[Amish]

@frahengeo Thanks man!
 
 
 
I have a question for anyone able to answer. I noticed on the back of the TX-8100 tuner there are two outputs, (Variable and fixed).
 
I know what they do, (variable would allow me to control the output volume of the tuner with it's dial and the fixed would be a fixed set output signal).
 
My question is which one should be used to the tuner input of the SA-8100 amp? Can either be used?

 

[analogsurviver]

  @frahengeo Thanks man!
 
 
 
I have a question for anyone able to answer. I noticed on the back of the TX-8100 tuner there are two outputs, (Variable and fixed).
 
I know what they do, (variable would allow me to control the output volume of the tuner with it's dial and the fixed would be a fixed set output signal).
 
My question is which one should be used to the tuner input of the SA-8100 amp? Can either be used?

I am not familiar with the TX-8100. 
 
Either can be used. They may or may not be identical - aside the potentiometer in the variable one, which can be used to match the output in loudness with your other source(s) in such a way that on "normal" music programme there are no radical changes in loudness when switching from say turntable to FM ( or in modern day, say from a CD or DAC ).
 
I have Technics ST-9030 tuner from their Pro series. This one DOES deviate from "loudness only" difference between direct and variable outputs. I forgot which is which, but IIRC direct one omits the sharp 19 kHz pilot tone filter - and as a consequence, at a price of slight audibility of the 19 kHz pilot tone (to the people young enough to still be able to hear pure sine wave of 19 kHz), achieves FAR better soundtage than most FM tuners, regardless of price. If the both outputs are set so to match the levels at difference below 0.1 dB, and AB comparing  them, there is clearly audible difference which one gives better sound. Instantly so. I would have to re-check the specs, but extension and flatness of the treble in this tuner when used without the sharp filter FAR exceeds specs even for FM transmitters. 
 
The only tuner I have heard to beat the ST-9030 in this capability was Tandberg TPT 3001A. Most other "super tuners, above ST-9030 level" simply can not match ST-9030 for the soundstage if and when ST-9030 is used without the sharp 19kHz pilot tone filter ( required back in the day primarily because of analog recorders that go totally berserk if FM out is not sufficiently filtered out for the pilot tone - today's digital recorders do not have this limitation any more and I always record from FM to DSD recorders without the filter ).

 

[Amish]

@analogsurviver
 
Thanks. I did some more digging last night and discovered that either could be used. The only reason I even asked is because while surfing the web yesterday I saw a post where someone was saying not to use the fixed as it could damage the amp. Seems odd to me that would be the case but it made me start thinking so I posed the question here.
 
 
Anyways thanks again.

 

[KeithEmo]

  I am not familiar with the TX-8100. 
 
Either can be used. They may or may not be identical - aside the potentiometer in the variable one, which can be used to match the output in loudness with your other source(s) in such a way that on "normal" music programme there are no radical changes in loudness when switching from say turntable to FM ( or in modern day, say from a CD or DAC ).
 
I have Technics ST-9030 tuner from their Pro series. This one DOES deviate from "loudness only" difference between direct and variable outputs. I forgot which is which, but IIRC direct one omits the sharp 19 kHz pilot tone filter - and as a consequence, at a price of slight audibility of the 19 kHz pilot tone (to the people young enough to still be able to hear pure sine wave of 19 kHz), achieves FAR better soundtage than most FM tuners, regardless of price. If the both outputs are set so to match the levels at difference below 0.1 dB, and AB comparing  them, there is clearly audible difference which one gives better sound. Instantly so. I would have to re-check the specs, but extension and flatness of the treble in this tuner when used without the sharp filter FAR exceeds specs even for FM transmitters. 
 
The only tuner I have heard to beat the ST-9030 in this capability was Tandberg TPT 3001A. Most other "super tuners, above ST-9030 level" simply can not match ST-9030 for the soundstage if and when ST-9030 is used without the sharp 19kHz pilot tone filter ( required back in the day primarily because of analog recorders that go totally berserk if FM out is not sufficiently filtered out for the pilot tone - today's digital recorders do not have this limitation any more and I always record from FM to DSD recorders without the filter ).

 
I would be a little more careful about that 19 kHz pilot tone.
 
If you have tweeters that really deliver up to 20 kHz, then it will actually be audible to quite a few people, and will also be very unpleasant to pets (dogs and cats can hear 19 kHz). It will also be quite unpleasant to those people who can hear it, and may result in headaches and other symptoms of "listener fatigue" in some of those who don't hear it as a distinct "sound".
 
The 19 kHz carrier is present on all stereo FM broadcasts (it's where the stereo information resides). Since it is technically inside the "audio band", most modern equipment should indeed "handle it" with few if any serious problems. However, you should also be aware that we're talking about a continuous 19 kHz tone, which carries the possibility of damaging your tweeters, especially if you happen to turn up the treble (which usually applies a boost that increases at very high frequencies - like 19 kHz).
 
Since design of sharp filters was somewhat difficult "back in the old days", it's not at all surprising that the filter might produce clearly audible "side effects" in the form of reduced treble response inside the audio band.

 

[analogsurviver]

   
I would be a little more careful about that 19 kHz pilot tone.
 
If you have tweeters that really deliver up to 20 kHz, then it will actually be audible to quite a few people, and will also be very unpleasant to pets (dogs and cats can hear 19 kHz). It will also be quite unpleasant to those people who can hear it, and may result in headaches and other symptoms of "listener fatigue" in some of those who don't hear it as a distinct "sound".
 
The 19 kHz carrier is present on all stereo FM broadcasts (it's where the stereo information resides). Since it is technically inside the "audio band", most modern equipment should indeed "handle it" with few if any serious problems. However, you should also be aware that we're talking about a continuous 19 kHz tone, which carries the possibility of damaging your tweeters, especially if you happen to turn up the treble (which usually applies a boost that increases at very high frequencies - like 19 kHz).
 
Since design of sharp filters was somewhat difficult "back in the old days", it's not at all surprising that the filter might produce clearly audible "side effects" in the form of reduced treble response inside the audio band.

No worries - Technics did know their stuff, as well as anyone else. I might decide to post a FFT spectrum for the same broadcast in FM stereo with or without the filter - that 19 kHz pilot tone is, even in "unfiltered mode", quite some dB down in level. The only thing that really do go berserk in unfiltered mode are analog tape recorders. And these usually sport an MPX (19 kHz stereo pilot tone) filter onboard - just in case. I have zero trouble recording off ST-9030 trough unfiltered output into analog cassette deck with MPX filter on.
 
For those that do not agree with this approach, Technics did provide conventional output.
 
There is no such thing as a filter ANYWHERE NEAR the audible range ( CD brickwall is the first thing that springs to mind )  that is audibly transparent. Not in real life anyway. Filters are getting ever better - but having to filter just above (CD) or even within (FM stereo) the officially accepted audible range limit of 20 kHz is simply to close not to cause audible trouble. It is much easier to obtain well sounding result by having larger bandwidth system which requires less severe and thus easier to implement filtering.

 

[KeithEmo]

  No worries - Technics did know their stuff, as well as anyone else. I might decide to post a FFT spectrum for the same broadcast in FM stereo with or without the filter - that 19 kHz pilot tone is, even in "unfiltered mode", quite some dB down in level. The only thing that really do go berserk in unfiltered mode are analog tape recorders. And these usually sport an MPX (19 kHz stereo pilot tone) filter onboard - just in case. I have zero trouble recording off ST-9030 trough unfiltered output into analog cassette deck with MPX filter on.
 
For those that do not agree with this approach, Technics did provide conventional output.
 
There is no such thing as a filter ANYWHERE NEAR the audible range ( CD brickwall is the first thing that springs to mind )  that is audibly transparent. Not in real life anyway. Filters are getting ever better - but having to filter just above (CD) or even within (FM stereo) the officially accepted audible range limit of 20 kHz is simply to close not to cause audible trouble. It is much easier to obtain well sounding result by having larger bandwidth system which requires less severe and thus easier to implement filtering.

 
Forget about "getting close to the audible range" - the original FM spec defines "the main band" as "extending from 23 Hz to 15 kHz". So, assuming that a broadcaster follows the standard, they aren't supposed to be broadcasting any actual audio above 15 kHz anyway (although I suspect that many sort of ignore that restriction

). 
 
Personally, I'm not a big fan of FM (because they never seem to be playing what I want), but I've also heard that many older tuners, including some that otherwise sound very good,  "have trouble" with many modern FM stations because several new digital subcarriers have been added to the overall mix. (And many older tuners, which used wider station-selectivity filters to enable them to achieve better audio performance, now find that some of these new sidebands occasionally leak through as "birdies" and other annoying noises.)

 

[analogsurviver]

   
Forget about "getting close to the audible range" - the original FM spec defines "the main band" as "extending from 23 Hz to 15 kHz". So, assuming that a broadcaster follows the standard, they aren't supposed to be broadcasting any actual audio above 15 kHz anyway (although I suspect that many sort of ignore that restriction

). 
 
Personally, I'm not a big fan of FM (because they never seem to be playing what I want), but I've also heard that many older tuners, including some that otherwise sound very good,  "have trouble" with many modern FM stations because several new digital subcarriers have been added to the overall mix. (And many older tuners, which used wider station-selectivity filters to enable them to achieve better audio performance, now find that some of these new sidebands occasionally leak through as "birdies" and other annoying noises.)

I am aware of everything mentioned - and ever more digital is creeping in FM sterep broadcasting, ever worse it sounds. OK for the "average" user (who wants a "clean" signal ), catastrophe for high quality audio. 
 
There are, fortunately, few stations within my reach that are OK both musically and technically. But on average, FM has unfortunately become crap best avoided. Under most favourable conditions, great live FM stereo broadcast is the best sound available out of live or studio. And it is amusing and funny, that out of all available FM stations, the best SQ has the world famous Radio Student
 
http://radiostudent.si/
 
https://sl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radio_%C5%A0tudent_Ljubljana
 
- because they always receive phased out equipment from our national radio and most of their gear is as old/ analog as you can still find in operation today.

 

[Mechans1]

Can you tell us where in a general way where you get these stations.  I live in the New York metropolan area in a suburb . The last all day classical station for a huge population ( many millions of people) had to share 1/2of their hours with an all jazz  station.  Can you believe how much the average listener's taste has changed!?  I don't listen to classical all that much, fortuneately there is a university based  station that plays classical all day and a couple of Jazz hours at night  If I am in the mood for radio classical,  that is where I have to go.  I suppose that Cable like subscription they can access virtually anything they want  You can be quite sure all of the music it mixed digitally .

 

[analogsurviver]

  Can you tell us where in a general way where you get these stations.  I live in the New York metropolan area in a suburb . The last all day classical station for a huge populat had to share 1/2of their hours with an all jazz  station.  Can you believe how much the average listener's taste has changed!  I don't listen to classical all that much, fortuneately there is a university based  station that plays classical all day and a couple of Jazz hours at night  If I am in the mood for that is where I have to go.  I suppose that Cable like subscription they can access virtually anything they want  You can be quite sure all of the music it mixed digitally .

FM is intended for not beyond horizon distances ( although in a pinch *can* work slightly beyond that limitation ). "On the sunny side of the Alps" was/is the old tourist slogan for my country - Slovenia - which most of Americans will have little trouble finding out where it is - by mentioning it is some 100 miles east of the little known town in Italy that also goes by the name of Venice

...
 
So, I can not give you any direction for SQ of FM stations in the USA - "slightly" too far for me. If you are the super lucky "FM  SOB" and live on some peak in the mountains, say at approx 1500 metres above the sea level, you may well have the pick of MANY stations; as a joke, I took a simple battery powered portable FM radio to one such location - and you can not turn the tuning knob without going past at LEAST TWO stations - which in the valley are not available even with reference broadcast grade equipment. At that place ( Velika planina https://sl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Velika_planina ) I could have ANY Slovenian station, most of the northern Italy stations, more powerful Croatian stations, stations from Austria ( Vienna Philharmonic Orchestra featured regularly in live broadcasts on ORF, Austrian Radio ...), even some Hungarian station(s) - ALL on FM ...
 
There is a thing - one thing - THE thing I have to be grateful to our national RTV Slovenija. And that is their archive of analog tapes from the end of WW2 to "present". Gradually everything is being digitized (or has already been digitized 

 - yeah, I do understand tha analog tapes deteriorate over time, that digitizing is the way to preserve them for the future ...) - but you should see my smile every time they play something genuinly analog 

. Our Italian audiophile friends have nothing but contempt for the FM - until, almost by force, seated in front of the good system with great FM as a source over here - sooo much has generally FM deteriorated just some 100 miles to the west... - it is whose station will sound the loudest, with music compressed to the absolute maximum limits technically possible; I would not care one iota for the FM under such conditions, either...
 
As you can see, there will be some research required - IF you have the ability to have a decent FM antenna on a rotator. I realize it is (next to ) impossible to have it organized if you live on say 103th floor - and there are some 100 or more floors above you, before there is a roof where you could perch that antenna. But do ask around - and particularly people that are around for at least 50 years; they might be able to point the good stations for you and then is up to you how much you want to invest in FM; but even a small antenna on a rotator and entry level tuner will drive the basic dipole (you get with every tuner) plus some supertuner right into the ground. Only each individual can  decide how  far he/she is likely to go - placing antenna to the highest position you can possibly get to is great for FM reception - but is unfortunately equally great for receiving a lightning ...

 

[Amish]

Not to derail the wonderful conversation you guys are on...lol But....
 
My 8100's arrived today and been testing everything. So far everything works fine and I'm really pleased with the sound. The music is more...musical running my Rotel through the SA-8100 and out to a set of Sennheisers. I am pleased to say that my Harmon Kardan 3490 is going to get packed up and stored in the garage. This Pioneer is more enjoyable to listen to than the HK which might be a little more sterile. Gonna hook up my Ember as a preamp and see how that goes.
 
The TX-8100 is one sweet tuner. Man it pulls in stations like no other. Well pleased. The amp is dead silent too. Max the volume and I don't hear anything at all. Just like my Bryston.
 
Not put on the shelf yet as I'm testing but..
 

 

[Skylab]

VERY nice, Amish!!!

 

[connieflyer]

Amish, you will love the set up, I bought the SA9100 and TX 9100 and the CTX 7100  when they first came out, and used them up till the late 90's gave to sister and she used them another 10 years, expensive to fix with the precision components, but at sixty watts the amp drove all my Wharfdales, and Electro-Voice EV-5's, I have looked at getting a renewed set, but the prices kept me away, enjoy my friend!

 

[Amish]

@Skylab Thanks man!! I'm well pleased.
 
@connieflyer I'm sure I will thanks.
 
 
So I have another question if anyone is willing to provide an answer.
 
I'm hooking up my project Ember amp as a preamp to the SA-8100. I see a few ways of doing this and would like to know if there is a best way to do it.
 
 
1. Looking at the rear of the SA-8100 amp I have the option of using the preamp input which bypasses the SA-8100 amp and seems to just pass through the Ember singal out to my speakers. This way seems to bypass every function of the pioneer amp. Volume control is done by using the gain on the ember. Sounds damn good too.
 
2. Plugging the Ember into the AUX 1 or AUX 2 now uses the amp of the Pioneer and all functions of the amp work. This way I have to turn the ember volume up to 75% or more and then use the volume on the pioneer. This was is convenient but not sure if SQ is as good. It's tuff to tell because switching between option 1 above and this one (aux 2) takes too much time to be able to judge sq properly.
 
3. My third option I have not tried yet but I could plug the Ember into one of the tape inputs.
 
 
So the question of the day is which is the purest way to run my Ember through the pioneer? I'm looking to get as much of the tube sound through this pioneer as possible.
 
Any thoughts?

 

[analogsurviver]

  @Skylab Thanks man!! I'm well pleased.
 
@connieflyer I'm sure I will thanks.
 
 
So I have another question if anyone is willing to provide an answer.
 
I'm hooking up my project Ember amp as a preamp to the SA-8100. I see a few ways of doing this and would like to know if there is a best way to do it.
 
 
1. Looking at the rear of the SA-8100 amp I have the option of using the preamp input which bypasses the SA-8100 amp and seems to just pass through the Ember singal out to my speakers. This way seems to bypass every function of the pioneer amp. Volume control is done by using the gain on the ember. Sounds damn good too.
 
2. Plugging the Ember into the AUX 1 or AUX 2 now uses the amp of the Pioneer and all functions of the amp work. This way I have to turn the ember volume up to 75% or more and then use the volume on the pioneer. This was is convenient but not sure if SQ is as good. It's tuff to tell because switching between option 1 above and this one (aux 2) takes too much time to be able to judge sq properly.
 
3. My third option I have not tried yet but I could plug the Ember into one of the tape inputs.
 
 
So the question of the day is which is the purest way to run my Ember through the pioneer? I'm looking to get as much of the tube sound through this pioneer as possible.
 
Any thoughts?

Hmmm... please specify, exactly, the signal paths from the source to the speakers/headphones, for both of the mentioned possibilities. And do take care whether it is an "input" or "output"...
 
Otherwise, congrats on your new gear - it looks very nice ! 

 

[Amish]

I took this from manual and drew in the info you requested. This is how I have it hooked up right now and it sounds great. But would it be best to run the tube amp into the pioneer amp's tape in or aux in?
 
 
PC USB > DAC > tube amp input > tube amp output > Pioneer SA-8100 amp's pre-power amp input