Combining aesthetics with specifications and prices. (A rant)

[Omega-TI]

Okay, when I was a kid I had a DX-160, later a DX-300. Both those radios looked cool, but were losers when it came to reception. So to me, desktop radios with external antennas have always been "it" for me.



Now, as I've gotten older, I've gotten "picky", well let's just say I have some "expectations" when it comes to specifications. Now there are a few radios out there that have some decent reviews, like the Tecsun 990x



But, YUK, they look cheap, have cheap displays, knobs on the side and are not very ergonomic.

Well, I found a radio that seemed to combine specifications, ergonomics, and aesthetics all in one package. Yeah, she's a beauty...



but.. when I looked at the price, I almost needed an adult diaper!

 

[GB46]

Okay, when I was a kid I had a DX-160, later a DX-300. Both those radios looked cool, but were losers when it came to reception. So to me, desktop radios with external antennas have always been "it" for me.

View attachment 114401

Now, as I've gotten older, I've gotten "picky", well let's just say I have some "expectations" when it comes to specifications. Now there are a few radios out there that have some decent reviews, like the Tecsun 990x

View attachment 114402

But, YUK, they look cheap, have cheap displays, knobs on the side and are not very ergonomic.

Well, I found a radio that seemed to combine specifications, ergonomics, and aesthetics all in one package. Yeah, she's a beauty...

View attachment 114403

but.. when I looked at the price, I almost needed an adult diaper!

I had a DX-300 back in the '80s. Its appearance was pretty impressive. Otherwise, however, it gave me nothing but trouble. It used to drift off frequency and then come back again on its own. My fingers were always on the tuning dial. Then the LED display started failing. Some segments started flickering, and eventually went out altogether.

I know what you mean about the cheap construction nowadays. As for plastic portables, mine is a Sangean ATS-909X. Not a bad looking radio, and I like the audio quality. It's not as stable as a base rig, however, and the fine tuning isn't fine enough. Because of the plastic cabinet, there's no shielding from the RFI generated by my laptop.

Fortunately my Icom R75 is still working well 21 years after I bought it. You can't beat metal cabinets, good, solid construction and a smooth tuning dial. There's a slight misalignment, as much as 30 Hz on some parts of the band, but it isn't noticeable in the voice pitch on SSB. The amount of error is indicated by Sorcerer when decoding HFDL transmissions, but they still get decoded perfectly, and I'm not about to monkey around trying to align the receiver without the required technical skills and test equipment. The radio can be fine-tuned in 1 Hz steps, anyway, and stations can then be programmed into memory with the corrected frequencies.

I'm not sure which Icom that is in your last picture, but those bells and whistles can make the radio pricey indeed. I could probably afford it, but can't justify the expense, considering the poor HF propagation. I'm in a noisy environment, too, and live in an apartment with antenna restrictions.

 

[SigIntel8600]

I'm not sure which Icom that is in your last picture, but those bells and whistles can make the radio pricey indeed. I could probably afford it, but can't justify the expense, considering the poor HF propagation. I'm in a noisy environment, too, and live in an apartment with antenna restrictions.

That would be the ICOM R-8600. Here is a review worth reading N9EWO Review Icom IC-R8600
To the OP, maybe this would fit your needs without needing diapers Tecsun S-2000

 

[bearcatrp]

The Icom 8600 is definitely top of the food chain for receivers. Would love to own one but the cost is out of my reach. Did get lucky and find a used Icom 8500 is great shape. If you can find a 8500, think you will be pleased.

 

[Boombox]

I sort of miss the glow of dials and the colored scales and the like. It had a magic to it. At the same time, I like the fact that with a very small radio, like my Grundig G2, I can hear almost as much off its whip as I did years ago using a bigger, well-built analog rig and a long outdoor antenna. The selectivity is about as good, for MW and SWBC, and the sound is often better (through headphones) (depending on older radio, too).

It's six of one, half a dozen of the other. It's always a toss-up. The older tech is still fun to use, and sometimes still performs well. All that said, the days of my buying radios, aside from maybe a new model AM-FM just for the heck of it, is long past. Everything I've got already gets the job done. The only addition I need, really, is putting up an outdoor antenna again.

 

[Omega-TI]

I sort of miss the glow of dials and the colored scales and the like. It had a magic to it. At the same time, I like the fact that with a very small radio, like my Grundig G2, I can hear almost as much off its whip as I did years ago using a bigger, well-built analog rig and a long outdoor antenna. The selectivity is about as good, for MW and SWBC, and the sound is often better (through headphones) (depending on older radio, too).

It's six of one, half a dozen of the other. It's always a toss-up. The older tech is still fun to use, and sometimes still performs well. All that said, the days of my buying radios, aside from maybe a new model AM-FM just for the heck of it, is long past. Everything I've got already gets the job done. The only addition I need, really, is putting up an outdoor antenna again.

Yeah, I sort of miss the days of the glow of the radio dial in a dark room picking up stations for distant shores. Sadly the shortwave broadcast bands have become a great wasteland. I'll probably put off getting a shortwave radio for the time being. I'll see how things go with my new radio that is coming soon.

Excellent sensitivity and selectivity is something that always evaded my wallet when I was younger, now in my "declining years", however many I have left, I've decided to crack open the wallet now and then to get something I'll be happy with and probably not outgrow. The scanner I recently bought will probably be the last one I'll ever purchase. The physical size of that radio was also a factor in my decision, because I may be "downsizing" in the near future as well. I still have my Bearcat 800XLT, but the way technology is going, it may become useless for public service monitoring in the next few years.

When you said it it was six of one, half dozen of the other, well that is so true. While the glow of the dial and playing with the fine tuning knob is, and was great, there is much to be said for having a waterfall display to look at to help you locate those elusive stations. The IF stage processing and adjustable bandwidth do wonders, as well as AF post processing. I had a friend once that liked to quote a line from a movie when he said all this fabulous technology was, "Voodoo magic man."

I had an opportunity a few years back to get an old wood case Crosley 148 tube radio. It sounded awesome and was in great condition, but the thought of having to potentially source replacement tubes in the future made me pass on the deal.

Things are always changing, but the nostalgia of radio from my youth is like a magnet. Listening to KFBK's Radio Mystery Theatre on a Radio Shack "Globe Patrol" kit was exciting and made many memories. Yeah, I'm getting old!

 

[GB46]

I guess I'm in the same boat as you guys, and at 75, possibly in the same age group, too. What I miss most are those SW broadcasters. They were what hooked me on shortwave starting in the late 1950s, mainly due to my fascination with the traditional music I was hearing from stations all over the world. I used to sit and listen to shortwave well into the night. In fact, I had taken one or two of my radios out of their fancy wooden cabinets and set the chassis on a shelf so I could watch the glow of those vacuum tubes. Sometimes a tube would be gassy and there would be a purple glow inside resembling the northern lights; it actually seemed to move around in time to the music.

The latest technology is fine, but has taken a lot of the challenge out of shortwave listening. At this point I've stopped buying radios altogether, unless both of my receivers bite the dust at the same time, and that's highly unlikely.

 

[GB46]

Another thing just occurred to me: The backlight in my portable's display is white, whereas the one in my R75 is amber. Which display do I look at most? The amber one, not only because it's warmer looking, but also because it reminds me of the orange glow from those old vacuum tubes.

Similarly, when I first started using PCs years ago, the screens were black, and the characters were amber. When they came out with so-called "paper white" displays I found them hard to get used to, not only because they caused eye strain, but also due to their cold appearance.

But technological changes are inevitable, and I shouldn't be nitpicking. I'm old enough to know better. Or: old enough, but no better.

 

[Token]

Okay, when I was a kid I had a DX-160, later a DX-300. Both those radios looked cool, but were losers when it came to reception. So to me, desktop radios with external antennas have always been "it" for me.

View attachment 114401

Yes, desktop radios with external antennas have always been my primary tools. Portables have their place, but just can't compete in the long run.

But, I am going to disagree with the assessment that the DX-160 and DX-300 are losers when it comes to reception.

I had, and still have, pretty much all of the DX series desktops. DX-75, DX-125, DX-150, DX-150A, DX-150B, DX-160, DX-200, DX-300, and DX-302. What you have to keep in mind is that they were all entry level radios. They were, in general, the least expensive, cheapest, radios you could buy in their day with their feature sets. They performed better than a portable, but not as good as a higher cost radio might.

The DX-300 (announced 1978, sold 79 and 80) was only for sale for a little less than 2 years, then it was revamped and sold as the DX-302. The DX-300 was the first somewhat affordable desktop with a digital readout. The next most affordable would probably have been the Kenwood R-1000, announced slightly later (but also for sale in 1979), and $130 more MSRP (DX-300 $369 and R-1000 $499).

The DX-300 had a couple of technical issues, and that is why RS replaced it with the DX-302 after less than 2 years of sales.

I think when viewed with realistic expectations the Realistic DX series of desktops were fine entry level radios. I know they seem to have introduced a lot of people to shortwave radio.

While I did have these radios in the 70's I tended to use slightly older tube radios at the time, things like the Hammarlund HQ-145X, HQ-180, various Hallicrafters, etc. Instead of spending the money on entry level newer radios I tired to spend about the same money on slightly older, slightly better, radios.

Well, I found a radio that seemed to combine specifications, ergonomics, and aesthetics all in one package. Yeah, she's a beauty...

View attachment 114403

but.. when I looked at the price, I almost needed an adult diaper!

Yes, the R-8600 is indeed a good radio. Unlike many DC to daylight radios, it performs quite well on all frequencies and does not give up performance on HF to get the rest of its coverage. But to get this performance they are not cheap.

I run 2 of them, and find they compete quite well with any radio you want to compare them to.

T!