Shootouts

shootouts

Übersetzung für shootouts im Englisch-Deutsch-Wörterbuch switchnow.nu Shootout. Shootout (Schlacht), mit Waffen ausgetragene Auseinandersetzung ( siehe Western, manchmal der Showdown); Shootout – Keine Gnade, Actionfilm. Übersetzung im Kontext von „shootouts“ in Englisch-Deutsch von Reverso Context: So an exception to this, however, is penalty shootouts.

Shootouts Video

Deadly shootout & police chase caught on camera, Seattle Hier sehen Sie Ihre letzten Suchanfragen, die neueste zuerst. Die Polizei bekommt ihren Anteil am Geschäft und hält sich raus. He was kidnapped and subsequently killed in a shootout with LAPD. Der Eintrag wurde im Forum gespeichert. Fussball Ist der Satz so korrekt in Englisch? Diese Beispiele können umgangssprachliche Wörter, die auf der Grundlage Ihrer Suchergebnis enthalten. We use the official final scores i. By the way, ballistics report came back on your little shootout. Zur Berechnung der Rangliste ziehen wir die offiziellen Endergebnisse d. Otherwise, Christina would never have risked a public shootout. Klicken Sie einfach auf ein Wort, um die Ergebnisse erneut angezeigt zu bekommen.

shootouts -

Aber die Schiesserei hat auch viel Spass gemacht. Penalty shoot-outs do not affect the calculation system. Um Vokabeln speichern und später lernen zu können, müssen Sie angemeldet sein. Shoot-outs aren't in the package. Fussball Ist der Satz so korrekt in Englisch? Übersetzung Wörterbuch Rechtschreibprüfung Konjugation Synonyme. Fussball Ist der Satz so korrekt in Englisch? The Chinese got word of the shootout at Lexington. Wie finde ich die neuen Satzbeispiele? Die Vokabel wurde gespeichert, jetzt sortieren?

Can you say, adrenalin? I'm sorry for the young man!!! If somebody asked that cop why did you shoot him 17 times, the classic answer would be because I ran out of ammunition.

Ohio Police Attacked with AK Posted May 06, by Member Law Enforcement , Police. Add your comment Login or join to comment Characters left: Much of this content is graphic in nature, showing unfiltered media from the global war on terror and other conflicts.

To the best of Military. In an attempt to free their friend, a criminal gang ambushed seven FBI agents and Kansas City police at the train station as they were escorting captured fugitive Frank Nash back to prison.

The FBI agents were unarmed, but the local police exchanged fire with the criminal gang. The gang unintentionally killed Nash along with the law officers.

The ambush was botched when a truck full of Civilian Conservation Corps workers, who had been dining at the Lodge, was misidentified as Dillinger's men by the Agents, who opened fire, killing one of the civilians and wounding two more.

Dillinger and his men briefly exchanged gunfire with Purvis's men before fleeing out the back of the lodge.

Carter Baum was killed, and another agent wounded, by Baby Face Nelson during the gang's escape. Nelson pursued the FBI Agents, exchanging gunfire with them, until his car was disabled.

Though Nelson was wounded seventeen times by the Agents, he and Chase were able to fatally injure both Hollis and Cowley. Nelson escaped, only to die that evening from his injuries.

Ordered to surrender, Fred opened fire; both he and his mother were killed by federal agents after an intense, hours-long shootout in a rented house.

Gangster Dutch Schultz and cronies battle with rival mobsters from Murder, Inc. Puerto Rican nationalists Oscar Collazo and Griselio Torresola got into a shootout with officers of the Capitol police and Secret Service while attempting to break into the Blair House and assassinate president Harry Truman.

By the end of the gun battle, Torresola and officer Leslie Coffelt were killed in an event that firearms instructor Massad Ayoob called "the boldest attempt at home invasion in modern history".

Charles Whitman barricaded himself at the top of the tower at the University of Texas at Austin and proceeded to fire randomly from the tower.

He eventually received return fire from police and armed civilians. He was killed in a final shootout when his perch was stormed by Austin police. On April 6, , California Highway Patrol officers engaged heavily armed criminals Bobby Davis and Jack Twining in a shootout in the parking lot of a restaurant near Newhall, California.

In a span of five minutes, Davis and Twining killed four CHP officers, making it the deadliest day in the history of Californian law enforcement.

In an attempt to free his brother, imprisoned Black Panther leader George Jackson , year-old Jonathan Jackson entered a courthouse in Marin County, California with an arsenal of weapons.

After storming into a room where a trial was taking place, Jackson armed defendant James McClain, who was on trial for murdering a prison guard, and two fellow convicts who were participating in the trial as witnesses, William Christmas and Ruchell Magee.

The four armed men then took the judge, a district attorney and three jurors hostage, and marched them out of the courthouse into a waiting getaway van.

As they attempted to flee the scene, a shootout broke out between the hostage takers and Marin County Sheriffs deputies providing security at the courthouse.

According to the other hostages, Haley was executed by the hostage takers with a shotgun that had been taped to his throat.

Magee was severely injured, but survived the battle and was sentenced to life in prison. One juror and the D.

One of the weapons used by Jackson was later traced to Black Panther icon Angela Davis , who was later tried but acquitted for participation in the crime.

It was later alleged by a Marin General Hospital doctor that Judge Haley was being treated for a brain tumor and should have been recused from trying cases for health reasons.

This remains one of the largest police shootouts in history with a reported total of over 9, rounds being fired 5, by police, 4, by the SLA. Every round fired by SLA members at the police missed the officers.

During the incident, police fired tear gas into the house, unintentionally starting a fire. All six SLA members were killed, either by police bullets or the fire.

The massacre took place at 2: A longstanding feud between two rival Chinatown gangs , the Joe Boys and Wah Ching , came to a head when a botched assassination attempt by the Joe Boys at the restaurant led to 5 civilians, including 2 tourists, being killed, and 11 others injured.

The assassination attempt came about after members of Wah Ching vandalized the graves of Joe Boys' members, breaking an unspoken taboo of respecting the dead.

MOVE was a back-to-nature, anti-technology group in Philadelphia , Pennsylvania in the s and s. They were involved in two shootouts with the Philadelphia police.

August 8, , Powelton Village. During an attempt to forcibly remove the group from the home in which they were living, a shootout took place between the police and the group; one police officer was killed.

Nine of the group members were tried and sentenced for murder. May 13, , Osage Avenue. About 10, rounds of ammunition were fired by the police.

The police dropped a bomb on the house, starting a fire which burned down 62 houses and killed 11 people. Prolonged shootout and chase between police in Norco, California, and five heavily armed bank robbers wearing military-style fatigues and armed with assault rifles , thousands of rounds of hollow-point bullets as well as various explosive and incendiary devices.

Police responded to a bank robbery call in Norco. Upon arriving the police were ambushed and outgunned. After the robbers unloaded over rounds at police cruisers, the officers were forced to retreat behind their cruisers or nearby obstacles, all the while being fired upon.

The suspects attempted to escape in their own vehicle. During this attempt, the driver of the suspects was killed by a stray police shot.

The suspects then hijacked a nearby vehicle and became involved in a prolonged chase, in which the suspects shot at police and disabled and destroyed 33 police vehicles as well as civilian cars with explosives thrown from the back of a truck.

The suspects also disabled a police helicopter by shooting at it. Later, the suspects lay in wait for police as they chased them, and ambushed them, resulting in the death of a police officer and wounding 2 others.

Heavily outgunned, the police were pinned down until one officer arrived with an AR carbine. After the police engaged the suspects with the AR, the suspects fled.

One of the suspects was killed in the shootout, one during a later standoff with the police the next day, and three were later captured. An attempted armed robbery of a Brinks armored truck by members of the Weather Underground and Black Liberation Army resulted in a shootout and the deaths of 20 police officers and a Brinks security guard in Nyack, New York.

The robbers, wearing body armor and equipped with assault rifles, initially ambushed the armored truck when it was parked at a shopping mall, killing Brinks guard Pete Paige and wounding his partner.

In a second shootout, police officers Waverly Brown and Ed O'Grady were killed and the robbers fled the scene in several different directions.

Four of the robbers were arrested during their escape attempt, and more than six other people involved were arrested in subsequent investigations over the next several years.

The last arrest was made in It did have bass but it was somewhere between running out of gas and running on empty.

You get a thump instead of feeling the bass as in the LT. All in all, the sound was pleasant and not irritating except for the bass presentation.

This model has a dynamic range expander switch that gives 0 db, 4 db or 9 db of expansion. At first, all I noticed was that everything got louder, but the more I worked with it, the more I got the feeling that it made the music kind of shout at me.

DX results showed the Phase Linear capturing my test stations on This power hungry monster uses 13 thirteen! Sixty watts probably was coming from these lamps.

A note on the surprisingly pleasant sound: Inside, I see only film caps along the audio path, with no electrolytics between the MPX chip, audio stage and output.

Now, I wonder if I pulled about half those lamps and beefed up the power supply? Would the bass come into its own?

Stay tuned, I'll let you know. Of course the winner again is the LT, but the Phase Linear wasn't the worst of the bunch.

This time around we have a very attractive Pioneer. The TXII gave a clean sonic presentation. Silibance was not irritating, and the midrange was articulate and pleasant.

Imaging was good but lacked the sense of depth of the LT. Where the TXII stumbled was in the lower midrange and bass area. The LT consistently gave more body to the music and a sense of power in the bass.

I'm actually impressed with the TXII's sound. The audio amp is a multi-function leg PA A quick look at the service manual invites some possible DIY improvements.

The final sound of the II gave a more fleshed-out midrange and an even sweeter treble. Worth, west of me, and On this rainy afternoon the II held its own, capturing This is the first tuner to match the LT in this test since I've starting using it.

On another day, swinging the APS-9 toward the east on The LT was able to dig through the muck and grab some classical music, weakly, but the Pioneer could capture nothing at As a side note, I'll never give up my roof-mounted FM antenna.

It has really brought in more stations with less noise for me. To summarize, the TX impressed, but the winner, as before, is the LT. This shootout will be longer than most as I give more information on the weak DX test stations.

The Marantz Model is an attractive tuner that's fun to watch, with its scope dancing along with the music. The scope can also be used for fine tuning.

The intense blue lighting of the dial and scope contrasting against the red indicators will appeal to many. Rotating my APS-9 antenna around the area gave these results.

Looking northwest to And on one particular night, I had to stop testing and listen to some really good jazz for an hour. Sometimes, you just get lucky.

In the same direction is another weak station at I was picking up more noise on the Marantz here. Next, I turned the antenna west, to the low-powered Texas Christian University station, Capturing an acceptable signal here has been a good test for the shootout tuners.

Surprisingly, both tuners did well on this night of DX tests. There was a cloud cover which may have helped. The Marantz had much more noise in wide mode that the LT did in wide.

Searching directly east, I could grab Maybe this summer I can relocate my antenna system to avoid facing into the giant tree in our yard.

I really want to open up the signal path toward east Texas. It was jazz week while testing these two and I tripped over another college station at Most of Dallas's "local" stations transmit from the large antenna farm in Cedar Hill, Texas, As far as sound quality goes, the Marantz had a forward, one-dimensional sound.

While never irritating or unpleasant, the midrange and treble had a light tonal quality that never made me forget that I was listening to a radio.

There was also more hiss in the background with weak or problem signals compared to the LT. On the plus side, the Marantz pulled in the hard-to-grab college stations in narrow mode but not as cleanly as the LT.

The LT easily won this one-on-one shootout. The Kenwood KT was a pleasant surprise. This time around, I had the chance to listen to two stock s and found no real unit-to-unit differences.

It was an enjoyable experience throughout the listening sessions. I expected sound close to the KT that I rated so low, mainly because the KT uses the same op-amp at the output, but not so!

The differences in circuitry upstream must be doing the trick. Against my standard LT, the soundstage presented itself slightly in front of the speakers from the upper midrange through the treble.

The dynamics that I found missing in the KT were there in the and made listening to music more enjoyable throughout the tests.

The imaging of the was precise and pinpoint, not slightly diffuse like the TU-X1. Maybe as part of the slightly "forward" upper range, you lose some of the three-dimensional sound quality found in the LT.

On the plus side, the had more front-to-rear depth than the or even the KT Bass was good and dynamics were surprisingly good.

The sibilance was there, but mild, and not as bad as on some previous test tuners. Tests on weak stations around the dial showed the KT to be a good DX machine.

Weak stations on Listening in on the weakest local station at The was definitely noisier than the LT, both in wide and narrow mode.

Strangely, there was some noise always present with either tuner That sounds like a dirty or well-used record. In wide mode, both tuners heard noise and interference from Not so with the Overall, as nice a tuner as the KT is, the LT must come out on top again.

This time we have the black version of the AH This is a beautiful tuner and I'm sure the silver version is, too. The tuner's display has a muted, off-white illumination that I find most attractive, particularly in a dimly lit room.

I was apprehensive about the touch controls, which seemed like a gimmick waiting to go wrong, but they worked flawlessly throughout the time the tuner was in my system.

Read Bob's review of the AH for more insight. Time to cut to the chase. This is a wonderful-sounding tuner. I listened for hours without any thought of sonic faults.

On casual listening, the Philips was very close in its sonic signature to the LT. I had to spend a lot of time to squeeze out any differences between the two tuners.

There was just a hint of more bass extension from the LT, impossible to notice without long listening sessions and an aural magnifying glass.

More noticeable was the added "life" in the highs. In the shootout wars, this was the first tuner to have more treble energy than the LT's that I still found just as enjoyable, if not more so.

If other samples sound this good, I highly recommend this tuner in stock form. It usually stayed as quiet as the Kenwood, but lost its large stereo soundstage.

There is obviously a high-blend type circuit causing the collapse of the soundstage, probably the "automatic noise canceling circuit," which is actually not a bad thing to keep the signal quiet.

To sum up, with a strong signal present, the two tuners fought an even battle. On weaker stations, the LT proved to be a slightly better all-around tuner.

Nonetheless, the Philips is highly recommended as a great music machine. It looks pretty neat. In fact, it dazzles. I can't help wondering how good it could have been, sonically, if all that transformer power and technology had been used to develop a good tube audio stage instead of these gadgets.

There are no glaring, unpleasant sonic problems. What I did hear or actually, did not hear, were low-level details in the music.

Ambiance and low-level detail were diminished compared to the LT. Bass was nice but not as powerful as the LT's. As a matter of fact, the more I listened, the more I was reminded of the pleasant sound presented by the Sequerra Model 1.

You lose some bass and gain some treble extension with the SAE, but I do hear a mini-Sequerra in there. Turn it on late at night, choose a nice wine and enjoy the tunes.

And here is a nice benefit of owning one: There was more background noise on the weaker stations compared to the LT, but not as bad as some tuners in the shootouts.

This tuner is the second of the the shootout contestants to have a known, good alignment, thanks to Bob. Nothing has been modified and no parts have been changed.

Fortunately, it sounds better than the first aligned tuner, the Mac MR Unfortunately, it doesn't DX as well. As usual, there were no noticeable problems at It held the signal fairly steady in narrow.

Going degrees away from KTCU on The sound presented during the listening tests to this weak signal showed up as harsh sputter as the F tried its best to grab and hold onto the signal.

The LT's attempt was less sonically offensive as it held then lost the signal. I had hoped for better DX performance from the F because, for some strange reason, I like the looks of this tuner.

Now for the sound. Here, we get to smile again. In treble sweetness, extension and ambient information, this is the second shootout tuner that, I feel, outperforms the LT - the first being the Philips AH These two tuners just get it right in the treble.

Boy, if I could tack this ability onto the already wonderful sounding LT As far as the midrange goes, both the F and LT held up well with articulate, focused images.

The only area where the F disappointed was in the lower midrange. There wasn't quite the weight and extra feel of power invoked as while listening to the LT.

That being said, the bass itself was nice and punchy on my system. I need to stop here to express how impossible this job would be without the LT being used as our standard, my benchmark for sonic neutrality and musicality.

The job could still be done but I would probably have less defined increments of sonic neutrality to post. Maybe it would be more of a clumping, something like "these seven sound good, but these nine I could live without," etc.

In any event, I have to say that the F is a great-sounding tuner and a heck of a value at the price they're being sold for on eBay - a dream tuner for someone on a budget.

Magnum Dynalab MD Winner: I told the gang I didn't want to do a shootout of our Kenwood transistor tuner against any tube tuners, including the MD hybrid, but they forced me.

They forced me to put this drop-dead gorgeous Magnum Dynalab tuner in my system and demanded that I listen to it.

What's a dedicated tuner guy to do? As before, the volume level was set to closely match the two tuners through the midrange. Because we can try different output tubes, this can be a chameleon of a tuner.

The typical buyer will most likely be tempted to do some "tube-rolling" and I, as the reviewer, was no different.

The stock tubes were not available for use as one arrived broken shipped from a third party, not from Magnum Dynalab.

The first tubes tried were two smooth plate Telefunkens. After warm-up and settling in, I first noticed a midrange with excellent lifelike imaging.

The treble was more forward than the LT's, but not irritating. The lifelike quality of voice and instruments made me sit up and listen.

On some recordings of female voice, there was a feeling that the singer was in the room. The MD's downfall came in the lower midrange and bass that was a little light compared to the LT's richer, fuller sound.

This was quite a surprise as I had expected a more lush "tube-like" sonic presentation in the lower ranges. Before the arrived, my assumptions were it would have a Mac MR 67 or Marantz 10B-type sound quality.

Did Magnum go out of their way not to overdo the "tube sound"? But when I tried a pair of s marked Sylvania, I heard a change for the better.

The lower midrange fleshed out somewhat, the bass seemed fuller, and there was some taming of the high frequencies. A very nice sound but, unfortunately, still not my favorite among the shootout tuners.

I wish I had a pair of RCA black plates available for more tube-rolling. I'll post a follow-up report if any better-sounding tubes are found. When I looked inside I noticed two.

I must stop and tell everyone right now, sonically, this is my least favorite cap of all the so-called high-end audio caps I've heard or tried in my own DIY projects.

Some people say they give more detail but to me, they always give a lighter, brighter sound to the music. I believe these caps create "detail" not originally in the music.

If they're in the direct audio path, I wonder what would happen if they were replaced with Infinicaps or? Would I finally fall in love?

Maybe, but in the meantime, the LT wins again. I give the MD a high rating, mostly because of the excellent midrange presentation. Turning to DX qualities The Magnum Dynalab has three IF bandwidths.

While rotating the antenna around the DFW area I was impressed by the stiff competition between these two tuners. On our weak station, Worth, both held on pretty well in wide mode and both were listenable and enjoyable in narrow.

There was more background hiss in the MD but more interference from One reason may have been that hailstorms tore half the leaves off the giant magnolia tree in our backyard and the APS-9 had a much cleaner line of sight.

No new problems were noticed from either tuner on the other usual DX experiments and neither tuner came out the clear DX winner.

Another dream tuner for the budget-conscious. Another tuner that sounds great stock. That makes my job of reviewing just that much harder.

The cream at the top is getting so thick it's overflowing. I want to listen to some bad-sounding tuners soon - well, maybe just one. This slim black Sansui has a very articulate midrange with good imaging.

The midrange and treble are slightly forward of the LT's presentation. The bass doesn't go as deep in punch power not many do. The Sansui's highs are sweet and non-irritating and blend well with the midrange.

There have been somewhere between 50 and nice-sounding tuners that have found a temporary home in my audio system since the formation of TIC.

Many of these tuners have been digital. There really haven't been that many bad-sounding tuners, and there have been some great ones - keepers you can just set and forget.

Tuners that tweak crazies like me could just leave alone, if that were possible. At the time of this writing I would be able to live with the top 13, if I had to, without mods.

This is a nice tuner for those who just want to play and forget about "fixing it up," although not in the LT's class. The DXing was as follows.

The TU-D99X picked up nearby weak stations when the antenna was correctly positioned. It and the LT both picked up To the northwest, Pointing east on The LT ignored As a matter of fact, I caught myself listening instead of reviewing quite often.

The faults I found were faults of omission rather than any glaring problems. This sample of the T-2 had a lot of drift, which lasted for a good 5 minutes after turn-on.

I wonder if this is a common problem with this model? After matching the volume of the two tuners through the midrange, I got the following sonic results.

When cranking it up, the bass energy in the room went deeper with the LT - more palpable, to use an overused audiophile term. There was a slight loss of harmonic richness to instruments in the T-2 compared to the LT.

I first noticed this with the strum of an acoustic guitar. The highs, although never unpleasant, were a little more pronounced.

This was most noticeable on an announcer's voice and during commercials, with the sibilance being sharper.

Again, I must say the differences were subtle but noticeable in side-by-side testing. Spinning the FM antenna around the area gave these results.

Our true test at The T-2 grabbed and held a good signal in either of the Yamaha's switchable RF modes, which are labeled Selectivity and Sensitivity.

Now here was a shock: On this day, the LT was intermittently swamped by Going to narrow mode on the LT reversed the results and the Kenwood gave a better signal than the Yamaha.

Both came in with good stereo lock but the Yamaha had more noticeable background noise. Later, I realized that Yamaha's circuitry had automatically switched to a more narrow filter configuration than Kenwood's wide.

Going degrees out from The Yamaha had trouble in any configuration, being swamped by To sum up, the T-2 is another nice tuner I could easily live with, if I weren't spoiled rotten with all these nicer tuner toys around me.

There have been quite a few more desirable tuners reviewed in these shootouts, but this Yamaha may very well be THE cutoff tuner between the keepers and the also-rans.

I have an interesting history with the FT series of MD tuners. I absolutely love the look and really should keep one in my collection, but they just cost too much and I'm just too cheap.

I have owned four or five of these tuners, dating back 12 or so years. The most expensive one was an Etude, a demo unit that I bought from a high-end store.

The first one was the most pleasant-sounding of the bunch, and the Etude was the brightest-sounding of the bunch. I've noticed a lot of variability in sound, at least to my ears, from this series.

What could cause this variability is anyone's guess. Now on to the Etude under test. There was nothing objectionable in this sample from the low bass through the highs.

It was a pleasant enough sound throughout. Pitting the Etude against the LT gave the following results.

The LT had a richer, warmer sound from the bass through the lower midrange. The LT's treble was a little more laidback but the Etude was never bright or unpleasant to listen to.

This Etude sample should satisfy most listeners. For a real jump in sound quality, however, the audio op-amp should be upgraded.

I've replaced the stock op-amp with Burr-Brown's OPA in a couple of these and in two older style FT's in the past year, and highly recommend this mod along with replacing the output caps with Black Gates or polypropylenes.

There is room inside. The owner of this Etude says, "This is the best tuner I've found out of many many many for a dreadful multipath interference condition.

Even in narrow mode the Etude had the cleaner signal. Swinging the antenna degrees to the east but leaving the tuners centered on Yes, I did fiddle with the dial to fine tune the stations.

The Etude seems to be more sensitive but not as selective as the LT. On our other test stations on Being suspicious of my first results, I revisited the DX tests on different days and nights as well.

The results were always consistent except I noticed that the LT sometimes had a quieter background. One note of interest is KOAI, at This station almost always has more background noise than other strong stations, as well as noise problems in general.

The LT was able to keep the background noise quieter than the Etude, but keep in mind that this has almost always been the case when other tuners were under test.

After the review, this sample will go under the knife soldering iron in the hopes of making it a better tuner.

On KTCU, our weakest local channel, both tuners were able to grab and hold a usable signal in narrow. The Realistic was noisier and the stereo light would occasionally flicker.

On the other weak stations used as tests, there were no real problems. On the always problematic As a DX machine, the TM is not up there with the big dogs, but it's better than many we've seen.

This little guy was also a pleasant surprise in the sound department, at least when a strong signal was present. It didn't have the same sense of depth as the LT, but was musically involving.

You don't quite get the same rich bass and dynamics as delivered on the LT and some others, but you do get a musically satisfying tuner.

The highs were sweet and never irritated. One thing I didn't like was the short travel of the tuning dial between stations.

You had to dial very slowly and gingerly to stop on a station. The TM definitely doesn't have the feel of the better Kenwoods and Sansuis from the "good ol' days.

I accentuate this review with the fact that every one I've tried had very poor reception. Although it is a good-sounding tuner, it is not sensitive at all and won't pick up anything but the strongest of stations.

The one now under review is no better: On the strongest stations, the sound was good, with good bass through the highs. The sound was more diffuse than the LT, which has great imaging.

I've bought a TU service manual so if I get it serviced and things improve, I'll post the results. I'm hoping this MAY be an assembly line problem and not a design problem.

Not recommended - lowest overall rating so far. I knew I was in trouble early into this review, not only because this Revox sounds great, but because there have been several great-sounding tuners on my shelf recently that you've not read about yet.

I've tried to keep a few reviews ahead of the schedule we've set and suddenly, we have several that all deserve to be at the very top.

This Revox is one of this growing cluster of excellent tuners - tuners so good, so excellent-sounding, it isn't fair or logical to place one above the other.

I'm not going to deviate from our established numerical list but I have to say that this cluster all belong bunched at the top. The creme de la creme, if you will, that really defy me placing one above the other.

This "cream" deserves a special mark but they have to do everything right, even if they sound slightly different from one another.

They must have deep bass, an articulate, pleasant-sounding midrange, and sweet, non-irritating highs. For lack of a better mark, I'll mark these as -C- besides placing them in numerical order.

The -C- will be strictly for sound, while the old order may include other thoughts and observations. I could tell from the first time I turned on the B that this was going to be a good fight.

This Revox has a rich, full bass, while the midrange was very lifelike and a pleasure to sink into. The midrange was slightly more forward than the LT's but never in a way that distracted from the whole presentation, and the highs were smooth and extended but never bright.

A definite improvement over the highs of the Revox B reviewed above. The whole sound was slightly more diffuse than the sound presented by the LT.

It was a very close match between the two as far as musical enjoyment, and the final decision came only after hours of listening to both.

Things are getting real tight at the top as more good tuners are brought into this shootout. The Revox's controls had a more "clunky" feel compared to some analog Sansui and Kenwood models that many of us love, but the sound is where it shines.

Turning to the DX track, at The Revox has no wide and narrow but did catch and hold the signal with much more noise. Switching to mono helped very little.

There was no jazz to be heard on The ReVox was able to control the background noise as well as the LT on Other tuners have been so nice-sounding, in their own way, they've made me look at the LT's sound in a new light.

Could there be more than one path to audio bliss from these tuners? Just a few thoughts after listening to so many tuners in my role as reviewer.

They had the same low, lush, powerful bass. The imaging was excellent on both, they were both very three-dimensional in their presentations, the highs were sweet and never fatiguing, and I could listen to either of them for hours.

It took me a very long time to come up with any sonic differences. Female voice and highs were just a touch lighter with the TU, or should I say the LT was a touch darker-sounding?

The differences were very, very slight. At times, while listening to female vocals, I imagined she stepped off the stage and sang to just me through the Kenwood but stepped back on the stage and sang to everyone at my "table" through the Sansui.

Just an image of the slight differences. The technical side of me was disturbed that it was so hard to tell them apart. One tuner's audio stage uses discrete transistors and the other tuner uses op-amps in the audio section, but in a unique way.

Why do they sound so similar? The planets were aligned just right? Whatever, the LT may have met its match. When it came to the torture test at With both tuners in wide mode, the Sansui was more consistent in holding onto a quieter signal.

In narrow mode, both tuners held a cleaner signal but the Sansui had more occasional noise as its stereo light flickered.

The Kenwood's stereo light held steady but it was obvious that the signal wasn't much more than mono. Manually switching both tuners to mono brought the different RF games these boys were playing under the same set of rules and after that, they fought to a draw.

Thanks to good tropospheric conditions, both tuners could pick up The Kenwood held a better signal, while the Sansui wasn't as selective and occasionally let To sum up, the TU is highly recommended.

The LT by a song and a prayer. That being said, if push came to shove, I could easily switch out the two and make the Sansui king. The ST-J88B is one of those tuners I would love to see hear aligned right with new filters selected the way we've learned they should be.

I like the sound and wonder just how far it could be pushed. The outside is very attractive, which is something I find hard to get right on a digital tuner.

It is wide, low and has an pleasant, understated display. I guess when you've had hundreds of different tuners sitting on the shelf, the sameness in colors can get tiresome.

When I saw it at my friend's office, I couldn't wait to snatch it up and take it home for a test drive. I usually don't do this but had to take a look under the hood.

It appears to have a user-friendly DIY-type layout that's fairly easy to understand, even without a service manual. There seems to be two op-amps along the audio path with capacitors that should be easy to upgrade, also.

Time to order some parts. Some DX thoughts first. On most stations, both tuners had signals that were clean, quiet and pleasant to listen to.

On the swing test, turning the roof antenna toward the east but staying on The DX tests again showed the same song, different tuner.

These tuners have a somewhat similar sonic signature. The differences were subtle but there. While listening one-on-one, it was a most enjoyable time and if other samples sound this nice, the ST-J88B is another one I can recommend.

The bass didn't have quite the power and punch as the Kenwood but had nothing to be ashamed of. The midrange was a little forward but pleasant, and there were no problems in the treble region.

Recommended, but the winner is still the LT. There isn't much to say. When trying to capture KTCU The Nak did handle the birdie problems on

Shootouts -

Zur Berechnung der Rangliste ziehen wir die offiziellen Endergebnisse d. I wasn't in any shootout. Schiesserei hat auch viel Spass gemacht. Aber die Schiesserei hat auch viel Spass gemacht. Um eine neue Diskussion zu starten, müssen Sie angemeldet sein. Um eine neue Diskussion zu starten, müssen Sie angemeldet sein. By the way, ballistics report came back on your little shootout. Lieutenant, es wurden zahlreiche Schüsse bei dem kürzlichen Feuergefecht im Club Mayan abgegeben. Das sorgt für authentischen Sprachgebrauch und gibt Sicherheit bei der Übersetzung! Murder, kidnap, gangland shootouts. Aber wenn das hier so weiter geht, können wir Sie nicht mehr unterstützen. For me it was just Mini 5 Reel Circus™ Slot Machine Game to Play Free in Rivals Online Casinos to spiele kartenspiele him the sort of luck that a goalkeeper needs on line trading penalty shootouts. We use the official final scores i. Anmeldung und Nutzung des Forums sind kostenlos. Penalty shoot-outs casino gelsenkirchen buer not affect the calculation system. Das redaktionell gepflegte PONS Online-Wörterbuch, die Textübersetzung und jetzt auch eine Datenbank mit mehreren hundert Millionen von authentischen Übersetzungen aus dem Internet, die casino osiris, wie ein Ausdruck in der Fremdsprache tatsächlich verwendet wird. Sie können aber jederzeit auch atptour das Planet 7 casino free deposit codes durchsuchen. Wenn Sie die Vokabeln in den Vokabeltrainer übernehmen möchten, klicken Sie in der Vokabelliste einfach auf "Vokabeln übertragen". Shootouts and ambushes every night. Hier sehen Atptour Ihre letzten Suchanfragen, die neueste zuerst. Mecze bundesligi Bilder Definition Wörterbuch Konjugation. He was kidnapped atptour subsequently killed in a shootout with LAPD. This may come from the slight loss of bass and dynamics compared to the LT. It was more bland than irritating. Our maiden held a steady stereo signal but at the cost of slightly more background hiss. December Learn how and when to remove this template message. When I proofread these reviews, I realize my atptour may seem harsh on some Shootout "victims"? Remember that I'm listening through all triode preamp, amps, plus monitors that image like crazy and precise imaging is one of my criteria. The individual images are often pinpoint and focused, while remaining full-bodied and lifelike. The treble was slightly dracula netent new slots forward than the LT's, but not irritating in the least. In my review shootouts the CT, Casino andernach adresse said, "No unpleasant sibilance. Wm 2019 finale much inside, though - it looks like a kit that a pre-teen could build. To the northwest, We are sorry for the inconvenience. As I said, a store owner nearby fsv union fürstenwalde the shootout. Wie finde ich die neuen Satzbeispiele? Es werden teilweise auch Cookies von Diensten Dritter gesetzt. Diese Beispiele atptour umgangssprachliche Wörter, die auf der Grundlage Ihrer Play Joker Poker Videopoker Online at Casino.com Australia enthalten.

After two marines make it home following an ISIS interrogation, one struggles to survive while the other fights his way back into the mixed martial arts world that he left behind years ago Start your free trial.

Find showtimes, watch trailers, browse photos, track your Watchlist and rate your favorite movies and TV shows on your phone or tablet!

Keep track of everything you watch; tell your friends. Full Cast and Crew. Our Favorite Trailers of the Week. See more production information about this title on IMDbPro.

Photos Add Image Add an image Do you have any images for this title? Learn more More Like This. A Soldier's Story 2: Return from the Dead Eric Roberts, John J.

I Got the Hook Up 2 Frank and Ava A house with a dark history. This is a wonderful-sounding tuner. I listened for hours without any thought of sonic faults.

On casual listening, the Philips was very close in its sonic signature to the LT. I had to spend a lot of time to squeeze out any differences between the two tuners.

There was just a hint of more bass extension from the LT, impossible to notice without long listening sessions and an aural magnifying glass.

More noticeable was the added "life" in the highs. In the shootout wars, this was the first tuner to have more treble energy than the LT's that I still found just as enjoyable, if not more so.

If other samples sound this good, I highly recommend this tuner in stock form. It usually stayed as quiet as the Kenwood, but lost its large stereo soundstage.

There is obviously a high-blend type circuit causing the collapse of the soundstage, probably the "automatic noise canceling circuit," which is actually not a bad thing to keep the signal quiet.

To sum up, with a strong signal present, the two tuners fought an even battle. On weaker stations, the LT proved to be a slightly better all-around tuner.

Nonetheless, the Philips is highly recommended as a great music machine. It looks pretty neat. In fact, it dazzles. I can't help wondering how good it could have been, sonically, if all that transformer power and technology had been used to develop a good tube audio stage instead of these gadgets.

There are no glaring, unpleasant sonic problems. What I did hear or actually, did not hear, were low-level details in the music.

Ambiance and low-level detail were diminished compared to the LT. Bass was nice but not as powerful as the LT's.

As a matter of fact, the more I listened, the more I was reminded of the pleasant sound presented by the Sequerra Model 1. You lose some bass and gain some treble extension with the SAE, but I do hear a mini-Sequerra in there.

Turn it on late at night, choose a nice wine and enjoy the tunes. And here is a nice benefit of owning one: There was more background noise on the weaker stations compared to the LT, but not as bad as some tuners in the shootouts.

This tuner is the second of the the shootout contestants to have a known, good alignment, thanks to Bob. Nothing has been modified and no parts have been changed.

Fortunately, it sounds better than the first aligned tuner, the Mac MR Unfortunately, it doesn't DX as well. As usual, there were no noticeable problems at It held the signal fairly steady in narrow.

Going degrees away from KTCU on The sound presented during the listening tests to this weak signal showed up as harsh sputter as the F tried its best to grab and hold onto the signal.

The LT's attempt was less sonically offensive as it held then lost the signal. I had hoped for better DX performance from the F because, for some strange reason, I like the looks of this tuner.

Now for the sound. Here, we get to smile again. In treble sweetness, extension and ambient information, this is the second shootout tuner that, I feel, outperforms the LT - the first being the Philips AH These two tuners just get it right in the treble.

Boy, if I could tack this ability onto the already wonderful sounding LT As far as the midrange goes, both the F and LT held up well with articulate, focused images.

The only area where the F disappointed was in the lower midrange. There wasn't quite the weight and extra feel of power invoked as while listening to the LT.

That being said, the bass itself was nice and punchy on my system. I need to stop here to express how impossible this job would be without the LT being used as our standard, my benchmark for sonic neutrality and musicality.

The job could still be done but I would probably have less defined increments of sonic neutrality to post. Maybe it would be more of a clumping, something like "these seven sound good, but these nine I could live without," etc.

In any event, I have to say that the F is a great-sounding tuner and a heck of a value at the price they're being sold for on eBay - a dream tuner for someone on a budget.

Magnum Dynalab MD Winner: I told the gang I didn't want to do a shootout of our Kenwood transistor tuner against any tube tuners, including the MD hybrid, but they forced me.

They forced me to put this drop-dead gorgeous Magnum Dynalab tuner in my system and demanded that I listen to it. What's a dedicated tuner guy to do?

As before, the volume level was set to closely match the two tuners through the midrange. Because we can try different output tubes, this can be a chameleon of a tuner.

The typical buyer will most likely be tempted to do some "tube-rolling" and I, as the reviewer, was no different. The stock tubes were not available for use as one arrived broken shipped from a third party, not from Magnum Dynalab.

The first tubes tried were two smooth plate Telefunkens. After warm-up and settling in, I first noticed a midrange with excellent lifelike imaging.

The treble was more forward than the LT's, but not irritating. The lifelike quality of voice and instruments made me sit up and listen.

On some recordings of female voice, there was a feeling that the singer was in the room. The MD's downfall came in the lower midrange and bass that was a little light compared to the LT's richer, fuller sound.

This was quite a surprise as I had expected a more lush "tube-like" sonic presentation in the lower ranges. Before the arrived, my assumptions were it would have a Mac MR 67 or Marantz 10B-type sound quality.

Did Magnum go out of their way not to overdo the "tube sound"? But when I tried a pair of s marked Sylvania, I heard a change for the better.

The lower midrange fleshed out somewhat, the bass seemed fuller, and there was some taming of the high frequencies.

A very nice sound but, unfortunately, still not my favorite among the shootout tuners. I wish I had a pair of RCA black plates available for more tube-rolling.

I'll post a follow-up report if any better-sounding tubes are found. When I looked inside I noticed two. I must stop and tell everyone right now, sonically, this is my least favorite cap of all the so-called high-end audio caps I've heard or tried in my own DIY projects.

Some people say they give more detail but to me, they always give a lighter, brighter sound to the music. I believe these caps create "detail" not originally in the music.

If they're in the direct audio path, I wonder what would happen if they were replaced with Infinicaps or? Would I finally fall in love?

Maybe, but in the meantime, the LT wins again. I give the MD a high rating, mostly because of the excellent midrange presentation.

Turning to DX qualities The Magnum Dynalab has three IF bandwidths. While rotating the antenna around the DFW area I was impressed by the stiff competition between these two tuners.

On our weak station, Worth, both held on pretty well in wide mode and both were listenable and enjoyable in narrow. There was more background hiss in the MD but more interference from One reason may have been that hailstorms tore half the leaves off the giant magnolia tree in our backyard and the APS-9 had a much cleaner line of sight.

No new problems were noticed from either tuner on the other usual DX experiments and neither tuner came out the clear DX winner. Another dream tuner for the budget-conscious.

Another tuner that sounds great stock. That makes my job of reviewing just that much harder. The cream at the top is getting so thick it's overflowing.

I want to listen to some bad-sounding tuners soon - well, maybe just one. This slim black Sansui has a very articulate midrange with good imaging.

The midrange and treble are slightly forward of the LT's presentation. The bass doesn't go as deep in punch power not many do.

The Sansui's highs are sweet and non-irritating and blend well with the midrange. There have been somewhere between 50 and nice-sounding tuners that have found a temporary home in my audio system since the formation of TIC.

Many of these tuners have been digital. There really haven't been that many bad-sounding tuners, and there have been some great ones - keepers you can just set and forget.

Tuners that tweak crazies like me could just leave alone, if that were possible. At the time of this writing I would be able to live with the top 13, if I had to, without mods.

This is a nice tuner for those who just want to play and forget about "fixing it up," although not in the LT's class. The DXing was as follows.

The TU-D99X picked up nearby weak stations when the antenna was correctly positioned. It and the LT both picked up To the northwest, Pointing east on The LT ignored As a matter of fact, I caught myself listening instead of reviewing quite often.

The faults I found were faults of omission rather than any glaring problems. This sample of the T-2 had a lot of drift, which lasted for a good 5 minutes after turn-on.

I wonder if this is a common problem with this model? After matching the volume of the two tuners through the midrange, I got the following sonic results.

When cranking it up, the bass energy in the room went deeper with the LT - more palpable, to use an overused audiophile term.

There was a slight loss of harmonic richness to instruments in the T-2 compared to the LT. I first noticed this with the strum of an acoustic guitar.

The highs, although never unpleasant, were a little more pronounced. This was most noticeable on an announcer's voice and during commercials, with the sibilance being sharper.

Again, I must say the differences were subtle but noticeable in side-by-side testing. Spinning the FM antenna around the area gave these results.

Our true test at The T-2 grabbed and held a good signal in either of the Yamaha's switchable RF modes, which are labeled Selectivity and Sensitivity.

Now here was a shock: On this day, the LT was intermittently swamped by Going to narrow mode on the LT reversed the results and the Kenwood gave a better signal than the Yamaha.

Both came in with good stereo lock but the Yamaha had more noticeable background noise. Later, I realized that Yamaha's circuitry had automatically switched to a more narrow filter configuration than Kenwood's wide.

Going degrees out from The Yamaha had trouble in any configuration, being swamped by To sum up, the T-2 is another nice tuner I could easily live with, if I weren't spoiled rotten with all these nicer tuner toys around me.

There have been quite a few more desirable tuners reviewed in these shootouts, but this Yamaha may very well be THE cutoff tuner between the keepers and the also-rans.

I have an interesting history with the FT series of MD tuners. I absolutely love the look and really should keep one in my collection, but they just cost too much and I'm just too cheap.

I have owned four or five of these tuners, dating back 12 or so years. The most expensive one was an Etude, a demo unit that I bought from a high-end store.

The first one was the most pleasant-sounding of the bunch, and the Etude was the brightest-sounding of the bunch. I've noticed a lot of variability in sound, at least to my ears, from this series.

What could cause this variability is anyone's guess. Now on to the Etude under test. There was nothing objectionable in this sample from the low bass through the highs.

It was a pleasant enough sound throughout. Pitting the Etude against the LT gave the following results. The LT had a richer, warmer sound from the bass through the lower midrange.

The LT's treble was a little more laidback but the Etude was never bright or unpleasant to listen to. This Etude sample should satisfy most listeners.

For a real jump in sound quality, however, the audio op-amp should be upgraded. I've replaced the stock op-amp with Burr-Brown's OPA in a couple of these and in two older style FT's in the past year, and highly recommend this mod along with replacing the output caps with Black Gates or polypropylenes.

There is room inside. The owner of this Etude says, "This is the best tuner I've found out of many many many for a dreadful multipath interference condition.

Even in narrow mode the Etude had the cleaner signal. Swinging the antenna degrees to the east but leaving the tuners centered on Yes, I did fiddle with the dial to fine tune the stations.

The Etude seems to be more sensitive but not as selective as the LT. On our other test stations on Being suspicious of my first results, I revisited the DX tests on different days and nights as well.

The results were always consistent except I noticed that the LT sometimes had a quieter background. One note of interest is KOAI, at This station almost always has more background noise than other strong stations, as well as noise problems in general.

The LT was able to keep the background noise quieter than the Etude, but keep in mind that this has almost always been the case when other tuners were under test.

After the review, this sample will go under the knife soldering iron in the hopes of making it a better tuner. On KTCU, our weakest local channel, both tuners were able to grab and hold a usable signal in narrow.

The Realistic was noisier and the stereo light would occasionally flicker. On the other weak stations used as tests, there were no real problems.

On the always problematic As a DX machine, the TM is not up there with the big dogs, but it's better than many we've seen. This little guy was also a pleasant surprise in the sound department, at least when a strong signal was present.

It didn't have the same sense of depth as the LT, but was musically involving. You don't quite get the same rich bass and dynamics as delivered on the LT and some others, but you do get a musically satisfying tuner.

The highs were sweet and never irritated. One thing I didn't like was the short travel of the tuning dial between stations.

You had to dial very slowly and gingerly to stop on a station. The TM definitely doesn't have the feel of the better Kenwoods and Sansuis from the "good ol' days.

I accentuate this review with the fact that every one I've tried had very poor reception. Although it is a good-sounding tuner, it is not sensitive at all and won't pick up anything but the strongest of stations.

The one now under review is no better: On the strongest stations, the sound was good, with good bass through the highs.

The sound was more diffuse than the LT, which has great imaging. I've bought a TU service manual so if I get it serviced and things improve, I'll post the results.

I'm hoping this MAY be an assembly line problem and not a design problem. Not recommended - lowest overall rating so far.

I knew I was in trouble early into this review, not only because this Revox sounds great, but because there have been several great-sounding tuners on my shelf recently that you've not read about yet.

I've tried to keep a few reviews ahead of the schedule we've set and suddenly, we have several that all deserve to be at the very top.

This Revox is one of this growing cluster of excellent tuners - tuners so good, so excellent-sounding, it isn't fair or logical to place one above the other.

I'm not going to deviate from our established numerical list but I have to say that this cluster all belong bunched at the top.

The creme de la creme, if you will, that really defy me placing one above the other. This "cream" deserves a special mark but they have to do everything right, even if they sound slightly different from one another.

They must have deep bass, an articulate, pleasant-sounding midrange, and sweet, non-irritating highs. For lack of a better mark, I'll mark these as -C- besides placing them in numerical order.

The -C- will be strictly for sound, while the old order may include other thoughts and observations. I could tell from the first time I turned on the B that this was going to be a good fight.

This Revox has a rich, full bass, while the midrange was very lifelike and a pleasure to sink into. The midrange was slightly more forward than the LT's but never in a way that distracted from the whole presentation, and the highs were smooth and extended but never bright.

A definite improvement over the highs of the Revox B reviewed above. The whole sound was slightly more diffuse than the sound presented by the LT.

It was a very close match between the two as far as musical enjoyment, and the final decision came only after hours of listening to both.

Things are getting real tight at the top as more good tuners are brought into this shootout. The Revox's controls had a more "clunky" feel compared to some analog Sansui and Kenwood models that many of us love, but the sound is where it shines.

Turning to the DX track, at The Revox has no wide and narrow but did catch and hold the signal with much more noise. Switching to mono helped very little.

There was no jazz to be heard on The ReVox was able to control the background noise as well as the LT on Other tuners have been so nice-sounding, in their own way, they've made me look at the LT's sound in a new light.

Could there be more than one path to audio bliss from these tuners? Just a few thoughts after listening to so many tuners in my role as reviewer.

They had the same low, lush, powerful bass. The imaging was excellent on both, they were both very three-dimensional in their presentations, the highs were sweet and never fatiguing, and I could listen to either of them for hours.

It took me a very long time to come up with any sonic differences. Female voice and highs were just a touch lighter with the TU, or should I say the LT was a touch darker-sounding?

The differences were very, very slight. At times, while listening to female vocals, I imagined she stepped off the stage and sang to just me through the Kenwood but stepped back on the stage and sang to everyone at my "table" through the Sansui.

Just an image of the slight differences. The technical side of me was disturbed that it was so hard to tell them apart.

One tuner's audio stage uses discrete transistors and the other tuner uses op-amps in the audio section, but in a unique way.

Why do they sound so similar? The planets were aligned just right? Whatever, the LT may have met its match. When it came to the torture test at With both tuners in wide mode, the Sansui was more consistent in holding onto a quieter signal.

In narrow mode, both tuners held a cleaner signal but the Sansui had more occasional noise as its stereo light flickered. The Kenwood's stereo light held steady but it was obvious that the signal wasn't much more than mono.

Manually switching both tuners to mono brought the different RF games these boys were playing under the same set of rules and after that, they fought to a draw.

Thanks to good tropospheric conditions, both tuners could pick up The Kenwood held a better signal, while the Sansui wasn't as selective and occasionally let To sum up, the TU is highly recommended.

The LT by a song and a prayer. That being said, if push came to shove, I could easily switch out the two and make the Sansui king.

The ST-J88B is one of those tuners I would love to see hear aligned right with new filters selected the way we've learned they should be. I like the sound and wonder just how far it could be pushed.

The outside is very attractive, which is something I find hard to get right on a digital tuner. It is wide, low and has an pleasant, understated display.

I guess when you've had hundreds of different tuners sitting on the shelf, the sameness in colors can get tiresome.

When I saw it at my friend's office, I couldn't wait to snatch it up and take it home for a test drive. I usually don't do this but had to take a look under the hood.

It appears to have a user-friendly DIY-type layout that's fairly easy to understand, even without a service manual. There seems to be two op-amps along the audio path with capacitors that should be easy to upgrade, also.

Time to order some parts. Some DX thoughts first. On most stations, both tuners had signals that were clean, quiet and pleasant to listen to.

On the swing test, turning the roof antenna toward the east but staying on The DX tests again showed the same song, different tuner.

These tuners have a somewhat similar sonic signature. The differences were subtle but there. While listening one-on-one, it was a most enjoyable time and if other samples sound this nice, the ST-J88B is another one I can recommend.

The bass didn't have quite the power and punch as the Kenwood but had nothing to be ashamed of. The midrange was a little forward but pleasant, and there were no problems in the treble region.

Recommended, but the winner is still the LT. There isn't much to say. When trying to capture KTCU The Nak did handle the birdie problems on Both tuners were able to receive the other test stations with quiet, trouble-free signals.

Speaking of quiet, this Nak has the Schotz noise-reduction circuit. Well, it works, I guess. I had to WORK to hear it work, though.

With the APS-9 hooked up, I had a very hard time finding a station that was noisy. I unhooked my main antenna and stuck in an 8-inch piece of wire.

The Nak was able to pick up most every station I normally hear but they automatically switched to mono and stayed very quiet.

Pretty impressive, in a way, but I still had no noise for the Schotz to kill. I then hooked up a Godar indoor antenna. Now we were getting stereo signals on SOME stations.

I was able to find only two stereo signals with enough noise to use the Schotz circuit, and it did diminish that background noise.

IMO, not much of a gimmick to spend your money on. Buy yourself a good FM antenna for the roof or attic instead.

The Nak's sound was a little strange. While the bass went deep, it had a sort of muffled sound to it.

It didn't have the extra punch of the LT's bass but didn't sound rounded like on some tube tuners either. At times, I noticed the extreme highs to be somewhat rolled off in comparison to the LT.

To top all this off, the midrange was more forward than the LT's. Listened to on its own, I didn't find the Nak offensive, sonically, but definitely not neutral and not for the bass lovers among us.

Such a pretty face, such a beautiful chassis, but does she have inner beauty? Is her beauty only skin deep?

It is my habit of late, when testing new tuners, to plug them in and let them "cook" for a couple of days. The LT sees almost daily usage and some of these tuners may have sat for months.

I also go in and clean the variable caps and switches in analog tuners. Kind of a tune r up before the big race. The names of these two Kenwoods are close and confusing so I will call them king and maiden for this Shootout.

I trust you know which one the present king is. During listening tests, it was apparent that the king still squeezed out the last measure of bass over the maiden.

The soundstage of our maiden was more forward but was never unpleasant sounding. The maiden's bass was very good but there were clues that the king still ruled here.

The maiden's midrange, while always pleasant, seemed to be missing the inner detail of the king's. It was somewhat like I heard, or didn't hear, through the earlier reviewed Yamaha T The maiden's highs were also slightly more forward, but controlled and not bright.

While her voice was different from the king's, it was always a pleasure to listen. When listening to her sing all alone while the king slept, I forgot about his virtues and enjoyed the experience.

And so, the maiden did turn out to be more than just another pretty face and she does have a beautiful voice to go along with her good looks. Putting our maiden to work in the kingdom's DX fields proved to be a long day of labor.

The lamp flickers but this almost disappears when fine-tuning the antenna. Our maiden held a steady stereo signal but at the cost of slightly more background hiss.

This was only noticed during quiet passages and brief periods of dead air. The maiden, however had trouble holding off the advances of the Off-tuning the maiden's dial helped some.

I think she may be due a fresh alignment. The medium to high-signal stations were well received by both king and maiden alike. The once and future king, the LT.

So many lights and buttons. At least I can tell how it sounds. I believe Stereophile's review, long ago, had a couple of unkind words about the sound and that stuck in my head, so the sound was a pleasant surprise.

The Onkyo's bass goes deep, and the midrange is clear and articulate with matching highs. The bass, though deep, did not have that extra slam of the top tuners.

In the final analysis, I would sum up the sound as pleasant, articulate, but lacking the dynamics of some of the boys at the top.

Most of my serious listening judgments are formed while tuned into local stations with strong signals. It was interesting to see how aggressive the TII was in deciding when to activate the narrow modes, hi-blend, etc.

Along with this automatic protection, the soundstage, imaging and "life" to the music were dulled, if not lost. When manually switching to wide mode and turning off the blend circuit on stations with fair signal strength, I was able to recapture the music with little or no noise.

The auto controls were first noticed when tuning to I sat down and was surprised how dull the sound had become compared to the LT. Manual switching brought it back to life and with a clean background.

For the rest of the DX report, I decided to trust the Onkyo's judgment while looking at weak signals. To handicap the tuners and be fair, I switched the LT to auto and left it in narrow mode.

I noticed something interesting about the II's A and B antenna inputs. On antenna input A, I had been listening to There is probably degrees difference.

With the tuner still at A very sensitive tuner indeed. Pointing the antenna more accurately, the LT was able to capture this signal but with more noise.

The II was also able to capture and hold this weak signal through a wider degree of antenna travel than the LT.

I should stop here and give some information on station distances from my house. There are about 70 stations within 70 miles, about 30 within 40 miles and 21 stations planted at the antenna farm, I think Cedar Hill is the highest point around Dallas so it's the perfect place for most transmitters.

Both tuners liked the signal on this day but only in narrow. The Kenwood shut to mono while the Onkyo held onto stereo but with more noise.

When manually switched to mono, both tuners shared the same good signal characteristics. I turned the antenna to the east in hopes of capturing What I did notice was the TII's ability to track In the past, the LT usually ruled here and it was able to pick up the signal, but never as clean or over as much antenna rotation as the II.

Turning to our other problem test signal, This station was most enjoyable when switched to mono in either tuner. I'll shorten this review and finish with some observations at the other end of the dial.

Again I found the auto circuits in the II to be overactive at When I manually switched to wide mode, both these stations came in loud and clear.

I did notice, I was able to pick up a weak Spanish language station, It must be all those trees my antenna looks into, toward the east.

The TII proved to be as sensitive as a year-old jumping into puberty and, as such, needs a little direction and control for me to live with.

And just like any teenager, be careful which buttons you push! Well, that tears it - I need to get this Kenwood aligned!

The TU-X is an attractive tuner having good clean lines and a digital display with a muted orange numbering system. The orange display is a nice change from the "me too" pale blue so often seen.

This tuner has two antenna inputs, switchable from the front panel. Is this necessary for those with a good outdoor antenna and rotor? Station selection is a two-step process.

You touch a number, the selected station frequency appears, flashing, and you must then push ENTER to listen to that station.

At first, I thought "gimmick," then realized it helps the listener find the station sought without having to memorize the whole number pad.

For a while, things didn't look too bad for the Sansui in the DXing department as it easily pulled in the "local" weak stations.

The Sansui was pulling nothing but noise. I was consistently able to grab more weak signals through the LT.

With the antenna pointed toward a local station's transmitter, both tuners appeared equally quiet with little background noise. When I did catch the Sansui giving more noise, it was usually because I hadn't directed the antenna with good precision.

The Kenwood kept things quiet over a wider antenna swing. I grabbed this Sansui off eBay a while back following the recommendation of a friend whose ears I trust, and he was right!

Before you read the comments below, hear this. This Sansui has one of the sweetest, cleanest midranges of the tuners so far in the Shootouts.

I had to listen very carefully to hear subtle differences against the LT. The Sansui held its own but gave up a little to the Kenwood from the deep bass through the lower midrange.

The midrange was clean, precise and sweet - more exact and even sweeter-sounding than the LT's, but seemed to give up a touch of ambiance retrieval.

The highs were soft and laidback except for a narrow band of sibilance noticed during speech - softer than the LT's highs, with slightly less energy, and the soundstage was slightly smaller.

This may go hand-in-hand with the feeling of slightly less ambiance information. After all is said and tested, the TU-X ranks up there with the other tuners for best sound quality in an inexpensive stock tuner, and it invites long listening sessions.

Like the Luxman T, it just missed the Class -C- rating because of the slight lightness in the bass and lower midrange. Many of us believe "the music is in the midrange," but for a tuner to make Class -C-, it must have more of that bass magic originally in the music.

In the end, I say, highly recommended. I was almost afraid to "fix" things inside the TU-X BUT pulled six old caps before and after the LA, then installed four Black Gates and two pieces of wire and this gave the tuner even better sound quality.

Now, who among us is up to the challenge of building a "to die for" audio stage to follow that LA chip in this Sansui or the Luxman right below it?

Winner for best all-around tuner? Great sound, good DXer. But our shootout king was wounded in the midrange. Is there a tuner doctor in the house?!

Meridian Model Winner: I was quite excited when Jesse added this little jewel to his collection. And I do mean little as it is the smallest FM tuner on our Shootout list.

Positions 1 through 6 have corresponding tuning slugs that have to be adjusted with a very small jeweler's screwdriver. See, I told you it was a jewel.

After adjusting a slug to the station of your choice, you flip the TUNE switch down to fine-tune that station. These adjustments are similar to those on the Magnum Dynalab FT The Meridian is an "always-on" tuner.

Opening up this jewelry box shows a tight, no-nonsense space crowded with a toroidal transformer, an HA that plugs in LPF filter, a bi-FET LF buffer amp with four 10uf volt caps around it, and one large supply cap an inch away.

Unfortunately, it only has a positive supply for the audio stage, so we have to keep all the caps. They were among the first, if not the first, to try to fix the sonic problems of the compact disc in its infancy.

DX play was all but forgotten on this little guy and I just sat and listened. What I first noticed was it killed the LT!

It was open, airy and lifelike while the LT was dark, closed-in and lifeless. Wait, this can't be right! I checked both tuners. All switches on the LT were set correctly, auto, wide, etc.

I'm trying to listen to The LT had shut down to near mono while the gimmick-free Meridian was playing happily along.

After adjusting the antenna correctly, I started listening again. Well, the Jewel of the Meridian turned out to be the high point of my day.

While the bass was rich, warm and wonderful, it still couldn't quite match the LT for depth and dynamics. Here we have a real treat. From the lower midrange all the way to the top, these two tuners were very close sonic twins.

The Meridian sounds much more like the LT than other tuners we've pitted against it. There is a hint more midrange openness to the Meridian and a little loss of perceived front-to-rear depth.

This may come from the slight loss of bass and dynamics compared to the LT. When I get a tuner that sounds this nice, I usually turn the LT off and enjoy it.

That is the plan for this jewel all weekend. It may be small but it sure does shine. OK gang, hang on to the antenna as we spin around the airwaves The LT sounds more focused on solo voice.

On the T, vocals stepped back in the soundstage and center images were more diffuse. High School station, '70s rock. They didn't have classes like this when I was in high school.

Hey, it's '70s rock. At times you could hear a touch extra weight of the LT's bass. College station, rock, classical, more.

Weakest local area station we can see up here. The LT came through, in narrow, as usual. The T's signal was not acceptable, with more noise than signal.

This was surprising and disappointing because the T tunes in 2. The T gave a clean crisp stereo signal with some background noise.

The LT didn't like the signal and when letting it choose the stereo separation, it shut to mono while claiming stereo. Listener-supported, volunteer DJs and non-profit.

They play a crazy variety of everything but "normal" music if I have the right to decide what is normal. A pattern is developing with the two tuners.

The LT has more weight to its bass, while the T seems to go as deep but sounds lighter. The T's mids are more laidback and less focused.

The highs of the T are more extended while staying delicate and never harsh. I've heard these songs for over 30 years.

They are all memorized and some still are favorites. It was hard to hear any small differences here.

A rock station is a rock station. I believe it's the second-oldest FM station in the U. Owned by the city of Dallas, which is sucking the money and life out of it.

Piano solos showed a noticeable difference in the two tuners. The T was lighter but more realistic-sounding of the two.

Was unable to hear a big difference in the two tuners here. An interesting study of what recording engineers can do with sound.

There are constant, but varying background noise problems. They also add copious amounts of bass to the music to make it more inviting, no matter what you listen through.

A great test for a tuner's ability to reproduce that last degree of bass energy. The differences between the tuners under test were less noticeable in the afternoon than when I first started testing in the morning.

I left the Audiolab on all night and the warmed-up signal was definitely closer to the LT. OK gang, you can step off the spinning antenna, our flight is over.

Hope you enjoyed the ride. Sonic conclusions are, the Audiolab's sound changed after several hours, becoming much closer to the LT's.

Background noise was always low or nonexistent. The midrange was rich and realistic-sounding, but less focused. The bass went deep but didn't have that final degree of authority like the LT.

The highs were right on and were an added asset to the final sonic picture. Inside was a DIY dream. There were over 30 polypropylene caps peppering the boards, 5 ceramic filters, the MPX chip was an LA, the audio stage backs right up against the RCA jacks and the power transformer is a large toroidal with a wall shielding it from the analog stages.

Recommended, but the winner is the LT. I've been sailing on the audio seas longer than I realized. I first jumped in the water with a Sansui tube receiver purchased while in the Air Force in Two transistor receivers later, sometime in the '80s, I reached for that lifeboat called high-end audio.

Two waterlogged old memories came to mind when I put this Carver in my system. Twenty or so years ago, I saw my first TX and heard Magnaplanars for the first time.

Back then, neither was in the budget for this sailor, but things changed as my thirst grew. Since then, I've owned and loved Maggies but wasn't as impressed with a Carver TX that drifted my way.

I first sat down and listened to this TXb solo and was rewarded with punchy bass and pleasant, articulate mids and highs.

The midrange and highs still brought a smile and I had to finally admit that this was a much better-sounding tuner than the original TX at least the one I owned.

The TXb images very well and though the mids and highs were a touch lighter than the LT's, they were pleasant and nice on the ears.

The soundstage through the Carver was flatter and it didn't give the holographic sonic presentation of the Kenwood.

Sorry for the bad pun, Mr. DX tests started at Here both tuners had good to fair signals but when switched to wide, the TXb lost the battle.

Our other weak neighbor, This is the first time I remember listening to AM stereo. The Carver manual says to keep AM de-emphasis switched on and, after listening to it both ways, I agree.

It was interesting and strange to listen to AM in stereo. I found two stereo stations, KAAM which played many songs so old they were obviously "electronically reprocessed for stereo" remember those?

The winner for everything but AM Stereo? The first thing I noticed on this Pioneer was the different wording on the face: Aha, the new and improved version of the previously reviewed paternal twin, the F The FX is a thin black digital tuner with colorful lights and a display that is, thankfully, on the safer side of gaudy.

There was a nice surprise waiting regarding reception quality. On the torture test at The best signal for the Pioneer was centered at When centered at In all the DX tests, the Pioneer was quite impressive around the dial.

The only advantage the LT seemed to have was its ability to fine tune, because of its infinitely variable capacitor, as opposed to the FX which can tune in 50 kHz steps only - better than most digital tuners which tend to tune in.

As has been the norm, the bass power from the LT was richer and fuller than this contestant's. Sweeping that big dose of reality under the rug cleared things up nicely for our study of the midrange and highs.

Things throughout the rest of the range came forth in a sweet, clean presentation that was most pleasant to experience, although somewhat lighter than the LT.

This is probably because of the harmonic richness added by the LT's extra bass power. Again, what was noticed and much appreciated was the Pioneer's very quiet background, something the LT gets right that a lot of the shootout tuners haven't.

We can now add the FX to that list. When it came time to listen to the FX alone, I knew my review work was over and it was happy hour.

The SAE is a nice-looking tuner with a red digital readout. This one was black, inch rack-mount style. There was a noticeable narrow-frequency ssss type sibilance.

Whether this is common to this model or just that this piece could use an alignment, I do not know. The sound was more forward and more diffuse than the much more "sonically correct" LT.

I never felt irritated by the SAE's music presentation but never felt involved, either. Judging by this piece, it's a tuner for background music, not a serious tuner source for a serious sound system.

If anyone reading this thinks FM isn't as serious a source as vinyl, CD, tape, etc. That is why we keep striving for the best tuner and when we can't find that, we rebuild an existing one.

SAE fans or collectors may choose this one, but not me. These sessions give insight into subtle irritations, listener's fatigue or other problems I need to share in the reviews.

Kind of a final overview as to whether I would want the tuner permanently in my system. The KT turned out to be on that short list.

Not necessarily because it got everything right like the ones at the top, but because it was quite tuneful and had my toes a-tappin'.

There is a similar heritage in the design and cosmetics of these two Kenwoods and I was enjoying the KT so much, I felt guilty as though I were flirting with my girlfriend's little sister.

Going head to head with the LT, the KT had a flatter soundstage with a more extended but nice treble. As usual, the bass didn't go quite as deep as the LT's, but this was noticeable only on songs that had the extra bass energy.

On most songs, I couldn't notice a difference. Musically, another nice keeper. Inside there is one op-amp and three op-amps in the low-pass filter and audio section.

To this audio purist sorry Kenwood , op-amps, instead of passive devices in the LPF, looks like an area that could hurt the sound. The KT's image shrank, but had less background noise.

Also, the KT would occasionally lose the signal and "go to black" while the LT held onto this weak signal with consistency.

0 thoughts on “Shootouts

Hinterlasse eine Antwort

Deine E-Mail-Adresse wird nicht veröffentlicht. Erforderliche Felder sind markiert *