One More Off Of The List
- Thread starter Bodyblue
- Start date
hate to say this, but the fisher looks nicer
You dont have to hate to say it, you like what you like. Between the Marantz and the Fisher it is the Marantz by a hair ONLY because the Marantz has the WC22 case. If I took it out of the case then the Fisher is better looking for sure. The dials are so close, I like the dark but some light ones like the STA 95 look really sharp as well.
bimasta
Addicted Member
I had an old Fisher SS integrated. Built in Japan after the Sanyo buyout, probably early on, it had a very refined sound. I looked inside. I've had a lot of Luxman amps, including their Reference series, and this Fisher-by-Sanyo looked like Luxman built it for Sanyo, I'm 99% sure. And built it to a very high standard, even for Luxman — as if Sanyo wanted a high-quality marque in its lineup. Both exterior and interior reminded me of the superb Luxman 5C50 preamp. So I never scoff at any "Studio Standard" units just because of the dubious history.
Ronald1973
8-trackin', Hank, Sr. man
It almost makes me wish I didn't like 5.1 sound so much! I just don't think I could ever go back to 2 channel. (flame away!) 
It almost makes me wish I didn't like 5.1 sound so much! I just don't think I could ever go back to 2 channel. (flame away!)
No flames here, I have both. Two channel vintage for music (three systems) and 5.1 for TV/DVD/BluRay/PS4
By the early 80s it was pretty much junk.....even their Studio Standard rack stuff was going downhill fast. The 1xxx series and 2xxx receivers were not bad at all but after that I would not touch them.
I've got an RS-1058 that I never use but probably should. It's rated at 90WPC but I think that is uber conservative. It pulls 500W per the back plate and seems to have tons of power. Nice build quality, midrange control, and pre-in/out jacks. 70's Fishers are pretty underrated imo.
musichal
poet emeritus
My benchmark for silver-face receivers is the rather modest, but very good-sounding Kenwood KR-6030.
It was the best I owned in the 70s. I liked the toggles better than push-button models, and it cranked out tunes with 80wpc on hand into a pair of Pioneer HPM-60s purchased new simultaneously. If I ever put together a vintage system, this is the receiver I'd want, for nostalgia. I would not want the Pioneers, which yet remain in the family. The tuner section sounded nice, too. The model suffers from an under-engineered power switch, and existing examples often flicker and buzz at turn-on. I read recently that the fix isn't simple for the non-tech, and wonder if that's true.
Also, in passing, I'll note that I have seen several places online that boast the MSRP was a bit over $500, but the everyday street price was $300.
I do like the Fisher's appearance, I admit.
It was the best I owned in the 70s. I liked the toggles better than push-button models, and it cranked out tunes with 80wpc on hand into a pair of Pioneer HPM-60s purchased new simultaneously. If I ever put together a vintage system, this is the receiver I'd want, for nostalgia. I would not want the Pioneers, which yet remain in the family. The tuner section sounded nice, too. The model suffers from an under-engineered power switch, and existing examples often flicker and buzz at turn-on. I read recently that the fix isn't simple for the non-tech, and wonder if that's true.
Also, in passing, I'll note that I have seen several places online that boast the MSRP was a bit over $500, but the everyday street price was $300.
I do like the Fisher's appearance, I admit.
Last edited:
Ronald1973
8-trackin', Hank, Sr. man
I have everything, including turntable, 8-track, computer, and cassette deck, hooked into my Sony 5.1 receiver. I love the sound. If I ever decide to do a second system for my bedroom, I would certainly go to 2 channel again for it.No flames here, I have both. Two channel vintage for music (three systems) and 5.1 for TV/DVD/BluRay/PS4
I passed on one of these Sears by Fisher receivers some months back in a thrift store ($15) because it was missing several knobs, and I did not think that getting them would be cheap or easy.
I am always entertained to here about these off-brand pieces that are good performers.
I am always entertained to here about these off-brand pieces that are good performers.
Have a case made for the Fisher then
The Fisher has a decent wood case, but just not nearly as nice as the expensive WC22. But the Fisher's stock case looks far better than what the metal Marantz case looks like. BUT, but, Realistic cases are simply nicer stock cases, IMO, than any other brands in similar price ranges back then. And RS put veneer cases even on almost bottom of the line units where the big guys used some pretty sketchy stuff ( my recently departed Pioneer SX680 was one of the worst, great looking face and great sound but total **** for a case.
One nice thing about this one is that all of the small knobs are the same size.....it makes finding the right size a lot easier. Also eBay usually people selling knobs. For brands like Fisher etc the prices are usually not to bad, unlike Marantz etc where one gets raped for just one.
My benchmark for silver-face receivers is the rather modest, but very good-sounding Kenwood KR-6030.
It was the best I owned in the 70s. I liked the toggles better than push-button models, and it cranked out tunes with 80wpc on hand into a pair of Pioneer HPM-60s purchased new simultaneously. If I ever put together a vintage system, this is the receiver I'd want, for nostalgia. I would not want the Pioneers, which yet remain in the family. The tuner section sounded nice, too. The model suffers from an under-engineered power switch, and existing examples often flicker and buzz at turn-on. I read recently that the fix isn't simple for the non-tech, and wonder if that's true.
Also, in passing, I'll note that I have seen several places online that boast the MSRP was a bit over $500, but the everyday street price was $300.
I do like the Fisher's appearance, I admit.
One of those and a 4070 have passed through my hands. They sounded nice and looked good but they were not built nearly as heavily as the 26/36/46/66/9600 series that came in the years
before it. My KR 4600 is really tired but the tuner is so good that I use it for the tuner for my Sony STR5800SD. And like you said, the power/speaker switch is a problematic item.
Last edited:
OMGCat!
Super Member
I voted triggered but of the three I definitely like the Fisher best. The Realistic is second because that natural light coming from behind the dials is very pretty.
I really did not mean to have the poll choose between the actual receivers pictured but the STA 95, IMO is one of the nicest looking receivers ever produced.......at least with the light dial. It is a stunner in person. There is something about the dark dial that gives out the "quality" vibe to me and it takes a real stunner like the STA 95 to compete. I voted "Triggered" as well because I love both.
drjohnnyfeva
Well-Known Member
Wow, that's a great story. Thanks for linking this from that other thread. Your Sears/Fisher is a real looker and I'm glad you're enjoying the sound too. I was totally blown away by the sound of the Fisher 170 I bought. As a kid it was always Pioneer, Technics, Yamaha, but, of course, I bought a Kenwood first. My uncle was a total audiophile and he guided me there as I wanted an integrated tape deck. I loved the thing. My father didn't, which made it all the better sounding.
I'm interested in knowing the characteristics of the speakers you use with the Fisher. I recall from the other thread that you prefer the two channels for music and we're both Polk fans.
btw, I sent an inquiry to Polk about the speakers I have. I think they are an earlier rendition of the ones they have selling on Amazon for $100. This is shocking to me, because my uncle was always a bit of a stereo snob. So to find that he might have spent a mere $100 in 1998 or so money, thrills me because he found terrific sound on a cheap budget... meaning to or not. And I think that is a commentary for another time. I always looked down my nose at anything from Montgomery Ward or Sears or JC Penny, maybe there are some diamonds in the rough out there still.
My uncle was a total audiophile and he guided me there as I wanted an integrated tape deck. I loved the thing. My father didn't, which made it all the better sounding. I'm interested in knowing the characteristics of the speakers you use with the Fisher. I recall from the other thread that you prefer the two channels for music and we're both Polk fans.
btw, I sent an inquiry to Polk about the speakers I have. I think they are an earlier rendition of the ones they have selling on Amazon for $100. This is shocking to me, because my uncle was always a bit of a stereo snob. So to find that he might have spent a mere $100 in 1998 or so money, thrills me because he found terrific sound on a cheap budget... meaning to or not. And I think that is a commentary for another time. I always looked down my nose at anything from Montgomery Ward or Sears or JC Penny, maybe there are some diamonds in the rough out there still.