Red Wave Radio

I have a Panasonic RFB 65 which is primarily used for AM  and FM
listening in the home and away.

I'm considering purchasing the C Crane CC Radio for its supposedly
exellent AM reception for in-the-house use.  Currently I have a GE
Superadio, but am not happy with its performance and lack of digital
station selection.

Another option is to purchase another multiband portable (its AC/DC jack
is broke again and I'm on batteries which it eats like mad).

Should I expect better AM reception from say a Sony ICF 2010 than the CC
radio or my RFB 65?  Or, are there other similar, but less expensive
multiband portable or lap portables that I should consider  for AM
listening as shortwave is a feature that I seldom use?  My assumption,
perhaps incorrect, is that a quality multiband radio should have
quality AM reception.

Thanks!

Bob D

If your primary use is "around the house"program listening and not
serious DX work, the CC Radio will suit you fine.  The battery life is
overstated by C Crane, based on my experience, but if you are running
it off the AC line cord - you won't notice.  If you leave it on
Weather Alert, the battery life really drops.

You will like the large display.  Only 5 pre-sets per band (AM, FM, TV
and Weather)

The FM receiver is suprisingly selective.  Of all the portables I
have, it is the only one that can clearly receive a weak classical
station that is right next to a local powerhouse.

If you are willing to give up on your digital requirement, you may
want to consider the Tivoli Model One (designed by Henry Kloss).  I
have no experience with it - but it has received very high audio
reviews, etc.  You may want to do a search on it  or look in past
postings in the newsgroup.

http://www.tivoliaudio.com/

I think it is somewhat overpriced at $160 but a lot of things are.

Another possibility is to try and find a used Radio Shack DX-375.
Good solid Am and FM reception plus decent shortwave coverage.
I have found that it is a decent performer for DXing and just local
listening.

It has been replaced by the DX-396.  You can find these on sale at RS
a few times a year for $70 (regularly $100).   It is digital.  Super
battery life (2 C cells).   It won't have the same audio as the CC
Radio of course...but not bad.   I think everyone has concluded that
these are made for Radio Shack by Grundig (or Lextronics).  

Russ

Quote:> If your primary use is "around the house"program listening and not
> serious DX work, the CC Radio will suit you fine.  The battery life is
> overstated by C Crane, based on my experience, but if you are running
> it off the AC line cord - you won't notice.  If you leave it on
> Weather Alert, the battery life really drops.

> You will like the large display.  Only 5 pre-sets per band (AM, FM, TV
> and Weather)

> The FM receiver is suprisingly selective.  Of all the portables I
> have, it is the only one that can clearly receive a weak classical
> station that is right next to a local powerhouse.

> If you are willing to give up on your digital requirement, you may
> want to consider the Tivoli Model One (designed by Henry Kloss).  I
> have no experience with it - but it has received very high audio
> reviews, etc.  You may want to do a search on it  or look in past
> postings in the newsgroup.

> http://www.tivoliaudio.com/

> I think it is somewhat overpriced at $160 but a lot of things are.

Just a note here--the Model one is still $100, it's the Model 88 that is
running around $160 or so.  I have both and find them both to be
bargains given the performance.

Donald Reeve

I should have mentioned, though, given the original poster's search for
a good AM radio that the Model One really sucks on AM.
Gorgeous-sounding on FM, but near totally deaf on AM....

dr

If you are willing to give up on your digital requirement, you may

Quote:> > want to consider the Tivoli Model One (designed by Henry Kloss).  I
> > have no experience with it - but it has received very high audio
> > reviews, etc.  You may want to do a search on it  or look in past
> > postings in the newsgroup.

> > http://www.tivoliaudio.com/

> > I think it is somewhat overpriced at $160 but a lot of things are.

> Just a note here--the Model one is still $100, it's the Model 88 that
is
> running around $160 or so.  I have both and find them both to be
> bargains given the performance.

> Donald Reeve

I didn't realize that - the poor AM performance on the Model One.
Thanks.

Also, on the Dx-375 or 396, you get 10 presets per band.  When the
DX-375 was on close out at RS for $35-$40, I think it was the best
value going.

Russ

The CCradio is excellent, and is just as amazing at FM DX as on AM, yet no
one ever seems to talk about this.   The GE superadio is a cheap plastic
piece of garbage in comparison.

Quote:> Should I expect better AM reception from say a Sony ICF 2010 than the CC
> radio or my RFB 65?

The CCradio will be best for AM broadcast band reception, as that is what it
was made to be, and that is what it consistently shows itself to be.   Do
get one of the radio shack am loop antennas (around $15) for it as they are
a perfect matched set.

Quote:>  Or, are there other similar, but less expensive
> multiband portable or lap portables that I should consider  for AM
> listening as shortwave is a feature that I seldom use?  My assumption,
> perhaps incorrect, is that a quality multiband radio should have
> quality AM reception.

Those have to be able to tune in a wide range of frequencies and can't
concentrate all the circuitry and filtering exclusively for the AM band as
the CCradio did.

If you want a good book on any topic, say golf, you can buy the world's
greatest set of encyclopedias and it won't have as much information on that
subject than a book just about golf.

Quote:> If your primary use is "around the house"program listening and not
> serious DX work, the CC Radio will suit you fine.

Also good for serious DX work too.

Quote:> The FM receiver is suprisingly selective.  Of all the portables I
> have, it is the only one that can clearly receive a weak classical
> station that is right next to a local powerhouse.

I find the same results with the FM in the CCradio.

Quote:> If you are willing to give up on your digital requirement, you may
> want to consider the Tivoli Model One (designed by Henry Kloss).  I
> have no experience with it - but it has received very high audio
> reviews, etc.

This is the best SOUNDING FM radio and blows away the fidelity of the CCradio
(or any other radio that is not a good home stereo system) but the AM section
of the Model One is very poor.

People buy the Model One for listening to FM, not AM.

Quote:> http://www.tivoliaudio.com/

> I think it is somewhat overpriced at $160 but a lot of things are.

The Tivoli Model One is only $99 on line or in stores, no one charges more
than this, except Ebay auctions.

A GREAT value for the spectacular sound (better than Bose) and real cherry,
walnut or maple woods it is cased in.

I can confirm this.  The CCradio is a far better choice for AM reception
and the amount of stations you can pull in.   I am still testing which is
better in pulling in the most FM stations between the two radios, but the
Model One "sound quality" of an FM station is far better than the CCradio.

The Model One should have just skipped the AM altogether as it really sucks
and then it could have been even cheaper in cost yet and less space inside
wasted for the AM circuitry.   Or they could have made the AM section
really great too.   The CCradio has equally impressive AM AND FM reception.

I would not go so far as to delete the AM section because if you have
strong local stations the AM sounds almost as good as the FM.

--
Telamon

This might be true if you're talking about the AM stereo stations who use
double the typcial spectrum allocation, and the Tivoli has a wide enough
bandwidth setting to take advantage of that, and can demodulate the
stereo signal.

No.
Panasonic analog receivers typically had excellent AM audio. The RF-2200
was probably the best for MW and was probably also best at nulling out
interfering stations. If you want better MW reception for the RFB 65, the
most you should need is a MW loop antenna.

Wait a minute. I used to own a Panasonic RFB-65. While it is a nice all-around
portable, and VERY well built, the Sony 2010 beats it on MW. The Sony 2010 is
more sensitive and selective on MW, and the Sony's synchronous detector is
wonderful. I have no experience with the CC radio. By the way, the RFB-65 has
digital readout/tuning, not analog.  

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
If voting could really change things, it would be illegal.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Quote:> This might be true if you're talking about the AM stereo stations who use
> double the typcial spectrum allocation, and the Tivoli has a wide enough
> bandwidth setting to take advantage of that, and can demodulate the
> stereo signal.

......double the typical spectrum allocation?   I'm not aware of that.

Anyway,  my experience with the CCRadio was that is was nice, but
over-hyped.  I don't think it will pick up any AM stations that the
Superradio or the Sony 2010 won't.

The CCRadio doesn't sound as nice (IMHO) on FM as some other sets its size.

Any of the popular multiband radios used with an AM loop would be suitable
for DX.
I do agree about the Panasonic RF-2200 and others in that series as being
exceptionally good on AM.

If it's FM DX you want, I still haven't found an equal to many models of the
Grundig Satellit.  My 650 will pick up stations that no other radio in the
house can hear.  And the capture ratio is good enough to allow you to
separate different stations on the same frequency by just rotating the
telescopic antenna.

So does the 2010 have homodyne detection when in synchronous mode on MW?
I assumed that such features would not be available on MW.
How good is the 2010 at nulling out stations?

Yes, but for some reason the homodyne detection only kicks in when receiving
San Francisco or Hollywood stations.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
If voting could really change things, it would be illegal.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------