[braitman]

Folks:

I'm about ready to look for a replacement for my fine Sony 5000F FM
Stereo Tuner. Nothing wrong with it, but I'd really like something
with AM reception, also. Any suggestions for a unit that combines both
FM and AM that is comparable in quality to the Sony?

Thanks, and happy new year!

Stephen

www.MusicAppraisals.com

[Harry Lavo]

"Soundhaspriority" wrote in message
...

"braitman" wrote in message
...
Folks:

I'm about ready to look for a replacement for my fine Sony 5000F FM
Stereo Tuner. Nothing wrong with it, but I'd really like something
with AM reception, also. Any suggestions for a unit that combines both
FM and AM that is comparable in quality to the Sony?

Thanks, and happy new year!

Stephen

www.MusicAppraisals.com

I don't think so. If the 5000F is anything like the 730, it is a rarely
transparent tuner. I do know of two Yamaha tuners that come close: the
TX930 and TX950.

And, of course, DX optimized tuners are another proposition entirely.


A used Carver TX-11b is the original a version with AM added. In general,
this Carver tuner is very sensitive and has very fine sound. It is the most
desireable of the Carver tuners but should still set you back less than
$200.

[Arny Krueger]

"braitman" wrote in message

Folks:

I'm about ready to look for a replacement for my fine
Sony 5000F FM Stereo Tuner. Nothing wrong with it, but
I'd really like something with AM reception, also. Any
suggestions for a unit that combines both FM and AM that
is comparable in quality to the Sony?

Best tuner around:

http://www.ham-radio.com/k6sti/xdr-f1hd.htm

http://theaudiocritic.com/plog/index...yId=1&blogId=1

http://www.thestreet.com/story/10446...ght-notes.html

I have 2 friends who are a lot more into FM than I am. Both say that the
ability of this little puppy to pull in distant stations with utmost clarity
is amazing.

This tuner uses a completely different and new technology. It is basically
two DSPs' with two RF stages, one for AM and one for FM. Instead of using
complicated analog filters, it uses DSPs. Critical circuits are in the
digital domain.

[George M. Middius[_4_]]

The Krooborg is ready to **** on another constructive discussion.

Best tuner around:

Such a klaim flies in the face of past iterations of borgma. Note that
Turdborg doesn't bother to define "best". Based on the Beast's prior
intonations, the primary Krooglish meaning of "best" is "cheapest".

This is what happens when KrazyBorg tries to have his turds and eat them
too.

[[email protected]]

On Jan 4, 6:36 pm, "Arny Krueger" wrote:
"braitman" wrote in message



Folks:

I'm about ready to look for a replacement for my fine
Sony 5000F FM Stereo Tuner. Nothing wrong with it, but
I'd really like something with AM reception, also. Any
suggestions for a unit that combines both FM and AM that
is comparable in quality to the Sony?

Best tuner around:

http://www.ham-radio.com/k6sti/xdr-f1hd.htm

http://theaudiocritic.com/plog/index...tCategoryId=1&...

http://www.thestreet.com/story/10446...-tuner-hits-al...


For FM it's a good buy although hardly "The Best". For AM not so
much.

For AM you have to decide whether you want good DX performance or
superb fidelity. If DX performance is your thing any of several
classic comm receivers with .5-2 MHz ranges are still the hottest
thing going, whether tube or early solid state. Equally sensitive but
not as selective are many common old junk yard car radios. Probably
the best ever built are the earlier all solid state Delcos and Philcos
(Ford) up to the mid to late 70s. You want the ones that are AM only
and ideally without the pushbuttons though those are OK too. You can
modify them to give an excellent audio out after the detector or you
can modify them to give IF out but that takes a little RF skills. They
then feed the hi-fi back end. You can make a good 12 volt supply very
cheaply out of a garage sale battery charger or whatnot. If you remove
the audio power transistor or power module the current draw is very
small. Tube buffs can simply provide heater and B+ power to an old
tube set the same way removing the vibrator supply. The solid state
sets are quieter and have generally better sensitivity but they do
overlaod easier. A RF attenuator that is switchable helps on the front
end.


For superb fidelity on AM nothing beats a simple TRF set, these can
be built following Millen lines by anyone. We have many people out
here building passive and active AM tuners here since KXTR is on AM
providing classical. Of course it's crapped up a little with
Ibiqui**** but still not bad.

[Arny Krueger]

wrote in message

On Jan 4, 6:36 pm, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:
"braitman" wrote in message



Folks:

I'm about ready to look for a replacement for my fine
Sony 5000F FM Stereo Tuner. Nothing wrong with it, but
I'd really like something with AM reception, also. Any
suggestions for a unit that combines both FM and AM that
is comparable in quality to the Sony?

Best tuner around:

http://www.ham-radio.com/k6sti/xdr-f1hd.htm

http://theaudiocritic.com/plog/index...tCategoryId=1&...

http://www.thestreet.com/story/10446...-tuner-hits-al...

For FM it's a good buy although hardly "The Best".

Based on what relevant facts?

For AM not so much.

Based on what relevant facts?


For AM you have to decide whether you want good DX
performance or superb fidelity.

This is an audio group, so the answer to your question is self-evident.

Equally sensitive but not as selective
are many common old junk yard car radios.

They don't compare with little Sony. I have that from senior car radio
professionals who work for the big 3. Some of these guys rather dislike
Philips for some of the crap that they have put out in the past have to
admit that this time they did it. Many of these guys cut their teeth on the
radios that you idolize, Bret.

There's nothing like producing radios by the 100,000s and then putting them
in expensive vehicles with extended warranties to teach people what works
and what doesn't.

Probably the
best ever built are the earlier all solid state Delcos
and Philcos (Ford) up to the mid to late 70s.

They were mediocre, even compared to the best recent radios that aren't yet
based on the same Philips chip set that Sony is using.

The solid state sets are quieter and have
generally better sensitivity but they do overload easier.

Simply not true.

A RF attenuator that is switchable helps on the front
end.

Not required.

For superb fidelity on AM nothing beats a simple TRF set,
these can be built following Millen lines by anyone. We
have many people out here building passive and active AM
tuners here since KXTR is on AM providing classical. Of
course it's crapped up a little with Ibiqui**** but still
not bad.

Contrary to cherished beliefs held by certain audio luddites, there really
has been progress in the design and production of AM and FM radios since the
1960s.

[George M. Middius[_4_]]

Tired of audio? Had enough reality? It's time for a snotstorm!

Best tuner around:
For FM it's a good buy although hardly "The Best".
Based on what relevant facts?

etc., etc.

As anyone can see, it's no longer important to help the OP find a tuner. Now
the only thing that matters to Bratzi and the Kroo is seeing which of them
can emit a bigger snotstream.

I'd love to stick around and see how this thrilling contest of 'borgishness
turns out, but I'd rather get on with my rusty-spoon appendectomy. That
ordeal, at least, is a one-time event.

[Arny Krueger]

"George M. Middius" wrote in
message

Tired of audio? Had enough reality? It's time for a
snotstorm!

And here serving one up, is the Middiot!

Best tuner around:
For FM it's a good buy although hardly "The Best".
Based on what relevant facts?

As anyone can see, it's no longer important to help the
OP find a tuner.

Say what, Middiot?

The guy got a factual, well-documented response from me. Then there was the
snotty but somewhat relevant reply from Bratzi. Then there is your current
snotstorm, Middiot.

Now the only thing that matters to
Bratzi and the my master and commander is seeing which of them can emit a
bigger snotstream.

Actually Middiot, the two leaders in this snotstorm are you and Bratzi, with
you way in the lead. When bigger piles of snot are emitted, you will be both
nearby and responsible.

I'd love to stick around and see how this thrilling
contest of 'borgishness turns out, but I'd rather get on
with my rusty-spoon appendectomy. That ordeal, at least,
is a one-time event.

Unfortunately Middiot, your rusty-spoon appendectomy won't hurt nearly as
much as your day-to-day existence. Sorry about that - if you posted your
address maybe someone would send flowers.

[Arny Krueger]

"Soundhaspriority" wrote in message


The thing is, FM reception is so flawed, some
people, notably JA, don't even consider it a high
fidelity medium.

Interesting, John has picked that up from my leadership, too?

Wow, if we could only train that boy how to do a proper listening test.

[Arny Krueger]

"Soundhaspriority" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Soundhaspriority" wrote in message


The thing is, FM reception is so flawed, some
people, notably JA, don't even consider it a high
fidelity medium.

Interesting, John has picked that up from my leadership,
too?
I think he developed that opinion independently.

Well then I give him credit for actually being able to hear the obvious. The
only thing widespread that is worse than broadcast AM & FM is satellite.

Wow, if we could only train that boy how to do a proper
listening test.

Please leave the "we" out of it.

The "we" includes a big part of the leadership of the AES.

It's real and it is heartfelt. But there are no serious hopes. John's
personal agenda and all that.

[Harry Lavo]

"Soundhaspriority" wrote in message
...

"George M. Middius" wrote in message
...




Tired of audio? Had enough reality? It's time for a snotstorm!

Best tuner around:
For FM it's a good buy although hardly "The Best".
Based on what relevant facts?

etc., etc.

As anyone can see, it's no longer important to help the OP find a tuner.
Now
the only thing that matters to Bratzi and the Kroo is seeing which of
them
can emit a bigger snotstream.

I'd love to stick around and see how this thrilling contest of
'borgishness
turns out, but I'd rather get on with my rusty-spoon appendectomy. That
ordeal, at least, is a one-time event.

George, this time, putting aside all personal considerations, Arny is
right. I'd buy that box if I had the need. The thing is, FM reception is
so flawed, some people, notably JA, don't even consider it a high fidelity
medium. I find I disagree with Arny on all things epicurean, but this is
not an epicurean question.

Bob Morein
(310) 237-6511

But the main advantage it has is better DX sensitivity due to greater
quieting and better seperation at low signal levels. That doesn't mean it
SOUNDS better on good source material, which is still the criteria I use for
tuners, as for other audio gear. There are a lot of tuners out there with
decent specs that sound like crap. I don't know this tuner...never heard
one...and it may be very good...or it may not be. But arguing one way or
t'other based on specs will not get anybody anywhere. Has anybody heard the
thing on a real quality FM signal?

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Jan 5, 9:30*am, "Arny Krueger" wrote:
"Soundhaspriority" wrote in message



The thing is, FM reception is so flawed, some
people, notably JA, don't even consider it a high
fidelity medium.

Interesting, John has picked that up from my leadership, too?

Wow, if we could only train that boy how to do a proper listening test.

What an ego. We've never discussed, FM, GOIA, but I keep it around for
background noise only.

Did you "train" me to think that way?

Insane minds are fun to watch, particularly when coupled with GOIA's
other myriad mental disorders.

[Harry Lavo]

"Soundhaspriority" wrote in message
...

"Harry Lavo" wrote in message
...

"Soundhaspriority" wrote in message
...

"braitman" wrote in message
...
Folks:

I'm about ready to look for a replacement for my fine Sony 5000F FM
Stereo Tuner. Nothing wrong with it, but I'd really like something
with AM reception, also. Any suggestions for a unit that combines both
FM and AM that is comparable in quality to the Sony?

Thanks, and happy new year!

Stephen

www.MusicAppraisals.com

I don't think so. If the 5000F is anything like the 730, it is a rarely
transparent tuner. I do know of two Yamaha tuners that come close: the
TX930 and TX950.

And, of course, DX optimized tuners are another proposition entirely.


A used Carver TX-11b is the original a version with AM added. In
general, this Carver tuner is very sensitive and has very fine sound. It
is the most desireable of the Carver tuners but should still set you back
less than $200.
After Arny's newsbreak, I'm going to dump my assortment of FM tuners. I
don't think I'm going to replace them either. Broadcast "HD" is stuck at
48 kHz. One can actually get higher bitrates off the web.

Actually, I don't agree with Arny or John on this. I happen to live in an
area with one of the finest signal-quality (by reputation) public radio
stations in the nation....and it's musical specialties are classical and
jazz, same as my own. And at moderate and moderately loud signal levels I
cannot hear any difference from my CD or SACD's when playing the same music.
And while it will invite Arnies ridicule, I have many times been able to
pick out SACD quality by guess, and then have the announcer confirm same in
subsequent remarks.

The Carver TX-11a and my perfectly restored Fisher FM-90b sound virtually
identical side by side in my main system, with the Carver having just a bit
more definition and transparency than the tube unit...but both sound
dimensional and musical and every bit hi-fidelity. I've had many tuners
side by side with one or the other, and I have never heard another tuner
that sounded as good. I certainly have not heard them all, but somewhere
over a dozen, including a couple of highly regarded units, so I don't say
this likely.

My take...bad FM sound is a function of some bad stations, casually designed
tuners, and lack of application of high-fidelity analog outputs to some of
those tuners. Not to an intrinisic problem that keeps it from being high
quality audio. And it is still one of the best "expanders" of musical taste
around.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Jan 5, 9:28*am, "Arny Krueger" wrote:

The guy got a factual, well-documented response from me. Then there was the
snotty but somewhat relevant reply from Bratzi. Then there is your current
snotstorm, Middiot.

Well, GOIA, you did make a claim of your recommendation being "the
best" when it's obvious you've never heard one.

I have a friend who likes SE 2A3 triode amps with no negative
feedback. I don't go around trumpeting them as "the best". Maybe I
should. ;-)

[Arny Krueger]

"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
wrote in message

On Jan 5, 9:30 am, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:
"Soundhaspriority" wrote in message



The thing is, FM reception is so flawed, some
people, notably JA, don't even consider it a high
fidelity medium.

Interesting, John has picked that up from my leadership,
too?

Wow, if we could only train that boy how to do a proper
listening test.

What an ego

If irony killed.

. We've never discussed, FM, my master and commander, but I keep
it around for background noise only.

I don't believe that you are capable of serious audio discussion, ****R.
Prove me wrong at your earliest convenience.

Did you "train" me to think that way?

No ****R there's no evidence that you are capable of intelligent thought.

Superior minds are depressing for me to watch, particularly when coupled
with my master and commander's myriad talents and skills.

Who programmed you to say that, ****R?

[Arny Krueger]

"Harry Lavo" wrote in message


But the main advantage it has is better DX sensitivity
due to greater quieting and better separation at low
signal levels.

A good sized book could be written about what you don't know about FM,
Harry.

That doesn't mean it SOUNDS better on
good source material, which is still the criteria I use
for tuners, as for other audio gear.

Pretty difficult, given how deaf and delusional you are, Harry.

There are a lot of
tuners out there with decent specs that sound like crap.

Who says that spec sheets are always truthful?

If you knew anything at all about FM Harry, you'd know that a full FM tuner
spec sheet is rarely ever seen, and that even the hollow shells of spec
sheets that audio vendors generally provide are full of outright lies.

I don't know this tuner...never heard one...and it may be
very good...or it may not be.

Wow, a truism! Well Harry, that's one way to avoid your usual fall-on-face
routine.

But arguing one way or
t'other based on specs will not get anybody anywhere.

Who argued based on specs?

Oh, a guy named Harry Lavo started ranting about specs.

Has anybody heard the thing on a real quality FM signal?

Yes, all the people in the articles I cited plus the close friends that I
mentioned.

Yes Harry, even people unlike you, they are people who can still hear pretty
well. Proof positive that they can still hear well: All of them kicked the
vinyl habit long ago.

[Clyde Slick]

On 5 Ian, 11:03, "Arny Krueger" wrote:
"Soundhaspriority" wrote in message



"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
m...
"Soundhaspriority" wrote in message
om

The thing is, FM reception is so flawed, some
people, notably JA, don't even consider it a high
fidelity medium.

Interesting, John has picked that up from my leadership,
too?
I think he developed that opinion independently.

Well then I give him credit for actually being able to hear the obvious. The
only thing widespread that is worse than broadcast AM & FM is satellite.

Wow, if we could only train that boy how to do a proper
listening test.
Please leave the "we" out of it.

The "we" includes a big part of the leadership of the AES.

It's real and it is heartfelt. But there are no serious hopes. John's
personal agenda and all that.

when you sway "we" you mean you
and your turd collection.

[Arny Krueger]

"Clyde Slick" wrote in message


when you sway "we" you mean you
and your turd collection.

...which I store in your mouth, Art.

I guess there is some chance that it will smell even worse, given enough
time there.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Jan 5, 7:41*pm, "Arny Krueger" wrote:
"Clyde Slick" wrote in message



when you sway "we" you mean you
and your turd collection.

..which I store in your mouth, Art.

GOIA also admits to some strange fantasies.

I guess there is some chance that it will smell even worse, given enough
time there.

GOIA admits that his turd collection smells. Why does he insist on
storing it on RAO?

[Clyde Slick]

On 5 Ian, 20:41, "Arny Krueger" wrote:
"Clyde Slick" wrote in message



when you sway "we" you mean you
and your turd collection.

..which I store in your mouth, Art.

I guess there is some chance that it will smell even worse, given enough
time there.

You like to keep them close to home, there is still some extra space
in Nate's casket.
Check it out the next time you are rummaging around in there.

[George M. Middius[_4_]]

Shhhh! said:

when you sway "we" you mean you
and your turd collection.

..which I store in your mouth, Art.

GOIA also admits to some strange fantasies.

Another unexpected confession from Mr. ****. First he admitted that his
feeble story about kiddie porn was a fabrication. Second, he admitted his
craving to be martyred on Usenet. Third, he admits to owning and valuing a
turd collection.

What on earth is happening in Kroogerland?

I guess there is some chance that it will smell even worse, given enough
time there.

GOIA admits that his turd collection smells. Why does he insist on
storing it on RAO?

Arnii, all kidding aside, it's time for you to 'fess up. What were your real
New Year's resolutions?

[[email protected]]

On Jan 5, 9:28 am, "Arny Krueger" wrote:
"George M. Middius" wrote in
messagenews:c384m499dup2ngdr4pmj2g5ac0br4ufcsb@4ax .com

Tired of audio? Had enough reality? It's time for a
snotstorm!

And here serving one up, is the Middiot!

Best tuner around:
For FM it's a good buy although hardly "The Best".
Based on what relevant facts?
As anyone can see, it's no longer important to help the
OP find a tuner.

Say what, Middiot?

The guy got a factual, well-documented response from me. Then there was the
snotty but somewhat relevant reply from Bratzi. Then there is your current
snotstorm, Middiot.

Now the only thing that matters to
Bratzi and the my master and commander is seeing which of them can emit a
bigger snotstream.

Actually Middiot, the two leaders in this snotstorm are you and Bratzi, with
you way in the lead. When bigger piles of snot are emitted, you will be both
nearby and responsible.

I didn't issue any snot. i put forth what I believed to be the best
solutions to the problem specified.

[Harry Lavo]

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
news
"Harry Lavo" wrote in message


But the main advantage it has is better DX sensitivity
due to greater quieting and better separation at low
signal levels.

A good sized book could be written about what you don't know about FM,
Harry.

That doesn't mean it SOUNDS better on
good source material, which is still the criteria I use
for tuners, as for other audio gear.

Pretty difficult, given how deaf and delusional you are, Harry.

There are a lot of
tuners out there with decent specs that sound like crap.

Who says that spec sheets are always truthful?

If you knew anything at all about FM Harry, you'd know that a full FM
tuner spec sheet is rarely ever seen, and that even the hollow shells of
spec sheets that audio vendors generally provide are full of outright
lies.

I don't know this tuner...never heard one...and it may be
very good...or it may not be.

Wow, a truism! Well Harry, that's one way to avoid your usual fall-on-face
routine.

But arguing one way or
t'other based on specs will not get anybody anywhere.

Who argued based on specs?

Oh, a guy named Harry Lavo started ranting about specs.

Has anybody heard the thing on a real quality FM signal?

Yes, all the people in the articles I cited plus the close friends that I
mentioned.

Yes Harry, even people unlike you, they are people who can still hear
pretty well. Proof positive that they can still hear well: All of them
kicked the vinyl habit long ago.


Arny, if you were a snake, you'd be feared for your venom. But you are not
a snake, so just go f..k yourself.

[[email protected]]

On Jan 5, 7:09 am, "Arny Krueger" wrote:
wrote in message





On Jan 4, 6:36 pm, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:
"braitman" wrote in message



Folks:

I'm about ready to look for a replacement for my fine
Sony 5000F FM Stereo Tuner. Nothing wrong with it, but
I'd really like something with AM reception, also. Any
suggestions for a unit that combines both FM and AM that
is comparable in quality to the Sony?

Best tuner around:

http://www.ham-radio.com/k6sti/xdr-f1hd.htm

http://theaudiocritic.com/plog/index...tCategoryId=1&...

http://www.thestreet.com/story/10446...-tuner-hits-al...
For FM it's a good buy although hardly "The Best".

Based on what relevant facts?

To be "the best" it has to be superior to any thing else available.
It isn't as good as a dedicated channelized rebroadcast receiver, it
isn't even as good as the yardstick McIntosh MR78. It's a pretty good
FM tuner but an inexpensive one lacking professional features. It
isn't designed to go into a monitoring facility or a translator
transmitter site rack. It has a cheap plastic case, 75 ohm input
(everything in real RF is 50 ohms) and no balanced audio, no IF, no
SCA output.

For AM not so much.

Based on what relevant facts?

Performance.

For AM you have to decide whether you want good DX
performance or superb fidelity.

This is an audio group, so the answer to your question is self-evident.

It isn't because many "audiophiles" include classical or nonprofit
style music listeners in hick towns who have to get skywave or big
town rimshot reception for satisfaction.

Equally sensitive but not as selective
are many common old junk yard car radios.

They don't compare with little Sony. I have that from senior car radio
professionals who work for the big 3. Some of these guys rather dislike
Philips for some of the crap that they have put out in the past have to
admit that this time they did it. Many of these guys cut their teeth on the
radios that you idolize, Bret.

There's nothing like producing radios by the 100,000s and then putting them
in expensive vehicles with extended warranties to teach people what works
and what doesn't.

Probably the
best ever built are the earlier all solid state Delcos
and Philcos (Ford) up to the mid to late 70s.

They were mediocre, even compared to the best recent radios that aren't yet
based on the same Philips chip set that Sony is using.

The solid state sets are quieter and have
generally better sensitivity but they do overload easier.

Simply not true.

While solid state has many advantages, front end headroom and AGC
dynamic range are not amongst them, at least not on any kind of
device-for-device basis. Front end RF tubes operating at 90-200V B+
and especially remopte cutoff pentodes used in AGC circuits had some
wonderful qualities, and it takes a lot of transistors and
considerable circuit conplexity to even equal them.

The other variables are 1) declining interest in AM performance by
most car buyers , and 2) the need to accomodate FM, cassette tape, 8
track tape or CD players in OEM sets. The latter took up space and
build cost budget. Therefore there was a range of years in which car
radios improved in AM performance, peaked, and then declined. When
build cost, declining importance of customer demand, and lack of
infinite engineering staffing place pressures in one direction that
aren't compensated in the other, the bubble moves left. Things don't
always continually get better in every way, as some things improve
others deprove-that is get worse. The auto industry is a textbook
case. Modern engine control electronics offer great advantages, but
the introduction of lost foam casting, shattered bottom connecting
rods, and one time torque to yield fasteners has made modern car
engines into more and more throwaway assemblies. In electronics,
there are many deprovements, or disimprovements, we see in everyday
life if we look. You can't buy a well made landline phone anymo old
WE 500 and 1200 sets are vastly better in terms of longevity and even
audio quality than modern cheap phones.

[Arny Krueger]

wrote in message

On Jan 5, 7:09 am, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:
wrote in message





On Jan 4, 6:36 pm, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:
"braitman" wrote in message



Folks:

I'm about ready to look for a replacement for my fine
Sony 5000F FM Stereo Tuner. Nothing wrong with it, but
I'd really like something with AM reception, also. Any
suggestions for a unit that combines both FM and AM
that is comparable in quality to the Sony?

Best tuner around:

http://www.ham-radio.com/k6sti/xdr-f1hd.htm

http://theaudiocritic.com/plog/index...tCategoryId=1&...

http://www.thestreet.com/story/10446...-tuner-hits-al...
For FM it's a good buy although hardly "The Best".

Based on what relevant facts?

To be "the best" it has to be superior to any thing else
available.

No it doesn't. It has a specific function in life - receive radio signals
for consumers to listen to. It doesn't have to be the tallest building in
the world, which is what you're demanding when you say that it "it has to be
superior to any thing else
available."

It isn't as good as a dedicated channelized
rebroadcast receiver,

Nonsense. An apple does not have to be an orange to be the best apple.

it isn't even as good as the
yardstick McIntosh MR78.

You are alone in that judgement.

It's a pretty good FM tuner but
an inexpensive one lacking professional features.

You seem to be very confused. The OP asked a specific question - what would
make a good replacement for a Sony TA 5000F. The Sony TA 5000F is not a
professional tool. It is a consumer radio.

It isn't designed to go into a monitoring facility or a
translator transmitter site rack.

Neither is a TA 5000F or a MR 78.

It has a cheap plastic case,

I'm sure that gauls you. It's also probably made in China.

75 ohm input (everything in real RF is 50 ohms)

One word: consumer.

and no balanced audio,

Neither did the TA 5000F nor the MR 78.

no IF,

Ditto.

no SCA output.

Ditto.


For AM not so much.

Based on what relevant facts?

Performance.

Based on what relevant documentation?

For AM you have to decide whether you want good DX
performance or superb fidelity.

This is an audio group, so the answer to your question
is self-evident.

It isn't because many "audiophiles" include classical or
nonprofit style music listeners in hick towns who have to
get skywave or big town rimshot reception for
satisfaction.

So what?

Equally sensitive but not as selective
are many common old junk yard car radios.

They don't compare with little Sony. I have that from
senior car radio professionals who work for the big 3.
Some of these guys rather dislike Philips for some of
the crap that they have put out in the past have to
admit that this time they did it. Many of these guys cut
their teeth on the radios that you idolize, Bret.

There's nothing like producing radios by the 100,000s
and then putting them in expensive vehicles with
extended warranties to teach people what works and what
doesn't.

Probably the
best ever built are the earlier all solid state Delcos
and Philcos (Ford) up to the mid to late 70s.

They were mediocre, even compared to the best recent
radios that aren't yet based on the same Philips chip
set that Sony is using.

The solid state sets are quieter and have
generally better sensitivity but they do overload
easier.

Simply not true.

While solid state has many advantages, front end headroom
and AGC dynamic range are not amongst them,

You've contradicted yourself. Here's the complement of a MR78:

3 JFET's, 2 MOSFET's, 17 Bipolar Transistors, 43 Diodes, 4 Integrated
Circuits

Read my lips vacuum-brain: No tubes!

at least not on any kind of device-for-device basis.

Nonsense.

Front end RF
tubes operating at 90-200V B+ and especially remopte
cutoff pentodes used in AGC circuits had some wonderful
qualities, and it takes a lot of transistors and
considerable circuit conplexity to even equal them.

Nonsense.

Nobody who is serious about performance is doing tubed front ends in modern
designs.

The other variables are 1) declining interest in AM
performance by most car buyers ,

Now you're faulting this product for being flexible.

and 2) the need to
accomodate FM, cassette tape, 8 track tape or CD players
in OEM sets.

8 track???

Cassette???

Bratzi, do you know what century you are currently in? What millenium?

The latter took up space and build cost budget.

Bratzi, this is the world of SS - the little Sony could have been even
smaller if they squeezed the air out of it.

Therefore there was a range of years in which
car radios improved in AM performance, peaked, and then
declined.

snip vacuum-brain nonsense

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Jan 5, 4:41*pm, "Arny Krueger" wrote:
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
On Jan 5, 9:30 am, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:
"Soundhaspriority" wrote in message

The thing is, FM reception is so flawed, some
people, notably JA, don't even consider it a high
fidelity medium.

Interesting, John has picked that up from my leadership,
too?

Wow, if we could only train that boy how to do a proper
listening test.
What an ego

If irony killed.

LOL!

. We've never discussed, FM, GOIA, but I keep
it around for background noise only.

I don't believe that you are capable of serious audio discussion, Master.
Prove me wrong at your earliest convenience.

Been there, done that. Prove it. It's in the Google archive.

Did you "train" me to think that way?

No Master there's no evidence that you are capable of intelligent thought..

But since JA is, you apparently "trained" him, yes?

Insane minds are fun to watch, particularly when coupled with GOIA's
other myriad mental disorders.

Who programmed you to say that, ****R?

Paranoid personality disorder is one of them. LOL!

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Jan 6, 6:29*am, "Arny Krueger" wrote:
wrote in message

For FM it's a good buy although hardly "The Best".
Based on what relevant facts?
To be "the best" it has to be superior to any thing else
available.

No it doesn't. It has a specific function in life - receive radio signals
for consumers to listen to. It doesn't have to be the tallest building in
the world, which is what you're demanding when you say that it "it has to be
superior to any thing else
available."

So, according to your 'logic', the "best" tuner has to compared to a
tall building.

LOL! You're crazy.

You've contradicted yourself. Here's the complement of a MR78:

I'd imagine Bratzi meant an MR71, GOIA.

[Arny Krueger]

"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
wrote in message

On Jan 5, 4:41 pm, "Arny Krueger"

wrote:

Who programmed you to say that, ****R?

Paranoid personality disorder is one of them. LOL!

So ****R, you finally admit that that your PPD is "programming" you to say
the weird things you say on RAO?

Admitting this should make you feel better - they say that confession is
good for the soul. But then you don't believe that you have a soul, right?

[Arny Krueger]

"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
wrote in message


You've contradicted yourself. Here's the complement of a
MR78:

I'd imagine Bratzi meant an MR71, my lord and master.

If you could read and comprehend more accurately grasshopper, you'd know
that Bratzi specifically said MR78. It is all solid state, and it is a
reasonble standard of excellence, which the MR71 never was.

But since when has adhering to the truth been a priority in your life,
****R?

[Clyde Slick]

On 6 Ian, 09:03, "Arny Krueger" wrote:
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
wrote in

You've contradicted yourself. Here's the complement of a
MR78:
I'd imagine Bratzi meant an MR71, my lord and master.

If you could read and comprehend more accurately grasshopper, you'd know
that Bratzi specifically said MR78. *It is all solid state, and it is a
reasonble standard of excellence, which the MR71 never was.

But since when has adhering to the truth been a priority in your life,
****R?

here is arny's cubicle, back in his Chrysler days
http://www.abrutis.com/photo-un+tron...eau-17840.html

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Jan 6, 8:01*am, "Arny Krueger" wrote:
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
wrote
On Jan 5, 4:41 pm, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
wrote in message

Insane minds are fun to watch, particularly when coupled with GOIA's
other myriad mental disorders.

Who programmed you to say that, Master?

Paranoid personality disorder is one of them. LOL!

So Master, you finally admit that that your PPD is "programming" you to say
the weird things you say on RAO?

Why don't you admit that you're an insane sack of ****, GOIA. You may
not feel better but it would offer you a start on telling the truth.
LOL!

GOIA tries to slip in an IKYABWAI for the 4,568,287the time. Ho hum.

Admitting this should make you feel better - they say that confession is
good for the soul. But then you don't believe that you have a soul, right?

GOIA, for an alleged "computer expert" you really aren't very good at
deceptively editing posts for your insane purposes.

Try again during one of your lucid moments (if you ever have any). LOL!

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Jan 6, 8:03*am, "Arny Krueger" wrote:
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
wrote in

You've contradicted yourself. Here's the complement of a
MR78:
I'd imagine Bratzi meant an MR71, GOIA.

If you could read and comprehend more accurately grasshopper, you'd know
that Bratzi specifically said MR78. *It is all solid state, and it is a
reasonble standard of excellence, which the MR71 never was.

So what? After all, you were the one who brought in tubes as an
"either/or" anyway. Bratzi didn't. If you could read and comprehend
you'd have already figured that all out. LOL!

What was the "standard of excellence" in the MR71s day, GOIA? The
Marantz 10b?

But since when has adhering to the truth been a priority in your life,
Master?

Now why would my offering an alternative upset you so, GOIA? I mean
your insanity excluded, of course.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Jan 6, 4:34*pm, "Arny Krueger" wrote:
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
On Jan 6, 8:03 am, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"

You've contradicted yourself. Here's the complement of
a MR78:
I'd imagine Bratzi meant an MR71, GOIA.
If you could read and comprehend more accurately
grasshopper, you'd know
that Bratzi specifically said MR78. It is all solid
state, and it is a
reasonble standard of excellence, which the MR71 never
was.
So what?

Well Master if you were a man, you'd admit that you were wrong and
apologize for it. Won't ever happen because you lack the integrity and
maturity.

Apologize for offering an alternative that Bratzi has neither
confirmed nor denied? And even if he had, apologize for harmless
speculation?

I'd say this points to severe drug abuse on top of your mental and
emotional disabilities. LOL!

*After all, you were the one who brought in tubes
as an *"either/or" anyway.

Wrong again. Bratzi brought up the issue, apparently ignorantly cutting
himself at the knees by bragging up the MR78.

Go count the words, sentences and paragraphs separating "MR78" from
"tubes". The two are not necessarily joined in context aside from in
your disturbed mind.

Tubes do have some superior attributes, GOIA. The military, in fact,
still uses them in some pretty critical applications because solid-
state won't do the job as well.

Bratzi didn't.

More evidence Master of either your lack of intelligence or lack of
personal integrity.

Uh-huh. Go do the count, GOIA.

What was the "standard of excellence" in the MR71s day,
GOIA? The *Marantz 10b?

The 10B seems like a likely candidate from the days of tubes.

So does the MR71.

[Iain Churches[_2_]]

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
news
"Soundhaspriority" wrote in message

"Arny Krueger" wrote in message
...
"Soundhaspriority" wrote in message


The thing is, FM reception is so flawed, some
people, notably JA, don't even consider it a high
fidelity medium.

Interesting, John has picked that up from my leadership,
too?
I think he developed that opinion independently.

Well then I give him credit for actually being able to hear the obvious.
The only thing widespread that is worse than broadcast AM & FM is
satellite.

Wow, if we could only train that boy how to do a proper
listening test.

Please leave the "we" out of it.

The "we" includes a big part of the leadership of the AES.

So you speak on behalf of the AES now, Arny?
I read the journal from cover to cover.
I cannot recall seeing a statement which states that
you have been made our spokesman.

Iain

[George M. Middius[_4_]]

Iain Churches said:

The "we" includes a big part of the leadership of the AES.

So you speak on behalf of the AES now, Arny?
I read the journal from cover to cover.
I cannot recall seeing a statement which states that
you have been made our spokesman.

Arnii doesn't respond to direct requests for leadership.

[John Atkinson[_2_]]

On Jan 7, 5:41 am, George M. Middius wrote:
Iain Churches said:
The "we" includes a big part of the leadership of the AES.

So you speak on behalf of the AES now, Arny?
I read the journal from cover to cover.
I cannot recall seeing a statement which states that
you have been made our spokesman.

Arnii doesn't respond to direct requests for leadership.

It should also be noted that while I am a long-time
member of the Audio Engineering Society, Arny
Krueger is not.

John Atkinson
Editor, Stereophile

[Arny Krueger]

"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
wrote in message

What was the "standard of excellence" in the MR71s day,
GOIA? The Marantz 10b?

The 10B seems like a likely candidate from the days of
tubes.

So does the MR71.

Nahh, the MR71 lacked the distinctive technology of the MR78. Nice build
quality, though.

[Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!]

On Jan 7, 5:30*am, "Arny Krueger" wrote:
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
wrote in message

What was the "standard of excellence" in the MR71s day,
GOIA? The Marantz 10b?

The 10B seems like a likely candidate from the days of
tubes.
So does the MR71.

Nahh, the MR71 lacked the distinctive technology of the MR78. *Nice build
quality, though.

I would hope so as the MR71 preceded the MR78 by several (10?) years,
and was tube versus solid-state.

I thought this was about tuners that represented the "standard of
excellence" for tubed units, which would exclude the MR78.

[Arny Krueger]

"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
wrote in message

On Jan 7, 5:30 am, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:
"Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!"
wrote in message

What was the "standard of excellence" in the MR71s
day, GOIA? The Marantz 10b?

The 10B seems like a likely candidate from the days of
tubes.

So does the MR71.

Nahh, the MR71 lacked the distinctive technology of the
MR78. Nice build quality, though.

I would hope so as the MR71 preceded the MR78 by several
(10?) years,

The point is that over a period of several years, the MR71 and 10B were
competitive. One was a nice implementation of traditional technology and one
was pretty radical for the day.

and was tube versus solid-state.

Irrelevant to any comparison fo the MR71 and the 10B. They were both tubed.

I thought this was about tuners that represented the
"standard of excellence" for tubed units, which would
exclude the MR78.

No, the OP was about tuner alternatives in 2009.