In article .com,
"RHF" wrote:

Telamon - No Matter Where You Look - There They Are ~ RHF

You can just about fold the corner of all the ads to mark the sections
of the book.

I think they should consider just publishing the blue pages every
quarter year to keep it current. I wonder if they have ever consider
that?

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

Telamon wrote:

In article .com,
"RHF" wrote:

Telamon - No Matter Where You Look - There They Are ~ RHF

You can just about fold the corner of all the ads to mark the sections
of the book.

I think they should consider just publishing the blue pages every
quarter year to keep it current. I wonder if they have ever consider
that?

Something similar to that was done in pre PWBR days. It was called Radio
Database International, the predecessor to PWBR.

That was 20 years or so ago.

dxAce
Michigan
USA

In article .com,
"Joe Analssandrini" wrote:

Years ago many shortwave radio companies and dealers advertised in
Passport. Sadly, this is no longer the case and I really don't know
why. Where is AOR's ad? Where are Sony's ads (yeah, right!)? Why
doesn't Degen/Kaito advertise? It's also a shame that the
distributors which do advertise (Universal being a notable exception)
just run the "co-op" Eton ads.

AOR is still selling the 7030+ in the USA (and elsewhere) so I'm
surprised they don't have an ad in Passport. Maybe the Universal ads
were enough exposure for them.

I am glad that Eton sees fit to advertise in Passport but I too wish
the ads were less repetitive (and more informative). At least those
ads don't cause Passport to lose its focus; they don't give Eton
radios "glowing" reviews where they don't deserve one.

I have found, over the years, that Passport's reviews are fair,
comprehensive, and ACCURATE. In my opinion the yearly Passport is
worth every penny they charge.

I also find the equipment reviews valuable. I think most people would be
of the same opinion. Since they cover the spectrum of equipment people
can read through that section and get a sense of what they want to buy
and so attain a level of performance.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

Telamon wrote:
In article .com,
"Joe Analssandrini" wrote:

Years ago many shortwave radio companies and dealers advertised in
Passport. Sadly, this is no longer the case and I really don't know
why. Where is AOR's ad? Where are Sony's ads (yeah, right!)? Why
doesn't Degen/Kaito advertise? It's also a shame that the
distributors which do advertise (Universal being a notable exception)
just run the "co-op" Eton ads.

AOR is still selling the 7030+ in the USA (and elsewhere) so I'm
surprised they don't have an ad in Passport. Maybe the Universal ads
were enough exposure for them.

I am glad that Eton sees fit to advertise in Passport but I too wish
the ads were less repetitive (and more informative). At least those
ads don't cause Passport to lose its focus; they don't give Eton
radios "glowing" reviews where they don't deserve one.

I have found, over the years, that Passport's reviews are fair,
comprehensive, and ACCURATE. In my opinion the yearly Passport is
worth every penny they charge.

I also find the equipment reviews valuable. I think most people would be
of the same opinion. Since they cover the spectrum of equipment people
can read through that section and get a sense of what they want to buy
and so attain a level of performance.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

Over the years, I, too, have generally found PWBR's equipment reviews
to be quite useful. I've made some fairly decent purchases based on
the insight provided by Passport reviews.

As for the Eton, the ad saturation in PWBR seems hardly surprising,
given the degree to which this company shells out overall in
advertising. It seems like I'm regularly coming across their full page
ads in a variety of periodicals: Foreign Affairs, Smithsonian,
Atlantic Monthly, etc.

junius

On 22 Nov 2005 11:33:41 -0800, "junius" wrote:


Telamon wrote:
In article .com,
"Joe Analssandrini" wrote:

Years ago many shortwave radio companies and dealers advertised in
Passport. Sadly, this is no longer the case and I really don't know
why. Where is AOR's ad? Where are Sony's ads (yeah, right!)? Why
doesn't Degen/Kaito advertise? It's also a shame that the
distributors which do advertise (Universal being a notable exception)
just run the "co-op" Eton ads.

AOR is still selling the 7030+ in the USA (and elsewhere) so I'm
surprised they don't have an ad in Passport. Maybe the Universal ads
were enough exposure for them.

I am glad that Eton sees fit to advertise in Passport but I too wish
the ads were less repetitive (and more informative). At least those
ads don't cause Passport to lose its focus; they don't give Eton
radios "glowing" reviews where they don't deserve one.

I have found, over the years, that Passport's reviews are fair,
comprehensive, and ACCURATE. In my opinion the yearly Passport is
worth every penny they charge.

I also find the equipment reviews valuable. I think most people would be
of the same opinion. Since they cover the spectrum of equipment people
can read through that section and get a sense of what they want to buy
and so attain a level of performance.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

Over the years, I, too, have generally found PWBR's equipment reviews
to be quite useful. I've made some fairly decent purchases based on
the insight provided by Passport reviews.

As for the Eton, the ad saturation in PWBR seems hardly surprising,
given the degree to which this company shells out overall in
advertising. It seems like I'm regularly coming across their full page
ads in a variety of periodicals: Foreign Affairs, Smithsonian,
Atlantic Monthly, etc.

junius

Saw an Eton ad in the Los Angeles Times yesterday. It showed their
newest crank-up powered radio charging a cell phone & touted it's
usefulness in an emergency. It was a full-page ad if that gives an
indication of how much they are willing to spend on advertising.

I wonder if they'd consider spending 20% or so LESS on advertising and
putting the money saved into research to improve their portable radios.
Why, after all these years, do NONE of their small portables feature a
synchronous detection circuit and why do so many of their new models
offer single conversion when, at similar or even lower prices, other
manufacturers offer dual conversion? (In MY opinion, anyone who spends
$150.00 on an ANALOG single conversion SW radio, no matter how "good"
it supposedly sounds, is wasting money!)

Just my thoughts.

Joe

Joe Analssandrini wrote:
I wonder if they'd consider spending 20% or so LESS on advertising and
putting the money saved into research to improve their portable radios.
Why, after all these years, do NONE of their small portables feature a
synchronous detection circuit and why do so many of their new models
offer single conversion when, at similar or even lower prices, other
manufacturers offer dual conversion? (In MY opinion, anyone who spends
$150.00 on an ANALOG single conversion SW radio, no matter how "good"
it supposedly sounds, is wasting money!)

Just my thoughts.

Joe

I have bought over the years, three Hallicrafters SX-62A's and one
SX-62 each one cost a little over $150.00. Single conversion.....good
receiver, great audio, has a decent fm section, what's not to like?
YMMV

Opinions are like rear ends, many of them stink!

Les Locklear
Gulfport, Ms.

Here is the actual, verbatim definition of "Passport's Choice" (from
the 2005 Passport to World Band Radio...I don't have the 2006 edition
yet):

"Passport's Choice. La creme de la creme. Our test team's personal
picks of the litter...models we would buy or have bought for our
personal use. Unlike star ratings, these choices are unapologetically
subjective."

Just means the radio is a personal favorite of the editors. Doesn't
mean it's better than other radios in its class, or the best model out
there.

As far as the ads, they need them to pay for the publication
(obviously). If Eton is the only company willing to pony up the cash,
so be it. I've found that the reviews seem pretty even handed and fair.
They really nitpick, IMO, and mention things that I think would bug
very few people out there, in an effort to fully disclose everything
about each model they review. So saying that they overrate Eton's
radios is a little unfair, I think.

Dear Les,

Obviously you are a collector of that model. My comment was meant for
those people who are buying a modern radio for daily use. Frankly, old
tube "boat-anchors," well-designed in their day though they may have
been, are not for most users today much as a 1959 Cadillac convertible,
"fancy" and advanced as it was then (and, even now, unbeatable in a
Fourth-of-July parade), would not be suitable for most drivers today.
And today's single-conversion radios, analog OR digital, are a waste of
money when you consider the price for good dual-conversion SW radios,
some of which even feature dual bandwidths and SSB reception. You can
select from a number of models selling for less than $100.00.

I too have an old "boat-anchor," a Lafayette Model HE-10, its
associated speaker the HE-11, and a pair of vintage crystal headphones.
I trot this out a few times a year just for old times' sake. It's nice
to see the tubes light up and to use the wonderful knobs with their
gorgeous flywheel effect (something sadly lacking on today's
receivers).

But there's absolutely no way I would ever go back to a
single-conversion receiver (with its images that even the best
single-conversion receiver cannot eliminate) nor would I go back to any
radio that does not have a synchronous detection circuit (and thus have
to suffer with selective fading distortion). If I'm not incorrect, the
Hallicrafters SX-62 models, like many radios of that time, cannot even
receive SSB and, though they may (I'm not sure) feature a crystal
calibrator, you still cannot tell exactly the frequency to which you're
tuned. And, like all analog-tuned receivers, to a greater or lesser
extent, they drift.

While, for a collector such as yourself, these limitations won't be
important, for most people today they most certainly would be. If one
is spending $150.00, a Sony ICF-SW7600GR (which features a sync
circuit) and a suitable antenna in absolute terms will run rings around
the Hallicrafters, audio quality excepted.

By the way, years ago, I always thought that Hallicrafters radios were
really good ones, right up there with Hammarlund models (though, like
everything else, "shy" of the Collinses). They were well-designed and
very rugged. In their respective classes, they were also the
best-looking SW radios on the market at that time.

Best,

Joe

"John S." wrote in message
oups.com...

Michael Lawson wrote:
"Brian Hill" wrote in message
...

"John S." wrote in message
oups.com...

Brian Hill wrote:
I just bought this and noticed all the Eaton and E1 ads. I
counted 18
plus
the review. Gee talk about overkill.

--

Regards
B.H.

Brian's Basement
http://webpages.charter.net/brianhill/6.htm

Brian's Radio Universe
http://webpages.charter.net/brianhill/500.htm

I noticed that last year too. That Eton continues to be the
shortwave
radio advertiser in PWBR says a lot about how this hobby has
shrunk.
It also makes me wonder how they can give an independent
opinion
about
Eton products given that most of their ad revenue comes from
Eton.


I agree.

They had no problem ripping the S350 a new one
for shortwave performance. About the only good
thing they said about it was that it had good sound.


Designating the 350 Editors Choice isn't exactly comparable to
having a
new hole ripped in ones posterior.

Where it counts, it did. The review admitted that the 350
got the editor's choice because it had the best audio
south of a Sat 800, not because it was a single conversion
powerhouse. In the shortwave reception department,
the improvement from 2005 to 2006 was that it's a bit
more stable, but it still has images and in the modern
day and age, a $150 single conversion receiver is a bit
cheap. Hell, my DX-440 is a double conversion receiver,
and it ran for $199 (or $149 on sale) back in 1989, with
(nowadays) older technology. The fact that in the
guts of the receiver the only thing going for it are
looks and sound does not bode well. You take away
the sound, you take away the Editor's Choice designation.

--Mike L.