Wayne wrote:
What I'd like to see in a portable MW receiver. A good audio section
like the one in the GE SR III. Both 9 and 10 KHz digital step tuning
with at least 1 KHz fine tuning. Good selectivity allowing for
split-frequency DX. Very good sensitivity. Better than average image
rejection. Synchronous detection. RF attenuator. Large ferrite bar
which can be rotated separate from the main body of the radio. Switch
allowing for disconnection of the internal ferrite bar antenna to allow
for exclusive use of an external antenna. S-meter. Make it an MW or MW
+ SW only set and tailor its performance to get the most out of those
bands. Oh, include stereo decoder. Is this asking too much?

Wayne

Wayne,

I don't think it is too much to ask. Please post when you find this
radio! That is certainly the one I want.

"Shepherd" ) writes:
Wayne wrote:
What I'd like to see in a portable MW receiver. A good audio section
like the one in the GE SR III. Both 9 and 10 KHz digital step tuning
with at least 1 KHz fine tuning. Good selectivity allowing for
split-frequency DX. Very good sensitivity. Better than average image
rejection. Synchronous detection. RF attenuator. Large ferrite bar
which can be rotated separate from the main body of the radio. Switch
allowing for disconnection of the internal ferrite bar antenna to allow
for exclusive use of an external antenna. S-meter. Make it an MW or MW
+ SW only set and tailor its performance to get the most out of those
bands. Oh, include stereo decoder. Is this asking too much?

Wayne

Wayne,

I don't think it is too much to ask. Please post when you find this
radio! That is certainly the one I want.


But the problem is that what is the market?

The GE Superradio carries a nice label, which likely sells more radios.
But it really isn't that much more than an average portable AM/FM radio.
It could be argued the bigger speaker (ie better sound for local reception)
is as much a factor as the the heralded ability to receive distant stations.

The things the previous poster wants is quite available in a receiver. A lot
of portable shortwave receivers have most of those features. But, they also
carry a higher price. The cost is a reflection of the better circuitry, but
it also reflects a more limited market.

Just about everyone will spend ten dollars to get a portable AM/FM radio.
Some will pay a bit more to get one with a bigger speaker (and maybe better
DX ability). But the number of people who want an AM/FM radio for DX is
a much smaller number. Development cost has to be spread over that smaller
population. The cost reductions of mass production can't kick in, as it
does at the ten dollar radio level.

Once the features are added, you have an AM/FM radio that costs quite
a bit, but for most people doesn't give them any extra ability (because
they aren't interested digging signals out of the mud). Many of the
people who might be interested would look at the price and say "but at
its core, it's still just an AM/FM radio". They might be more tempted
by the addition of shortwave bands, but that adds more cost, and those
already exist.

Michael

Michael Black wrote:
"Shepherd" ) writes:
Wayne wrote:
What I'd like to see in a portable MW receiver. A good audio section
like the one in the GE SR III. Both 9 and 10 KHz digital step tuning
with at least 1 KHz fine tuning. Good selectivity allowing for
split-frequency DX. Very good sensitivity. Better than average image
rejection. Synchronous detection. RF attenuator. Large ferrite bar
which can be rotated separate from the main body of the radio. Switch
allowing for disconnection of the internal ferrite bar antenna to allow
for exclusive use of an external antenna. S-meter. Make it an MW or MW
+ SW only set and tailor its performance to get the most out of those
bands. Oh, include stereo decoder. Is this asking too much?

Wayne

Wayne,

I don't think it is too much to ask. Please post when you find this
radio! That is certainly the one I want.


But the problem is that what is the market?

The GE Superradio carries a nice label, which likely sells more radios.
But it really isn't that much more than an average portable AM/FM radio.
It could be argued the bigger speaker (ie better sound for local reception)
is as much a factor as the the heralded ability to receive distant stations.

The things the previous poster wants is quite available in a receiver. A lot
of portable shortwave receivers have most of those features. But, they also
carry a higher price. The cost is a reflection of the better circuitry, but
it also reflects a more limited market.

Just about everyone will spend ten dollars to get a portable AM/FM radio.
Some will pay a bit more to get one with a bigger speaker (and maybe better
DX ability). But the number of people who want an AM/FM radio for DX is
a much smaller number. Development cost has to be spread over that smaller
population. The cost reductions of mass production can't kick in, as it
does at the ten dollar radio level.

Once the features are added, you have an AM/FM radio that costs quite
a bit, but for most people doesn't give them any extra ability (because
they aren't interested digging signals out of the mud). Many of the
people who might be interested would look at the price and say "but at
its core, it's still just an AM/FM radio". They might be more tempted
by the addition of shortwave bands, but that adds more cost, and those
already exist.

Michael

I agree with all you said. I enjoy the hobby of DX listening and most
who do will pay a bit extra for a good radio. However, DX enthusiasts
tend to be a bit weird, not to mention far and few between. I include
myself in that group. I don't have lots to spend on radios. If I did,
I would probably own a Drake R8, which I understand, is an awesome
radio!

I have a love-hate relationship with my GE SR III. It's such an odd
radio. It shines in ways one would not expect for a $50 radio. I was
enamored by its audio quality the moment I hear it. It just sounds
great! As for its DX ability, it sure is a sensitive set but lacks in
the selectivity department particularly on the top end of the dial. But
it sounds great! I am amazed at how inaccurate its dial calibration is!
But it sounds great! It looks and feels like it may fly apart at any
moment. But it sounds great! I truly believe that if better quality
control and craftsmanship were put into that set, it would really be an
attractive radio. But then the price would have to go up. I have set my
GE SR III aside other high-performance portables and it gets pretty
much anything all others pick up and with superior sound. My GE SR III
benefits quite well from the Select-A-Tenna set alongside especially on
the lower end of the band. Could someone explain to me why the SAT when
introduced to a radio causes the tone of the signal to change. The
treble seems to drop off a bit, but the bass and midrange become
stronger and louder resulting in a richer sounding signal. It's
almost as if the receiver is somehow more selective and concentrating
the signal into a smaller or more narrow area.

Wayne

I posted earlier after buying the Radio Shack 12-150 ... and I'll be
the first to admit that this radio was my first foray into DX ... but
I've been disappointed in the radio overall. It has a simplistic
attractiveness to it, and it has PLL, but the knobs are real cheap
plastic (and will probably have a short lifespan!) and the reception
hasn't been as great as I'd hoped for a radio that was boasted as being
"extreme range." The SW capabilities are very weak, but that might be
my inexperience.

I have spent hours navigating through this message board and getting
advice, and I've decided to return this radio and spend a lot more than
I'd planned and get the Sony 7600gr. I sure appreciate all the
knowledge and experience that people share on these message boards!
I'm going to hang onto the 12-150 a couple more days so I can try them
side by side for my own curiousity to learn how different radios
function.

For the earlier posts, I enjoy a good sound, but it's not my driving
factor ... it probably was when I was a teen and was dialed into FM,
but I'm mostly listening to talk radio programs, so to get a weaker
speaker from a radio with stronger reception is a trade that I'm
willing to make.

That's just my humble opinion!

Wayne wrote:

Could someone explain to me why the SAT when
introduced to a radio causes the tone of the signal to change. The
treble seems to drop off a bit, but the bass and midrange become
stronger and louder resulting in a richer sounding signal. It's
almost as if the receiver is somehow more selective and concentrating
the signal into a smaller or more narrow area.

Wayne


What you may be experiencing is the high Q of the antenna. This results in a
low bandwidth passed by the antenna. For example, if the Q is 200, then the
bandwidth at 600 kHz is only three kHz. Anything above 1.5 kHz in the audio
will be attenuated.

(note: I've assumed a value for Q. I don't know the real number for the
SAT.)

craigm

wrote:
RobnzBoy wrote:
The first review:
http://www.eham.net/reviews/detail/6263

This is the same garbage radio, as the S350 !

Stay away from this radio. Quality control problems. With the AM
switched to narrow, the thing is deaf except for a few locals.
Sensitivity improves alot in the WIDE mode, but the tuning shifts... to
tune 880kHz, I have to tune to 890kHz to center it

The FM is also bad... living near two 50kw'ers, the entire band is
useless. The WX picked up the local station 20 miles east, but one of
the 50kw'ers would bleed in if I moved the whip around.

Bass and Treble controls are reversed and the huge knob is not easy to
work with (an UP/DOWN button would have been better).

Audio quality is OK. There is an AUX input jack. The diplay is nice,
if not a little too bright (the backlight stays on with AC... it goes
off after 5 seconds using batteries).

I got mine last Sat, it was the only one in the store.

wrote:
wrote:
RobnzBoy wrote:
The first review:
http://www.eham.net/reviews/detail/6263

This is the same garbage radio, as the S350 !

Stay away from this radio. Quality control problems. With the AM
switched to narrow, the thing is deaf except for a few locals.
Sensitivity improves alot in the WIDE mode, but the tuning shifts... to
tune 880kHz, I have to tune to 890kHz to center it

The FM is also bad... living near two 50kw'ers, the entire band is
useless. The WX picked up the local station 20 miles east, but one of
the 50kw'ers would bleed in if I moved the whip around.

Bass and Treble controls are reversed and the huge knob is not easy to
work with (an UP/DOWN button would have been better).

Audio quality is OK. There is an AUX input jack. The diplay is nice,
if not a little too bright (the backlight stays on with AC... it goes
off after 5 seconds using batteries).

I got mine last Sat, it was the only one in the store.

I got this radio last Monday and, contrary to many of the posts, I have
really enjoyed the radio. I have gotten really good reception on the
MW. I live in a very rural area and in a metal building and still
pick up solid reception from WOAI which is about 400 miles south of me.
Maybe I got the "good one".

All I can say is that I am happy with this model at least for the time
being.

wrote:
wrote:
RobnzBoy wrote:
The first review:
http://www.eham.net/reviews/detail/6263

This is the same garbage radio, as the S350 !

Stay away from this radio. Quality control problems. With the AM
switched to narrow, the thing is deaf except for a few locals.
Sensitivity improves alot in the WIDE mode, but the tuning shifts... to
tune 880kHz, I have to tune to 890kHz to center it

The FM is also bad... living near two 50kw'ers, the entire band is
useless. The WX picked up the local station 20 miles east, but one of
the 50kw'ers would bleed in if I moved the whip around.

Bass and Treble controls are reversed and the huge knob is not easy to
work with (an UP/DOWN button would have been better).

Audio quality is OK. There is an AUX input jack. The diplay is nice,
if not a little too bright (the backlight stays on with AC... it goes
off after 5 seconds using batteries).

I got mine last Sat, it was the only one in the store.

I guessed the 12-150 was a repackaged Grundig S350, SRIII, or the
original high-performance radio that RS used to carry. I had that
piece-of-crap S350, now returned to RS, and weighing in at just one
pound, as the 12-150, I should have known better (but, it had a pretty
face). Really sick of all the hype and cheap Chinese-made receivers. I
have a $25 RS PLL AM/FM 12-898 (now discontined) that performs as well
as my S350 did. If the 12-150 had a handle similar to the S350, it too
would reek of cheap imitation leather ! Good decision to take that
cheap piece of **** back to RS !

Hi Shepherd:

Count it a blessing that you live in a rural location. The reasons
I say this is because I forgot to mention a particular quirk of the
SONY ICF SW7600GR. It, like most didital radios, has less than perfect
image rejection. I live in the inner city with numerous MW stations
within a mile or two of me. I get ghost images of these stations which
pop up in various places on the dial. Most radios choke on these strong
local signals though. Oddly, the best radio I have at rejecting images
is...don't laugh...a GE SR III. It, by the way, is my most sensitive
set and I would pit it against any radio costing twice as much for
overall performance. The sad thing about the GE SR III sets is the poor
quality control issues. If you can find a good one, it's a keeper.

But, I'm happy you are pleased with your SONY. I like mine too and
it's a great set for its size and price.

Wayne
Shepherd wrote:
wrote:
wrote:
RobnzBoy wrote:
The first review:
http://www.eham.net/reviews/detail/6263

This is the same garbage radio, as the S350 !

Stay away from this radio. Quality control problems. With the AM
switched to narrow, the thing is deaf except for a few locals.
Sensitivity improves alot in the WIDE mode, but the tuning shifts... to
tune 880kHz, I have to tune to 890kHz to center it

The FM is also bad... living near two 50kw'ers, the entire band is
useless. The WX picked up the local station 20 miles east, but one of
the 50kw'ers would bleed in if I moved the whip around.

Bass and Treble controls are reversed and the huge knob is not easy to
work with (an UP/DOWN button would have been better).

Audio quality is OK. There is an AUX input jack. The diplay is nice,
if not a little too bright (the backlight stays on with AC... it goes
off after 5 seconds using batteries).

I got mine last Sat, it was the only one in the store.

I got this radio last Monday and, contrary to many of the posts, I have
really enjoyed the radio. I have gotten really good reception on the
MW. I live in a very rural area and in a metal building and still
pick up solid reception from WOAI which is about 400 miles south of me.
Maybe I got the "good one".

All I can say is that I am happy with this model at least for the time
being.

On 11 Nov 2006 17:43:52 -0800, wrote:

wrote:
wrote:
RobnzBoy wrote:
The first review:
http://www.eham.net/reviews/detail/6263

This is the same garbage radio, as the S350 !

Stay away from this radio. Quality control problems. With the AM
switched to narrow, the thing is deaf except for a few locals.
Sensitivity improves alot in the WIDE mode, but the tuning shifts... to
tune 880kHz, I have to tune to 890kHz to center it

The FM is also bad... living near two 50kw'ers, the entire band is
useless. The WX picked up the local station 20 miles east, but one of
the 50kw'ers would bleed in if I moved the whip around.

Bass and Treble controls are reversed and the huge knob is not easy to
work with (an UP/DOWN button would have been better).

Audio quality is OK. There is an AUX input jack. The diplay is nice,
if not a little too bright (the backlight stays on with AC... it goes
off after 5 seconds using batteries).

I got mine last Sat, it was the only one in the store.

I guessed the 12-150 was a repackaged Grundig S350, SRIII, or the
original high-performance radio that RS used to carry. I had that
piece-of-crap S350, now returned to RS, and weighing in at just one
pound, as the 12-150, I should have known better (but, it had a pretty
face). Really sick of all the hype and cheap Chinese-made receivers. I
have a $25 RS PLL AM/FM 12-898 (now discontined) that performs as well
as my S350 did. If the 12-150 had a handle similar to the S350, it too
would reek of cheap imitation leather ! Good decision to take that
cheap piece of **** back to RS !

I have an Eton- Grundig S350DL and am quite happy with it. I also recently
purchased the RS 12-150 and am pleased with it also.

The reception is good in both and the sound is quite good.

For MW sensitivity I would give the edge to the 350DL and sound to the
12-150, but each serve my needs.

As for the size and weight of the 12-150 I know that it is listed as
weighing only 15oz on the Radio Shack web site, but the one I have weighs
4lbs 11oz. without batteries and measures 9" w x 12 1/2" w x 4" d.