• 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

tube receiver recommendations

bre's dad

bre's dad

I drank what?!?
Hi. Haven't posted in awhile so figure this is good as time as any. I've had a little Allied 333 tube receiver. Love the sound of it but I'm really wanting something with more than about 8-9 watts. Even with some decently efficient speakers, it still runs out of steam. I'm wanting to replace that with another tube receiver. The short list is:
1. Fisher 400
2. Fisher 500
3. Fisher 800
4. Sansui 1000a

Aside from trying to find a unit that has been restored (I'm not set up to do a recap or restoration), who all has experience with any of these or any recommendations not on the list (I know there's more out there.) Mainly use it listening to vinyl but also listen to FM often. I'd prefer to go receiver rather than separate amp/preamp/tuner.
 
Register to hide this ad
Do you have a budget in mind? I would be on the lookout for a Harman kardon Ta260 (not 230, they look alike but the 260 has a lot more power) or possibly a ta5000 or 7000. Also, the Scott 340 or 345 would be a good choice if you never listen to am.
 
There are a few things higher on the priority list & budget, but if it plays out I'm hoping $500-$1000. I used to have a 1000a but didn't know anything about it nor did I no anyone that would work on it so I ended up bartering it for something else. Seemed like a good idea at the time but stupid on my part looking back.
 
Probably generalizing, but based on hearing different units, my perception of sound by brand, FWIW:

Fisher (KX-100, 400) and HK (A300): a bit brighter, more air, not particularly tubey/mellow sounding

Scott (LK-72): more traditionally tubey with thicker midrange, highs maybe a bit rolled off

Sansui and Sherwood: very punchy, strong sounding, but also a bit tubey sounding
 
If your budget allows you can never go wrong with Fishers. If you want to just go through finding a receiver once then go for the Fisher 800 and have it professionally restored.

I see you have a McIntosh C26/2105 setup. I had that setup for several years. How do you like? I really liked the humble little C26. It had a little something special to it.
 
Well, I've always told my wife when I die I'll need two coffins. One for me and one for the McIntosh stuff.
 
I'm a Sherwood guy. They're snug inside, but built very well and have a really nice clean sound. The tuners are also pretty darn good. They're not super "tubey" sounding either.
 
Any of the Fishers is a good choice by my reckoning. Great sounding, easy to repair/restore (i.e., easy to work on), and timeless aesthetics.
The cool guys all collect the whole set, though ;-)

The Sansui has good output transformers. Other than that... well... no comment.

Re: Sherwoods, nice but tedious to work on (per comment above).
Sonically, the Sherwood tuners do probably edge out the Fishers (at least the 'consumer grade' Fishers)., though. The 400/500/800 tuners are fine, though.

No good vacuum tube hifi component is 'tubey sounding' as far as I am concerned. There are numerous second-rate ones which are, though.
 
One good thing about the Sherwoods is they used a lot of good parts, and often don't need a lot besides filter caps. They're also a rather shallow chassis, so no "layers" of crap to dig through. Despite the small size, they're probably not really any worse to deal with than any of the others. To be frank about it, my S-7000 is easier than my Fisher 600 inside.
 
Dunno about the 600 (that's one of the simulcast stereo receivers with a vacuum tube HV rectifier?), but the 400 and 500 are, I'd opine, the easiest to service vacuum tube receivers extant.
... but what do I know?

400:


undersidenoveau by Mark Hardy, on Flickr

500C:

DSC03163 by Mark Hardy, on Flickr

I can pull out my S-8000 and snap a photo of the underpinnings some time if I get up the gumption.
Sherwood S8000IV by Mark Hardy, on Flickr

Don't get me wrong -- I like the Sherwoods, but everything's jammed so tight I worry about heat, too.
 
The 600 is indeed the simulcast unit. Under the hood its constructed almost like 2 units bolted together. Its not, but the front part is on sort of a "step" up into the RF deck with the preamp circuits. Its a bit deep up there, and the parts are layered in somewhat. In the back its more flat, but its just very busy. It also has dual vacuum rectifiers, one for the power amp and one for the tuner and preamp. Its got a number of those brown turd caps up there that ought to be changed, and some of them are wound underneath of other parts. Not impossible to work on, its just not the most fun experience either. Not to say that the S-7000 is roomy, just that since it needed less under the chassis, its a bit less annoying to work on. It does have more can capacitors, all of which I removed to re-stuff, a process I simply do not enjoy doing.

The 400 and 500 look somewhat less packed. I would imagine the S-8000 to be a bit less full than my 7000 is too, since it has no AM tuner to contend with.
 
You might consider adding a Pilot 746 to that list. Probably hard to find though. I love the Pilot gear.
Around 28 watts per channel.
 
If you want AM on the FISHERS, the TA-600 or TA-800 is probably the best sounding AM Receiver Tuner FISHER MADE. It had to match quality with the FM side.

Between the "B" model and "C" Model, The B models are slightly better sounding than the "C" model's but harder to finding a GOOD example that is working or needing an overhaul.
 
I can confirm the TA-600 AM tuner sounds very good. The Sherwood 7000's does as well. Stuff made during the simulcast era was designed for high fidelity AM, though unfortunately its of little real benefit now. The broad IF response tends to make them noisy and prone to interference from adjacent frequencies. The Sherwood has a broad/narrow response switch, I honestly can't recall right now if the Fisher 600 does too. In narrow mode on the Sherwood at least, its pretty selective and extremely sensitive. I've done a fair bit of AM DX with that thing.
 
I dunno -- the good AM tuners can sound surprisingly good to me, even set to broad selectivity. Depends on the station and the reception conditions in situ, I suppose.

The Sherwood AM tuners are very (very) good.

S2000 by Mark Hardy, on Flickr

I have minimal experience with Fisher AM tuners -- I have a nice FM-80, which is reputed to have a good AM tuner. All I can say about this particular example is that it works; I haven't spent much time listening to its AM output, unfortunately.

DSC_9821 by Mark Hardy, on Flick


Sorry for the thread drift! ;)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom