Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: notesfiles - hp internal release 1.2; site hpcnoa.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!gamma!exodus!mhtsa!mh3bs!eagle!harpo!seismo!hao!hplabs!hp-pcd!hpcnoa!rmd
From: rmd@hpcnoa.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.audio
Subject: Re: FM tuner info wanted
Message-ID: <30200023@hpcnoa.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 10-Feb-84 13:21:00 EST
Article-I.D.: hpcnoa.30200023
Posted: Fri Feb 10 13:21:00 1984
Date-Received: Fri, 10-Feb-84 02:39:36 EST
References: <30200018@hpcnoa.UUCP>
Organization: Hewlett-Packard - Fort Collins, CO
Lines: 78
Nf-ID: #R:hpcnoa:30200018:hpcnoa:30200023:000:2337
Nf-From: hpcnoa!rmd    Feb  5 10:21:00 1984

I  finally  settled  the issue of which FM tuner to buy by going out and
buying four FM tuners (with the  understanding  that I could return them
within a week or so for any  reason).  I  brought  them all home and did
direct A/B  comparisons of two tuners at a time -- using a roof antenna,
a roof preamp/splitter, and dual 75 ohm coax as the signal sources.

I tested the following tuners:

   -NAD 4150 with 'Schotz' detector and 1.2 microvolt claimed usable
    sensitivity.
   -Sony ST-S555 ES.  This has similar specification to the Pioneer F90
    tuner and uses somewhat similar concepts in its design.  (I couldn't 
    find an F90).  The Sony also has the most 'high-tech' user interface.
   -Carver TX11.  This has some typically bizarre Carver circuitry and
    specs a 50db quieting sensitivity of 6 microvolts into 300 ohms.
   -Denon TU-720.  This is an analog tuner with a slide-rule dial.  I got
    it from the local 'high end' outlet (who naturally claimed that 
    analog tuners sounded better than digitally synthesized tuners)
   -JVC RS77 receiver.  This is my original receiver.

The  Carver  and the Sony blew away  everyone  else.  For my needs,  the
Carver was somewhat better than the Sony, but that might not be true for
everyone.  I took me 5 hours to decide  between the Carver and the Sony,
and I changed my mind twice in the process.  The Carver has  advantages,
but they are fairly subtle.

Here are comparisons of the five tuners with respect to  characteristics
I consider important:

Distortion: (on strong stations)
   1)  Carver
   gap
   2)  Sony
   big gap
   3)  NAD
   big gap
   4)  Denon
   5)  JVC

Distortion: (on weak stations)
   1)  Sony
   2)  Carver
   big gap
   3)  NAD
   4)  Denon
   5)  JVC

Selectivity:
   1) Carver
   gap
   2) Sony
   big gap
   3) NAD, Denon, JVC (tie)

Frequency Response:
   1) Carver, Sony, NAD, Denon (tie)
   big gap
   5) JVC

Sensitivity:
   1) Carver
   gap
   2) Sony
   big gap
   3) NAD 
   4) Denon, JVC (tie)

Presets:
   1) Carver (16)
   2) Sony (8)
   3) JVC (6)
   4) NAD (5)
   5) Denon (0)

The thing that  finally  convinced me to go with the Carver was the fact
that it could reduce the  distortion on the strong  stations I listen to
most  frequently.  Also, it could receive the largest number of stations
(and they were listenable).