Joe Analssandrini wrote:
Dear DeWayne,

Let me make a statement that you (and all here) should seriously
consider. NO shortwave radio with portable characteristics will match
the performance of a tabletop shortwave receiver, all other things
being equal.

I think I understand the point you are trying to make. But clearly
there are selected portable receivers that will outperform selected
tabletops.



While as RHF noted I am partial to the AOR AR7030 Plus (properly
configured) and, as I operate the set mostly via the RxWINGS
computer-control program and therefore have none of the complaints of
the person who does not like the AR7030's operating procedure (which
is, in fact, very easy to learn and use - I myself do operate the set
from its control panel every once in a while), the fact is that your
Drake R8 is very close in performance to the AOR and should be superior
in reception quality to the Eton E1, Grundig Satellit 800 (and yes I
own one of these too) or any other portable radio.

If you have a "weak point" (and I use this term carefully) in your
system, it is the antenna, good as the AOR LA-380 is according to all
reviews I have read. You might want to consider the Quantum Loop v.2
http://www.radiointel.com/review-qloop.htm for DXing on the MWs.
While I have no personal experience with it, Jay Allen is a respected
reviewer. If a Wellbrook Loop or an outside wire antenna is out of the
question for you, this might be an improvement over the AOR LA-380 on
MW. You would, of course, have to carefully research this one, though.

In short, I do not believe you need another radio; certainly, the Drake
R8 you have, assuming it is working properly, should be excellent for
MW DXing. The antenna is the key here - remember the antenna is always
more important than the radio.

As always, the above represents my opinions only. I hope they were of
some help to you.

Best,

Joe

P.S. Remember, I can handle things. I'm smart! Not like everybody says
... like dumb ... I'm SMART and I want RESPECT!

John S. wrote:

I think I understand the point you are trying to make. But clearly
there are selected portable receivers that will outperform selected
tabletops.



For instance?
--
Brian Denley
http://home.comcast.net/~b.denley/index.html

On Sat, 22 Apr 2006 23:36:00 -0400, "Brian Denley"
wrote:

John S. wrote:

I think I understand the point you are trying to make. But clearly
there are selected portable receivers that will outperform selected
tabletops.



For instance?

SW8 vs FRG-100

Brian Denley wrote:
John S. wrote:

I think I understand the point you are trying to make. But clearly
there are selected portable receivers that will outperform selected
tabletops.


A for instance would be: A Sony 2010 will outperform a Kenwood R300.
And I'm sure you can come up with several others.




For instance?
--
Brian Denley
http://home.comcast.net/~b.denley/index.html

John S. wrote:

I think I understand the point you are trying to make. But clearly
there are selected portable receivers that will outperform selected
tabletops.

If you look really hard to find the crappiest tabletop receivers ever
built, then maybe. In general, though, if you want real performance, go
for the tabletops. And most of all, remember this cardinal rule of
receiver purchasing:

A $500 dollar portable is still just a portable. (It's also an
extremely bad deal, but that's a story for another time...)

Steve wrote:
John S. wrote:

I think I understand the point you are trying to make. But clearly
there are selected portable receivers that will outperform selected
tabletops.

If you look really hard to find the crappiest tabletop receivers ever
built, then maybe. In general, though, if you want real performance, go
for the tabletops.

Since performance can be assumed to take into account many factors I
think it is safe to say a portable of the quality of a 2010 will run
circles around several (but certainly not all) tabletops.


And most of all, remember this cardinal rule of
receiver purchasing:

A $500 dollar portable is still just a portable. (It's also an
extremely bad deal, but that's a story for another time...)

"A portable is an extremely bad deal." Hmmm...you must have benefit of
special insight that legions of purchasers of portables have completely
missed. I'm sure they (and I) would appreciate your insight into the
qualities of portable radios, so please feel free share them.

Actually, I would never say that a portable receiver is necessarily a
bad deal. I have a Sony 7600GR, for example, that I spent a little over
a hundred bucks on. That was money well invested. I've gotten many,
many hours of enjoyment from it and it continues to go strong. I'd say
the same about my little Grundig Mini-World receiver, which is
literally so small it fits in my shirt pocket. There are some very,
very good deals to be had on portables out there.

Steve wrote:
Actually, I would never say that a portable receiver is necessarily a
bad deal.

If that is the case then were you just talking to yourself when you
said: A $500 dollar portable is still just a portable. (It's also an
extremely bad deal, but that's a story for another time...)


I have a Sony 7600GR, for example, that I spent a little over
a hundred bucks on. That was money well invested. I've gotten many,
many hours of enjoyment from it and it continues to go strong. I'd say
the same about my little Grundig Mini-World receiver, which is
literally so small it fits in my shirt pocket. There are some very,
very good deals to be had on portables out there.

You need to figure out what you really think before pushing the Post
Message icon my friend.

You conveniently left out the "$500" part when you quoted me, fool. The
"$500" was quite an important omission on your part. I assumed you just
misunderstood me and that you weren't just being an idiot, but now I
see that you were just being an idiot.

In that case, hey, I didn't say YOU couldn't spend $500 on a portable,
if you want to. If that floats your boat, knock yourself out.

Do you like hamburgers? If so, check this out:

http://www.trendhunter.com/trends/fleurburger-5000/

I'd never spend this much on a hamburger, because a $5000 is still just
a hamburger. But hey, they're selling plenty of them in Vegas...and in
SF now.

Enjoy your burger!!!! And maybe you'll think twice now before shooting
off your mouth again.

Steve wrote:
You conveniently left out the "$500" part when you quoted me, fool. The
"$500" was quite an important omission on your part. I assumed you just
misunderstood me and that you weren't just being an idiot, but now I
see that you were just being an idiot.

Whether the $500 is in or out of the quote is pretty much irrelevant to
the conclusion that you are seriously out of touch with current radio
technology. Yes, I know the Zenith TO is a marginal performer when
compared to modern tabletop (and portable) receivers. But you need to
move forward at least 5 decades in your thinking and experience. Most
modern portables will outperform several table top receivers (and
remember the 2010 and more recent offering from Eton are priced below
your beloved $500 number).


In that case, hey, I didn't say YOU couldn't spend $500 on a portable,
if you want to. If that floats your boat, knock yourself out.

You are the one who made the inane statement about portables, not me.

Do you like hamburgers? If so, check this out:

http://www.trendhunter.com/trends/fleurburger-5000/

I'd never spend this much on a hamburger, because a $5000 is still just
a hamburger. But hey, they're selling plenty of them in Vegas...and in
SF now.

I can't imagine why you would want to spend $5000 or $500 on a
hamburger, but if that is what floats your boat, then who am I to
deprive you of that pleasure.



Enjoy your burger!!!! And maybe you'll think twice now before shooting
off your mouth again.

You may wish to look at the portables offered in the post 1970's world
before making such a completely unsupported statement again. You
really come across as out of touch.