Jack Daniels

---------------- On 11/15/2004 8:09:43 PM radiob wrote: Save and buy a Magnum Dynalab, youll be happy you did. ---------------- Funny, I just rebuilt and hotrodded a 350-C for a customer who was running a Dynalab, and in his opinion, the Scott "blew it away". He also commented that it received more stations, stations that he never knew exsisted on the dial. Personally, I think the Scott is the better bargain. Vintage Scott tuners properly set up will blow away todays offerings. Another Scott sleeper is the 312-D solid-state broadcast tuner, it offers the same sound and performance as the 350-C, but uses FET's instead of tubes. It also gives you a wonderful headphone amplifier with variable adjust for left and right channels. Just my point of view. -JD

---------------- On 11/15/2004 7:57:32 PM rf3iicrazy wrote: "Sometimes it is just in the recording. Whether due to close miking, the recording studio or the producer, it's there." I hear this at its worst on Foreigners "Cold as Ice". You're as cold a icesssssssssssss Tom ---------------- 33 1/3 or compact disc? I have the LP, and that song is very shrill. The later Foreigner LP's were recorded better, especially "4", which has "Urgent" on it. -JD

---------------- On 11/15/2004 3:35:29 PM Mark Hardy wrote: Well, for $200,you could buy about 7 or 8 Sherwood S-3000's. I'd buy one or two of 'em and you'd have a very good sounding, mono, FM only tube tuner (and a spare for parts if you ever need them). If you really want stereo, spend some of the leftovers on an MPX adaptor (if it were me, I'd probably pick an EICO MX-99). The Sherwood's not as sexy looking as a Scott or Fisher tuner (not to mention a 10B!), but they are dang fine sounding tuners and still generally bargains IMO, even at eBAY prices. ---------------- That's true, you could buy several Sherwoods. But they would never come close to the quality of the Scott 350-C, you only get what you pay for. I've worked on them all, and find the Sherwood units lacking in overall sound quality and selectivity. Sherwood uses electrolytic capacitors for the output stage, and Scott uses Mylar. The high ESR of the electrolytics results in a degraded signal, a lousy high end, and boomy bass. There is limited space to mount some higher quality caps under the hood, so they are out of the question. The Sherwood does use a quality Foster-Seeley discriminator, but Scott's wide-band ratio detector gets my vote for sound quality. Scott tuners cannot be beat, IMHO. Save your ducats and buy a Scott, you can't go wrong. -JD

One of the absolute best tube tuner values on the market today is the H.H. Scott 350-C. It is very comparable in performance to the 310-E, but is far more reliable. They turn up on ebay every so often, and typically sell for under $200. This is a far better tuner than the 350 or 350-B, or any Dynaco or Sherwood. The 350-C tends to stay in alignment, and it is not picky about RF tubes or replacing of tubes. If you purchase a 350-C, have your tech replace the output coupling capacitors (two 0.1 uF 400V with Mylar film/foil), and the peak amplitude holding capacitor after the ratio detector (25 uF 25V electrolytic). Nothing else needs replacing, and these three parts will take a dull tuner and make it spectacular. You will be hard pressed to find a nicer sounding tuner than the 350-C. Cosmetic wise, it matches the later model Scotts, (233, 222-D, 299-D, LK-72-B, LK-48-B, 200, 200-B, LK-60, 260, LK-60-B, and 260- -JD

---------------- On 11/11/2004 10:59:19 PM NOSValves wrote: Heck download the manual and look at the distortion specs of a "low distortion amplifier" I almost chocked 5% Wow at full power !! ---------------- 5% distortion is typical of a single-ended design, and the distortion percentage has zero bearing on overall sound quality. Total harmonic and intermodular distortion from a single-ended design carries different harmonics than that of push-pull designs. To judge an amplifier solely on distortion specifications is lame from my point of view. -JD