Plenty of good country out there though but not everybody likes that.
 
Yep, I listen to the low frequency school stations also, unfortunately the ones I am getting have turned to talk with only one still feeding classical music. I live in an area just off Long Island Sound with only farm land between me and the water one mile away.

The winter gales are fun, but fierce! To keep all kinds of aluminum from crashing into my back yard I have a dual dipole omnidirectional FM antenna in my attic. A nice high gain directional antenna up on the roof would be really nice, but I'm afraid it would only last one season!
 
musichal said:
The 'astonishing' Sony HD tuner might be a good choice for you for a seperate tuner, with its small size, and performance that will beat (by far) the tuner sections of today's receivers. Plus, it's remote-controlled, and less than a c-note.
Click to expand...

I have a friend who has an HD tuner (not a Sony but forget the brand) and likes it MUCH better than the onboard tuner of his home theater receiver. I do know he got it less than $150.

When I was going research on a new home theater box, many recommended the Integra line (high end Onkyo.) Overall I was very impressed with the sound in two channel. The tuner is decent and sounds better than I expected, but still doesn't pull in as well as some of my vintage analog tuners (McIntosh MR-74, Marantz 2226B.)
 
I have been happy with the tuners in both my Onkyo TX-SR805 and TX-SR702. They seem to be pretty close to my SX-1250, which is better than my SX-1050; they MUST have something connected to the antenna terminal - otherwise there is NOTHING. The old pioneers on the other hand, don't need anything connected - but certainly receive better with an external antenna.

The onkyo's tuners are as described - a small aluminum box mounted to the back plate, connected via ribbon cable to some other board.

I certainly prefer the look and feel of the old analog tuners. I looked at the sony xrdsft1* whatever it is, and while I am sure it sounds great - it just wouldn't look or feel right in any of my systems.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom