fisher 400 review (1963)

[tubeboob]

Great find for me, thanks

What a great post, it's always a thrill for me to find information on the Fisher 400 receiver, especially since I have two of them, and one is right now getting the once over with Mike Urban.

Thanks again!!:thmbsp:

 

[mfda]

Thanks for this Chris. Haven't used my 400 since I went with dedicated integrated amps for listening to vinyl. Did not have much use for a unit with a tuner. I am going to have to do a direct A/B test against the Scott.

BTW $330 in 1963 equates to around $2,300 in today's money. Not cheap.

And the $25 for the case would be $175. Makes some of the flea bay asking prices almost reasonable.

John

 

[Destructor]

I often A B my Fisher 400 and Scott 340B, I can never really decide which I like better.

 

[audiodon]

Destructor,
It's a difficult decision to choose the best between two fine examples of the technology.
In this case, you can't really lose either way.
They're definitely different and both are good, but so are better examples among fine wines, coffees, or choclates.

 

[Stephen J]

This would be a great addition to...

...The Fisher forum...:yes:

 

[angel17]

What a great post, it's always a thrill for me to find information on the Fisher 400 receiver, especially since I have two of them, and one is right now getting the once over with Mike Urban.

Thanks again!!:thmbsp:

I love my fisher 400 too... I purchased mines directly from Mike Urban's shop completely restored a few years ago. Also have Scott 340B and Sansui 1000A all done by Mike. They are keepers.