• 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

Fisher 175t WPC

AR4x

AR4x

Active Member
I just scored one off eBay.

The owner said it's 65wpc @ 8ohm, this is what I need :smoke:

However, I read couples of sources on the internet, it said 20wpc :sigh:

So, I'm a bit confused, how many wpc actually this thing is pulling out.

Is there anyone who can gimme some info. on this?

Thanks again,

Ben
 
Register to hide this ad
The Fisher 175-T

65-Watt AM-FM Stereo Receiver
THE FISHER 175-T is a landmark in high fidelity engineering. It is the first high-powered receiver with professional AM and FM-Stereo facilities to be offered at half the cost one would expect to pay. In terms of total performance, the Fisher 175-T is unquestionably the finest value in the AM-FM Receiver category. It has 65 watts of music power at 8 ohms — a measurement that conforms to the impedance of virtually every speaker system of good quality.

It has comprehensive tape and phono facilities, and provisions for an auxiliary source. It has main and remote speaker switches for guiding the musical program to virtually every room of your home. At your option, you can turn off all speakers and listen to your favorite recording or broadcast through headphones which plug into the front panel receptacle. This flexibility, the most significant barometer of an amplifier's capability, is matched to an ingenious tuner section.

The most advanced kind of Field Effect Transistors and Integrated Circuits (IC's), incorporated in the high-sensitivity front-end and IF stages respectively, can seek out the most distant and weakest FM stations one would consider unobtainable. The large, easy-to-read numbers on the AM and FM dial glass is only one of many conveniences that make tuning a pleasure, never a problem.

SIZE: 15 1/2" wide, 4" high, 12 3/4" deep. WEIGHT: 18 pounds. CABINET: Walnut (vinyl) 60-UW, optional at additional cost.

Note that the 65 watts is "Music power". Back in the 60's (this was a 1968 model), there was a power war and manufacturers used terms such as that and peak power in their ads to inflate the power. In reality, the RMS power was probably in the 20-25 wpc region. That is still enough power to drive just about any vintage speaker you will come across. This receiver is from the Avery Fisher era and I am sure it is a fine receiver. My Fisher 700T that I bough new in 1967 is still running strong and has only needed a couple dial bulbs replaced. Don't worry about the rated power and enjoy your great score. Pre-1969 Fishers were the heyday for Fisher (before it sold) and some of the best equipment of the era.
 
It should do fine with the AR's. 65W IHF or EIA rating (total watts combined channels) works out to roughly 15-20 Wats per channel RMS. The 175-T is roughly equivalent to the SX-434 from Pioneer a few years later. It was also used in consoles in 1969-70 as the 23-R.

It's a good little receiver. i've got a 23-R I use as an amp, as the tuner section went tit's up, and parts that are bad aren't available.

Larry
 
larryderouin said:
It should do fine with the AR's. 65W IHF or EIA rating (total watts combined channels) works out to roughly 15-20 Wats per channel RMS. The 175-T is roughly equivalent to the SX-434 from Pioneer a few years later. It was also used in consoles in 1969-70 as the 23-R.

It's a good little receiver. i've got a 23-R I use as an amp, as the tuner section went tit's up, and parts that are bad aren't available.

Larry
Click to expand...


Thanks... but I'm a bit confused... SX 434 seems too weak for power hungry ARs.

According to this article here, this thing is giving out 65wpc @ 8 Ohm.

http://us.ebid.net/for-sale/fisher-t-receiver-magazine-ad-51718275.htm
 
Last edited:
Music power (Peak Wattage, EIA, IHF) watt's measurements were a TOTAL of the COMBINED CHANNELS for less than a second. This is peak wattage for dynamics. The ad doesn't say "per channel". It just says 65 watts Music power. Owning 5 different FISHER Receivers, I can tell you that the 175 is NOT capable of 65Watts per channel. If you converted the EIA, or IHF (Which FISHER was using at the time) peak wattage, to continuous RMS wattage, which is a continuous rating, and more like real operation, you'd get roughly 10-20 watts per channel. (remember that back then speakers were generally very efficient.) Which is equivalent to the power put out by the SX-434 (15-18 depending on 8 or 4 oHm load). I also own a 434, bought in 1974. Put them side by side and they are pretty much equal.

50W and better receivers and amps (RMS FTC ruling 1974) generally have about 8200Uf or better of main Filtering. The 175-T has 2000uf/50V of Main Filtering. This is less than the SX-434 which has 2 x 3000uf/25V of Main Filtering. My Sansui 2000A at 38WPC has 3000uf/35v Main filtering. There's no way the 175-T can put out 65Watts per Channel.



Pre 74 was TOTAL PEAK instantaneous watts total for both channels.
Post 74 was CONTINUOUS Watts PER CHANNEL. Some manufacturers also gave the peak wattage which would be higher. This is also referred to as headroom. The continuous watts were a more real world measurement than the peak measurement.

Imagine you are able to rev your engine to 7000 redline for a second. It makes say 250 horse power there. But only for a second. Now remeasure it in the realm of everyday driving, and you get say 180. Which would be more accurate for most people's driving style. I would think for everyone except for a few miscreants that love to hear their "fart tubed" 4 cylinder Sardine can's whine like a whore in church, the 180 would be a more realistic measurement. But Marketing hype and commericalism have jammed down our throats that 250 horses is better. But they don't tell you that it's at redline and for a second or two, (it's hidden down in the fine print, in amonst the garbage like how much domestic content there is in their car) and basically useless.

It's breaks down to which standard you use. Peak or Continuous.
Peak will say "so many watts music power, peak, or instantaneous".
RMs will say xWatts @ y oHms into 20 to 20,000Hz. per channel.


Larry
 
The 175-T was near or the botl back then and 20watts rms per channel would be about it. Back then, this power range was the norm for many receivers unless you were into power wars and had a fat wallet. OTOH, lower powered amps many times sounded better than their higher powered brethen as there was more parts to select from in designing and building the units while parts selections as power went up was more limited.

Whether it has enough power to open up your ARs depends on the ARs. I have a Sherwood amp that has 25 watts per channel and it does a very good job on my Bozaks that are large enough for an average person to hide in. If it does not open the ARs up enough, look for a set of speakers that are more efficient as the Fishers from that period are nice sounding, well engineered and built units worthy of being the center of a very good office or 2nd system.
 
HTHMAN said:
Look at post #18 of this thread and you will see a chart of some Fisher receivers. Yours is not included, but you can estimate your actual power from it. Should be enough power for your AR's which are not as inefficient as their reputation may make you think

http://www.audiokarma.org/forums/showthread.php?t=329636&page=2
Click to expand...

That's a great Rosetta Stone table for the early soiled state Fisher receivers! How'd I miss that the first time around...?
 
Thanks everyone for the valuable inputs, I have AR5, AR4, and AR7... maybe it will suit the 7 or Dynaco A25xl best.

Only 20wpc, not that I expected though...
 
I'd vote for the Dynaco but not based on actual listening to the combo. Also, the ARs all should probably do well but, not possibly opening then up as well.
 
Brian said:
OTOH, lower powered amps many times sounded better than their higher powered brethen . . .
Click to expand...

Very true. I've listened to most of the 1st gen Fisher SS receivers. My favorite sounding of that group is still the diminutive 220-T - provided it is paired with the right speakers. Very nice sounding RCA germanium outputs and very well voiced. We've matched it against some similarly powered Marantz receivers from a few years later, and the little Fisher beat 'em. And rock durable, if you can believe it. We have two in everyday service (sometimes 10-12 hrs a day), both chugging along flawlessly for over a decade now after restoration.

Fifteen years ago, people were kicking these to the curb, or I'd get them as "throw ins" on a tube equipment deal (to be rid of them). My, how times have changed. These are very nice instruments. Congrats to the OP on his 175.
 
I was going thru the '69 Console catalog and it hit me. The Royal Electra has a 23R which is the console designation for the 175-T. So without further ado......The crib sheet for '69. Note they give the Royal Electra 130W's which would account for the original 65W confusion. But it's an IHF rating, so the IHF vs RMS conversion stands.

1969FisherBrochure0044.jpg



1969FisherBrochure0045.jpg



1969FisherBrochure0046.jpg
 
Oh Yeah. But way more complex. It's got varactor tuning on FM, which when working is very good, if not its a boat anchor. The 500-TX was FISHER's TOTL, SS Receiver in the States from 69 to 72. It's brother the 800-T was the multi voltage overseas version. The front panel was a different color and the wired remote for tuning was standard on the 800-T, vs an option for the 500-TX. I picked up mine for $30, 2 years ago, and spent about $75, recapping , new diodes, resistors in select spots. The wired remote I got off E prey for $35. Luckily mine works well. It takes some getting used to, as FISHER split a lot of functions and had 3 different knobs for functions. Plus the preset's, auto scan, and the regular knobs for the normal pots, you've got one very busy front end. It'll push most every speaker out there, most of them really well. I'd use the 175 for a bedroom or small office system and a 500-TX in the living room.

The last few I saw on ebay were going for Stupid money. ($400-$550). I think its a buyers market out there. Just be very careful and ask a lot of questions of the seller, and audition it if possible.

Larry
 
The other day, I saw Fisher 250tx, reaching around 400$. Dun know why people are crazy about this small little receiver, only about 30wpc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom