Date   

Re: Best, simplist, FM ultralight radio?

jlochey <john.lochey@...>
 

Hey, thanks!

I have one of those, and they are awesome.

Believe it or not I was looking for something that was even smaller, but still decent.

As usual, I'm looking for something that doesn't exist! Ha, ha!


John

--- In ultralightdx@..., "Stu" <StuMorri0@...> wrote:


The National Geographic offer (see previous posts) of the Grundig G8 Traveler II Digital would seem to be right up your alley....


--- In ultralightdx@..., "jlochey" <john.lochey@> wrote:

Group,

If I had to buy a very simple ultralight FM DX machine for a beginner, what would be your choice?

Simple is better.

Low price is good too.


Thanks!



John
KC8JDI


Buying PL310 from Anon-Co

Bob Coomler <w6rjc@...>
 

I've been ought of the loop for awhile, so apologies if this is a non-issue or has been addressed before.  In the past I've ordered from Anon-Co, was pleased with how things transpired and would prefer to get a new PL310 from them.  The eBay listing shows these to be "seller refurbished" at a cost ($34.99 + $24.00) which is comparable to new units from other vendors.  Anything I need to be concerned about?  Thanks.
 
Bob Coomler
Tucson, AZ


Re: Best, simplist, FM ultralight radio?

Stuart
 

The National Geographic offer (see previous posts) of the Grundig G8 Traveler II Digital would seem to be right up your alley....

--- In ultralightdx@..., "jlochey" <john.lochey@...> wrote:

Group,

If I had to buy a very simple ultralight FM DX machine for a beginner, what would be your choice?

Simple is better.

Low price is good too.


Thanks!



John
KC8JDI


Best, simplist, FM ultralight radio?

jlochey <john.lochey@...>
 

Group,

If I had to buy a very simple ultralight FM DX machine for a beginner, what would be your choice?

Simple is better.

Low price is good too.


Thanks!



John
KC8JDI


Re: recommend good AM radio + mp3 player combo?

jlochey <john.lochey@...>
 

I know this doesn't meet all of your specs, but I really like my Sangean PR-D8. It records perfectly to an SD card automatically. I found it to be quite sensitive and easy to use. Got it on Amazon for about $110.

Your mileage may vary! ; )


John

--- In ultralightdx@..., "Stephen" <pianoplayer88key@...> wrote:

My uncle is looking for something like in the title for his birthday coming up the end of this month. I've heard there's a Degen radio (DE1123 or DE1125, I forget) that has the Si4734 chip in it, but he also wants something with fairly high capacity. If that one doesn't accept SDHC cards (I'm going to look after I post this) or have at least 16GB or 32GB memory built in, is there another recommended one that has Si4734-like selectivity (but without the elevated RSSI near strong signals that my PL-380 is plagued with - btw he lives about 10-12 mi or so NW of me), good capacity (preferably at least 8GB with a SDHC slot, or 16GB if it has no slot), and a good antenna (but not a slider, as it would be too big)?

I just looked at a few google links for the DE1123 and DE1125, and while I still can't tell if it has an SD card, there are some things I already don't like about it. Could someone recommend another one? The only other one I'm aware of is something like Radio YourWay, or something that CCrane company sells, and while I can't remember accurately, I (think) my aunt (his wife) told me he knew of that model but there was something he didn't like about it, but I forget.

Any recommendations? While he didn't specify, I would prefer to keep the price and size (including any external AM antenna, although I would prefer it be internal) limits within ultralight specifications, even if there are other reasons the radio doesn't qualify as an ultralight.


Re: recommend good AM radio + mp3 player combo?

pianoplayer88key
 

Hmm.... well I was reading the reviews, and considering what seems to be currently available, the CC Witness seems to be the "lesser of the evils". However, there are some things tha I personally can't get over. The lack of playlist (M3U) and ID3 tag support is not good, for one thing. Also, lack of a record level control is inexcusable, although I don't know if my uncle, who would be using this and wants one (mp3 player and AM radio - may or may not be the CCW) for his birthday coming up the end of this month, would be using the record feature. He mainly wants to listen to audio files he loads on there, and listen to the radio during his lunch break, so I want to point him to a pocket-sized, reasonably-priced product that blows away the competition for how well it does those two things.
As for the radio, considering he lives in the same general metro area I do, and will be doing most of his listening in the daytime, I would want it to have a good radio... and based on what I'm reading about the CCW, I don't think it's good enough for me to recommend it. For example, I would at least expect to be able to hear usable audio from a 100-watt station on 530 that's 100 miles away or a 500-watt on 1290 that's 200 miles away without any splatter from a non-IBOC 50kW station 1 mile and 10kHz away. My PL-380, while it's sensitive enough to pull in that DX, is definitely not selective / overload rejecting enough to do it next to a strong signal. For example, I'm 9 miles from a 50kW on 1170, and there's no trace of a 50kW on 1180 that's about 230 miles away (and on the other side of the Tehachapi Mountains). At least I'm not trying to find something for my grandma in L.A. to listen to stations on 1100, 1107, 1116, 1120, 1290, 1296, 1305, 1310, 1420, 1431 or 1440 with, though - she lives 1/3 mile from a 23kW on 1300 and a 50kW on 1430, and less than 5 miles from a 50kW IBOC on 1110.

I haven't asked if my uncle would be willing to consider two separate devices (one for mp3 and the other for AM radio). Are there any that you all would recommend whose combined price is no higher than the CCW (preferably much cheaper - he was considering the DE1123 but didn't like the fact that it only had 2GB memory), and combined size is small enough for BOTH to fit in a pocket, with good enough shielding on the mp3 player to not bleed through the radio even when he's listening to a station that the 7.5" loopstick PL-380 can't hear? He may not be the DXer I am, BTW, but I still think the radio he gets should be a good one so the stations he does listen to don't have interference issues.

Any recommendations? Should I suggest the Witness even though I personally think it would turn out to be a piece of , or is there a better solution?

--- In ultralightdx@..., "gkinsman1" <gkinsman@...> wrote:

Hi guys,

I own a CC Witness. It definitely isn't a DSP radio, and its AM performance is inferior to that of other ultralights like the DT-400W and PL-380.

I bought the CCW mainly because of the timer recording capability, not for the reception. However, it works fine with my Terk loop to record local AM stations. Without the loop, the recording circuitry can generate quite a bit of noise. The loop provides sufficient signal to overcome most of this noise. Bit rates above 64 Kbps can cause hets on some AM stations. Since 64 Kbps is sufficient for recording talk radio, this doesn't bother me too much.

The CCW takes SD cards up to 2 GB and SDHC cards up to 16 GB.

I have used the line-in recording capability with my Sony 7600GR, CCRadio-SW and Grundig Sat 800. All of these radios have line out jacks. I generally record line in at 256 Kbps, since there is no het issue with this type of recording.

With the 7600GR and CCR-SW, it's necessary to use a headphone attenuator cable to get distortion-free recordings, since the CC Witness has no recording level control.

With the Sat 800 things are a bit more complicated, as it seems to have a very high line out level. Using sufficient attenuation to prevent the CCW from distorting results in the Sat 800 line out itself distorting, because it can't drive the attenuated load. To get around this, I use a so-called "line driver" amplifier (normally used in car stereos) set on 0 dB gain between the Sat 800 and the attenuator cable. The line driver has no trouble driving the attenuated load.

As an MP3 player, the CCW sounds pretty good, but it's no Ipod. There is no ID3 tag sorting or playlist support, and no color display for album art.

Here are a couple of reviews:

http://reviews.cnet.com/mp3-players/c-crane-witness-am/4505-6490_7-33351260.html

http://theradiokitchen.net/how-to-gather-sound-from-the-sky-from-almost-anywhere/

Here is some more info:

http://www.ccwitness.com/

http://www.ccrane.com/radios/am-fm-radios/cc-witness.aspx

Stephen - It sounds like you want an MP3 recorder with an AM radio equal to that in the better ultralights, and including DSP filtering. I don't think such a device exists.

The CCW does what I need it to do, and I'm happy that I bought it.

Regards,
Gary

--- In ultralightdx@..., Mark Roberts <markrobt@> wrote:

The DE1123 does not accept any kind of external memory, and its
recording is at low quality. I wouldn't recommend it as a recorder.
It's OK for FM; the AM seems insensitive and the audio bandwidth is
a measly 2 kHz.

I believe the CCrane AM radio and recorder is called the Witness. I
don't think it's a DSP radio.


7.5" LW Plug-in Loopstick NDB-DX on the Tecsun PL-380

Gary DeBock
 

Hello All,
 
While running some detailed comparisons of the newly hot-rodded 7.5" LW loopstick PL-380 with a stock ICF-2010, it was discovered that the modified Tecsun is actually quite a bit more sensitive than the ICF-2010 on all frequencies below about 250 kHz. The model features a 2000 uh center-wound coil (composed of 120 turns of 40/44 Litz wire) on a type 33 ferrite bar, and is pictured at http://www.mediafire.com/i/?ditdm4ym2g25k5m .
 
Some of the NDB-DX received here in Puyallup, WA last night on the modified PL-380 around 0700 UTC:
 
                                                  RSSI              S/N
 
200-UAB      Anahim Lake, BC        18                  00    (weak; inaudible on ICF-2010)
201-YJ         Victoria, BC                18                  00    (weak; inaudible on ICF-2010)
206-PWT             ?                        25                  15
216-GRF      Ft. Lewis, WA             27                 18   
236-YZA              ?                        15                  04
242-                    ?                        15                  02    (weak; inaudible on ICF-2010)
251-YCD             ?                         20                 08
 
73, Gary DeBock


Re: Grundig G8 for $25 at National Geographic site plus 20% off coupon!

terribly wet
 

You have it right !!! I'm in SouthWest Connecticut. Down here you can get all the HD hssssssssssssssss from New York City. I'm just far enough away to avoid most as most NYC stations actually in New Jersey as to antennas except WFAN 660/WCBS 880.


I have not been doing serious listening but mostly just using a car radio. Of coarse it's nice and sensitive but no way to null out allot of stuff.

I have been just re-stocking myself with some modern radios after being away from AM BCB DX for a long time.

I sit on allot of old stuff but some is getting ancient.


Boom-Box. I forget the model. It sits in Wal-Mart now. At least here it stunk. I could not even get 1260 Westport, Ct. and WNLK 1350 Norwalk, Ct. which are locals. Probably the FM I got WEBE 107.9 with it's 50kw almost next to me. It just seems the radios get worse not better.


Digital ? I think it even made it's own noise on that Boom-Box.


The old GE SuperRadio PLUS with digital--- The digital made some noise but it was not much. A signal would cover it up if strong enough.

G8 audio ? I find it lacking. Down here it'd hard to understand for example WHYN 560 and WTAG 580 and WPRO 630. The G5 much better at that. (Days)

That Sangean PR-D5P the above perfectly listenable.


Some might be selectivity in my 'higher' rf area.



Then to sound cheerful it's probably a new batch of Sangean PR-D5P from China and everybody will say---this stinks !!!


o-boom boxes ? The population might carry it out to the country when 'they get away' and uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh ? where are the radio stations ?


So enuff. Have fun.


Logged a new one tonight. 1220 CJUN Cornwall,Ont. Probably common but can't remember hearing it.

--- In ultralightdx@..., "farmerik" <farmerik@...> wrote:

I am not sure any boombox was made for DXing, but rather made to play local music stations LOUD.So the money went into the speakers and amp, and the tape transport first. I have a SONY ICF-F10S, and it costs less than $50 and sounds pretty good, but is not a DX machine either.

I like the G8's ability to clearly hear the audio, without much interference, on a good number of AM stations. But without an external antenna, it's not for DXing. FM is extremely good though, and I can find quite a bit on SW from major broadcasters.

I noticed you hear the same local stations as I do, so you can't be far away from North East CT.

Sangean made a large part of my pile of dead digital radios, so I have been avoiding them. I'll have to look up that one you like. I am leaning toward analog when ever I can get it for AM and SW broadcasts. That's why I got the SONY. For SSB, as far as I know all modern portable sets are digital, which is fine as long as they work.

The new Analog AM FM radio expected from CCrane [?Sangean?] does sound interesting. I hope it is reliable and works well.

I enjoy almost all my radios, but each one I like is good at different things. - FARMERIK



--- In ultralightdx@..., "terribly wet" <zz4@> wrote:



Once if in a rural area one could pick up a GE Super-Radio at many places.


I don't know what they do now.


I'd swear anything bought out of a retail store (not internet) in 2010 is terrible. Even FM you might be lucky to get a couple of your strongest stations.

Those charts where they show AM Coverage ? maybe if your in the strongest area of alleged signal coverage you might get the AM station.

I just tried the Sony BoomBox that is being sold in many stores including Wal-Mart. The $49.99 thing. It has direct recording from the radio with a built in tape recorder. Wonderful until I found the receiver was a dud. Pay $50 and no receiver ?


As said I like the Grundig G8. The AM section on mine is not the best but alternative radios in 2010 ?


Radio Shack (bless me) had a clearance on the Grundig G5 at $39.99. I found 2 left and bought them. I found both were used 're-packaged' (sold as new) and one simply did not work. I was able to return that.

I made an earlier post wondering about Grundig warranties. It seems there is none unless someone says otherwise. All I got is 'nonsense' by email and telephone.

Taking a walk in the woods I compared the G5 and G8. The G5 is better as to picking up weak AM signals.(540-1700) At least it gets some weak ones days that the G8 there is nothing there.


The best radio I have reviewed at same time is the Sangean PR-D5P. It picks up the weak ones the Grundig's struggle for and it is perfectly listenable. ya know...here...560 WHYN 580 WTAG 630 WPRO etc. WBZ 1030 perfectly listenable on the Sangean and listenable on the G5 but difficult to understand anything on the G8.


As said I like the DT-400W but wish more uumph into the speaker.


For FM to me digital is necessary. I seem to know where I am on the AM dial but FM ? grrr 95.1 96.7 88.6 grrr don't know


I think that G8 is worth $25. Have a back-up !!! I wish I got the $5 off bargain. (where is it ?)

The Sony ICF-38 is regular $25 and does not have the features of the G8. I just like that because it sounds better but could be better as to sensitivity. ---but a radio from Walgreens (I mean a local big-box store radio if they have any)?


Radio Shack has some new ULTRA-RANGE portable. I never hear of anybody that tried it. I never had much luck with Radio Shack. There was once a popular Radio Shack TRF ? Radio. Buy some extras. They fall to pieces.

I'd assume many of these modern Chinese radios 'fall to pieces' or go into electrical dysfunction but----------- (any choice ?)


Excuse my departure from Ultra-Light conversation. (G8 ?)





--- In ultralightdx@..., "Powell E. Way III" <w4opw@> wrote:

The DT-400W is the little yellow one. It has an OK FM and excellent AM. It's not quite as good as the G8. The FM on the G8 is amazing. The G8 can play a lot
louder than the DT-400W because of a larger speaker. The DT-400 also has an
EXCELLENT weather band.


Don't buy any of that drug store garbage.....

Powell

NNNN
POP email is powell at backroads DOT net




________________________________
From: terribly wet <zz4@>

The problem is I guess 'plenty' that might be better. That Sangean ? DT44 ??????
-the yellow one- is better...

My G8 is not 'hot' on AM but beats some consumer junk from a big box store. At
night there must be something on every channel (if in a place like NE USA) but
daytime sensitivity is not dynamite. The audio is often hard to understand. (at
least from the speaker)


Re: recommend good AM radio + mp3 player combo?

Gary Kinsman
 

Hi guys,

I own a CC Witness. It definitely isn't a DSP radio, and its AM performance is inferior to that of other ultralights like the DT-400W and PL-380.

I bought the CCW mainly because of the timer recording capability, not for the reception. However, it works fine with my Terk loop to record local AM stations. Without the loop, the recording circuitry can generate quite a bit of noise. The loop provides sufficient signal to overcome most of this noise. Bit rates above 64 Kbps can cause hets on some AM stations. Since 64 Kbps is sufficient for recording talk radio, this doesn't bother me too much.

The CCW takes SD cards up to 2 GB and SDHC cards up to 16 GB.

I have used the line-in recording capability with my Sony 7600GR, CCRadio-SW and Grundig Sat 800. All of these radios have line out jacks. I generally record line in at 256 Kbps, since there is no het issue with this type of recording.

With the 7600GR and CCR-SW, it's necessary to use a headphone attenuator cable to get distortion-free recordings, since the CC Witness has no recording level control.

With the Sat 800 things are a bit more complicated, as it seems to have a very high line out level. Using sufficient attenuation to prevent the CCW from distorting results in the Sat 800 line out itself distorting, because it can't drive the attenuated load. To get around this, I use a so-called "line driver" amplifier (normally used in car stereos) set on 0 dB gain between the Sat 800 and the attenuator cable. The line driver has no trouble driving the attenuated load.

As an MP3 player, the CCW sounds pretty good, but it's no Ipod. There is no ID3 tag sorting or playlist support, and no color display for album art.

Here are a couple of reviews:

http://reviews.cnet.com/mp3-players/c-crane-witness-am/4505-6490_7-33351260.html

http://theradiokitchen.net/how-to-gather-sound-from-the-sky-from-almost-anywhere/

Here is some more info:

http://www.ccwitness.com/

http://www.ccrane.com/radios/am-fm-radios/cc-witness.aspx

Stephen - It sounds like you want an MP3 recorder with an AM radio equal to that in the better ultralights, and including DSP filtering. I don't think such a device exists.

The CCW does what I need it to do, and I'm happy that I bought it.

Regards,
Gary

--- In ultralightdx@..., Mark Roberts <markrobt@...> wrote:

The DE1123 does not accept any kind of external memory, and its
recording is at low quality. I wouldn't recommend it as a recorder.
It's OK for FM; the AM seems insensitive and the audio bandwidth is
a measly 2 kHz.

I believe the CCrane AM radio and recorder is called the Witness. I
don't think it's a DSP radio.


Re: recommend good AM radio + mp3 player combo?

Mark Roberts
 

The DE1123 does not accept any kind of external memory, and its
recording is at low quality. I wouldn't recommend it as a recorder.
It's OK for FM; the AM seems insensitive and the audio bandwidth is a
measly 2 kHz.

I believe the CCrane AM radio and recorder is called the Witness. I
don't think it's a DSP radio.


Re: Plugging the PL-360 7.5" Loopsticks Into the Tecsun PL...

pianoplayer88key
 

Interesting.  My PL-380 only indicates up to 63dBu for some reason.  Also you didn't say what your RSSI readings with the stock antenna are when you tune about 15, 20, or 25 kHz off of KSUH's frequency while aiming the (stock) antenna at their transmitter, and last I checked the group's search function doesn't work properly so I don't think I could find your post in which you said what KSUH's barefoot on-frequency RSSI reading was.

My strongest daytime pests (all readings in 1kHz mode) include:

 600 KOGO  5.000kW -  7.69mi, 249.21° ; 63,25 facing, 43,25 null ; 30dBu @ 580, 42dBu @ 614 (IBOC)
 690 XEWW 77.500kW - 24.62mi, 199.63° ; 63,25 facing, 46,25 null ; 34dBu @ 705 (slight splatter +/-10kHz - splatter comments are when facing station)
 760 KFMB  5.000kW -  7.29mi, 320.85° ; 63,25 facing, 46,25 null ; 34dBu @ 775 (moderate to somewhat heavy splatter +/-10kHz)
 910 KECR  5.000kW -  9.39mi,   7.15° ; 63,25 facing, 43,25 null ; 34dBu @ 775 (somewhat heavy splatter on 910)
1130 KSDO 10.000kW -  6.34mi, 350.26° ; 63,25 facing, 40,25 null ; 45dBu @ 1145, 43dBu @ 1115 (don't know why I was able to null it so much - it's my second strongest daytime pest ... also moderate splatter on 1120)
1170 KCBQ 50.000kW -  9.35mi,   7.27° ; 63,25 facing, 53,25 null ; 43dBu @ 1185 (moderate splatter on 1180)
1210 KPRZ 20.000kW - 25.71mi, 326.14° ; 50,25 facing, 35,05 null ; 37dBu @ 1225 (included for null and off-channel readings)
1360 KLSD  5.000kW -  8.28mi, 255.34° ; 62,25 facing, 30,24 null ; 32dBu @ 1375 (semi-weak splatter on 1370)
1470 XERCN 10.00kW - 18.03mi, 182.86° ; 55,25 facing, 32,25 null ; 30dBu @ 1485 (moderate to slightly heavy splatter on 1480)

I can get 1kW stations at a distance of 194.9mi on 1490 (15,11) and 1340 (22,00), a 500-watt on 1290 (24,00) same distance and a 2.5kW on 1250 at 201.08mi, though.  That is after briefly tilting the radio vertical to reduce the signal strength, THEN aiming the antenna to try for best reception.  (I find that sometimes helps tame the elevated RSSI a little, but it's still not good enough for some stations I want to hear.)  I should mention that those are Santa Barbara stations.... and since they're mostly across a salt water path (Pacific Ocean) due to the curve of the coastline, do they count as TPs? ;)

However, I can't get a 5kW at 88.28mi on 1480, a 5kW on at 94.31mi on 1350, a 50kW at 237.01mi on 1180, a 10kW at 80.77mi on 1140, a 5kW at 80.17mi on 920, or a 2.5kW at 92.85mi on 590.  I also have serious trouble with a 50kW at 111.43mi on 1110 - the signal is very faint under a 41dBu RSSI reading.
On the other hand, though, I have, with the Select-A-Tenna (all others listed up to now are barefoot), pulled in a 50kW at 445.42mi on 680 and at 625.88mi on 700.  Also, when I'm in a car (which nulls the RF across the band), I can get up to a 18dB SNR on a station on 1550 that indicates a 15dBu RSSI.

I think I remember you said in a previous post that you thought my PL-380 may be defective.  I think it's been too long for Joyce to exchange it with another unit, so what would you recommend?  I'd like to be able to get something that will fit in my pants pocket without the antenna protruding on which I can hear stations on 920, 1140, 1180 just to name a few, without splatter from locals mentioned above on the adjacent channels (910, 1130, 1170).

My original purpose for getting an ultralight recommended/recognized by the group was so I could have a radio in my pocket (the antenna would have to fit in there too) that would hear a decent signal (preferably at least 20-25dB SNR) on 1110 KDIS.  My previous radio's selectivity was horrible and had absolutely NO chance with mega-pest 1130 KSDO, and even if KSDO was off the air, KDIS would be barely readable, and probably almost stomped on by giga-pest 1170 KCBQ.  Also, upon reading the glowing reviews of the selectivity on the PL-380, I was hoping I would be able to get the station on 1180 without splatter from the local 50kW on 1170 as well, but unfortunately it seems the PL-380 has some shortcomings, as it appears (to me) Rick Robinson pointed out in his post, that I'm having a hard time overcoming.
Now I wouldn't mind having a radio in the size of the PL-380's cabinet, but would prefer that it be oriented VERTICALLY instead of horizontal.  If something existed that was that size, would there be enough room to put a good front-end tuned circuit or two in there (or whatever it would take) to help with the overload/image rejection, and still have the selectivity of the Si4734 radios?  Also I wonder how the sensitivity would be if it had a 0.5" Amidon-61 loopstick taking up the entire width of the cabinet...




--- In ultralightdx@..., D1028Gary@... wrote:
>
> Hi Stephen,
>
> Thanks for your question. KSUH-1450 is the most troublesome pest here,
> although the IBOC monstrosity KHHO-850 comes in a close second.
>
> When the 7.5" plug-in loopstick PL-380 is tuned to 1450 kHz and pointed at
> KSUH, the daytime RSSI reading here is 87, and the S/N reading is 25. When
> the loopstick nulls the pest on 1450, the readings drop to 61/25. For
> daytime DX, the hot-rodded PL-380 has no trouble limiting the KSUH splatter to
> 1442-1458 kHz when the station is nulled, and can easily receive KARR-1460
> in Kirkland, WA (a 5 KW station about 45 miles from here) in the KSUH null,
> with an additional trace of KUTI in Yakima (5 KW at about 120 miles).
>
> The PVC Loops (and other tuned passive systems) have a tuning capacitor
> which provides additional selectivity to help cut down local splatter-- a big
> advantage rarely mentioned by those promoting hard-wired air core loops
> without this benefit. For this reason, the PVC loops (both portable and
> fixed) can combine altazimuth nulling with an additional tuned circuit, cutting
> down local splatter more effectively than the nulling action of a loopstick
> alone.
>
> Despite this (in answer to your question), receiving Trans-Pacific DX on
> 1449 kHz or 1458 kHz is unlikely in a location like Puyallup, no matter which
> antenna is used. There is no TP station on either frequency strong enough
> to break through the KSUH hash, on those frequencies. In order to receive
> TP-DX on a noisy frequency, you need a fairly strong signal from Asia. Just
> like in domestic DX, you can null a pest to your heart's content, but that
> won't get you a new logging. Your antenna needs to be sensitive enough to
> dig out a DX station in the null of the pest, and in the case of 1449 and
> 1458 kHz in Puyallup, that's highly unlikely. The best I've managed with the
> 9' PVC loop here in Puyallup was a reception of 819-Pyongyang (North Korea)
> in the null of semi-local 820-KGNW (50 KW at about 20 miles), primarily
> because of an ideal combination of optimum null angle and freakish DX station
> strength. The strength of the DX station is the most important factor in
> your odds of success, when chasing DX only 1 kHz away from a pest.
>
> 73, Gary
>
>
> In a message dated 7/14/2010 1:38:47 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
> pianoplayer88key@... writes:
>
>
>
>
> For me, one ultimate test of external antennas is how well do they do when
> near very strong signals. For example, I believe you are
> about 2-3 miles from 1450 KSUH's transmitter, and it splatters across a
> few hundred kHz on radios with poor selectivity.
> When you use the external antennas (whether they're the PVC loops or the
> large loopsticks) with the Tecsun (or other) DSP-based radios, how close can
> you get to the local station's frequency and still have a chance at
> logging DX? For example, I believe 1449 is a split channel frequency - can you
> get anything on that frequency without 1450 bleeding through? Or, are you
> close enough to 1450 so that even without an external antenna you're getting
> 50dBu readings in blank channels across a portion of the band?
>
> --- In _ultralightdx@... (mailto:ultralightdx@...)
> , D1028Gary@ wrote:
> >
> > Hi Richard,
> >
> > It's true that for the barefoot PL-310 and PL-380 models, there is a
> > tradeoff in AM sensitivity and soft mute inconvenience, which makes the
> > purchasing decision quite interesting (fully described in the PL-380
> review, which
> > is posted at __http://www.mediafire.com/?w4yuzhj2kyz__
> (http://www.mediafire.com/?w4yuzhj2kyz_)
> > (_http://www.mediafire.com/?w4yuzhj2kyz_
> (http://www.mediafire.com/?w4yuzhj2kyz) ) ). But for the 7.5" plug-in loopstick project, all the
> > advantages would swing over to the PL-380 model. The upgrade loopsticks
> > provide a huge boost in the PL-380's AM and LW sensitivity, and the soft
> mute
> > inconvenience is less, allowing the innovative Si4734 model to be used
> to
> > its full DXing potential.
> >
> > In answer to your question, a PL-310 could certainly be modified to
> accept
> > these 7.5" plug-in loopsticks (with the FM and SW input jack left
> intact),
> > but there would be more soft mute hassle than with the PL-380.
> >
> > The newly-modified PL-380 model was tested with the experimental LW 7.5"
>
> > plug-in loopstick here last night (photo below, and at
> > __http://www.mediafire.com/?ditdm4ym2g25k5m__
> (http://www.mediafire.com/?ditdm4ym2g25k5m_) (_http://www.mediafire.com/?ditdm4ym2g25k5m_
> (http://www.mediafire.com/?ditdm4ym2g25k5m) ) ), and
> > it was giving the stock ICF-2010 stiff competition on the lower LW
> > frequencies. When these 7.5" plug-in LW and AM loopsticks are used with
> the PL-380
> > model, Richard, the DXer can have excellent DX, freedom and convenience
> on
> > both bands-- the main reason that this new project was completed before
> my
> > family's Oregon beach vacation next week :-)
> >
> > 73, Gary
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > In a message dated 7/14/2010 6:57:18 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
> > farmerik@ writes:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > When I compared the 380 and 310 from your reviews, I chose the more
> > sensitive 310, even though the 380 does have less muting problems. So I
> will be
> > interested in a 380 modified to use the external loop sticks you make,
> > including the forthcoming LW version.
> >
> > Will you be leaving the FM and SW input jack intact, so I can use that
> > too? - FARMERIK
> >
> > --- In __ultralightdx@...
> (mailto:_ultralightdx@...) _ (mailto:_ultralightdx@...
> (mailto:ultralightdx@...) )
> > , D1028Gary@ wrote:
> > >
> > > Hi Farmerik,
> > >
> > > Mouser Electronics has supplied me with high quality electronic parts
> > for
> > > years, and they have a great variety of components. I should have used
> a
> >
> > > high quality plug-in jack from them instead of the Radio Shack type,
> but
> > this
> > > entire project was kind of a spur-of-the-moment effort to prove to
> > myself
> > > that the PL-380 cabinet modification mechanical design was viable, and
> > the
> > > mechanical design was about 90% of the challenge in this case.
> > >
> > > After refinement of the components and procedures, this PL-380 plug-in
> > > loopstick project should provide another way for non-technical DXers
> to
> > enjoy
> > > thrilling transoceanic DX, this time on a receiver with the full
> > > capabilities of the Si4734 DSP chip. Have fun!
> > >
> > > 73, Gary
> > >
> > >
> > > In a message dated 7/13/2010 5:24:44 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
> > > farmerik@ writes:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > Many years ago, I liked Switchcraft jacks and plugs, I don't know if
> > they
> > > still make them. Where would you recommend to buy quality jacks and
> > plugs,
> > > or what brands should I look for?
> > > I would like to add 1/8th inch phone jacks which will bypass the
> > internal
> > > loop sticks in my larger radios, if I can do it. Maybe I should go
> with
> > 1/4
> > > inch though.
> > > With help from a member here, I am working on a version of Jim's Hoop
> > > Loop.-FARMERIK
> > >
> > > --- In ___ultralightdx@...
> (mailto:__ultralightdx@...) _
> > (mailto:__ultralightdx@...
> (mailto:_ultralightdx@...) ) _ (mailto:__ultralightdx@...
> (mailto:_ultralightdx@...) _
> > (mailto:_ultralightdx@...
> (mailto:ultralightdx@...) ) )
> > > , D1028Gary@ wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hello All,
> > > >
> > > > For those interested in weird loopstick experimentation, a Tecsun
> > PL-380
> > > > model has been successfully modified to accept the 7.5" plug-in
> > > loopsticks
> > > > (AM and LW) developed for the PL-360 model.
> > > >
> > > > Using a strange collection of plastic parts and dubious Radio Shack
> > > > components, a small "docking port" was designed and assembled for
> > > attachment to
> > > > the top of the PL-380 cabinet, using the same "rubber lock" shock
> > > absorbing
> > > > system that has proven successful in the PL-360 7.5" loopstick
> models.
> > > In
> > > > the case of the PL-380, however, there is no whip antenna tip (or
> > > antenna
> > > > plug-in jack) that can be used for mounting the 7.5" loopsticks-- so
> > > both had
> > > > to be designed from scratch.
> > > >
> > > > A .25" O.D. 1" long section of a Levelor blind plastic wand served
> > > nicely
> > > > as the loopstick frame rubber hose mount, and a Radio Shack 1/8"
> phone
> > > jack
> > > > (part number 274-0248) served not-so-nicely as the plug-in jack,
> > mainly
> > > > because of the cheap quality of the material. Both were secured in
> > > vertical
> > > > holes drilled in a cut-up section of a Swanson Level Square, glued
> to
> > > the top
> > > > of the PL-380 cabinet. Various photos of this fanatical contraption
> > will
> > > > be uploaded to the Ultralightdx photos section, in a new file.
> > > >
> > > > The original design had the stock loopstick antenna in-circuit
> > whenever
> > > > the 7.5" plug-in antenna was unplugged, meaning that either antenna
> > > could be
> > > > used as desired. This system actually worked for a while, until the
> > > > temperamental Radio Shack plug-in jack decided to go on strike (a
> > > mechanical
> > > > connection issue), making me wonder why I ever used it in the first
> > > place.
> > > > Eventually I decided to disconnect the stock loopstick, and use only
> > the
> > > 7.5"
> > > > plug-in loopstick, which has always worked perfectly in this weird
> > > experimen
> > > > t. The PL-380 DXing performance with this 7.5" plug-in loopstick is
> > > > equivalent to that of the fixed-frame 7.5" loopstick PL-380's, which
> > was
> > > the goal
> > > > of the project.
> > > >
> > > > Because of the low quality of the Radio Shack phone jack and some
> > other
> > > > mechanical refinements that would optimize this project, it would be
> > > best not
> > > > to take orders for similar PL-380 cabinet modifications until these
> > > > improvements are made. For those 22 DXers who have already received
> > > their PL-360
> > > > 7.5" plug-in loopsticks, however, this project may eventually
> provide
> > a
> > > way
> > > > to enjoy great transoceanic AM (and LW) DX on the PL-380 model--
> > simply
> > > by
> > > > plugging in their existing 7.5" loopsticks.
> > > >
> > > > 73 and Good DX,
> > > > Gary DeBock (in Puyallup, WA, USA)
> > > >
> > >
> >
>


Re: Grundig G8 for $25 at National Geographic site plus 20% off coupon!

Rik
 

I am not sure any boombox was made for DXing, but rather made to play local music stations LOUD.So the money went into the speakers and amp, and the tape transport first. I have a SONY ICF-F10S, and it costs less than $50 and sounds pretty good, but is not a DX machine either.

I like the G8's ability to clearly hear the audio, without much interference, on a good number of AM stations. But without an external antenna, it's not for DXing. FM is extremely good though, and I can find quite a bit on SW from major broadcasters.

I noticed you hear the same local stations as I do, so you can't be far away from North East CT.

Sangean made a large part of my pile of dead digital radios, so I have been avoiding them. I'll have to look up that one you like. I am leaning toward analog when ever I can get it for AM and SW broadcasts. That's why I got the SONY. For SSB, as far as I know all modern portable sets are digital, which is fine as long as they work.

The new Analog AM FM radio expected from CCrane [?Sangean?] does sound interesting. I hope it is reliable and works well.

I enjoy almost all my radios, but each one I like is good at different things. - FARMERIK

--- In ultralightdx@..., "terribly wet" <zz4@...> wrote:



Once if in a rural area one could pick up a GE Super-Radio at many places.


I don't know what they do now.


I'd swear anything bought out of a retail store (not internet) in 2010 is terrible. Even FM you might be lucky to get a couple of your strongest stations.

Those charts where they show AM Coverage ? maybe if your in the strongest area of alleged signal coverage you might get the AM station.

I just tried the Sony BoomBox that is being sold in many stores including Wal-Mart. The $49.99 thing. It has direct recording from the radio with a built in tape recorder. Wonderful until I found the receiver was a dud. Pay $50 and no receiver ?


As said I like the Grundig G8. The AM section on mine is not the best but alternative radios in 2010 ?


Radio Shack (bless me) had a clearance on the Grundig G5 at $39.99. I found 2 left and bought them. I found both were used 're-packaged' (sold as new) and one simply did not work. I was able to return that.

I made an earlier post wondering about Grundig warranties. It seems there is none unless someone says otherwise. All I got is 'nonsense' by email and telephone.

Taking a walk in the woods I compared the G5 and G8. The G5 is better as to picking up weak AM signals.(540-1700) At least it gets some weak ones days that the G8 there is nothing there.


The best radio I have reviewed at same time is the Sangean PR-D5P. It picks up the weak ones the Grundig's struggle for and it is perfectly listenable. ya know...here...560 WHYN 580 WTAG 630 WPRO etc. WBZ 1030 perfectly listenable on the Sangean and listenable on the G5 but difficult to understand anything on the G8.


As said I like the DT-400W but wish more uumph into the speaker.


For FM to me digital is necessary. I seem to know where I am on the AM dial but FM ? grrr 95.1 96.7 88.6 grrr don't know


I think that G8 is worth $25. Have a back-up !!! I wish I got the $5 off bargain. (where is it ?)

The Sony ICF-38 is regular $25 and does not have the features of the G8. I just like that because it sounds better but could be better as to sensitivity. ---but a radio from Walgreens (I mean a local big-box store radio if they have any)?


Radio Shack has some new ULTRA-RANGE portable. I never hear of anybody that tried it. I never had much luck with Radio Shack. There was once a popular Radio Shack TRF ? Radio. Buy some extras. They fall to pieces.

I'd assume many of these modern Chinese radios 'fall to pieces' or go into electrical dysfunction but----------- (any choice ?)


Excuse my departure from Ultra-Light conversation. (G8 ?)





--- In ultralightdx@..., "Powell E. Way III" <w4opw@> wrote:

The DT-400W is the little yellow one. It has an OK FM and excellent AM. It's not quite as good as the G8. The FM on the G8 is amazing. The G8 can play a lot
louder than the DT-400W because of a larger speaker. The DT-400 also has an
EXCELLENT weather band.


Don't buy any of that drug store garbage.....

Powell

NNNN
POP email is powell at backroads DOT net




________________________________
From: terribly wet <zz4@>

The problem is I guess 'plenty' that might be better. That Sangean ? DT44 ??????
-the yellow one- is better...

My G8 is not 'hot' on AM but beats some consumer junk from a big box store. At
night there must be something on every channel (if in a place like NE USA) but
daytime sensitivity is not dynamite. The audio is often hard to understand. (at
least from the speaker)


Re: Stephen's testing

Rick Robinson <w4dst@...>
 

On 7/14/2010 5:52 PM, dhsatyadhana wrote:
Excellent points, Rick. Correct me if I'm wrong, but that is what happens with the PL-310/360-380 when I plug in or inductively couple a broadband antenna like the Wellbrook FLR-100 or LF Engineering H-900 whip - complete overload here in urban Seattle.
Absolutely right Kevin. The Si4734 based receivers are very sensitive but are very overload susceptible, especially in urban locations. Nice antennas BTW. I use a Wellbrook AP-100 preamp/splitter with my external antenna system. I'm fortunate to live in a rural area of the Blue Ridge Mtns. without any bad MW RF problems or the preamp might cause me problems. LF Engineering antennas are highly regarded by LW non-directional beacon DXers.
However, if I put a simple tuned preamp like the MFJ 1020C in between, all is well, and no doubt a simple coil and varicap would do the same thing.
The "front end" of your preamp is an excellent cure for your problem, as you discovered. A cap and coil will also work well by making the radio more selective to the frequencies being applied to the antenna and attenuating off frequency signals.
What about putting a potentiometer, or a fixed resistor of the appropriate value, in-between the broadband antenna and Si4734 receiver to simply cut down on the RF energy being pumped into the front end?

That's exactly what the "DX/Local" swiches on some radios, like my Grundig G5, are. They are voltage dividing resistor circuits to cut down on the RF signal level. Some communication receivers have non-switchable MW attenuators installed in their front ends. The Icom R75 and Yaesu FRG-100 are 2 examples of receivers with these attenuators. There are mods available for removing them to increase MW sensitivity.

Best ULRing,

Rick


Re: Plugging the PL-360 7.5" Loopsticks Into the Tecsun PL...

Rik
 

You have projects ahead of you farther than the eye can see!

It would just be an excuse to buy a PL-380 for me, not that I NEED an excuse!

-FARMERIK

--- In ultralightdx@..., D1028Gary@... wrote:

Hi Richard,

It's true that for the barefoot PL-310 and PL-380 models, there is a
tradeoff in AM sensitivity and soft mute inconvenience, which makes the
purchasing decision quite interesting (fully described in the PL-380 review, which
is posted at _http://www.mediafire.com/?w4yuzhj2kyz_
(http://www.mediafire.com/?w4yuzhj2kyz) ). But for the 7.5" plug-in loopstick project, all the
advantages would swing over to the PL-380 model. The upgrade loopsticks
provide a huge boost in the PL-380's AM and LW sensitivity, and the soft mute
inconvenience is less, allowing the innovative Si4734 model to be used to
its full DXing potential.

In answer to your question, a PL-310 could certainly be modified to accept
these 7.5" plug-in loopsticks (with the FM and SW input jack left intact),
but there would be more soft mute hassle than with the PL-380.

The newly-modified PL-380 model was tested with the experimental LW 7.5"
plug-in loopstick here last night (photo below, and at
_http://www.mediafire.com/?ditdm4ym2g25k5m_ (http://www.mediafire.com/?ditdm4ym2g25k5m) ), and
it was giving the stock ICF-2010 stiff competition on the lower LW
frequencies. When these 7.5" plug-in LW and AM loopsticks are used with the PL-380
model, Richard, the DXer can have excellent DX, freedom and convenience on
both bands-- the main reason that this new project was completed before my
family's Oregon beach vacation next week :-)

73, Gary





In a message dated 7/14/2010 6:57:18 A.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
farmerik@... writes:




When I compared the 380 and 310 from your reviews, I chose the more
sensitive 310, even though the 380 does have less muting problems. So I will be
interested in a 380 modified to use the external loop sticks you make,
including the forthcoming LW version.

Will you be leaving the FM and SW input jack intact, so I can use that
too? - FARMERIK

--- In _ultralightdx@... (mailto:ultralightdx@...)
, D1028Gary@ wrote:

Hi Farmerik,

Mouser Electronics has supplied me with high quality electronic parts
for
years, and they have a great variety of components. I should have used a
high quality plug-in jack from them instead of the Radio Shack type, but
this
entire project was kind of a spur-of-the-moment effort to prove to
myself
that the PL-380 cabinet modification mechanical design was viable, and
the
mechanical design was about 90% of the challenge in this case.

After refinement of the components and procedures, this PL-380 plug-in
loopstick project should provide another way for non-technical DXers to
enjoy
thrilling transoceanic DX, this time on a receiver with the full
capabilities of the Si4734 DSP chip. Have fun!

73, Gary


In a message dated 7/13/2010 5:24:44 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time,
farmerik@ writes:




Many years ago, I liked Switchcraft jacks and plugs, I don't know if
they
still make them. Where would you recommend to buy quality jacks and
plugs,
or what brands should I look for?
I would like to add 1/8th inch phone jacks which will bypass the
internal
loop sticks in my larger radios, if I can do it. Maybe I should go with
1/4
inch though.
With help from a member here, I am working on a version of Jim's Hoop
Loop.-FARMERIK

--- In __ultralightdx@...
(mailto:_ultralightdx@...) _ (mailto:_ultralightdx@...
(mailto:ultralightdx@...) )
, D1028Gary@ wrote:

Hello All,

For those interested in weird loopstick experimentation, a Tecsun
PL-380
model has been successfully modified to accept the 7.5" plug-in
loopsticks
(AM and LW) developed for the PL-360 model.

Using a strange collection of plastic parts and dubious Radio Shack
components, a small "docking port" was designed and assembled for
attachment to
> the top of the PL-380 cabinet, using the same "rubber lock" shock
absorbing
system that has proven successful in the PL-360 7.5" loopstick models.
In
the case of the PL-380, however, there is no whip antenna tip (or
antenna
> plug-in jack) that can be used for mounting the 7.5" loopsticks-- so
both had
to be designed from scratch.

A .25" O.D. 1" long section of a Levelor blind plastic wand served
nicely
as the loopstick frame rubber hose mount, and a Radio Shack 1/8" phone
jack
(part number 274-0248) served not-so-nicely as the plug-in jack,
mainly
because of the cheap quality of the material. Both were secured in
vertical
holes drilled in a cut-up section of a Swanson Level Square, glued to
the top
of the PL-380 cabinet. Various photos of this fanatical contraption
will
be uploaded to the Ultralightdx photos section, in a new file.

The original design had the stock loopstick antenna in-circuit
whenever
> the 7.5" plug-in antenna was unplugged, meaning that either antenna
could be
used as desired. This system actually worked for a while, until the
temperamental Radio Shack plug-in jack decided to go on strike (a
mechanical
connection issue), making me wonder why I ever used it in the first
place.
Eventually I decided to disconnect the stock loopstick, and use only
the
7.5"
plug-in loopstick, which has always worked perfectly in this weird
experimen
t. The PL-380 DXing performance with this 7.5" plug-in loopstick is
equivalent to that of the fixed-frame 7.5" loopstick PL-380's, which
was
the goal
of the project.

Because of the low quality of the Radio Shack phone jack and some
other
mechanical refinements that would optimize this project, it would be
best not
to take orders for similar PL-380 cabinet modifications until these
improvements are made. For those 22 DXers who have already received
their PL-360
7.5" plug-in loopsticks, however, this project may eventually provide
a
way
to enjoy great transoceanic AM (and LW) DX on the PL-380 model--
simply
by
plugging in their existing 7.5" loopsticks.

73 and Good DX,
Gary DeBock (in Puyallup, WA, USA)


Re: Grundig G8 for $25 at National Geographic site plus 20% off coupon!

Harold
 

"I think that G8 is worth $25. Have a back-up !!! I wish I got the $5 off bargain. (where is it?"
 
 
 
 
On the right  second down is the 20% off link. Click it, find the Grundig, add to cart, proceed to checkout and see the price of $19.95
 


Re: Grundig G8 for $25 at National Geographic site plus 20% off coupon!

mr.decker
 

I went to www.google.com and typed in the following search item:

national geographic store coupon

The first item that popped up in the search results was "Nat Geo Store 20% Off." I clicked that result, and it brought me to the National Geographic Store. I then opened up another tab in my browser window and went to the link for the G8 that I found in the top post of this thread. The price was still listed as $24.95 until I added it to my cart. When I added it to my cart, its price dropped to $19.95, and there was a note on the screen that the the price was discounted 20%.

Hope this helps.

Brian

--- In ultralightdx@..., "terribly wet" <zz4@...> wrote:

More precise directions ?


I tried but I see tons of codes but nothing that seems to match.








--- In ultralightdx@..., "mr.decker" <mr.decker@> wrote:

I just did the same Google search, and the result was 20% off! It was also directly through National Geographic Store, and the link title in Google was "Nat Geo Store 20% Off." I jumped on it, and the radio's price became $19.95. After shipping, the total cost was $25.95. I already have a G8, so this one will be stored away. This is my favorite travel radio for FM DXing. I wish it had the sound quality through the speaker as my D96L, but I usually DX through headphones anyway.

Brian

--- In ultralightdx@..., "texnote" <texnote@> wrote:

I did a Google search for 'national geographic store coupon' and one of the sponsored links (the ones on top highlighted in yellow), belongs to the National Geographic Store itself and will give you another 10% off. The link label is "Nat Geo Store 10% Off". Try it and see if it works. Worked for me.


Re: Grundig G8 for $25 at National Geographic site plus 20% off coupon!

Powell
 

I just got my PR-D5P. I find it as good on AM as the SuperRadio series. It's AM isn't as good soundwise.

It will get 70 hours life on the 6 C cell batteries. 

The problem with the DT-400W is it is so small, and that's what limits speaker size. The CC-SWP is excellent, has better audio and is decent for the price.

There is going to be a CC-EP  in August  that may be a Super Radio replacement if C Crane gets it right.

IF you can find one, the Panasonic "Mr.Thin" RF-032D rivals the current ultralites on performance. Made in the early 1980's it's analog. But it's half the thickness of any of the current Ultralites.

Powell





 NNNN
POP email is powell at backroads  DOT     net




________________________________

From: terribly wet
To: ultralightdx@...
Sent: Wed, July 14, 2010 5:43:16 PM
Subject: [ultralightdx] Re: Grundig G8 for $25 at National Geographic site plus
20% off coupon!



Once if in a rural area one could pick up a GE Super-Radio at many places.


I don't know what they do now.





The best radio I have reviewed at same time is the Sangean PR-D5P. It picks up
the weak ones the Grundig's struggle for and it is perfectly listenable.  ya
know...here...560 WHYN  580  WTAG  630 WPRO  etc. WBZ 1030 perfectly listenable
on the Sangean and listenable on the G5 but difficult to understand anything on
the G8.


As said I like the DT-400W but wish more uumph into the speaker.


F

Radio Shack has some new ULTRA-RANGE portable. I never hear of anybody that
tried it. I never had much luck with Radio Shack. There was once a popular Radio
Shack TRF ? Radio. Buy some extras. They fall to pieces.

I'd assume many of these modern Chinese radios 'fall to pieces' or go into
electrical dysfunction but----------- (any choice ?)


Excuse my departure from Ultra-Light conversation. (G8 ?)




docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/


Re: Stephen's testing

dhsatyadhana <satya@...>
 

Excellent points, Rick. Correct me if I'm wrong, but that is what happens with the PL-310/360-380 when I plug in or inductively couple a broadband antenna like the Wellbrook FLR-100 or LF Engineering H-900 whip - complete overload here in urban Seattle. However, if I put a simple tuned preamp like the MFJ 1020C in between, all is well, and no doubt a simple coil and varicap would do the same thing.

What about putting a potentiometer, or a fixed resistor of the appropriate value, in-between the broadband antenna and Si4734 receiver to simply cut down on the RF energy being pumped into the front end?

Kevin S
Bainbridge Island, WA

--- In ultralightdx@..., Rick Robinson <w4dst@...> wrote:
Stephen has chosen a worse case scenario in which to compare receivers.
Few receivers have been designed to deal with operation in high RF
fields. 20 meters from a BCB transmitting antenna radiating 1000 watts,
is going to produce a very strong RF field and it would be interesting
to measure the RF field to see just how strong it is. At one time, the
FCC required such readings of all broadcast antennas and KSUH probably
has copies of the RF field measurements. The list of receivers that can
deal with such an RF environment are small. Some are the legendary
R-390A, Watkins-Johnson 87XX series, Racal receivers, current top end
ham transceivers, the Icom R-9500 and AOR AR-7030+, and other premium
receivers too numerous to list. Rob Sherwood's web site has a table
containing the results of his thorough testing of current and vintage
gear if anyone is interested in seeing how different receivers stack
up. His main interest is ham radio and how well receivers, and
transceivers, react to strong signals 2kHz away as one would find during
ham radio contesting.

Good sensitivity and good selectivity do not automatically make for good
immunity to overload and image rejection, which I think Stephen has
found out. The older Panasonic he is using contains discrete front end
components that may be larger than the entire Si4734 chip and appear to
produce a better rejection to high RF levels and the problems associated
with this environment than his PL-380. Compare that old Panasonic to a
classic RF-2200 or a Sony 2010 and I would imagine Stephen's old
Panasonic would show up rather poorly. The very early British made
AR-7030s, non-Plus version, had problems with imaging and dealing with
the extreme RF that European DXers deal with from megawatt LW and MW
broadcasters. This was found to be due to the use of surface mount
capacitors and inductors in the front end of the receiver. Later models
of the '7030 and the Plus version, use leaded components which
eliminated this problem. Can you imagine the size of the components
inside of the Si4734?

Judging from Dr. Phil's excellent paper on the Si4734 chip and the
Silicon Lab data sheet for the Si4734, there appears to be no band pass
filtering, only an AGC controlled low noise amplifier in the AM chain.
You can't miniaturize an R-390A front end to fit on an IC, at least not
with current technology. ( Wouldn't that be nice?) Long story short,
Stephen has shown one of the shortcomings of the Si4734 chip, poor
strong signal handling in the presence of high RF levels. This is still
the infancy of "DSP radio on a chip" technology and we can only have
better radios to come. I find my G8 and PL-380 to be amazing radios,
but as Stephen has seen, they have some shortcomings.

Until we can have the front end of an R-390A in a chip, problems with
high RF levels will not be overcome. Since trying to DX in such an
environment is impractical in the first place, don't hold off buying and
enjoying the fun of a ULR because of this issue.

Rick W4DST


Re: Grundig G8 for $25 at National Geographic site plus 20% off coupon!

terribly wet
 

Once if in a rural area one could pick up a GE Super-Radio at many places.


I don't know what they do now.


I'd swear anything bought out of a retail store (not internet) in 2010 is terrible. Even FM you might be lucky to get a couple of your strongest stations.

Those charts where they show AM Coverage ? maybe if your in the strongest area of alleged signal coverage you might get the AM station.

I just tried the Sony BoomBox that is being sold in many stores including Wal-Mart. The $49.99 thing. It has direct recording from the radio with a built in tape recorder. Wonderful until I found the receiver was a dud. Pay $50 and no receiver ?


As said I like the Grundig G8. The AM section on mine is not the best but alternative radios in 2010 ?


Radio Shack (bless me) had a clearance on the Grundig G5 at $39.99. I found 2 left and bought them. I found both were used 're-packaged' (sold as new) and one simply did not work. I was able to return that.

I made an earlier post wondering about Grundig warranties. It seems there is none unless someone says otherwise. All I got is 'nonsense' by email and telephone.

Taking a walk in the woods I compared the G5 and G8. The G5 is better as to picking up weak AM signals.(540-1700) At least it gets some weak ones days that the G8 there is nothing there.


The best radio I have reviewed at same time is the Sangean PR-D5P. It picks up the weak ones the Grundig's struggle for and it is perfectly listenable. ya know...here...560 WHYN 580 WTAG 630 WPRO etc. WBZ 1030 perfectly listenable on the Sangean and listenable on the G5 but difficult to understand anything on the G8.


As said I like the DT-400W but wish more uumph into the speaker.


For FM to me digital is necessary. I seem to know where I am on the AM dial but FM ? grrr 95.1 96.7 88.6 grrr don't know


I think that G8 is worth $25. Have a back-up !!! I wish I got the $5 off bargain. (where is it ?)

The Sony ICF-38 is regular $25 and does not have the features of the G8. I just like that because it sounds better but could be better as to sensitivity. ---but a radio from Walgreens (I mean a local big-box store radio if they have any)?


Radio Shack has some new ULTRA-RANGE portable. I never hear of anybody that tried it. I never had much luck with Radio Shack. There was once a popular Radio Shack TRF ? Radio. Buy some extras. They fall to pieces.

I'd assume many of these modern Chinese radios 'fall to pieces' or go into electrical dysfunction but----------- (any choice ?)


Excuse my departure from Ultra-Light conversation. (G8 ?)

--- In ultralightdx@..., "Powell E. Way III" <w4opw@...> wrote:

The DT-400W is the little yellow one. It has an OK FM and excellent AM. It's not quite as good as the G8. The FM on the G8 is amazing. The G8 can play a lot
louder than the DT-400W because of a larger speaker. The DT-400 also has an
EXCELLENT weather band.


Don't buy any of that drug store garbage.....

Powell

NNNN
POP email is powell at backroads DOT net




________________________________
From: terribly wet <zz4@...>

The problem is I guess 'plenty' that might be better. That Sangean ? DT44 ??????
-the yellow one- is better...

My G8 is not 'hot' on AM but beats some consumer junk from a big box store. At
night there must be something on every channel (if in a place like NE USA) but
daytime sensitivity is not dynamite. The audio is often hard to understand. (at
least from the speaker)


Stephen's testing

Rick Robinson <w4dst@...>
 

On 7/13/2010 9:29 PM, Stephen wrote:
Another issue I've had from when it was new was how poorly it deals with nearby high-powered signals.
snip ...
do you by any chance have ANY idea WHY a radio with horrible selectivity, when about 20 meters from a local station's transmitter (I'm not joking, either - I actually recorded the examples above from there!), would be much better at hearing off-channel weaker stations than a radio that's supposed to have absolutely superb selectivity, even considering that the more selective radio is normally much more sensitive as well?
Stephen has chosen a worse case scenario in which to compare receivers. Few receivers have been designed to deal with operation in high RF fields. 20 meters from a BCB transmitting antenna radiating 1000 watts, is going to produce a very strong RF field and it would be interesting to measure the RF field to see just how strong it is. At one time, the FCC required such readings of all broadcast antennas and KSUH probably has copies of the RF field measurements. The list of receivers that can deal with such an RF environment are small. Some are the legendary R-390A, Watkins-Johnson 87XX series, Racal receivers, current top end ham transceivers, the Icom R-9500 and AOR AR-7030+, and other premium receivers too numerous to list. Rob Sherwood's web site has a table containing the results of his thorough testing of current and vintage gear if anyone is interested in seeing how different receivers stack up. His main interest is ham radio and how well receivers, and transceivers, react to strong signals 2kHz away as one would find during ham radio contesting.

Good sensitivity and good selectivity do not automatically make for good immunity to overload and image rejection, which I think Stephen has found out. The older Panasonic he is using contains discrete front end components that may be larger than the entire Si4734 chip and appear to produce a better rejection to high RF levels and the problems associated with this environment than his PL-380. Compare that old Panasonic to a classic RF-2200 or a Sony 2010 and I would imagine Stephen's old Panasonic would show up rather poorly. The very early British made AR-7030s, non-Plus version, had problems with imaging and dealing with the extreme RF that European DXers deal with from megawatt LW and MW broadcasters. This was found to be due to the use of surface mount capacitors and inductors in the front end of the receiver. Later models of the '7030 and the Plus version, use leaded components which eliminated this problem. Can you imagine the size of the components inside of the Si4734?

Judging from Dr. Phil's excellent paper on the Si4734 chip and the Silicon Lab data sheet for the Si4734, there appears to be no band pass filtering, only an AGC controlled low noise amplifier in the AM chain. You can't miniaturize an R-390A front end to fit on an IC, at least not with current technology. ( Wouldn't that be nice?) Long story short, Stephen has shown one of the shortcomings of the Si4734 chip, poor strong signal handling in the presence of high RF levels. This is still the infancy of "DSP radio on a chip" technology and we can only have better radios to come. I find my G8 and PL-380 to be amazing radios, but as Stephen has seen, they have some shortcomings.

Until we can have the front end of an R-390A in a chip, problems with high RF levels will not be overcome. Since trying to DX in such an environment is impractical in the first place, don't hold off buying and enjoying the fun of a ULR because of this issue.

Rick W4DST