Hello, I'm interested in trying shortwave listening. I have narrowed
my choices to the Kaito 1103, and Sony SW7600GR.

I would very much appreciate any opinions on which you prefer, and
why.

Also, is lack of wide/narrow switch on the Sony a problem?

Thanks.

On Sep 21, 3:38*am, JimK wrote:
Hello, I'm interested in trying shortwave listening. I have narrowed
my choices to the Kaito 1103, and Sony SW7600GR.

I would very much appreciate any opinions on which you prefer, and
why.

Also, is lack of wide/narrow switch on the Sony a problem?

Thanks.

I guess the choice of radios is based on what you like to listen to.
The Kaito is good for broadcasting on SW and the Sony is good for
Single sideband. Note that Sony is getting very hard to get parts for
if the radio goes bad. The Sony is more expensive than the Kaito. The
Sony is built sturdier. Get a chance to see and hadle both radios if
you can.
Mike

JimK wrote:
Hello, I'm interested in trying shortwave listening. I have narrowed
my choices to the Kaito 1103, and Sony SW7600GR.

I would very much appreciate any opinions on which you prefer, and
why.

Also, is lack of wide/narrow switch on the Sony a problem?

Thanks.

You're about 20 years too late. Shortwave broadcasting is dead.
Perhaps you'd enjoy utility monitoring; for that you'll need a better
radio.

On Mon, 21 Sep 2009 04:57:29 -0700, dave wrote:

JimK wrote:
Hello, I'm interested in trying shortwave listening. I have narrowed
my choices to the Kaito 1103, and Sony SW7600GR.

I would very much appreciate any opinions on which you prefer, and
why.

Also, is lack of wide/narrow switch on the Sony a problem?

Thanks.

You're about 20 years too late. Shortwave broadcasting is dead.
That's bull**** !
Perhaps you'd enjoy utility monitoring; for that you'll need a better
radio.

JimK wrote:
Hello, I'm interested in trying shortwave listening. I have narrowed
my choices to the Kaito 1103, and Sony SW7600GR.

I would very much appreciate any opinions on which you prefer, and
why.

Also, is lack of wide/narrow switch on the Sony a problem?

Thanks.


Welcome to the hobby. SW listening is a shade of its former
self, but there's still plenty to snag. Lots to enjoy.

Radios....about any passable radio you buy will be a decent
start. It will not be the last one you buy. But what it will do is
get you active, so you can refine your interests, and then select a
radio that meets the needs of those interests. You'll also begin
experimenting with methods of improving reception: eliminating noise
sources, possibly experimenting with external antennae.

Any decent radio can get you into the hobby, and help you learn
the craft of radio.

Sony: 7600 is a popular radio. Not without reason. I personally
don't recommend Sony because of their service practices. If
something goes wrong, you can jump through many hoops, waste many
months (in one case I waited two years for a VCR to come back from
the Sony Service Center, with some great stories as to why it was
taking so damned long) waiting for a piece to be repaired, only to
be told after it all, that it was unrepairable, and that they'd be
glad to sell you a new product and give you pro rated credit for
your old one. Great sounding. In practice you end up spending about
150% more for a working radio than you thought you would.

So, I don't recommend any Sony product on that basis.

But if you're determined to go that way, then go with your eyes
open.

Wide/Narrow: This is probably a non-issue. There are a number of
ways that manufacturers execute selectable bandwidth. They can
actually switch in additional or alternate filters, which would be
the better way, or they can simply switch in or out additional
capacitance to roll off the upper end of the response curves. GRE
built radios for 'The Shack' (...what the F*CK are these people
thinking) would simply switch in some extra capacitance to roll off
the audio when you selected 'Narrow.' To switch in additional or
alternate filters costs money. And requires more stable, and a
finer, alignment...adding considerably to the cost of the radio.

And if the filters are selected correctly, especially on the
portable, narrower bandwidth is usually unnecessary, unless you're
in a crowded band pulling one CW operator out of many.

If the radio you select doesn't have a Wide/Narrow selector, you
probably won't miss it.


Features overall... The Sony has synchronous detection. A nice
feature. Very erratically executed across manufacturers. Sony
usually does it pretty well. Now, there are some radio hobbycraft
practitioners, and reviewers as well, who will tell you NEVER buy a
radio without a sync detector. Ignore them. These people are
dilletantes masquerading as high performance SWL'ers. The truth is
that sync is a nice feature. But not a necessity. And a good
operator with the radio of his choice can pull a decent listen out
of his signal of interest without it. Nice feature. Not a necessity.
And most sync detectors have enough quirks that you can do better
with ECSS than you can with sync. So look for a radio that can
detect single sideband (SSB.)

Tuning resolution should be pretty fine. For program listening,
you can get away with nearly a kilohertz. For ham/utilities, you'll
need something finer. 100Hz is passable, 50Hz is better. 10Hz is
good. But you'll need what's called a 'clarifier.' Many radios have
them. Many don't. A clarifier will enable you to zero in on a signal
in SSB, or ECSS for the best listening. Without it, you may get a
low level beat that can be really irritating.

Build quality should be good. You're going to beat this thing up
if you drag it with you where you go. And you'll want to take it out
of the city or town where you live for the lower noise figures
possible out in the woods. Lower noise means better hearing of low
level signals. Some decent DX is possible in the woods, without any
modifications or additional antenna.

The Sony offers a pretty decent product for the money in these
areas. Audio can be kind of harsh, though. And you will be listening
for long stretches.

The Kaito is a basic radio. Offering few of the advanced features
but it has more pleasant audio, and about the same sensitivity and
build as the Sony.

My personal choice would be the Kaito. Because it's not a Sony.
Your mileage may vary.

Recommendation: Go to a brick and mortar store and try each. Side
by side, if you can. Then find the best price and order your
selection on line.



p

On Sep 21, 9:08*am, "D. Peter Maus"
wrote:
JimK wrote:
*Hello, I'm interested in trying shortwave listening. I have narrowed
*my choices to the Kaito 1103, and Sony SW7600GR.

*I would very much appreciate any opinions on which you prefer, and
*why.

*Also, is lack of wide/narrow switch on the Sony a problem?

*Thanks.

* * Welcome to the hobby. SW listening is a shade of its former
self, but there's still plenty to snag. Lots to enjoy.

* * Radios....about any passable radio you buy will be a decent
start. It will not be the last one you buy. But what it will do is
get you active, so you can refine your interests, and then select a
radio that meets the needs of those interests. You'll also begin
experimenting with methods of improving reception: eliminating noise
sources, possibly experimenting with external antennae.

* * Any decent radio can get you into the hobby, and help you learn
the craft of radio.

* * Sony: 7600 is a popular radio. Not without reason. I personally
don't recommend Sony because of their service practices. If
something goes wrong, you can jump through many hoops, waste many
months (in one case I waited two years for a VCR to come back from
the Sony Service Center, with some great stories as to why it was
taking so damned long) waiting for a piece to be repaired, only to
be told after it all, that it was unrepairable, and that they'd be
glad to sell you a new product and give you pro rated credit for
your old one. Great sounding. In practice you end up spending about
150% more for a working radio than you thought you would.

* * So, I don't recommend any Sony product on that basis.

* * But if you're determined to go that way, then go with your eyes
open.

* * Wide/Narrow: This is probably a non-issue. There are a number of
ways that manufacturers execute selectable bandwidth. They can
actually switch in additional or alternate filters, which would be
the better way, or they can simply switch in or out additional
capacitance to roll off the upper end of the response curves. GRE
built radios for 'The Shack' (...what the F*CK are these people
thinking) would simply switch in some extra capacitance to roll off
the audio when you selected 'Narrow.' To switch in additional or
alternate filters costs money. And requires more stable, and a
finer, alignment...adding considerably to the cost of the radio.

* * And if the filters are selected correctly, especially on the
portable, narrower bandwidth is usually unnecessary, unless you're
in a crowded band pulling one CW operator out of many.

* * If the radio you select doesn't have a Wide/Narrow selector, you
probably won't miss it.

* * Features overall... The Sony has synchronous detection. A nice
feature. Very erratically executed across manufacturers. Sony
usually does it pretty well. Now, there are some radio hobbycraft
practitioners, and reviewers as well, who will tell you NEVER buy a
radio without a sync detector. Ignore them. These people are
dilletantes masquerading as high performance SWL'ers. The truth is
that sync is a nice feature. But not a necessity. And a good
operator with the radio of his choice can pull a decent listen out
of his signal of interest without it. Nice feature. Not a necessity.
And most sync detectors have enough quirks that you can do better
with ECSS than you can with sync. So look for a radio that can
detect single sideband (SSB.)

* *Tuning resolution should be pretty fine. For program listening,
you can get away with nearly a kilohertz. For ham/utilities, you'll
need something finer. 100Hz is passable, 50Hz is better. 10Hz is
good. But you'll need what's called a 'clarifier.' Many radios have
them. Many don't. A clarifier will enable you to zero in on a signal
in SSB, or ECSS for the best listening. Without it, you may get a
low level beat that can be really irritating.

* *Build quality should be good. You're going to beat this thing up
if you drag it with you where you go. And you'll want to take it out
of the city or town where you live for the lower noise figures
possible out in the woods. Lower noise means better hearing of low
level signals. Some decent DX is possible in the woods, without any
modifications or additional antenna.

* *The Sony offers a pretty decent product for the money in these
areas. Audio can be kind of harsh, though. And you will be listening
for long stretches.

* *The Kaito is a basic radio. Offering few of the advanced features
but it has more pleasant audio, and about the same sensitivity and
build as the Sony.

* *My personal choice would be the Kaito. Because it's not a Sony.
Your mileage may vary.

* *Recommendation: Go to a brick and mortar store and try each. Side
by side, if you can. Then find the best price and order your
selection on line.


FWIW, good post Peter.

On Sep 21, 9:08*am, "D. Peter Maus"
wrote:
JimK wrote:
*Hello, I'm interested in trying shortwave listening. I have narrowed
*my choices to the Kaito 1103, and Sony SW7600GR.

*I would very much appreciate any opinions on which you prefer, and
*why.

*Also, is lack of wide/narrow switch on the Sony a problem?

*Thanks.

* * Welcome to the hobby. SW listening is a shade of its former
self, but there's still plenty to snag. Lots to enjoy.

* * Radios....about any passable radio you buy will be a decent
start. It will not be the last one you buy. But what it will do is
get you active, so you can refine your interests, and then select a
radio that meets the needs of those interests. You'll also begin
experimenting with methods of improving reception: eliminating noise
sources, possibly experimenting with external antennae.

* * Any decent radio can get you into the hobby, and help you learn
the craft of radio.

* * Sony: 7600 is a popular radio. Not without reason. I personally
don't recommend Sony because of their service practices. If
something goes wrong, you can jump through many hoops, waste many
months (in one case I waited two years for a VCR to come back from
the Sony Service Center, with some great stories as to why it was
taking so damned long) waiting for a piece to be repaired, only to
be told after it all, that it was unrepairable, and that they'd be
glad to sell you a new product and give you pro rated credit for
your old one. Great sounding. In practice you end up spending about
150% more for a working radio than you thought you would.

* * So, I don't recommend any Sony product on that basis.

* * But if you're determined to go that way, then go with your eyes
open.

* * Wide/Narrow: This is probably a non-issue. There are a number of
ways that manufacturers execute selectable bandwidth. They can
actually switch in additional or alternate filters, which would be
the better way, or they can simply switch in or out additional
capacitance to roll off the upper end of the response curves. GRE
built radios for 'The Shack' (...what the F*CK are these people
thinking) would simply switch in some extra capacitance to roll off
the audio when you selected 'Narrow.' To switch in additional or
alternate filters costs money. And requires more stable, and a
finer, alignment...adding considerably to the cost of the radio.

* * And if the filters are selected correctly, especially on the
portable, narrower bandwidth is usually unnecessary, unless you're
in a crowded band pulling one CW operator out of many.

* * If the radio you select doesn't have a Wide/Narrow selector, you
probably won't miss it.

* * Features overall... The Sony has synchronous detection. A nice
feature. Very erratically executed across manufacturers. Sony
usually does it pretty well. Now, there are some radio hobbycraft
practitioners, and reviewers as well, who will tell you NEVER buy a
radio without a sync detector. Ignore them. These people are
dilletantes masquerading as high performance SWL'ers. The truth is
that sync is a nice feature. But not a necessity. And a good
operator with the radio of his choice can pull a decent listen out
of his signal of interest without it. Nice feature. Not a necessity.
And most sync detectors have enough quirks that you can do better
with ECSS than you can with sync. So look for a radio that can
detect single sideband (SSB.)

* *Tuning resolution should be pretty fine. For program listening,
you can get away with nearly a kilohertz. For ham/utilities, you'll
need something finer. 100Hz is passable, 50Hz is better. 10Hz is
good. But you'll need what's called a 'clarifier.' Many radios have
them. Many don't. A clarifier will enable you to zero in on a signal
in SSB, or ECSS for the best listening. Without it, you may get a
low level beat that can be really irritating.

* *Build quality should be good. You're going to beat this thing up
if you drag it with you where you go. And you'll want to take it out
of the city or town where you live for the lower noise figures
possible out in the woods. Lower noise means better hearing of low
level signals. Some decent DX is possible in the woods, without any
modifications or additional antenna.

* *The Sony offers a pretty decent product for the money in these
areas. Audio can be kind of harsh, though. And you will be listening
for long stretches.

* *The Kaito is a basic radio. Offering few of the advanced features
but it has more pleasant audio, and about the same sensitivity and
build as the Sony.

* *My personal choice would be the Kaito. Because it's not a Sony.
Your mileage may vary.

* *Recommendation: Go to a brick and mortar store and try each. Side
by side, if you can. Then find the best price and order your
selection on line.

* *p

Great post Peter.

dave wrote:

You're about 20 years too late. Shortwave broadcasting is dead.
Perhaps you'd enjoy utility monitoring; for that you'll need a better
radio.


Maybe because I am on the other side of the world, I would dispute that.
Shortwave broadcasting is alive and well, but it's no longer the prefered
method of reaching distant audiences.

Broadcasters who want to reach a more affluent audience have moved to methods
of transmission which are cheaper to transmit, but more expensive to receive.
For example, Internet "broadcasting", satellite sub carriers, etc. They have
also moved to video broadcasting which can not be done by shortwave.

As Dave said, 20 years ago things were different. A cheap shortwave radio
with a short antenna, such as the built in whip, could receive broadcasts
from around the world, 24/7. Due to propigation, you would have to tune to
various frequencies, even when it was night where you were and daytime at the
source or vice versa.

The "biggies", BBC, VOA, AFRN (US millitary entertainment for distant bases),
Deutcshe Welle (Germany), Radio France International, Radio Moscow,
Radio Habana Cuba, HJCB (The Voice of the Andes) and so on. There was even
at one time a Shortwave broadcaster out of New Orleans, which often just
relayed their FM service.

Now most of them have scaled down, or left shortwave entirely.

For example, the BBC no longer "beams" their signal to North America, but you
can still receive it. Not as easily as before, which means you may need to be
more proactive about choosing when you listen and have a better antenna or
receiver. On the other hand, most of the people reading this will have access
to their streaming audio on the Internet, or via a local cable TV or DBS
service.

Many broadcasters use shortwave radio to reach populations that are too
distant and too poor to have broadband Internet, satellite receivers, etc.
Whether or not you would be able receive them at all, or with a cheap receiver
is questionable.

Geoff.


--
Geoffrey S. Mendelson, Jerusalem, Israel N3OWJ/4X1GM

On Sep 21, 8:44*am, "Geoffrey S. Mendelson"
wrote:
dave wrote:
You're about 20 years too late. *Shortwave broadcasting is dead.
Perhaps you'd enjoy utility monitoring; *for that you'll need a better
radio.

Maybe because I am on the other side of the world, I would dispute that.
Shortwave broadcasting is alive and well, but it's no longer the prefered
method of reaching distant audiences.

Broadcasters who want to reach a more affluent audience have moved to methods
of transmission which are cheaper to transmit, but more expensive to receive.
For example, Internet "broadcasting", satellite sub carriers, etc. They have
also moved to video broadcasting which can not be done by shortwave.

As Dave said, 20 years ago things were different. A cheap shortwave radio
with a short antenna, such as the built in whip, could receive broadcasts
from around the world, 24/7. Due to propigation, you would have to tune to
various frequencies, even when it was night where you were and daytime at the
source or vice versa.

The "biggies", BBC, VOA, AFRN (US millitary entertainment for distant bases),
Deutcshe Welle (Germany), Radio France International, Radio Moscow,
Radio Habana Cuba, HJCB (The Voice of the Andes) and so on. There was even
at one time a Shortwave broadcaster out of New Orleans, which often just
relayed their FM service.

Now most of them have scaled down, or left shortwave entirely.

For example, the BBC no longer "beams" their signal to North America, but you
can still receive it. Not as easily as before, which means you may need to be
more proactive about choosing when you listen and have a better antenna or
receiver. On the other hand, most of the people reading this will have access
to their streaming audio on the Internet, or via a local cable TV or DBS
service.

Many broadcasters use shortwave radio to reach populations that are too
distant and too poor to have broadband Internet, satellite receivers, etc..
Whether or not you would be able receive them at all, or with a cheap receiver
is questionable.

Geoff.


How is it over there in Israel Geoff? I've been saving at least
twenty dollars (more often than not thirty five) a week for the
last three years and four months in the hope to visit your
country, I can't wait.

I can just imagine the DX over there. :-) I kind of have the feeling
though that my time will be taken care of, maybe
listen some at night.

JimK wrote:
Hello, I'm interested in trying shortwave listening. I have narrowed
my choices to the Kaito 1103, and Sony SW7600GR.

I would very much appreciate any opinions on which you prefer, and
why.

Also, is lack of wide/narrow switch on the Sony a problem?

Thanks.


I strongly recommend against getting a mid-priced portable for your
first radio. They have very limited reception capabilities. You want
something with SSB and the ability to use a full antenna. Maybe a nice
used "tabletop" receiver.

Have you read "Passport to World Band Radio"?