In Reply to: Pioneer P-90 vs modded Eico Classic 2200 -1st go posted by Neff on December 30, 2008 at 16:47:36:
I aligned the Pioneer P-90 early this morning. I have little time, thus must perform immediately when not at the work place. This holiday has been timely.
I did not find the Pioneer P-90 tuner far out of alignment at all. The front-end was almost perfect. The Pioneer P-90 narrow and wide I.F. selection performs correctly and of course more selevtive vs the Eico 2200. The Pioneer P-90 has much better stereo channel seperation measurements, but I do not hear much difference in-between the Eico 2200 and Pioneer P-90 in that regard.
The Pioneer P-90 also easily outperforms the Eico 2200 in adjacient channel selectivity, but I am not in a demanding area requiring a very selective FM tuner. The Pioneer P-90 multiplexer is extremely clean with regard to distortion. The Eico 2200 does not measure up even close, however I do not hear excessive distortion with the Eico 2200 in stereo mode.
One surprise is the modified Eico 2200 has close to the same sensitivity RF front-end wise as the Pioneer P-90 using a 300 ohm twin lead dipole type interior antenna. I live in a valley removing line of sight to most FM stations. Where the Pioneer P-90 outperforms the Eico 2200 is to select Narrow I.F. mode and most noise goes away on weak FM stations. Thus, the Eico 2200 has no real benefit besides being a good tube type FM receiver with reasonable sensitivity. However, I do not listen to weak FM signals that do not provide great sonics.
For one to believe a tube type FM stereo receiver would outperform a modern design dual FET front-end FM receiver with a selective I.F. section and a HD immune modern multiplexer design is redicilous when viewing the specifications.
However, all the performance features of the Pioneer P-90 does not provide the sonic high performance of the Eico 2200 at my location. If one is located in a difficult reception area with lots of strong signals & various multipath issues, the well designed modern FM tuners such as the Pioneer P-90 being rated at #29 is your only option. I would guess #29 rated as a minimum requirement for those seeking a quality SS FM tuner.
Anyways, the modified Eico 2200 provides much better dynamics and sonic pleasure over the entire audio frequency range vs the Pioneer P-90. On the other hand the Pioneer P-90 has a soft and easy listening presentation. Unless you seek a somewhat close to an average CD system sonic performance playback that requires a great 'clear channel' FM station close by to support my statement, purchase the Pioneer P-90 for $50. Appears unbeatable for the money.
I will advise others that do not modify tuners that the Fisher 100B or 200B series will likely have some of the best tube receivers with viewing the schematics and including cost vs performance ratio. I am not sure I want a $500 to $1000 FM tube type receiver in a HD FM expanding environment. For somewhat less sensitive receive performance and having a quality 12AX7 in the audio out section, the Fisher KM-60 is a good bet. I give a sonic edge to a modified Eico 2200 vs modified KM-60 (own both), but unless you are a tech or have a tech available- who cares. A stock Fisher KM-60 is quite superior to a stock Eico 2200 sonically.
I have not mentioned Sherwood FM tube tuners. I have not much experience with the Sherwoods, but the stock S-3000IV sounds ok.
I need to find a Kenwood KT-990D with immunity to HD FM as my next FM tuner. It ranks #9 in the www.fmtunerinfo.com site.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- RE: Pioneer P-90 vs modded Eico Classic 2200 -2nd go - Neff 01/1/0907:28:15 01/1/09 (4)
- BTW..... - Neff 07:44:26 01/1/09 (3)
- Duh....make that Pioneer F-90....nt - Neff 10:40:07 01/1/09 (2)
- RE: Duh....make that Pioneer F-90....nt - Mark W. 11:07:24 01/6/09 (1)
- Ya, Pioneer 90 or P-90 was in my head - Neff 12:41:14 01/6/09 (0)