Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!uwm.edu!csd4.csd.uwm.edu!info-high-audio-request
From: kucharsk@number6.Solbourne.COM (William Kucharski)
Newsgroups: rec.audio.high-end
Subject: Re: A Test of Tuners (long)
Message-ID: <4796@uwm.edu>
Date: 2 Jul 90 14:40:09 GMT
Sender: news@uwm.edu
Lines: 31
Approved: tjk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu

In article <4742@uwm.edu> higinbotham@relyon.dec.com (Brent Higinbotham) writes:
 >2. Sound
 >
 >	hands down winner,
 >
 >	Magnum Dynalab FT 101a	(anyone surprised?)
 >
 >	A digression: don't forget, we are talking 101 *A* here. This is the
 >	successor to the renowned 101. It boasts "25% more adjacent channel
 >	attenuation", instant on capability (to relieve drift) -- thus the
 >	replacement of the AFC switch with the defeatable blend switch
 >	(thank goodness!), and a newly designed circuit board "wherein all
 >	functions have now been integrated".

Hey, don't forget that the 101 is a pretty damn good tuner as well.  Yes,
there is a drift problem with power cycling, but then again my entire system
has been powered down about three times in its entire life.  If you leave
the 101 on drift occurs once and you don't have to worry about it.

However, I _DO_ wish that I could get that blend switch, but even the
modifications you can have done to your 101 don't include it (sigh...).

All in all, though, it's quite a bit better than the Carver TX-11a it
replaced and the Luxman I auditioned at the same time...

					-- Bill
--
===============================================================================
| Internet:   kucharsk@Solbourne.COM	      |	William Kucharski             |
| uucp:	...!{boulder,sun,uunet}!stan!kucharsk |	Solbourne Computer, Inc.      |
= The opinions above are mine alone and NOT those of Solbourne Computer, Inc. =