[net.audio] Integrated amps & Carver tuner

wmartin@brl-tgr.ARPA (Will Martin ) (03/22/85)

Anyone out there have any experience with or recommendations for a low-end
and physically small integrated amp? I'd prefer one of the flat-pack
designs, since I want to squeeze a humongous Sansui tuner and a cassette
deck, along with the amp, into a small space, for a bedroom system. (I'm
now using an old Kenwood receiver and the cassette deck, but would like
to get better use out of the tuner which is now practically unused --
it's a Sansui TU-9900, one of which was used as a reference in Stereophile's
recent tuner tests, and deserves better treatment than the neglect it
now endures.) Since the amp would not be used with any phono gear, phono
pre-amp stage qualities are unimportant, as are headamp capabilities, etc.

Cost on the above is the primary consideration, so stuff available from
mailorder discounters is the main interest. Since it is easy to find a 
receiver for under $99 that fits these requirements, I am irked that I
can't just go out and buy the amp section alone for $79 or so... (Yes,
I understand the economies of scale and that the demand for cheap
receivers exceeds the demand for cheap amps; I don't have to like it,
though...) (Before you suggest that I use such a receiver: I don't want
that cheap FM section sitting on or under that good tuner, radiating
spurious gorp into the tuner and causing whatever deleterious effects.
I am not enamored of the idea of buying a new receiver and excising or
disabling the tuner portion, either.)

And on the Carver tuner vs. receiver cost -- is it definite that the
tuner section in the Carver receiver has ALL the capabilities and
performance of the separate tuner? If so, the posted cost comparisons
are valid. If they are really different animals, merely sharing a
few circuits or cosmetics, though, they are not really comparative.
Anyone out there know the details of the innards of these beasts
and can speak authoritatively?

Regards,
Will Martin

USENET: seismo!brl-bmd!wmartin     or   ARPA/MILNET: wmartin@almsa-1.ARPA

rfg@hound.UUCP (R.GRANTGES) (03/23/85)

[]
I'm pretty sure that the review I read said the Carver receiver FM
section worked better than the tuner did. Don"t know about the bells and whistles. I think they said that they understood that the improvements made in the 
rcvr had also been carried over to later model tuners. I believe noth reviews
were in Audio.

-- 

"It's the thought, if any, that counts!"  Dick Grantges  hound!rfg