Quad Fm3 question

[Barrymagrec]

Only replace the electrolytic caps, don`t go near any of the others, especially any small polystyrenes.

 

[chartz]

My FM3 is sensitive enough, not much less than my FM4s (I have three) and it sounds really good in its context: a full Quad 60’s vintage system.
I live far, far from the nearest transmitters (100 miles away each) and get almost no hiss with no distortion.
Distortion might mean that the tuner has to be re-aligned.
That said, my FM3 was professionally re-aligned 8 years ago.

Only replace the electrolytic caps, don`t go near any of the others, especially any small polystyrenes.

I agree.

 

[Mike Reed]

Getting some constant mild distortion now,

On all channels equally? Is there a signal strength indicator on the tuner and maybe a mono facility. That'd certainly sort out whether it's signal paucity or component based.

 

[chartz]

There is no mono switch on the FM3: only the 33 preamp can switch an FM3 to mono.
No strength meter either I’m afraid. Just two bulbs as tuning indicators.

 

[Tony L]

No strength meter either I’m afraid. Just two bulbs as tuning indicators.

I thought the bulbs kind of acted as a signal strength meter, the stronger the station the brighter and more solid the centre tuning.

I need to dig mine out and give it a service at some point. It worked last time I used it, but that was long, long ago as I also have a beautiful early-70s Sony ST-5150 which is rather more sensitive and has a stronger output. That thing pegs the signal strength meter on R3 (which is the only thing I’d listen to) with one of those plastic aerials one pins to the wall!

I keep the FM3 for sentimental reasons/in case I ever want to go back to my system #1 of 33/FM3/JR149s. I’ve even got the Quad wood case!

 

[chartz]

Yes, this. I managed to find a brand new one.

 

[Tony L]

Stunning. Mine was boxed, but used. I had to sand the top down a bit to get rid of some scratches, it came out ok:

I think yours is definitely teak, not so sure about mine, maybe walnut? Doesn’t quite look like teak to me. Box just says ‘wood case’.

 

[The Captain]

Ooh nice fingerjointed hardwood case! So that's Tony's who bought it from you @chartz ? I like the 33 even more.. & affordable, but of course no good without a power amp. Just out of curiosity, is a 306 compatible with a 33?

Anyway I'll do some proper comparison tests to my Arcam tuner, this wknd. Rather exhausted from work until then.

I could have a peep inside too, see if anything obvious n/g. Cheers, Capt

 

[The Captain]

@Tony L that is supercool, looks fantastic. I'm totally with you on the look of these two. Whoever designed them was a master of contemporary design IMO.

cpt

 

[The Captain]

I wonder why vol knobs, & here the tuner control knob.. are on the LHS ? Naim too. I mean if 85% of folks are right handed. Seems odd to me having to reach across. I think this is my most boring post ever on pfm.

Capt

 

[chartz]

I think yours is definitely teak, not so sure about mine, maybe walnut? Doesn’t quite look like teak to me. Box just says ‘wood case’.

Mine is afromorsia I think.

 

[Tony L]

I wonder why vol knobs, & here the tuner control knob.. are on the LHS ? Naim too. I mean if 85% of folks are right handed. Seems odd to me having to reach across. I think this is my most boring post ever on pfm.

Capt

They flipped them around for the 34/FM4, so must have come to the same conclusion. As I was so used to the 33/FM3 the 34/FM4 always looked upside down to me. I’ve since got used to the 34 (never owned an FM4).

That was one of the most significant design changes of the Walker-era. The 33 is really a sharper squared-off 22 aesthetically. Fits in the same hole with a little filing. The 303 is exactly the same size as a Quad II too, so it would fit in the same cabinets etc. They really thought all this stuff through! The exact opposite of the brands that brought something new and different out every year. Quad stuff was usually in production for a decade or more.

 

[chartz]

I almost bought a new Quad 303… in 1983.
It was produced for almost 20 years.

 

[Tony L]

The original ESLs were available for 25 years or so.

 

[chartz]

Ooh nice fingerjointed hardwood case! So that's Tony's who bought it from you @chartz

No, for me it was an eBay buy. I paid £ 90 for it pre-Brexit.

 

[Tony L]

Paid about that for mine too, and about a decade ago.

 

[Mike Reed]

Bought a new 42 (???) Quad pre. from Billie Vee after losing patience with its predecessor with plug-in modules. These were to front my RCA valved mono's at the time. Terrible pre; lifeless and totally uninspiring as I remember. Might have been lack of synergy, I s'pose, at least in part. Think that was when I discovered Naim by buying a used 42/110 for my office LS3/5As. Of course, one thing led to another back in the early eighties.

 

[chartz]

It was probably a Quad 44 then. The one with modules was the 33. It can sound like that in the wrong context (the 34 too).

 

[Tony L]

The 44 was the one with the plug-in input modules, you could configure it‘s inputs however you liked assuming you bought the appropriate modules for your needs. A clever idea for folk with multiple turntables, tape decks etc. It was the successor to the 33. The 44 also had an output stage that could be configured and had enough grunt to drive IIs and modern power amps that need 1.5V.

The 44 was seen as too complex for most Quad buyers, so the 34 was introduced as a simplified cut-down version. In many ways they cut it down too far as it often needs resistors soldering on the mainboard to make the gain usable given the very low number of steps on the otherwise very nice volume attenuator and the fact it is fairly easy to drive it into clipping with modern digital sources. It also has low output and can only really be used with the (0.5V) Quad power amps of its era without modification. Used within its defined envelope it is a nice preamp though (I’ve got a late grey one).

PS I don’t know about the 44, but the 34 can be a risky used buy as in some earlier versions (there are seven or so revisions) the mainboard has issues due to the solder mask degrading and causing corrosion in the vias (it is a two-sided board). I think this is limited to the early DIN era with light blue boards, I’ve never heard of it with RCA equipped (grey) ones).

 

[chartz]

I had one (a DIN 34), but the PCB tracks had started to rot. But it was fixable (a few caps and two chips which had failed) and still works absolutely fine after 6 years. I use it with a 405-1.
The newer PCB with RCA sockets was wonderfully made and and the caps didn’t leak. The only problem was dull sound because of ageing coupling caps.