How is it ? that a tuner smokes the table ???

I always love the term, blows away or smokes in our audio hobby.

I've owned many high quality vintage tube tuners over the years, as well as some more recent solid state ones, including the legendary REL Precedent (from 1954; and that's Radio Engineering Laboratories, no relation to the modern subwoofer manufacturer); the equally legendary Marantz 10B; an MR71, several by H.H. Scott (310C, 310D, 311D) and Fisher (FM90X, FM200), several Radiocraftsmen 10 mono tuners from 1952; a 1980's Carver TX-11, and some other lesser solid state units.

Any of these tube tuners can produce truly gorgeous, beautiful sound, in situations where the station is broadcasting good quality material with good quality equipment and minimal compression, and assuming the signal conditions are within the particular tuner's capabilities in terms of sensitivity and selectivity.

I would not go as far, though, as saying that FM can be superior to a quality vinyl or digital source. Those sources are what the station is playing, after all, and the transmission and reception path in between can at best only add euphonic sweetening or other euphonic inaccuracies, or at worst introduce significant degradation.

I'll add that among all of the tuners I mentioned the REL Precedent (which is what I currently use, in conjunction with a Scott LM35 multiplex adapter) is by far the most sensitive, in stereo with the LM35 as well as in mono mode, and it is as good as or better than all of the others sonically. Although relative to the Marantz 10B, that may have simply been due to the REL being in better condition.

BTW, please no inquiries asking if the REL is for sale; it is not, and will not be!

Regards,
-- Al

I own a Magnum Dynalab MD 108 tuner. I also live in an area that has not only great reception but a vast choice of stations to listen to. I really like the anolog sound of this tuner and its incredible bass from FM listening. I also own a Michell Gyro SE II. I would never say or think the tuner betters the turntable as if it did I would be correct in thinking the turntable was not set up properly and was in need of adjustment or repair. I will however go as far as saying for listening enjoyment with no fatigue what so ever it gives up not too much to my Esoteric DV50S but that definately may be in part that I just turn it on set it to the station I want and forget about it. If I did not live in an area with so much clear reception and choices to listen I probably would not feel the same. But a tuner any brand beating out a turntable properly set up especially a table 4 times the price which would be 25,000 dollars. Never, unless it had issues. Cheers.

Some random comments:

$ does not = Q. The mere cost of a turntable set up is not a guarantee of quality.

FM potential still exists but the number of stations with quality broadcasting seems to be declining.

I believe the value of FM is highly dependent on where you live. In So. Cal. the quality of both programming and broadcast has declined over the past 10 years. While I can receive at least 25 stations (no recent count) not more than 3-4 are worth listening to. When visiting friends in RI a few years ago, we listened to two live concert broadcasts from Boston one evening on a 40+ year old Fisher tuner, they were both outstanding.

On the best of days, I've not heard an FM broadcast that can compare with the frequency extension, soundstage presentation, or dynamics of a good vinyl system.

As suggested by others, I agree there must be a problem with component matching or set up (or both) in Jimpcn's friend's table system.

It depends.

I like FM but Fm has limited high frequency extension I think?

That might result in lower fatigue and more relaxation listening to good quality stations at least compared to other sources that extend to higher frequencies depending, at least in some cases.

I think it would be hard to make a general case that FM is better than good vinyl or digital though.