Lisa Simpson wrote:
It's the bandspread dial part I can't get the hang of, and since I have
several other receivers, I really don't need the aggravation!

"Jim Hackett" wrote in message
. net...
It is NO different to tune than any other analog radio with a bandspread
dial. Again, I don't know why you would have thought it would be MORE
sensitive than the 394 or 302 both of which are much more modern designs.
Other than...You can't believe EVERYTHING you read on the internet...


Lisa Simpson" wrote in message
.. .
Anyone interested in a DX-160? I am considering getting rid of it,
because
it doesn't seem to be anymore sensitive than my DX-394 & DX-302, plus it
seems too weird to tune stuff in, and I don't really need the hassle
considering I have many other receivers to choose from . . .

Don't give up so soon...it's a challenge to be overcome!!! FWIW, I
acquired a Realistic DX150b from an estate sale and went through a
definite learning curve too. I never bothered with setting up a log
scale, but did use bandspread for ham signals. Take a little time in
learning to use bandspread tuning, but also realize that feature isn't
really needed for AM listening. Just use main tuning for AM signals.
Play with ham signals on 80 meters at night to get the hang of the
bandspread dial.

It works and once you get the hang of it bandspread it is fun. By
design you have to slow down with these analog designs, and sometimes
that's a good thing because it forces you to stop and listen before
moving on. Although, after a couple of hours of tuning around with an
oldie I'm ready for the simplicity and speed of point-and-shoot tuning
on our modern digital wonder boxes.