[Arran]

Well, Mike,

The sound is a bit bassy with the tone control set to "Hi-Fidelity"...but this is, after all, AM radio and the 9-S-262 does not have the variable IF bandwidth of a 37-116.

The sound quality is comparable, I think, to a Philco 118 or 650. Which is probably as close to "apples to apples" as I can get. I would say more like the 650 than the 118. I am going from memory here as I do not have a 118 or 650 console.

I would classify the 9-S-262's sound as definitely better than a 111. The 111's speaker is handicapped by that solid spider that greatly dampens the speaker's performance. With an open spider as on a 112 speaker, the 111's sound will be greatly improved but I would still say the 9-S-262 is better.

The 9-S-262 does produce a pleasing, mellow sound. The acoustic adapter is a good add-on, I think.

I forgot to mention: This set sounds very impressive to have a single ended audio output. The 118 and 650 utilize push-pull outputs.

Ron;
  I think it would take a side by side "shootout" to really narrow it down. As far as I can see the Brand Z sets used speakers that were sourced from an outside manufacturer like Utah or Lansing, so they may have had the edge in quality over the speakers that Philco built in house. As for the single ended output it looks like this set uses a feedback loop to eliminate some of the distortion, from the plate of the 6F5 back to the grid of the 6F5 through C14, since it does not have a pair of push pull outputs to do the same. The acoustical adapter is just a baffle of course to absorb and redirect some of the sound coming out the speaker rather then having a wall or an acoustical labyrinth do this, some Rogers built sets used a device called a "Chladni Disc" which supposedly performed a similar function.
Regards
Arran