wrote:
On Thursday, July 31, 2003 12:49:38 PM UTC-4, Judah Smith wrote:
THE REVIEW OF THE AGES FOR THE DX-160 -

[...]


Great revues! Lay-mans words that a layman can understand!!!

That would be a ten year old article.

George

Ernie

On Wed, 25 Sep 2013, George Cornelius wrote:

wrote:
On Thursday, July 31, 2003 12:49:38 PM UTC-4, Judah Smith wrote:
THE REVIEW OF THE AGES FOR THE DX-160 -

[...]


Great revues! Lay-mans words that a layman can understand!!!

That would be a ten year old article.

I always liked the review from Popular Electronics that Radio Shack
reprinted in some ads (maybe it was for the DX-150), about how great
reception on the highest band was, I think they even said "great image
rejection". No wonder Radio Shack reprinted the review.

IN looking at pictures for one of those Radio Shack receivers, it looks
quite a bit like what I remember the layout of my Hallicrafters S-120A
junk receiver looked like. I should open that thing and look. But it
made me wonder if we saw the same generic transistor receiver used by
various companies in different cabinets. If nothing else, both receivers
had the circuitry on one board, and the tuned circuits on another, which
can't be good for good design.

I always liked the look of the Ameco R5, especially since it had an extra
band that went from 30 to 54MHz, just the SP-600. But that had to be an
even worse receiver than the DX-160 and the like, precisely because of
that added band. I can't really imagine it was very useful, stability
wise or image rejection wise. But boy, all of those things looked so good back
then, a world beyond me because I didn't have the money.

That pocket Grundig radio, the Mini Traveller or something, that I got at
a garage sale a few years ago for 2.00 can't be worse than those 40 year
old solid state analog receivers. And yet, it is in some ways so much
better. It has an LCD frequency counter on board, so you actually know
what frequency you are tuned to. And then to make tuning easier, the
limited tuning speactrum is broken down into smaller segments. TO offset
that, the thumbwheel tuning doesnt' make it so easy to tune the receiver.

I paid around $80 Canadian for that Hallicrafters S-120A in the summer of
1971, clearing out my accumulated birthday and Christmas money, and it was
junk. But you can buy a number of recent shortwave portables for the same
price, or somewhat higher, that are nearly infinitely better than that
Hallicrafters. Better readout because it's digital. Better tuning beause
it's not got a sliderule dial with backlash. Better image rejection
because it converts up to a high IF, then down to a lower frequency.
Better selectivty because it uses ceramic filters rather than just IF
transformers. And pretty good SSB reception, because they have actual
product detectors. That Hallcrafters never worked on SSB, too low a BFO
level, until I used a potentiometer between the antenna terminals and the
antenna, so I could attenuate the signals. And by the time the incoming
signal was weak enough so the BFO would be strong enough, virtually no
signals were receivable.

I am surprised I've never seen any DX-160s or that level of receiver at
garage or rummage sales. LIke I said a while ago I was really surprised
to find a TMC GPR-90 at a garage sale, and only $20. I sure wouldn't spend
more than that on a DX-160 or the like.

Michael

On Thursday, September 26, 2013 1:03:17 AM UTC-4, Michael Black wrote:
On Wed, 25 Sep 2013, George Cornelius wrote:



wrote:

On Thursday, July 31, 2003 12:49:38 PM UTC-4, Judah Smith wrote:

THE REVIEW OF THE AGES FOR THE DX-160 -



[...]





Great revues! Lay-mans words that a layman can understand!!!



That would be a ten year old article.



I always liked the review from Popular Electronics that Radio Shack

reprinted in some ads (maybe it was for the DX-150), about how great

reception on the highest band was, I think they even said "great image

rejection". No wonder Radio Shack reprinted the review.



IN looking at pictures for one of those Radio Shack receivers, it looks

quite a bit like what I remember the layout of my Hallicrafters S-120A

junk receiver looked like. I should open that thing and look. But it

made me wonder if we saw the same generic transistor receiver used by

various companies in different cabinets. If nothing else, both receivers

had the circuitry on one board, and the tuned circuits on another, which

can't be good for good design.



I always liked the look of the Ameco R5, especially since it had an extra

band that went from 30 to 54MHz, just the SP-600. But that had to be an

even worse receiver than the DX-160 and the like, precisely because of

that added band. I can't really imagine it was very useful, stability

wise or image rejection wise. But boy, all of those things looked so good back

then, a world beyond me because I didn't have the money.



That pocket Grundig radio, the Mini Traveller or something, that I got at

a garage sale a few years ago for 2.00 can't be worse than those 40 year

old solid state analog receivers. And yet, it is in some ways so much

better. It has an LCD frequency counter on board, so you actually know

what frequency you are tuned to. And then to make tuning easier, the

limited tuning speactrum is broken down into smaller segments. TO offset

that, the thumbwheel tuning doesnt' make it so easy to tune the receiver.



I paid around $80 Canadian for that Hallicrafters S-120A in the summer of

1971, clearing out my accumulated birthday and Christmas money, and it was

junk. But you can buy a number of recent shortwave portables for the same

price, or somewhat higher, that are nearly infinitely better than that

Hallicrafters. Better readout because it's digital. Better tuning beause

it's not got a sliderule dial with backlash. Better image rejection

because it converts up to a high IF, then down to a lower frequency.

Better selectivty because it uses ceramic filters rather than just IF

transformers. And pretty good SSB reception, because they have actual

product detectors. That Hallcrafters never worked on SSB, too low a BFO

level, until I used a potentiometer between the antenna terminals and the

antenna, so I could attenuate the signals. And by the time the incoming

signal was weak enough so the BFO would be strong enough, virtually no

signals were receivable.



I am surprised I've never seen any DX-160s or that level of receiver at

garage or rummage sales. LIke I said a while ago I was really surprised

to find a TMC GPR-90 at a garage sale, and only $20. I sure wouldn't spend

more than that on a DX-160 or the like.



Michael

Did you go back to that place just to see if they have more of the good stuff?

On 9/26/13 24:03 , Michael Black wrote:
IN looking at pictures for one of those Radio Shack receivers, it looks
quite a bit like what I remember the layout of my Hallicrafters S-120A
junk receiver looked like. I should open that thing and look. But it
made me wonder if we saw the same generic transistor receiver used by
various companies in different cabinets. If nothing else, both
receivers had the circuitry on one board, and the tuned circuits on
another, which can't be good for good design.


DX-160 was made by the late GRE, of Japan. OEM manufacturer for a
number of companies. So, your supposition is likely correct--You did see
the same radio in different packages.

DX-160 wasn't related to S-120A, however. Actually, DX-160 was a
better radio.

On Thursday, September 26, 2013 5:05:31 PM UTC-4, D. Peter Maus wrote:
On 9/26/13 24:03 , Michael Black wrote:

IN looking at pictures for one of those Radio Shack receivers, it looks

quite a bit like what I remember the layout of my Hallicrafters S-120A

junk receiver looked like. I should open that thing and look. But it

made me wonder if we saw the same generic transistor receiver used by

various companies in different cabinets. If nothing else, both

receivers had the circuitry on one board, and the tuned circuits on

another, which can't be good for good design.





DX-160 was made by the late GRE, of Japan. OEM manufacturer for a

number of companies. So, your supposition is likely correct--You did see

the same radio in different packages.



DX-160 wasn't related to S-120A, however. Actually, DX-160 was a

better radio.

Isn't Alinco part of GRE ? Or maybe the other way around. They seem to have one HF receiver currently in production . It is DX-R8 .

On 9/26/13 17:02 , wrote:

Isn't Alinco part of GRE ? Or maybe the other way around. They seem
to have one HF receiver currently in production . It is DX-R8 .



GRE has assumed sales and service for Alinco. But GRE is unable to
manufacture products of its own, due to a Chinese Government action on
the property where the GRE plant was located.


There is an interesting circularity to this thread. Judah's review is
of a DX-160 that I modified, and sold to him.

Truth is, that DX-160 was a fun radio. And from the moment I saw it
in the RS catalog, I wanted one. Took 30 years, but I finally got one.
And at the time it was new, it would have been my best option. WAY to
wide....I mean, the lower sideband started on the radio sitting to its
left. But it was fun. And it was a real radio.

On 09/26/2013 02:05 PM, D. Peter Maus wrote:
On 9/26/13 24:03 , Michael Black wrote:
IN looking at pictures for one of those Radio Shack receivers, it looks
quite a bit like what I remember the layout of my Hallicrafters S-120A
junk receiver looked like. I should open that thing and look. But it
made me wonder if we saw the same generic transistor receiver used by
various companies in different cabinets. If nothing else, both
receivers had the circuitry on one board, and the tuned circuits on
another, which can't be good for good design.


DX-160 was made by the late GRE, of Japan. OEM manufacturer for a
number of companies. So, your supposition is likely correct--You did see
the same radio in different packages.

DX-160 wasn't related to S-120A, however. Actually, DX-160 was a
better radio.



Are you sure GRE has gone to the great trash heap?

http://www.gre.co.jp/business/radiocom_e.html

http://greamerica.com/

They look pretty alive on the web. HRO sells their full line of very
nice scanning radios.

On 09/27/2013 07:11 AM, dave wrote:
On 09/26/2013 02:05 PM, D. Peter Maus wrote:
On 9/26/13 24:03 , Michael Black wrote:
IN looking at pictures for one of those Radio Shack receivers, it looks
quite a bit like what I remember the layout of my Hallicrafters S-120A
junk receiver looked like. I should open that thing and look. But it
made me wonder if we saw the same generic transistor receiver used by
various companies in different cabinets. If nothing else, both
receivers had the circuitry on one board, and the tuned circuits on
another, which can't be good for good design.


DX-160 was made by the late GRE, of Japan. OEM manufacturer for a
number of companies. So, your supposition is likely correct--You did see
the same radio in different packages.

DX-160 wasn't related to S-120A, however. Actually, DX-160 was a
better radio.



Are you sure GRE has gone to the great trash heap?

http://www.gre.co.jp/business/radiocom_e.html

http://greamerica.com/

They look pretty alive on the web. HRO sells their full line of very
nice scanning radios.

Never mind:

GRE Official Announcement 10/23/2012

October 23, 2012


To our valued Dealers and Customers,

Due to circumstances beyond its control, General Research of Electronics
of Japan (GRE)
is temporarily not able to manufacture the GRECOM and Radio Shack
branded radio scanners.

The Chinese Government’s plan to redevelop the area where the GRE
factory had been in
operation for over ten years finally forced its closure. Anticipating
this eventuality,
GRE was in the process of building a new factory but unfortunately the
cost of raw materials,
labor and increased taxes created a heavy financial investment burden
that could not be
effectively recovered.

GRE America continues to market, support and service the GRECOM branded
scanners and is
contractually committed to keep the Library Database updated and
current. GRE America
will continue to market, service and support Alinco’s radio products
without any interruption.

We sincerely apologize for this unfortunate turn of events. GRE is
proceeding to establish
a contract with a new factory and believes it will be able to restart
the manufacturing in
the near future.


For continued sales, service and support, please contact the GRE America
office.

Raj Gounder
Director of sales
GRE America, Inc.