• The move to the new server is done. There are some software and database maintenance updates in process. This has us passing the hat around to help out. We appreciate any donations. Seriously, even a dollar helps. The payment page may be found here - https://www.audiokarma.org/support.html

Marantz 10b or McIntosch Mr-67

schwarcw

AK Subscriber
Subscriber
Lots of folks on this forum and others speak reverently about the Marantz 10B. These go for lot of buck on eBay and the 'Gon. But is their value truly in the performance of the unit or the collectability of it.

The McIntosh MR-67 also has a legendary performance reputation but cost 1/3 to 1/2 as much as the 10B.

Any thoughts on this subject? What would you own?

Carl
 
Register to hide this ad
FWIW, I would go for the McIntosh MR-67. It is a fantastic sounding tuner and much easier to align/repair in the event it is necessary. There are only afew techs capable of repairing the very complicated but beautiful 10B and that may/should be a consideration in the future.

I love the MR-67 and have had the pleasure of owning each. From a listening point of view, I would take the 67 hands down. This is not a slam on the 10B whatsoever but just a practical recommendation.

My .02

Barry
 
Lots of folks on this forum and others speak reverently about the Marantz 10B. These go for lot of buck on eBay and the 'Gon. But is their value truly in the performance of the unit or the collectability of it.

The McIntosh MR-67 also has a legendary performance reputation but cost 1/3 to 1/2 as much as the 10B.

Any thoughts on this subject? What would you own?

Carl

It's probably the collectabiliy factor. The 10b is a legend. I haven't had a 67 but I had a 71 and now own two 10b's. Depending on the quality of your local FM stations, there would problaby be little difference if any in the sound quality. The scope on the 10b is extremely useful for antenna orientation.

I chose the 10b. I always wanted to have one in its wood cabinet. If they were women, I'd want to date the 67 but marry the 10b.
 
Both tunas sound great. I've heard both, but I never directly compared them. I own an MR-67 because of how superb it sounds, and because I could not justify the expense for a 10B.

IMO the primary advantage to the 10B is the coolness factor of having the scope, and also the fact that it is much far more selective than any Mac tube tuna. But if you sit down and listen to a 67, all of the sudden you won't care about the 10B anymore. It is simply the most seductive sounding tuna I've ever heard.
 
If you're interested in the best tuners ever made, I wouldn't overlook the Fisher FM-1000. This is the tuner that caused Marantz to develop the 10B, an effort so expensive it drove Marantz to sell the company.
 

Attachments

  • f0_1_sbl.JPG
    f0_1_sbl.JPG
    22.6 KB · Views: 149
REL Precedent (or the Sequerra) if you want the sine qua non.

..of the pair asked about, though, I think day in day out, one might be happier with the McIntosh.
 
i bought an mr-67 recently. and all that was told to me about this unit is true. i do not own a marantz and never heard one. i couldn't justify the $ on the 67, now i am glad that i did. thanx to all who chimed in.

regards, j garcia
 
If you're interested in the best tuners ever made, I wouldn't overlook the Fisher FM-1000. This is the tuner that caused Marantz to develop the 10B, an effort so expensive it drove Marantz to sell the company.

I know that picture :D. Yes also a fine tuner but probably harder to find in good condition than the others!

Just to clarify my statements above, I am not downgrading the quality whatsoever of the 10B. One of the finest tuners ever built and just quality throughout with lucious sound quality.

My beleif however that the MR-67 is a fantastic buy for the dollar and the sound is also fantastic. Not just for the money, but just period IMHO.
 
I know that picture :D. Yes also a fine tuner but probably harder to find in good condition than the others!

Just to clarify my statements above, I am not downgrading the quality whatsoever of the 10B. One of the finest tuners ever built and just quality throughout with lucious sound quality.

My beleif however that the MR-67 is a fantastic buy for the dollar and the sound is also fantastic. Not just for the money, but just period IMHO.
I agree completely.
 
For future reference, here is a lightly better picture of the Fisher FMR-1 that can be placed in the archives. It is a little brighter and shows a little nicer.

FisherFMR1.jpg
 
The 10b has a glorious midrange, but is lacking at the frequency extremes. However, many owners have maintenance horror stories while others don't. It's also a good bet that the 10b will cost a lot more to maintain than the MR67. In addition, some TIC members claim the 20b is better sounding (probably the 10b's frequency extremes shortcomings).

Don't have any experience with the MR67, but have never heard a bad word about it. Quite a few consider it to be the best McIntosh tube tuner.

If it's within your budget though, I'd go with the Marantz due to 1) looks (scopes are the coolest), 2) cache, and 3) resale at little or no loss (maybe even a profit if the stars are properly aligned).
 
I own both an MR67 and an FM-1000, and have not yet bought a 10B. Both the 67 and the 1000 sound superb. My tech, who has worked successfully on several 10Bs, does not think they merit the premium over the 67 (a lot of $, mine probably has a cost basis of $1,100) and the 1000 (not nearly as much $, with a cost basis of about $2,000) on the basis of sonics and performance. Scarcity value and looks - although the 67 and the 1000 look great, in my opinion - account for much of the 10B's premium. As I understand it from my tech, the 10B is more difficult to service.

I've attached a photo of my current home office system which shows my FM-1000 and MR67 above and below an MC225 and a C11. Frankly, I find it hard to imagine a better sounding system. Maybe the 10B would make an improvement. Now, where can I find another $3,000.....
 

Attachments

  • Office2-25-07fweb.JPG
    Office2-25-07fweb.JPG
    51 KB · Views: 229
I own both an MR67 and an FM-1000, and have not yet bought a 10B. Both the 67 and the 1000 sound superb. My tech, who has worked successfully on several 10Bs, does not think they merit the premium over the 67 (a lot of $, mine probably has a cost basis of $1,100) and the 1000 (not nearly as much $, with a cost basis of about $2,000) on the basis of sonics and performance. Scarcity value and looks - although the 67 and the 1000 look great, in my opinion - account for much of the 10B's premium. As I understand it from my tech, the 10B is more difficult to service.

I've attached a photo of my current home office system which shows my FM-1000 and MR67 above and below an MC225 and a C11. Frankly, I find it hard to imagine a better sounding system. Maybe the 10B would make an improvement. Now, where can I find another $3,000.....


Very nice!

Now, go get that 10B:D

As far as supply and demand go, there seem to be a lot of 10b's available on eBay, Audiogon, etc. The MR-67 is harder to find, sound is on par with the 10b, has undesputable build quality and sells for half as much or less. Maybe it's time to invest, buy low :D

Carl
 
Very nice!

Now, go get that 10B:D

As far as supply and demand go, there seem to be a lot of 10b's available on eBay, Audiogon, etc. The MR-67 is harder to find, sound is on par with the 10b, has undesputable build quality and sells for half as much or less. Maybe it's time to invest, buy low :D

Carl

I've noticed the amount of 10b's for sale also. When I was doing my research, before I bought my first one, there was one article that had quotes from Saul, Sid and the gang that talked about how they were aligned in an oven and there was something that no one should ever do to it. Don't remember exactly what that was but it's ruined if someone messes with it. I wish I could track the serial # of some of these that are for sale. I have a feeling in the future there will be some very cheap 10b's and some very expensive ones. It's the old "buyer beware" and another quote comes to mind, "sometimes the cheap comes out expensive". I don't think you can mess up a 67 to the point where it can't be fixed so that's something in its favor.
 
The model 10 was the tuner that would not stay aligned. It was replaced by the 10b. Very few model 10s were ever made. All 10bs are collectible. The biggest determining factor for value is cosmetic condition. The 10b is a wonderful tuner. All else being equal, I think it is superior to the MR67 and MR71. I currently have an MR67. Just my opinion. I do concede that the audio difference is small. Where the 10b really shines is in the coolness factor. The scope and the incredible build quality really sets it apart. I suspect the value of the 10b and other super tuners will plateau in the future due to increasingly compromised broadcast quality.
 
Having had both at the same time, in a system using the Marantz 7C, Marantz 9s and KLH Nines, the 10b had better detail and more realistic midrange and bass that had more control. It was the dream date but when it came time for the marriage (to quote above) I decided the 10b was not a lifetime probability and the maintenance would be too expensive as she was a showgirl. The 67 b/c of the deficiencies compared to the 10b also was not a keeper. I found the Fisher TFM-1000 (ss tuner replacement for the FM-1000) at the time to be the answer for me and used it as my main tuner until replacing with the MR77 after some long looking.

The 10b is like a custom handbuilt car. Not something for Joe Average who worries about spending $100 on a good wine as getting 1 in shape is not inexpensive and as there were no service manuals only a few persons really understand it. For those who can afford it and willing to put the money into it to make sure it is 100%.

The sccope has limited use in real terms unless you can rotate the antenna. It is better than a meter or "tuning eye" but there is a balance between function and cost.

The 67 standalone a very good tuner and few probably will find better. My advice would be to get the 67 and ship it to AudioClassics and Richard go through it.
 
Brian, you're the first person I've run across who had a TFM-1000. Can you give me a bit more on your thoughts, especially vs the FM-1000? If you thought highly of it, that's really interesting, because it doesn't even come close to fetching the prices of any of the other tuners in this thread.
 
The TFM-1000 was the ss equiv of the FM-1000. Fisher, Scott, Marantz and Sherwood each developed their version of a successor to their totl tuner the Marantz 20/20b, the Scott 4312 and the Sherwood 3300. McIntosh was the only company that really did not seem intent of developing an ss equiv to the 71 and progressed steadily in design up through the 77 (equiv to the 67) and 78 (equiv to the 71).

The Fisher TFM-1000 came closer meeting the design goal than the others in terms of sound AND public acceptance. The 20/20b is probably the best in terms of sonics but Marantz fans did not accept it as a worthy successor. FWIW, the innovative thumbwheel of the 20 did not have the feel of the 10b tuning knob and actualy was disliked by those of us who well Saul followers at first.

Each of these units had problems as the design engineers and production engineers each were working in new territory. In hindsight, it is amazing they produced such fine units as these. In some ways this gen of tuners may have been the best overall of all tuners in terms of design and sound. It seemed that with each succeding gen, the component, design and production quality was balanced against the profits.

The TFM-1000 used the German front end from the same source they got the FRM-1 and FM-1000 front end from and that means it was 1 of the best. These were amazing in quality. Only Scott seemed to try to develop a front end as good as what had been developed in Germany. The weaknesses were cold solder joints, socketed rather than soldered transistors requiring pulling and cleaning about every 6 months to prevent intermittants and other problems. This cost Fisher deally in warranty repairs. I went through either 2 or 3 (can not remember- just too many years ago) before getting 1 that either did not implode within weeks or out of the box sounded like trash. I finally called Avery whom I knew and he had 1 pulled from stock and burnt in for a couple of weeks. He delivered it to me on 1 of his frequent trips to Boston. No, not signature or custom plague :(. At the time I had the 10b and 1 20 (or was it a 20b?) on loan. I had earlier rejectd a 4312 pre-production unit as just out of the running (sadly - it just was no match). I had already decided to move the 10b. These were so plentiful then for about $150, it was no big thing to replace. The FM-1000 was scarcer and few seemed to be available on the market. In comapring the 20 to the 10b, they did not sound the same but again it seemed more a different solution to a probelm rather than a better or worse solution. The TFM-1000 and the 20b in neck to neck competition were too tough a call to make a call for a clear winner. The TFM-1000 became my choice mainly as I was at the tiem getting disallusioned by the problems at Marantz with the takepver and a personal loyalty to Saul (strange thinking on my part) and Avery's personal handling on my problem with the 1000 that by the way was still not unusual with Fisher. You could call the company as big as it was, ask for Avery and actually get a call back. 1 reason why there ar more than a few letters from Avery to customers on that auction site from time to time.

The TFM-1000 today or at least the 1s I've noticed on that site all seemed either beaten or needed TLC. I've only seen 1 and it was recent that looked to be cared for. I suspect most were abused as a result of owner frustration in keeping them running. Mine never had a problem and I sold it to a friend who up until some 15 years ago when I last spoke to him still had it and it had served him faithfully. If you find 1 in good cosmetic condition and not a dirt trap and works, I think I'd jump on it is I were considering a tuner before any I've mentioned here as they are somewhat rare and more than live up to Avery's well earned reputation for getting an excellent tuner out the door. I have the slightly older little brother, the TFM-300 and find it enjoyable to listen to but not up to the MR77 or Philisp 6731 that are my main tuners.

I've not mentioned the Sherwood 3300 that succeeded to 3000. I have only heard 1 very briefly and not enough time to evaluate it. The design overcame some of the early ss tuner issues. I have 1 along with the matching amp in with Warren at his time having grabbed the pair as they looked pristine and supposivley being sold by the person who sold them new to their owner. Will be interesting to see how the pair live up to the Sherwood reputation. I absolutley loved my Sherwood S5000/3000 stereo combo.
 
Back
Top Bottom