C. Crane has sent me their new CC Skywave shortwave portable for review. I’ve been using it since Friday and have started putting together a quick review.
If you have any thoughts or questions, please comment and I’ll try to address them in the upcoming post.
While electronics manufacturer C. Crane offers a number of unique AM/FM radios, including some of the best portable medium wave receivers on the market, they’ve traditionally only had two models of shortwave radio––namely, the CCRadio-SW, and the CCRadio-SWP. Earlier this year, however, C.Crane announced a new portable that would join their product line: the CC Skywave.
Admittedly, I was eager to give this little radio a go: C. Crane touts the Skywave as an exceptional travel radio, for which I’m always on the hunt. Last week, I had my opportunity when C. Crane sent me the new CC Skywave sample for review. I instantly got to work scrutinizing their newest offering…and here’s what I’ve discovered.
The form factor of the Skywave is very similar to C.Crane’s CCRadio-SWP pocket radio; in fact, its smooth plastic body even feels the same. While this radio doesn’t have the rubberized coating that have become popular on radio exteriors in recent years, supposedly to provide an easy-to-grip surface, I’m pleased that C.Crane does not use this, as these coatings can eventually deteriorate over time and with heat exposure, becoming somewhat tacky or sticky to the touch.
The Skywave’s backlit LCD display is small, but readily viewable from several angles. All of the buttons on the front of the Skywave have a tactile response, again, similar to the CCRadio-SWP. The buttons require slightly more pressure to activate than Tecsun and Degen models; I prefer this, especially for a travel radio: should I forget to activate the key lock, it’s much less likely that the radio will accidentally turn on during transit.
As always, I attempted first to see how many radio features and functions I could uncover without first consulting the owner’s manual. In the past, C.Crane products have been some of the most intuitive on the market. Fortunately, the Skywave did not disappoint: first, I was able to set both the clock and alarm within moments; both essential in a travel radio.
Once the radio is on, it will display either the time or frequency on the main display. While the Skywave defaults to a time display, I discovered that the lock button toggles the display between time and frequency for ten seconds. (Note: After reading through the manual later, I learned that you can actually change the default display mode to either time or frequency–very nice touch!)
I then turned on the radio and found the memory allocation to be very straightforward: tune to the desired station, then press and hold a number button two seconds to save. Press a button quickly to recall. Memory remembers bandwidth, stereo, or mono (if FM), and any voice or music audio filters utilized–very handy!
Speaking of bandwidth, the Skywave has five on shortwave, medium wave, and air bands: 6, 4, 3, 2, and 1 kHz. By pressing the bandwidth button, you can cycle through these from widest to narrowest. The bandwidth defaults to 3 kHz, but the default can be changed by holding down the bandwidth button for five seconds (with radio powered off).
To enter a frequency in AM/FM/SW, you simply press the FREQ button, then key in frequency. To scan through the band, simply press and hold one of the up/down arrow buttons. Worth noting: the Skywave’s scan function is one of the fastest I’ve seen in a portable.
On the topic of scanning, and since this is a travel radio, I would have liked C.Crane to include an ETM function like that found in the Tecsun PL-310ET and PL-380. It’s quite a handy function for auto-populating temporary memories from a simple band scan. I assume this is not an option on the DSP chip powering the Skywave.
Owner’s manual
Once I had my fun trying to discover as many functions on the Skywave without the manual’s aid, I finally opened it and discovered a few more functions.
One feature I’ve already come to love in the Skywave: the ability to change the tuning speed, and thus frequency step-spacing on the tuning knob (option of 5 or 1 kHz steps), just by pressing the knob itself. I much prefer this to using a front-panel tuning step button because it’s so easy to operate in low-light settings (lounging in bed, for example).
Another unique feature of the Skywave is a switchable audio filter for voice or music. With the filter set to “voice,” the audio is enhanced for human voice intelligibility. When set to “music,” it widens the audio filter, thus optimizing audio fidelity. Toggling the audio filter settings between voice and music is very easy, but not intuitive; indeed, it’s almost a hidden feature you can discover via the owner’s manual. Simply press the “1” and “2” simultaneously while listening to a broadcast to toggle the filter.
I should note that the C.Crane owner’s manual is one of the most straightforward and simple I’ve seen in ages. You can tell that, at least in the English version that came with mine, this manual was written by a native English speaker. It made for simple, clear instruction without head-scratching over obscure terms. Even the least technically-inclined user will understand these instructions, no problem.
After asking SWLing Post readers what they would like me to include in this review, a number of you responded that you wanted me to give the AM broadcast band reception a proper review.
My foray into medium wave listening with the Skywave started off on the right foot. The very first night with the Skywave, I tuned it to 740 kHz, my favorite, albeit challenging to reach, AM station here in the North America–CFZM “Zoomer Radio” While those living in the midwestern and northeastern US can receive Zoomer radio easily enough at night, it is often a tough catch here in the southeast in the evening hours. After nightfall it competes with clear channel stations that also occupy 740 kHz. With a portable radio, the lock on Zoomer is never terribly strong and is very prone to fading.
But after tuning the Skywave to Zoomer, I received CFZM so well it sounded like a local station–in fact, I couldn’t believe it until a station ID confirmed that I was receiving it. Even more surprising was that I received it away from home, in an area plagued with RFI noise where I typically have to carefully turn a radio to null out the noise in an effort to enhance the desired broadcast. But the Skywave somehow mitigated this noise better than my other portables. Even when I turned the radio in the direction of the offending electrical noise, it wasn’t as bad as on other portables. Truly, the reception was remarkable.
With Zoomer firmly locked in, I hopped into bed, turned the volume to a comfortable level, and listened for at least half an hour before falling asleep. I was pleasantly surprised the following morning, some eight hours later, when I woke to the Skywave playing CFZM at the same level. Phenomenal! Perhaps conditions were exceptionally favorable that night; nonetheless, the Skywave couldn’t have impressed me more.
A side note–on the previous day, I’d inserted two generic alkaline AA batteries in the Skywave; after a total of ten hours playing at medium volume, the battery indicator still showed full capacity.
Medium wave audio samples
While time won’t allow a full audio sampling of the medium wave band for comparison, I did record the following comparison between the Skywave and the Tecsun PL-310ET (which I regard as one of the more capable sub-$100 ultra-compact portables on the market).
Since SWLing Post readers specifically asked to hear how the Skywave handles choppy nighttime medium wave DX conditions, I tuned to two frequencies with overlapping broadcasts, one of which was slightly dominant: 950 kHz and 990 kHz. I set the AM bandwidth to 3 kHz on both radios and made the recordings within one minute of each other. The CC Skywave’s audio filter was set to “voice.”
In the following recordings, listen for Radio Reloj (Cuba)–it’s buried deep in the noise. You might detect the ticking and “R” “R” in Morse code. These recordings were taken within one minute of each other.
The Tecsun PL-310ET on 950 kHz:
Note that the Skywave pulled out the dominant broadcaster–one I could barely hear on the PL-310ET.
I then made a recording on 990 kHz AM which had a stronger dominant station.
The Tecsun PL-310ET on 990 kHz:
To my ear, the Skywave was clearer and the commentator’s voice seemed to pop out of the noise better.
I’ve spent a great deal of time listening to the Skywave on the medium wave band this week and I feel comfortable recommending it for the medium wave DXer.
While I’ve spent comparatively less time (thus far) evaluating the Skywave’s FM band, I can say that the Skywave receives my “benchmark” FM stations with ease. Sensitivity also seems to be on par with my other DSP based portables (meaning, excellent sensitivity).
Of course, being a shortwave enthusiast, I’ve spent the bulk of my listening time since receiving the Skywave on the shortwave bands. And during this time, alas, shortwave radio band conditions have been challenging for any radio. Yet I’m happy to note that this little radio does not disappoint: it has excellent sensitivity and selectivity for a radio of its size. When I compared the Skywave with the Tecsun PL-310ET, in almost every situation, they are nearly equal in performance.
Shortwave audio samples
Below I’ve included audio samples of the Skywave on 9580 kHz (Radio Australia). Under normal conditions, Radio Australia would be a blowtorch signal here in North America, but this particular morning, propagation was quite poor. In the audio, you’ll hear both radios attempting to cope with pronounced fading, with their AGC circuits reacting to the quick rise and fall of signal strength. Both radios were set to a 3kHz bandwidth and the Skywave’s audio filter set to “voice” to help mitigate noise.
Note that Radio Australia was broadcasting music, which can be more difficult to evaluate, but the vocals were prominent enough I felt it made for a good comparison.
This morning, I also recorded WWV on 15 MHz. Again, propagation conditions were poor across the bands, so even WWV (normally very stable) was affected by quick fading (QSB). For kicks, I decided to add the benchmark Tecsun PL-660 to this comparison. If you recall, it received some of the highest marks for sensitivity in our weak signal shoot out. The Tecsun PL-310ET and CC Skywave were set to 3 kHz bandwidth and the Tecsun PL-660 to it’s narrow bandwidth (which I felt was most equivalent).
The good news is that the Skywave is certainly a sensitive and selective portable. While evaluating shortwave performance over the past week, I’ve been pleasantly surprised by how well this little radio receives.
Those of us living or traveling in North America will appreciate the Skywave’s built-in NOAA weather radio functionality. Since I have at least a dozen self-powered radios and desktops that have built-in NOAA weather reception, I typically don’t give the band much thought. I figured NOAA reception would be a mediocre add-on with the Skyview. I was wrong.
Not only does the Skywave have NOAA weather radio, but it also has SAME weather alerts. What’s so great about that? Imagine that you’re travelling to a rural area and weather is looking ominous; in this case, you can simply set the Skywave to the strongest NOAA channel and activate the weather alert (choose options for 4, 8, or 16 hours). If severe weather is reported for your geographic area, the Skywave will alert you.
I’m very pleased with the NOAA weather radio reception, as well. The Skywave receives NOAA stations even better than one of my dedicated weather radios.
C.Crane included the Air band for travelers, as a means to listen to air traffic control while in an airport or awaiting a flight’s arrival. I have several portables with the AIR band, but most lack an autoscan ability (Grundig G3, G6), and performance on these tends to be mediocre at best.
I’ve traveled to three different cities over the past week and used the Skywave to tune to the local air-traffic control tower. After a bit of scanning, it eventually found the frequency, and reception was quite good. I have not yet used the AIR band in an airport (notorious for RFI) nor in a large metro area, so I can’t comment about performance under those conditions.
What really separates the Skywave apart from my other shortwave portable with the AIR band is that it actually has an adjustable squelch mode. Nice touch!
Unlike Tecsun portables which typically ship with batteries, an external antenna wire, chargers, travel cases, and the like, the CC Skywave comes with very few included accessories––just a carry case, an owner’s manual, and earphones.
Most of the headphones/earphones that accompany a shortwave radio package are of the cheapest quality. I’m happy to note that the Skywave’s included earphones are the best I’ve ever received as an included accessory with a shortwave radio.
The CC Buds Earphones are in-ear style (which I prefer, for sound isolation) with soft silicone earpieces. They are tuned to a frequency response which favors voice, an enhanced mid-range. For SWLing and MW DXing, I believe they’re nearly ideal. Indeed, I’m planning to use these with my Elecraft KX3 next time I’m operating QRP––I’m sure that SSB will sound great.
Since these are tuned for the spoken word, however, I wouldn’t necessarily favor the CC Buds Earphones over my Sony in-ear buds for music listening.
Every radio has pros and cons, and I jot down my reactions as I evaluate a new radio so as not to forget any details. The following is my list:
Pros:
Cons:
The CC Skywave is nearly identical in size to the late and great Grundig G6.
C. Crane has few shortwave radios in their product line, and all perform rather well for their price point; I know, as I have owned all of them and even purchased as gifts in the past.
But I was concerned a few months ago when I noted the similarity between the CC Skywave and the poorly-reviewed Digitech AR1733, sold in Australia/New Zealand by Jaycar.
Fortunately, it’s clear that C. Crane noticed the shortcomings of the AR1733 and has modified the Skywave’s design and firmware accordingly, which may account for the delayed roll-out of the CC Skywave. Obviously, the Skywave’s ACG circuit has been tweaked to cope with medium wave and shortwave listening, since a poor ACG circuit is one of the shortcomings of the AR1733. But, if so, wow…what a tweak.
Because all in all, the CC Skywave is a excellent little radio. Indeed, in terms of the ultra-compact portable market (models like I included in a recent shoot-out), I think it’s one of the best surprise performers I’ve seen in the past couple of years.
After just one week with it, I’ve already decided to take the CC Skywave along on my travels to see how it performs over time. It will replace my PL-310ET and PL-380 for my one bag domestic and international travelling. The CC Skywave is also especially well-suited for the “go”-bags and “bug-out” bags used in evacuations and other emergencies. Indeed, with AM/FM/SW/AIR plus functional NOAA radio, this little radio packs a lot––in short, the Skywave packs enough to get packed in my bag.
The CC Skywave can be purchased directly from C. Crane. It is also available at (soon) Universal Radio and Amazon.com.
SWLing Post contributor, Dave Zantow (N9EWO), writes:
Allan’s (W2AEW) excellent “You Tube” Video has just been posted here on the CountyComm GP-5/SSB:
Many thanks for sharing this video, Dave!
Readers: I suggest you check out the library of informative videos Allan (W2AEW) has created over the years and even subscribe to his YouTube channel. His tutorial videos are quite professional and he does a brilliant job explaining complex electronic principles. Indeed, be sure to check out one of his latest on the ETOW HumanaLight kit:
Many thanks to SWLing Post reader, Thomas Ally, who points out that Tom Stiles has published an array of videos featuring the Eton Satellit. The actual reviews and features begin with TRRS #0446.
Click here to view the complete Eton Satellit video thread on Tom’s Radio Room Show.
[Update: Please note that this survey has been closed, but the audio samples–labeled Radio A and Radio B–will remain to allow others the opportunity to make an evaluation prior to reading the PL-680 review.]
[Update 2: The PL-680 review and readers’ survey results have now been posted! Check it out here.]
I’ve been spending a little time with my new Tecsun PL-680 today, and it’s been most interesting. Of course, I’ve already begun to form a few opinions about the radio and am taking notes. Yet I never believe a shortwave radio can be judged in one sitting; there are simply too many variables to account for, such as minute changes in propagation, fading, local radio interference, all of which can have a temporary effect on performance. It’s better to judge a radio after having used it over the course of at least a week or so, in diverse reception conditions.
Still, as I tuned the PL-680, I was already wondering how it compared with its predecessor, the PL-660–? And since I’ve received at least ten emails from readers curious about the same thing, I thought I might start a series of blind audio tests in order to let our readers decide for themselves.
So…ready for some fun?
Below, I’ve embedded eight recordings comparing the PL-660 and PL-680 on shortwave. All of these are recordings of broadcast stations, no SSB yet (I simply didn’t have the time today).
To participate, just listen, then fill out the form that follows with your choice of “Best Radio” for each broadcast. But do note the following:
Click here to use our response form to vote on your favorites, or simply use the form embedded below:
When I heard early reports about the new Tecsun PL-680, I was already wondering how it would stack up alongside other Tecsun portables. An early photo of the Tecsun PL-680 revealed how very similar it is, indeed, to the Tecsun PL-600, which has been on the market for many years. Moreover, the features of PL-680, which I heard about only a few weeks ago, sounded to me like a carbon copy of the venerable PL-660. I investigated further, and spoke with Anna at Anon-Co; she was given to understand that the Tecsun PL-680 was essentially a re-packaged PL-660 with improved sensitivity. I was curious enough about the PL-680 that I ordered one from Anna as soon as they were available, even paying for expedited shipping in order to have it in hand a bit sooner.
The Tecsun PL-660 has been on the market for several years now; it’s one of the most popular shortwave portables on the market. And for good reason: the PL-660 is relatively inexpensive, simple to use, packs all of the most vital and desirable functions/modes, and is available from a variety of retailers that ship worldwide. I have reviewed it numerous times and often used it as the basis for comparison with other shortwave portables. It’s China-based manufacturer, Tecsun, has emerged over the past few years as the dominant manufacturer of shortwave radios.
I posted a few unboxing photos the day I received the PL-680.
The Tecsun PL-680 looks like the Tecsun PL-600 body, with the Tecsun PL-660 features and layout. Indeed, the full complement of buttons, switches and dials are identically positioned to those of the PL-660.
Let’s cut to the chase…
Question: So, does the PL-680 have more functions than the PL-660?
Answer: No. It appears to be, and likely is, identical in every (functional) respect to the Tecsun PL-660. No surprises here, unless there are hidden features I haven’t discovered…!
Check out the following comparison photos–the PL-600 on the right, PL-660 in the middle, PL-680 on the right (click to enlarge):
The similarity is so striking, in fact, that I believe the PL-680 is the first radio I’ve ever turned on for the first time, only to find I immediately knew every function. I’m so familiar with the PL-660 that I could even use the PL-680 in the dark the first night I used it.
It also helps, of course, that the PL-680 is nearly identical to the PL-600, too, which I’ve owned for many years.
Here’s how I see the PL-680 product development equation:
In truth, I was quite disappointed that Tecsun did not add a line-out jack to the PL-680.
The PL-660, alas, lacks line-out, and though my Tecsun PL-880 has a line-out, its default shortwave volume is simply too high to be used by most digital recorders. I had hoped that the PL-680 might have a proper line-out jack, potentially making it a replacement for my trusty Sony ICF-SW7600GR. Unfortunately, this is not the case.
But other than missing a line-out jack, I really have few complaints. I’ve always been a fan of simple radio design and I believe Tecsun has done a good thing by keeping the user experience so similar in their PL-6XX line of portable shortwave radios. Apparently, a good thing is a good thing.
But here’s what everyone wants to know…
Question: Does the PL-680 have any performance advantages over the PL-660?
Short Answer: Yes! (But keep your PL-660.)
I should add here that I’m about to get rather technical and radio-geeky, so if you’re only interested in a summary, please skip to the bottom of the page.
Otherwise, help yourself to a cup of coffee, and let’s talk radio…
Since I spend 95% of my listening time on shortwave, I’ll begin with shortwave performance. Again, we’ll compare the PL-680’s performance with that of the PL-660.
Reader survey results
Having had such great results from radio comparison shoot-outs in the past (check out our shoot-out between top portables and ultra-compact radios), I decided it would make sense to invite our informed readership to evaluate the PL-680’s performance in a series of blind, informal tests. (For information about these surveys, please read through the first of the three surveys.)
Shortwave AM broadcast listening
In most circumstances, you’ll find that the PL-680 has better sensitivity than the PL-660. It’s a marginal improvement, but one I certainly notice on the shortwave bands–and so did the majority of readers who participated in the shortwave AM reception survey.
The survey had recordings from a total of three broadcasters: Radio Prague, WWV, and Radio France International.
The PL-680 was “Radio A,” and the PL-660 was “Radio B.”
The Radio Prague recording was quite strong and was the only broadcast in our survey in which the PL-660 and PL-680 ran neck-and-neck.
In truth, I believe strong signal reception on both these radios is excellent and nearly indistinguishable from each other.
Survey results from the WWV and Radio France International recordings showed a strong preference for the Tecsun PL-680. Again, here are the original recordings:
Based on comments from those who participated, the PL-680 came out ahead of the PL-660 in two respects: better sensitivity, and more stable AGC. In both sets of recordings, the signal was weaker than the Radio Prague recording, and QSB (fading) more pronounced. Herein lies a well-known weakness of the PL-660: soft muting and a sometimes over-active AGC equates to more listening fatigue.
Here is a chart with the full survey results based on 194 listener reports. The number of responses are represented on the vertical axis.
Obviously, the engineers at Tecun addressed the soft muting/AGC problem of the PL-660. In all of my time with the PL-680 on the air, I haven’t noticed any soft muting; the audio has been smooth and the AGC copes with fading much better than the PL-660. No doubt, these two improvements alone make the PL-680 a worthy portable for shortwave radio listening.
There is a downside to the improved sensitivity, however: the PL-680 has a slightly higher noise floor than the PL-660. This is mostly noticeable during weak-signal listening. Though I haven’t compared it yet, I’m willing to bet that the noise floor is comparable to that of the Sony ICF-SW7600GR. Personally, if increased sensitivity and stability means a slightly higher noise floor, I’m okay with that. I find that I listen better when the signal is stable and not fluttering/muting with every QSB trough.
Synchronous detection
The second survey focused on synchronous detection, which is a very useful receiver tool that mitigates adjacent signal interference and improves a signal’s stability. Perhaps it was my good fortune that the same day I tested synchronous detection, fading on even strong stations was pronounced at times. Perfect!
The first recording set was from Radio Australia, a relatively strong signal here in North America. Still, QSB was pronounced–making for an unstable signal–and there was hetrodyne interference in the upper sideband of the broadcast. When I switched the radios into lower sideband sync, halfway through, it effectively mitigated the hetrodyne in all of the recordings.
PL-680 – 1st recording Radio Australia
PL-660 – 1st recording Radio Australia
PL-680 – 2nd recording Radio Australia
PL-660 – 2nd recording Radio Australia
The second set of recordings were of Radio Riyadh–a much weaker station–also affected by QSB:
PL-680 – 1st recording Radio Riyadh (wide band filter)
PL-660 – 1st recording Radio Riyadh (wide band filter)
PL-680 – 2nd recording Radio Riyadh (narrow band filter)
PL-660 – 2nd recording Radio Riyadh (narrow band filter)
While I have always considered the PL-660 to sport one of the stronger sync locks in current production portables, it did truly struggle to maintain a lock in both the Radio Australia and Radio Riyadh recordings. Indeed, I was so surprised by how comparatively feeble the sync lock was on Radio Australia, that I disconnected the PL-660 from the recorder and moved to a different location to verify that something nearby wasn’t causing the sync lock instability. It was not; it was solely due to unstable band conditions.
It came as no surprise that survey respondents took note of the PL-680’s stronger sync lock: the PL-680 beat the PL-660 by a wide margin in both sample recordings. I chart the results, below, from a total of 85 responses:
Very good, PL-680! Someday I’d like to compare the PL-680 with the Sony ICF-SW7600GR, which I’ve always considered to have, among current portables, the strongest sync lock.
Single Sideband
I wasn’t able to provide an audio survey of SSB performance since the PL-680 picked up too much noise from my digital recorder to make for a fair contest.
Meanwhile, I’ve spent time listening to both radios in SSB mode and comparing the models. To my ear, both are very close in SSB performance, but again the PL-680 does have a slight edge on the PL-660 in terms of sensitivity and AGC performance.
SSB audio fidelity is very similar in both radios.
While I haven’t spent more than, let’s say, an hour with the PL-680 on the FM band, I have concluded that it is very sensitive–able to receive all of my benchmark local and regional FM stations.
An informal comparison between thePL-680 and the PL-660 also leads me to believe that they are both excellent FM performers and seemed to compare favorably. I would certainly welcome FM DXers to comment with their own evaluations of the PL-680.
I’ve also posted a medium-wave listener survey since many of you asked that I provide an evaluation of the medium-wave band.
In short, here is where the PL-680 loses to the PL-660: whereas, on the shortwave bands, the PL-680 is more sensitive, it lacks the same sensitivity on the medium-wave bands.
Though I believe the PL-680 does a marginally better job than the PL-660 of handling the choppy conditions of nighttime MW DX, the PL-660 still pulled voices and music out of the static and made them noticeably more intelligible.
The survey result swung very hard in favor of the PL-660, which has long been one of the more notable medium-wave performers among shortwave portables.
I provided a total of four sample broadcast recordings for comparison. Below, I have embedded one of them–a recording of 940 AM in Macon, Georgia, for your reference.
You can listen to all four recordings in the original survey (again, note that Radio A is the PL-680, B is the PL-660).
Survey results were definitive, with a total of 116 responses:
In all but the strong station sample (750 AM – WBS Atlanta), the PL-660 was preferred by a wide margin.
Invariably, all radios have strengths and weaknesses; here is a list of my notes from the moment I put the Tecsun PL-680 on the air:
Pros:
Cons:
If you’re a shortwave radio listener, you’ll be pleased with the Tecsun PL-680. In all of my comparison tests between the Tecun PL-660 and Tecsun PL-680, the PL-680 tends to edge out the PL-660, performance-wise. This coincides with the user surveys, too.
If you’re a medium-wave DXer, you might skip over the PL-680. That is, unless Tecsun makes a good iterative design improvement. If you’re a casual medium-wave listener, on the other hand, you’ll probably be pleased with the PL-680.
All in all, I like the Tecsun PL-680 and I see myself using it more than the PL-660 when I’m on the go. If you’re primarily a shortwave radio listener, the PL-680 may very well be worth the upgrade. At $95 US plus shipping, it is certainly a good value. Note that Anon-Co plans to post the Tecsun PL-680 for sale on eBay in March 2015.
A few weeks ago, I made an impulse purchase: a Sony ICF-2001.
Perhaps it was the post about John Lennon’s ICF-2001, or perhaps it was the simple fact I couldn’t afford a ‘2001 when I was a kid; either way, I saw what I thought was a fair price and I bit the bullet.
At about 9-10 years old I remember seeing the (above) image of the ICF-2001 in an advertisement and imagining all that I could hear with this amazing–microprocessor-controlled, dual conversion, frequency synthesized general coverage(!)–portable receiver.
At the time, my only shortwave radio was the Zenith Trans Oceanic Royal D7000–a wonderful radio for sure–but the convenience of digital tuning? I could only imagine.
The ICF-2001 had revolutionary featured like direct access keypad tuning and an LCD digital readout. The ICF-2001 covered 150 to 29,999 kHz and, like my Transoceanic, could receive single sideband. It also had six memories that could be assigned to buttons for quick access to my favorite frequencies. Six. Whole. Memories!
I picked up my used ICF-2001 for $67.00 US shipped. The seller (a fellow ham radio operator) insured that the radio was in excellent mechanical shape, though cosmetically showed some signs of wear. The only thing missing was the ICF-2001’s shoulder strap. That was fine by me, though, because the seller included all original manuals/documentation and a very cool canvas carry bag (below) that fits the ICF-2001 like a glove.
I’ve had the ICF-2001 for a few weeks now and I must say that I’m quite pleased. It’s much larger that most portables currently on the market, but was probably slightly smaller than the venerable ICF-2010.
The audio from the ICF-2001’s built-in speaker is top-notch; with separate treble and bass control, it’s easy to adjust audio to your taste.
Would the ICF-2001 out-perform a modern portable receiver? Probably not. Was performance similar to the ICF-2010? No way. The ICF-2001 has a few annoying quirks (like muting between frequencies, no tuning knob, a backlit display that’s rather small and hard to read at certain angles)–items most modern portables have long since addressed.
With that said, the ICF-2001 does have a few features I wish modern receivers would adopt, like, a built-in antenna trimmer.
This morning, on my porch, I listened to several broadcasters across the bands and used the antenna adjustment to tweak the match. The adjustment would sometimes increase reception by three S units. I would love to have a similar feature on, say, my Tecsun PL-680.
I also like the old school power switch–a proper mechanical switch that makes it much more difficult to accidentally turn the radio on while traveling or operating in a portable setting.
Even thought the ICF-2001 was a bit of an impulse purchase, I have no buyer’s remorse at all. She’s a sturdy rig with great audio and, I believe, decent performance on the shortwave and medium wave bands. I can certainly confirm that it would have blown my mind when I was 9 years old!
Besides..if the ICF-2001 is good enough for John Lennon, it’s good enough for me!
Any SWLing Post readers out there still have a Sony ICF-2001?
Many thanks to SWLing Post contributor, Dan Robinson, who shares this YouTube video comparing four of his receivers: the McKay Dymek DR33-C6, the East German made RFT EKD 515, Japan Radio Company NRD-301A, and his Watkins Johnson 8718A/MFPWJ WJ .
The following review originally appeared in the May 2015 issue of The Spectrum Monitor magazine.
It’s no secret…I’m a bit of an SDR geek. Yes, after discovering the power of software-defined radios a few years ago, I’m hooked: SDR listening represents nearly 95% of my home listening and monitoring. And I love it.
As a result, I’m always looking at new SDR technologies to note advances that could improve both my at-home and on-the-road listening––not to mention, satisfy my appetite for spectrum and broadcast recordings.
A few months ago, I heard about a new military-grade SDR called the TitanSDR. Being eager to check it out, I reached out to the Italy-based manufacturer, Enablia; they kindly lent me a TitanSDR Pro for review.
TitanSDR back panel (Photo: Enablia)
But here I must insert a disclaimer. Even though I love SDRs, I always find myself hesitating slightly when it comes to writing a review of one––simply because, when compared with tabletop and portable radios, SDRs tend to be so very complex. While I’m fairly well versed in what to expect of an SDR application, the learning curve (and sometimes even installation curve) can be formidable. And the TitanSDR seemed especially daunting: since it’s designed for heavy, full-duty, multi-channel SIGNET and military use, I expected to need a at least a few days to both install the device and, more significantly, to learn the ropes of the application which drives the SDR.
Fortunately, my fears were unfounded. The TitanSDR and I were in sync almost before I knew it, hinting favorably about an accessible user interface.
The TitanSDR ships in a box with the following components: the Titan SDR “black box” receiver, a TitanSDR installation DVD, a printed installation manual, a USB memory stick with a license key, USB cable with chokes on both ends, and a separate regulated power supply.
Not purely a plug-and-play device, the TitanSDR requires a proper three-step installation. Fortunately, the installation manual walks you through the process, which is actually quite simple. Within a mere five minutes, I had the TitanSDR installed and on the air.
The application which runs an SDR is your interface to all of the radio’s capabilities. A top-notch SDR paired with a confusing SDR application will greatly diminish usability and, frankly, sheer enjoyment.
Fortunately, this is where the TitanSDR comes up trumps. To be clear: the TitanSDR has one of the best user interfaces of any SDR I’ve ever tested. While SDR interfaces are subjectively evaluated––some prefer a more dense, involved GUI––I always appreciate simplicity and overall usability over lots of (visible) bells and whistles.
Click to enlarge
I’m especially impressed with how easily the TitanSDR app is designed to cope with multiple band windows, both wide and narrow, while many SDR manufacturers struggle with making an intuitive interface for merely one wideband and one narrowband window, each.
The user interface is divided into three major components: the panoramic scope, the wideband scope, and the narrowband scope. Let’s take a look at each.
Panoramic Scope
TitanSDR Panoramic Scope. Click to enlarge.
When you first open the Titan application and connect the SDR, the panoramic display, which spans the top of the window, comes to life. If hooked up to an antenna, you’ll see spectrum peaks across the display, but you’ll hear no audio because you must first select a wideband and then a narrowband window.
Wideband Scope
At the upper left portion of the panoramic scope, you’ll find a button that allows you to add a wideband selection/channel. After clicking the “add” button, you’ll need to choose the width of your wideband slice. Your choices:
After selecting your wideband width, the wideband scope will appear with the spectrum and waterfall in action. At this point, you’ll still hear no audio, but you’ll see a wideband swatch of frequency represented by your selection.
New wideband selections default with a beginning frequency of 0 kHz. To place the wideband selection into the part of the shortwave spectrum you want to hear or record, you simply click and drag the appropriately colored wideband swatch within the panoramic display to the part of the HF spectrum you wish to monitor.
Selecting a Wideband channel size. Click to enlarge.
Your first wideband selection is labeled in red, the second in green, third in blue, fourth in purple. While there are limits to the number of wideband selections you can make, based on the total bandwidth of your selections [the TitanSDR owner’s manual provides a matrix of possible combinations], each is readily identifiable by color in the panoramic display.
After you’ve created a wideband selection and placed it where you’d like to listen, you’ll now need to make a narrowband selection in order to begin tuning and listening.
Narrowband Scope
Creating a narrowband channel is similar to creating a wideband channel: at the top of the wideband scope window, simply click on the “add” button, and then click within the wideband scope spectrum display to place the narrowband channel where you want it.
Once placed, this new narrowband scope will be visible in the lower right portion of the TitanSDR application window. You’ll also hear audio for the narrowband selection.
The narrowband selection defaults in USB mode, but you can quickly change modes by selecting one from the panel above the narrowband spectrum. Your choices:
Tuning
After using the TitanSDR for only a couple of days, I found I was quite comfortable tuning through the bands. Every SDR application has its own quirks; the TitanSDR app gives you several tuning options.
Within a narrowband window, you may tune by:
Tuning within the wideband scope is as simple as clicking and dragging the narrowband shaded area.
Of course, wideband areas can be moved to different parts of the HF spectrum by simply clicking on the shaded wideband area within the panoramic scope and moving it to a different location. But you can only do this if there are no active narrowband channels within the selected wideband channel.
With the ability to load multiple wideband channels with multiple embedded narrowband channels, you might think tuning and manipulating the various channels would get confusing. But this is just not the case. Herein lies the excellent user design behind the TitanSDR.
The software engineers at Enablia obviously put time into designing their application for users who routinely use multiple channels. Each channel is clearly color-coded across the scopes, and selecting them is a simple process: one of four wideband channels via the panoramic display, and one of many narrowband channels via the wideband display. Indeed, TitanSDR produced a brief video (http://youtu.be/XDdilGykSuY) describing how to use the TitanSDR application interface. The concept of selecting and manipulating the various channels is so easy, I actually knew how to do it prior to receiving and installing the software…and all from this eleven-minute video tutorial.
Without a doubt, the TitanSDR user interface is one of my favorites among the numerous SDRs I’ve evaluated.
Speaking of multiple channels, if you have a particular combination of wideband and narrowband channels that you like to load each time, you can save the full configuration and reload it at startup, preserving every frequency and channel. Brilliant.
Recording
For shortwave archivists (like the author of this review!), the TitanSDR is very enticing. Even the most basic version of the TitanSDR allows for 4 wideband channels and 8 narrowband channels of simultaneous recording. This means that you can record a wideband channel and as many as eight individual live broadcasts consecutively. While rarely needed, it’s an impressive feature. Quite often I’ve wanted to record as many as three broadcasts simultaneously; my WinRadio Excalibur, for example, allows for as many as three consecutive broadcast recordings, but limited within a 2 MHz bandwidth. The TitanSDR has no such limitation. You could load four wideband channels across the spectrum––say, one within the mediumwave band, one on 41 meters, one on 31 meters, and one on 10 meters––and record or listen to up to eight individual broadcasts within those channels. The TitanSDR pro will even allow for up to 40 consecutive narrowband channels of recording.
The record and schedule functions are prominent in the narrowband scope window (above) and the wideband scope window.
What’s more, the TitanSDR has one of the most versatile automatic file naming systems I’ve ever used. Not only can it embed the date, frequency, and mode, but also the start time and end time. It also has a user-defined string which allows for more file name customization. And another nifty feature: the Titan can be set to embed either local or UTC time in the filename.
Yet another feature the archivist in me delights in? You can schedule narrowband and wideband recordings within the application––no need for an external program or macro.
Missing features?
As a product designed specifically for military and government applications, the Titan application currently lacks many of the features you might expect in a $1000+ software defined receiver. The version of the TitanSDR application (at time of publishing this review) lacks a variable notch filter, 90 second waterfall review, and an embedded time stamp––features one might well expect from a receiver in this price class.
Prior to publishing this review, I contacted Enablia with a list of features I thought should be included, and they agreed that these features should be added to appeal to the ham radio and shortwave listening customer base. Indeed, within a matter of two weeks, I was sent a new version of the Titan application with the addition of a number of keyboard shortcuts that I recommended. A few weeks later, I received another update which included the ability to set the maximum size of spectrum recording “chunks” to anything between 50MB and 2GB. Enablia plans to add more of the features for the radio hobbyist in time, but after this review has been posted.
If you’re seriously considering purchasing the TitanSDR, you might contact Enablia first to see if and/or when these features are to be added. I’m confident they will be added in time.
When I begin a radio review, I keep a checklist of pros and cons as I discover them to remind myself of my initial discoveries.
Here’s my list from the TitanSDR:
Pros:
Cons:
No doubt, I’m impressed with the TitanSDR, performance-wise. It’s as sensitive and selective as any SDR I’ve ever tested. Serious weak-signal DXers will be pleased with this rig.
Of course, there’s the daunting price tag of the TitanSDR, which makes it clear that this was a receiver designed for government and commercial use: the basic version of the TitanSDR retails for 1380 EUR, the TitanSDR Pro for an even heftier 1970 EUR.
This pricing places it well above the Microtelecom Perseus, WinRadio Excalibur and Elad FDM-S2, all of which can be purchased for $1000 or less.
Who might benefit from the extra cost of the TitanSDR? Those who need a receiver with a very robust front end. With no less than 16 pre-selectors, the TitanSDR is a great choice for those living in the vicinity of blowtorch radio stations. If you’re looking for a stable, easy-to-use flagship SDR with a rock-solid application to support it, you might just splurge on this impressive SDR.
I always ask myself at the end of a review if I would purchase the equipment I’ve spent a couple of months evaluating. I can honestly say that if I had the money, I would not hesitate to purchase the basic version of the TitanSDR. With its four wideband and eight narrowband channels, it would more than suit my receiver needs as a broadcast archivist.
1,380 EUR buys the basic version of the TitanSDR – With four WB (Wideband) channels, eight NB (Narrowband) channels (to be allocated on WB channels) and VAC (virtual audio) interfaces to third party SW decoders, this is a solid and adaptable SDR.
1,970 EUR buys the TitanSDR Pro – With four WB channels, 40 NB channels (to be allocated on WB channels), VAC interfaces to third party SW decoders, basic LAN control and plug-in software interfaces (by LAN Ethernet) to software decoders CODE300-32 by Hoka Electronic (http://www.hoka.net/products/code300-32.html) and Krypto500 by Comint Consulting (http://www.comintconsulting.com/k500.html), this SDR can sing and dance.
View TitanSDR purchasing information and options on Enablia’s website: http://www.enablia.com/titansdr-receiver.html
The following review originally appeared in the May 2015 issue of The Spectrum Monitor magazine.
Good things often come in small packages. But not all of these things are…well, affordable.
Ironically, earlier this year, just after I began to evaluate and review the superb TitanSDR Pro, a robust military-grade SDR, I was approached by the UK-based manufacturer of the SDRplay RSP software-defined radio and asked to review their receiver. I was instantly intrigued––and, truth be told, just a bit amused, considering the difference between these two receivers. And what, exactly, separates the SDRplay RSP from the TitanSDR? At least $1350.
The SDRplay RSP is one of the recent generation of economical wideband SDRs based upon innovative, inexpensive chipsets; in the RSP’s case, based upon the Mirics MSI3101 SDR chip, and a MSI001 tuner. Priced at a mere $149 US (plus shipping), the SDRplay RSP is one of the least expensive, yet full-featured SDRs which actually include the HF bands and below, and which require no extra upconverter. Preliminary reviews of the SDRplay RSP were quite positive, so when the folks at SDRplay requested that I review an RSP on loan, I immediately seized the opportunity.
My review unit of the SDRplay RSP has blue ends caps and an F style connector. All current production units have the new back case and SMA connector.
My SDRplay RSP arrived in a modest well-padded box. And what was inside? Only the SDRplay RSP and a small F-to-BNC adapter. You’ll need to supply a USB cord, as it’s not provided by SDRplay. If you’re like me, though, you already have a number of these around; I prefer USB cables with ferrite chokes (click here for an example).
Note that shortly after I received my review unit, SDRplay made two design changes to the RSP:
1) the F style antenna jack has been replaced with the more common SMA connector, and 2) the chassis color has been changed to black.
There are only two ports on the RSP: the antenna port, and on the other side of the box, a USB B-Type port (see photo above). Connecting it to your computer and antenna are a cinch.
The RSP’s chassis is made of a strong, lightweight plastic. A very simple design, and one that, I expect, would easily survive the rigors of my favorite brand of one-bag air travel to international DX destinations.
Software Installation
Unlike many of the other SDRs I’ve reviewed in the past (see the Elad FDM-S2 and TitanSDR), the SDRplay RSP does not come with a proprietary (OEM) SDR application. Meaning, the SDRplay company does not make their own SDR application that controls the RSP. Instead, SDRplay provides an API to allow application and demodulator development. There are already plug-ins for third-party SDR applications (like SDR# and HDSDR, for example); once installed, these plug-ins create an excellent compatibility bridge with the RSP.
But note that since the SDRplay RSP relies on third-party applications, the installation process isn’t exactly plug-and-play; you must typically download USB drivers, then the SDR application of your choice, and finally (typically) a dedicated plug-in for the software. Yet it’s not a complicated process by any means; SDRplay’s website has links to all of the necessary downloads (http://www.sdrplay.com/downloads.html) and installation manuals (http://www.sdrplay.com/documentation.html). No intimidation factor here.
Advantages and disadvantages of third-party applications
I should also note that I’ve always been a fan of SDR manufacturers offering open compatibility with third-party applications; in fact, when hardware manufacturers have approached me in the development stages of product design, I always suggest they leave room for third-party development.
HDSDR running the SDRplay RSP (Click to enlarge.)
Why? First, as free SDR apps are so widely used in amateur, scanner, as well as shortwave radio circles, there is already a very large user-base for support when you have compatibility issues. Additionally, third-party applications often work on multiple platforms, like Windows, OSX, Linux and even Android/iOS; OEM application tend to work only on Windows OS. Secondly, if you’re already using, for example, HDSRDR to control a radio, adding the SDRplay RSP is very easy, and as a bonus, you’ll already be familiar with the user interface––there’s hardly any learning-curve involved. Finally, I find I’m much less concerned about product obsolescence when hardware is designed to work in such an open-development environment, thus indicating greater potential for forward-compatibility.
Of course, on the flip side, not having an OEM application means that troubleshooting is often more difficult. If you encounter a problem you’ll have to determine whether the problem lies with OS, computer/tablet, USB driver, SDR application, or hardware––or whether the problem is in a combination of two or more of these, or the communication between them.
Fortunately, I’ve been very pleased with the SDRplay support team; this group has promptly addressed any questions or concerns I’ve had. Moreover, the RSP also has an active forum of users (http://www.sdrplay.com/community/).
In most reviews, I focus the majority of my SDR review upon the pros and cons of the application’s user interface. In this case, since the SDRplay RSP is using widely-distributed third-party applications, I can focus primarily on the SDR’s performance, instead.
The SDRplay RSP is currently compatible with the following third-party SDR applications:
The ExtIO screen–available in your application of choice via the RSP plugin–allows you to change the RSP’s IF Bandwidth/Mode, LNA GR Threshold, Mixer and ADC settings.
Indeed, when I asked the SDRplay support team about a comprehensive list of supported SDR apps, they responded:
“We should be compatible with any SDR application that supports the EXTIO library––this is what we are using for SDR# and HDSDR. [We] should also be compatible with any Linux application that uses the gr-osmosdr interface library (such as GQRX and Gnu-Radio).
We have just released it and I’m in the process of writing up the installation instructions. We have also had this running on a Raspberry Pi 2.”
…A Raspberry Pi 2 application? I, for one, can’t wait to try this in the near future––!
For this review, I used two favorite apps with which I’m familiar: SDR# and HDSDR.
SDR# running the SDRplay RSP (Click to enlarge.)
Wideband
I should note here that the SDRplay RSP also has an exceptionally wide frequency range covering from 100 kHz to 2 GHz, with only a narrow gap between 380 MHz and 430 MHz. With the appropriate software, you can use the RSP for a number of applications, for example, scanning, FM DXing, and possibly even radio astronomy.
So, how about receiver performance?
I’ll going to cut to the chase here: For the $149 price tag? I’m very impressed.
Keep in mind, this is the first SDR I’ve ever reviewed––or even spent more than a few hours exploring––that costs under $400. My only other experience with a low-cost SDR was a few hours spent with the Funcube Dongle Pro+––a popular wideband SDR dongle that also covers the HF spectrum. Frankly, I was disappointed with the Funcube Dongle Pro+, which I found subject to unwanted noises and even some imaging, which I assumed might be indicative of this class of SDR. Fortunately, I’ve not experienced this sort of thing with the SDRplay RSP.
In short: I fully expected $149 performance out of the RSP, but was very surprised to find performance on par with a receiver two or three times this cost.
So for comparison purposes, I chose the Elad FDM-S2 as the benchmark. I currently have three other SDRs in my shack, but the FDM-S2 is the next-lowest in price (currently listed at $539). But to be quite clear: the FDM-S2 is a pretty high benchmark, as I consider it a superb receiver for its price class.
When I first turned on the RSP and tuned through the HF bands, I was quite amazed at the relatively low noise floor of this receiver. Stations seemed to “pop” out of the static. I had assumed that the SDR# application had some sort of DSP noise reduction engaged, but this proved not to be the case––I confirmed the same low noise floor level via the HDSDR application.
SDRplay actually gave the RSP to me on an extended loan, so I’ve had the opportunity to use it both in quiet winter conditions and more unsettled, noisier conditions indicative of spring and summer here in the US. I used the RSP almost exclusively for two weeks in an effort to uncover its most notable strengths and weaknesses. But by the end of the two-week period, I began to suspect that the RSP might actually have sensitivity on par with my other SDRs. To answer this question, I turned to A/B comparisons with the FDM-S2.
Sample audio
I believe the following is a good representative comparison between the SDRplay RSP and the Elad-FDM S2.
The following recordings are of Radio Riyadh on 15,225 kHz. Riyadh’s signal is quite weak and voice levels are barely above the noise floor. Both the Elad FDM-S2 and SDRplay RSP (via HDSDR) were set to a slow AGC, AM sync, and a 8.2 kHz bandwidth.
In this representative sample––and pretty consistently throughout all my comparisons––the FDM-S2 was able to pull voice and music out of the noise better than the RSP. In weak signal DXing, this is important, especially when you’re listening for a station ID.
So would I ever replace my FDM-S2 with the RSP? No.
Still, for a $149 receiver? This performance is most impressive! The RSP is only a little less sensitive than my much pricier SDRs.
Invariably, all radios have strengths and weaknesses; here is a list of my notes from the moment I put the RSP on the air:
Pros:
Cons:
I walked into this product review expecting to be…well, disappointed. As I have some benchmark SDRs on my desk at all times, I hadn’t investigated inexpensive SDRs because I felt they would simply be redundant.
Fortunately, the SDRplay RSP really impressed me from the beginning with its low noise floor, variable IF bandwidth options, and relative ease of installation. Since the RSP only requires one USB cable for both data and power, it’s also an ideal portable SDR.
Up to this point, I’ve always hesitated suggesting that those interested in a beginner’s SDR invest in any sub-$200 SDR, unless they simply want to get their feet wet and aren’t interested in performance. But at $149 US––the price of a good shortwave portable radio––I can confidently recommend at least the SDRplay RSP to those readers who want to start out with a good-quality rig. Indeed, for many, it might out-perform other receivers in their shack.
I see the RSP having a place in my shack as well, especially on my portable shortwave listening adventures. If you’re looking for a quality first SDR, or, like me, are interested in a supplemental or remote receiver that won’t break the bank, the RSP is just the ticket. And at just $149, you simply can’t lose.
Meanwhile, what’s next for me? I plan try the RSP via the Raspberry PI 2 and my newly acquired Dell Venue 8 tablet.
The SDRplay RSP can be purchased directly from SDRplay via their online store: http://www.sdrplay.com/purchase.php
Resources:
Just last week, I received the new Sangean ATS-405 on loan from Universal Radio. Though I’ve only had the radio for a week, I thought I’d share a few un-boxing photos (by request) and my initial impressions/review of this radio.
The ATS-405 comes with a thick owner’s manual (in five languages), a 7.5 volt AC adapter, and a soft radio case. The package does not contain rechargeable batteries nor a clip-on wire antenna (like many Tecsun products do, for example).
Overall, the packaging accommodates the radio and accessories efficiently and would probably ship safely even if the carrier doesn’t handle it with particular care.
The first thing I noticed about the ATS-405 is the near-identical design and layout Sangean has used in their design of past shortwave radios. If you’re a Sangean fan, you’ll find all of the functions, buttons, and labels pretty much in the same place; virtually no learning curve.
After unboxing the ATS-405, I installed a fresh set of AA batteries in it and turned on the radio…
Like most Sangeans, the display is crisp, clear and can easily be read straight-on or at low angles, like when the radio is resting on its back stand, for example. If you look at the display from a higher angle, however, you’ll find that the LCD digits nearly disappear.
Back-lighting is perfect: it’s soft and consistent across the display, very much like the ATS-909X.
Audio from the internal speaker is good. It’s in the same league with most similarly-priced competitors.
Keeping in mind that I’ve only logged a few days of listening time on the ATS-405, I do have some initial impressions about receiver performance across the bands:
Right side view (click to enlarge)
FM
On a positive note, I believe FM performance is quite good. Perhaps not in the same league with my PL-660 or PL-680, but still the Sangean offers above-average sensitivity. I was able to pick up my distant benchmark FM stations with ease, though to help with the signal lock, I had to switch from stereo to mono reception.
AM/Mediumwave
AM reception is a bit of a mixed bag. I find that the ‘405’s overall sensitivity and selectivity are quite good for broadcast band listening.
When I first tuned around on the AM broadcast band, however, I found the noise floor a little too high. Regardless of whether I was tuned in to a station or not, there was an ever-present high-pitched hiss, like static. It was quite disappointing, especially since I read a review by Jay Allen that really complimented the AM performance on the ATS-405.
I trust Jay’s reviews, however, so I promptly contacted him. Jay pointed out that the problem may be that I was listening in the default “wide” filter setting on AM. And indeed, he was right–though I had changed filter settings a few times while tuned to local stations, I had moved it back to wide and didn’t make note of this. (The ATS-405, by the way, has three filter settings: wide, medium and narrow.)
Left side view (click to enlarge)
But the wide setting is really too wide, and was certainly the source for the bulk of the high-pitched hiss I heard. The best filter setting for most broadcast band listening is the middle position, which sounds like a 5-6 kHz filter. In the middle position, noise is decreased significantly. I also believe selecting the “music” audio tone setting helps dissipate some of the noise.
Regarding the noise floor: to be clear, I still feel like the noise level is slightly more noticeable, to my ear, on the ATS-405 than on the PL-660, PL-600, and PL-310ET when band-scanning or weak signal listening. This is most likely some internally-generated noise that somehow still meets Sangean’s engineering spec.
Local AM stations sound fantastic, and the ATS-405 can detect all of my benchmarks. AM audio fidelity is better than that of my PL-660 and, even, PL-310ET. When locked on a local station, the noise floor also seems to disappear. For some reason, I even find that the ATS-405 does a better job receiving local AM stations from indoors–even near noisy electronics–than other sub-$100 portables with which I’m familiar.
Uh-oh, birdies
The most disappointing discovery I made on the Sangean’s AM broadcast band is that it has DSP birdies. Birdies are internally-generated noises resulting from the outputs of the oscillators that form part of the DSP receiver circuit. While almost all receivers do have birdies somewhere in the receiver’s reception range, radio engineers try to keep them out of the way of the important parts of the band.
Unfortunately, my ATS-405 has strong DSP birdies on 800 and 1600 kHz. This is a big negative for me, since my favorite regional AM broadcast station is located on 1600 kHz (WTZQ). Rather than attempting to describe what the birdies sound like, here are a few audio clips that will give you an idea–I start with 1350 AM, which has no birdies and is representative of good AM reception:
WZGM 1350 kHz (broadcast sample with no birdie):
800 kHz (birdie on frequency with no broadcast signal):
WTZQ 1600 kHz (birdie on broadcast signal):
The ATS-405’s birdies almost sound like a jamming signal on 1600 kHz. Indeed, if this station were only located on a different frequency, I’m sure it would be quite audible on this radio…too bad.
Birdies on 800 and 1600 kHz may very well be deal-breakers for many of us. Again, since one of my favorite regional independent broadcasters is on 1600 kHz, it’s a deal-breaker for me.
Jay specifically mentioned a lack of birdies on the AM broadcast band in his review. It could very well be that he doesn’t hear them on his particular receiver–variations in quality control on a radio production line are certainly a real phenomena (the Grundig G3 is a case in point). This could indicate that some units may have pronounced birdies while others don’t. If you purchase an ATS-405, I would check to see if your unit has birdies after powering it up.
When I contacted an engineer for Sangean North America, and described my listening experience, he confirmed that he believed these are, indeed, DSP birdies. I may ask Sangean if they can send another ATS-405 for comparison.
On a more positive note, I checked harmonics in the HF/shortwave bands and heard no DSP birdies there.
Country of origin?
Bottom view with charge and keylock mechanical switches (click to enlarge)
One additional question I posed to Sangean: where is the ATS-405 made? One reader told me the radios are produced in both Taiwan and China. Thinking variations in quality control may be accounted for by two different production lines, I checked my radio to see where it was made. Unfortunately, my unit has no mention of country of origin; not on the radio, the box, the manual, behind the battery cover, nor on the back stand. It’s possible it could be marked internally, but I didn’t want to take apart a receiver I’ve been loaned.
Sangean came back with a firm answer:
“I can confirm that the ATS-405, along with all our radios, are manufactured in China. We have an office in Taipei for engineering, sales, marketing and customer support.”
Not a big surprise here; I expected China was the country of origin.
To sum up AM performance: if you aren’t bothered by the birdies on 800 and 1600 kHz, or if your unit isn’t producing them, you’ll find the ATS-405 a capable little AM broadcast band receiver.
Our HF propagation conditions since last Friday (when I first turned on the ATS-405) have been poor. Other than a few short band openings, I’ve struggled to hear anything other than the normal blow-torch broadcasters we hear in North America. Still, bad propagation conditions are actually good for reviewing some aspects of a shortwave receiver, so I used the opportunity.
In terms of sensitivity on the shortwave bands, I think the ATS-405 is mediocre. It lags behind my Tecsun PL-660, PL-600, PL-310ET, and CC Skywave. Adding a clip-on wire antenna to the telescoping whip (there is no aux antenna port) does help in terms of sensitivity.
Since I do most of my listening on the shortwave bands, this, too, is a deal-breaker for me. If you primarily listen to stronger shortwave stations, or spend most of your time on the FM/AM bands, then you might still consider the ATS-405.
The ATS-405’s selectivity seems to be on par with my other DSP-based portables. In truth, though, band conditions have been so unfavorable, I don’t feel like I’ve had ample opportunity to test selectivity. I’ll likely follow up this initial review with an update.
And as on medium wave, the noise floor on the shortwave bands seems a little high to me–especially with the filter set to the “wide” position.
While I clearly haven’t been wowed by the ATS-405’s shortwave performance, I have been more favorably impressed with some of its innovative features: specifically, the ability to control squelch, tuning mute, and soft mute.
Using the menu button (see image above), you can engage or disengage the tuning mute and soft mute by pressing the “2” or “3” buttons on the keypad, then using the tuning up/down buttons to toggle these features on and off. Squelch works the same way, using the “1” button and volume control to set the threshold.
This menu control works regardless whether the radio is turned on or off.
Of course, by using the menu button and the keypad, you can also control the ‘405’s tuning steps, AGC, clock, and backlighting functionality; each of these are marked in green next to the appropriate button on the keypad (see image above), a very useful feature.
I wish other radio manufacturers would give users the ability to control some of the DSP chip’s built-in functionality, as the ‘405 does with the muting–especially since over-active soft muting has been the downfall of several DSP-based radios. Thanks for trail-blazing, Sangean!
Invariably, all radios have strengths and weaknesses; here is a list of my notes from the moment I put the ATS-405 on the air:
Pros:
Cons:
I’m going to hold onto the Sangean ATS-405 for a few more weeks, as I’d like to give it a more thorough test on the shortwave bands. I hope to follow up with a post offering a few representative recordings.
My nutshell opinion of the ATS-405 so far is that it’s a decent little radio with a lot of functionality and features for a rig in its price class. But overall, its performance seems to me rather mediocre. If you primarily listen to FM, you’ll be pleased. If you’re a mediumwave listener, you’ll be pleased only if you don’t mind the 800/1600 kHz DSP birdies. If you’re primarily a shortwave listener, you’ll need to carry a clip-on wire antenna to bring the sensitivity up to the level of similarly-priced receivers.
In short, I do want to like this radio unreservedly. But it appears that Sangean may need to pull up its socks on their quality control. Readers: please comment if you’ve purchased the ATS-405–I’m very curious to learn whether there are QC discrepancies in performance from one unit to the next.
Follow the tag ATS-405 for updates.
Many thanks to Universal Radio for supplying this radio, on loan, for review!
Mike’s thrift store Panasonic RF-888 (left) and his GE Super Radio II (right)
SWLing Post contributor Mike (K8RAT) writes:
I happened upon a good find of a vintage radio recently when I visited my local Goodwill store in a small city in Ohio.
Among the electronic equipment on a shelf I discovered a Panasonic RF-888. I was not familiar with this radio. The large speaker along with switches and knobs for features found on the better radios impressed me.
The price on the sticker read $3.50. I paid at the counter and motored away not knowing what a bargain I had received.
The RF-888 audio is very good on FM and good on AM. Sensitivity and selectivity are very good on both bands. The tuning meter is useful.
I recommend visits to local second-hand stores. You never know what you might find.
Mike, K8RAT
Many thanks for sharing this story, Mike, as it provides a good lesson for us all: never pass by a thrift store! I’ve never had the good fortune of finding a gem like the RF-888–or a Sony ICF-2010 like Vlado–but I shall keep searching.
Panasonic RF-888s sell on eBay for $100 US and higher–at $3.50, I’d say Mike snagged a deal.
After publishing my initial review of the Sangean ATS-405, I received feedback from several ATS-405 owners (via comments and email–thank you!) who do not have the internally-generated DSP “birdies” that plague my receiver on 800 and 1600 kHz AM. I strongly suspect my ATS-405 has a manufacturing defect of some sort.
Sangean is kindly sending me another ATS-405 review sample for comparison purposes. I will post an update to the initial review as soon as I’ve had the opportunity to evaluate the new sample.
After publishing my initial review of the Sangean ATS-405 on July 25, I contacted Sangean and requested a sample radio for comparison purposes. Back story: there were some receiver performance issues that I suspected may have been tied to my particular ATS-405 unit. Sangean kindly dispatched another ATS-405 which I received last week. The following is an update to my initial ATS-405 review.
In truth, there were two main reasons I wanted another unit to compare to my initial review radio:
I noted in my initial review that the initial ATS-405 had an ever-present noise, a sort of low-volume static hiss. The noise floor, while not high, certainly seemed to be higher than other comparable shortwave portables, and was most noticeable when tuned to marginal/weak stations. I suspect many listeners may not notice it unless they compare it with other portables.
Fortunately, my new review unit’s noise floor seems to be slightly lower than that of my initial review unit. [Perhaps this unit’s board is better soldered–?] The noise is still there, but can be better mitigated by judiciously using narrow filters and the three-position audio tone control.
I suspect this is a noise somewhere in the audio amplification chain, because I find it less noticeable with headphones, and more pronounced via the ATS-405’s internal speaker.
In terms of sensitivity and selectivity on the shortwave bands, I believe my new unit is identical to that of the initial review unit. That is to say, the ATS-405 is not an especially sensitive shortwave receiver, but fairly average, and thus will fit the bill for most but not for the discriminating weak-signal hunter. Frankly, even my $46 Tecsun PL-310ET does a better job of pulling in weak stations.
I’ve tried tinkering with the AGC settings and soft mute–very cool features!–in an attempt to improve sensitivity, but alas, these only help the quality and stability of the received signal.
Immediately after opening the box of the new ATS-405 sample, I popped in a fresh set of AA batteries and tuned the Sangean to 1600 kHz AM. [If you read my initial review, I noted a strong DSP birdie on 1600 and (to a lesser degree) on 800 kHz].
At first listen, I was happy to note that the new unit lacks the wild DSP noise that overwhelmed my favorite local station on 1600 kHz.
As I listened more carefully, though, I did note a metronomic “chick” sound that was also present but partially buried in the noise on my initial ATS-405.
Below, I’ve embedded audio comparing the two receivers:
Initial review unit:
New review unit:
Listening to these samples, I realize I may have had the filter set to the middle position on the first sample and the wide setting on the second (hence, the brighter tone).
To further demonstrate the difference between the two, I made this short video; I start with my initial review unit, then switch to the new review unit provided by Sangean:
Note that this was recorded at least 100 feet from my house on the tailgate of my pickup truck. DSP birdies on 800 kHz sounded very much like the 1600 kHz sample, save the noise level on the latter is slightly lower and there are no broadcast stations in the background.
None of my other portables have digital noises or birdies on 800 and 1600 kHz.
So, the bad news: I do still hear a noticeable (and slightly annoying) internally-generated noise on the new review unit. The good news: it isn’t as objectionable as that on my initial review unit.
In short: I stand by my initial review of the Sangean ATS-405.
While the new ‘405 review sample seems to perform better than the initial ‘405 sample, I find the discrepancy somewhat marginal, especially since I spend the bulk of my time on the shortwave and mediumwave bands.
I’m not a fan of production runs where units vary so greatly from one to another, making accurate testing difficult. Therefore it’s quite possible you might receive a unit that performs better than those I tested…but unfortunately, the opposite is also true.
So, if you’re a Sangean fan, if you don’t mind the birdies on mediumwave, and if you mostly listen to strong shortwave stations, you may entertain purchasing an ATS-405. The keypad layout is almost identical to previous Sangean models.
To be clear, of course, this radio’s negatives above have been viewed under a microscope; the ATS-405 is not a “bad” receiver, it’s just not that exceptional. Other than the added mute/AGC/squelch features, when compared to its predecessors, it’s really not a better iteration.
In conclusion? For the $90 US price, I believe there are better receivers out there–such as the Tecsun PL-600 (which, as a bonus, has USB/LSB reception–and saves you $10, to boot).
SWLing Post contributor, Guy Atkins, writes:
My “bargain bin” $13.99 portable Basbon DSP receiver arrived yesterday from China while I was out of town. That was fortunate for the little radio, as my absence allowed it another day of life (in one piece) on planet earth.
The good: the radio’s case is surprisingly solid and of good quality. To hold the receiver you’d think you had a $50+ portable in your hands. The smallish and very basic LCD display (cleverly labeled “DISPLAY” for those who don’t catch on too quickly) looks crude however, and gives forewarning that crude performance awaits.
The so-so: strong, local FM signals sound intelligible but with lots of tinny audio and some distortion. Strong AM signals (which happen to be near or coincide with North America’s 10 KHz channel spacing) are adequate.
The bad & ugly: Once you get past the puzzling multiple button presses to get past the clock display into shortwave operation, the noises and hisses coming from the speaker will make you wish you’d left well enough alone! Strong SW signals audible on Kaito’s $17.99 low-end (and analog) WRX-911 are simply a noisy, tone-covered mess on the Basbon receiver.
I was curious if the digital hash and noise was the result of an unshielded DSP chip, so I opened up the receiver. These two pictures show both sides of the primitive PCB:
After removal of TEN (!) little silver screws holding the PCB board in place I could remove and flip it over. The square, multi-lead chip to the lower left of the LCD display is unmarked, and is presumably the DSP IC. I was contemplating making a small grounded metal shield to cover the chip, but as I moved the Basbon radio’s internals on my workbench the array of case buttons literally fell apart.
That’s the end of THAT idea! I have more interesting radio projects to spend my time on.
Thanks so much, Guy! While I’m a little sad the Babson DSP radio performed so poorly, at $13 I suppose we can’t be terribly surprised. My Babson DS-858 is yet to arrive–it took the seller 10 days to ship it and now it’s on the ePacket journey from China. Once received, my expectations will be adjusted accordingly.
In truth, like Guy, I often jump on radio deals like this in the off chance they may perform well for their price. Most of the time, though, I feel like I’m taking a bullet for SWLing Post readers–! (Ha ha!) Giving an honest assessment of a poor radio keeps anyone else from wasting their money.
Many thanks, Guy, for digging into the Babson and for sharing your review with us!
SWLing Post reader, Bob C., recently shared his review of the C.Crane CC Skywave portable radio:
Well, I just received my new CC Skywave radio and it’s terrific! I own a lot of portable radios (including several Tecsun DSP sets), and the Skywave is a new favorite and will likely become my standard radio for travel.
Good fit and finish, great ergonomics, and easy to use. I was pleased to find that, despite what’s written in the ads and on the back of the radio, you can set the radio to receive FM down to 76 MHz by selecting the a 9 kHz MW spacing.
Great for international travel. The following is my brief review (by band):
Mediumwave
The Skywave is far better than any of the Tecsuns and is almost as good as the C Crane 2E (my best MW receiver). At my location (40 miles N of Chicago), the distant groundwave fringe includes WLW, WJR, and KTRS (St. Louis) – in descending order of reception potential. Most radios can get a whisper of WLW (though not discernible), while the other two are rare. The C Crane 2E gets WLW and WJR well enough that you can listen; KTRS is detectable. The Skywave gets WLW and WJR and you can tell that KTRS is there. That indicates that the Skywave is among the best. And there are no birdies nor whistles on the band. Nice.
FM
Just as sensitive and about 99% as selective as any of the Tecsun DSPs. The shorter antenna doesn’t seem to hamper reception at all. And, with no soft muting and a more logical tuning setup, it’s a pleasure to work with. Lastly, the stereo reception threshold on the C Crane DSP chip is significantly lower than that on any of the Tecsun rigs, so most signals decode stereo and simply sound better. Where I live, I have tons of signals that are 0.2 MHz apart (i.e. 101.9 Chicago, 102.1 Milwaukee, 102.3 Waukegan – and local) – the Skywave has no trouble separating these and providing a usable signal for all three.
Shortwave
Seems to do just fine. I have not had any overload issues with my unit and can pull in all as many SW signals and most of my other small portables. The lack of SSB is an inconvenience, I suppose, but I guess you can’t have it all!
NOAA/Weather radio
This band is great to have and is perfectly functional. I will say that this isn’t my most sensitive WB radio, but it’s not deaf by any definition. It’s just a little less sensitive to distant fringe WB stations than some of my other sets. But it does dependably pull in anything within 60 miles, so we’re only talking about ability to pull in distant fringe signals (which can be fun).
Air
I’ve played around with this a little and it definitely works better than expected. O’Hare tower is about 25 miles away and I get it clearly, along with aircraft that are (from what I can tell) basically anywhere within about 60 miles. The ability to scan is very helpful; however, catching a signal when someone is broadcasting is tricky. A little online research into local ATC frequencies goes a long way toward having fun on this band. The Skywave seems to work the Air Band better than the G6 and G3, my only other radios with this band.
So, overall, this radio has been a very pleasant surprise. No disappointments whatsoever. Kudos to C Crane Company for doing such a fine job with yet another radio.
Thanks so much for sharing your thoughts on the CC Skywave, Bob! Like you, I really love this little radio for travel and gave it a favorable review several months ago.
That’s an excellent tip about widening the FM frequency range down to 76 MHz by selecting 9 kHz steps on mediumwave. Brilliant!
Readers should be aware that some Skywave owners have noted a vulnerability to overloading and imaging in urban markets or where blowtorch stations are nearby. If your listening post fits this description, you may want to hold off until C.Crane has addressed the issue.
The CC Skywave can be purchased directly from C. Crane. It is also available at Universal Radio and Amazon.com.
SWLing Post reader, Marty (W5MRM), comments:
I recently picked up a Sangean ATS-909X to use as a bedside radio.
This blog post inspired me to put together a video review of the ATS-909X as a bedside radio. The video review can be found on my youtube page [or via the embedded player below]:
Great video, Marty, and thanks for the thorough review!
You can follow all of Marty’s videos on YouTube by visiting this page.
Regarding the C.Crane CC Skywave, SWLing Post reader, William Pietschman (W8LV) comments:
I find that the Skywave is so stable on the air band, I can use it to decode ACARS with the Android App!
Listened to WBCQ, and Arnie Coro’s show last night from Havana along with some Jazz music.
It pulled FM stations out of the air like nothing else, meaning the weaker ones here in my rural Ohio location. And I could pick up three NOAA broadcasts, two very strong, one scratchy…. Since the NOAA system is of course designed to let you pick up one station in whatever particular area of the county you live in, I consider this excellent!
With the AM I pulled in Canadians, Boston , stations in IOWA and KFI. I also note it’s very directional on AM… I could null out WTVN and pick up Texas with no problem. I have owned and do own lots of shortwave radios, and I MUST say, this is one hell of a good set!
It’s going into my Winter zip-up jacket pocket so it will always be handy for the DX Season, and I also notice that the headphones are VERY good, and have a long enough cord so it’s not pulling at my ears like some sort of damned harness… I HATE short earphone cords!
(And while I am on the subject of ear phones, and while I haven’t been zapped in the ear with static this year yet by dry air causing that annoying problem, I wonder how these earphones are going to do in that regard… the Sony’s are unbearable in Winter! Ouch! I wonder if anyone else out there has this problem besides me, and has found a solution?)
First of all, thank you for making me aware of the ACARS app and that you can successfully use it with the CC Skywave. I will add the ACARS app to my growing list of HamRadio/SWL applications and also try it myself!
Your experience with the CC Skywave is very similar to mine. It is a fabulous portable receiver. If it only had SSB and sync detection, it would be the ultimate compact portable. The CC Skywave is an everyday carry (EDC) radio for me–either it, or the Sony ICF-SW100, accompany me everywhere in my Timbuk2 messenger bag.
Regarding static discharge from headphones, I don’t think I’ve ever had this happen to me; sounds annoying, though! I suppose walking in dry winter conditions with a thick winter jacket could increase chances of discharge. Perhaps the in-ear design of the included CC earbuds–with silicon earpieces–will minimize and insulate you from this problem? Let us know!
Thank you for your assessment of the CC Skywave, William!
When I discovered that Degen had recently refreshed the receiver design of the DE1103, I was intrigued, to say the least. The original DE1103 sported some serious performance for a sub-$100 receiver.
The 2015 model of the Degen DE1103 implements a DSP chip (the Silicon Labs Si4735-D60).
Yet I was on the fence about purchasing the new DE1103. Why? In truth, I never fell in love with the original DE1103. While I appreciated the 1103’s unique analog-style digital display, I never got used to its quirky ergonomics. Degen had quality control issues, too: I had to return two faulty units before getting one that worked as advertised (incidentally, I had a similar problem with the Kaito KA1102).
Then last week, SWLing Post reader, Ron, contacted me. He had purchased the new DE1103 from Hong Kong-based eBay vendor Bigbargainonline.
Ron kindly provided the SWLing Post with his impressions of the DE1103, as follows:
Performance is roughly on a par with the earlier dual conversion version. This one is just as hot, but no hotter.
If you were thinking a GP5 on a bigger ferrite bar, yes…and no.
There is one major gripe…[this unit] will not remember frequencies set with the BFO on, like the earlier dual-conversion version did. Instead you have to turn the BFO on for each memory frequency [for which you] need it.
One thing [I] noticed right off was the almost complete lack of AGC “pumping” on CW and SSB that all earlier versions had (yay!) but this plus comes at the cost of having the BFO “remembered” in memory.
Zero-beating (or centering) the BFO to null on WWV and local AM stations to check alignment was…strange. At null beat the BFO seems to quit for a second. It is fine
either side of zero beat, however.This is doubtless due to Tecsun’s adapting the Silicon Labs IC to a full range BFO like this. Recall the same IC in the GP5 features Upper and Lower selection on CW/SSB.
This 1103 DSP version also has the GP5’s slight tuning mute, not a problem.
But for ease of operation in CW/SSB mode, the GP5 is [much] better IMO.
Ron also notes that he wasn’t pleased with the DE1103’s longwave performance and didn’t feel the mediumwave and shortwave reception was an improvement on the original DE1103.
He decided that he would sell this DE1103 and gave me first dibs, so I bit the bullet. I was eager to compare the new DE1103 with some of the other DSP-based portables in my collection. Ron dispatched the DE1103 immediately–it arrived a few days ago, but I didn’t have a chance to test it until yesterday.
I took the Degen DE1103 outside, sat it on the tailgate of my truck and put it on the air…
I tuned around the mediumwave band and picked up all of the local benchmark stations. Same with FM. So far, this tuning confirmed Ron’s assessment of the DE1103: it didn’t surpass the original.
But the shortwave bands were a different story.
As I tuned around the HF bands, the DE1103 seemed to receive quite a lot signals. But in most instances, I could hear local AM broadcasters bleeding in, as well. Indeed, imaging was prevalent across the shortwave bands–the receiver was obviously being overwhelmed by a local broadcaster. Unfortunate.
Could strong interference account for this? While there are local AM broadcasters around, they’re not exactly “blow-torch” stations. Indeed, I’ve never had overloading issues with other shortwave portables I’ve used in the same location–not even with my Kaito WRX911!
Imaging was prevalent on the DE1103 when it was tuned to pretty much any audible shortwave broadcaster.
Here’s a video of the Degen DE1103 tuned to the Voice of Greece on 9,420 kHz:
What you’re hearing in the audio is a local broadcaster bleeding in. Note that when I tune off-frequency, no imaging is heard.
Wondering if something had changed locally–and just to be fair–I pulled out my Sony ICF-SW100 and sat it next to the DE1103. The Sony had no issues.
This time, I tuned to WWV on the 19 meter band and compared the two receivers:
As Dan Robinson expresses it, the ICF-SW100 “wipes the floor” with the DE1103. There’s no hint of overloading in the SW100.
My buddy, Ron, is clearly a keen radio reviewer; obviously he didn’t hear overloading on the shortwave bands where he tested the rig, else he would certainly have mentioned it. The location where I tested the DE1103 does have some local broadcasters in the area, but no clear channel or high-power stations; in short, there’s no likely interference within a ten-mile radius to account for this debilitating performance problem.
Obviously, the new DSP version of the Degen DE1103 is especially prone to imaging on the shortwave bands. In fact, it’s the only receiver I’ve ever tested that has overloading issues at this testing location (where I tested the original Degen DE1103, by the way).
My assessment? Avoid the new Degen DE1103.
A much better receiver with SSB for roughly the same price would be the venerable Tecsun PL-600 ($89.99 at Amazon and $89.95 at Universal Radio). If SSB reception isn’t necessary, you might also consider the CC Skywave or the very affordable Tecsun PL-310ET.
This article originally appeared in the November 2015 issue of The Spectrum Monitor magazine:
Despite the often-expressed view that shortwave may be on the decline, if one were to look at this year’s shortwave technology alone, the truth would seem to be anything but. Remarkably, 2015 has been a great year for the shortwave radio listener, as several models of portables, tabletops, and SDRs have been either introduced or improved.
The following is a basic, easy-to-follow buyer’s guide to some of the best receivers on the market currently. This guide is, by no means, comprehensive; rather, it’s a selection of rigs I have tested, some of which I now own. It builds on the guide I published in the November 2014 issue of TSM, and highlights innovations since that issue, while still acknowledging the contributions of previous models.
If your budget is tight, or if you’re looking for a radio that could easily slip into your glove compartment, backpack, carry-on, or even jacket pocket, you need to consider a compact shortwave radio.
Typically, there is a performance compromise with compact radios: they don’t always have the sensitivity of their more expensive cousins; they have a more limited frequency range; and they don’t detect single-sideband signals. Nonetheless, the ones listed here are fine performers for their size and price. Entries are listed in alphabetical order.
The Eton Traveller III
Eton Traveller III
Eton has once again refreshed the design of its popular “Traveller” series of compact receivers: their latest is the third edition, the Eton Traveller III. I’ve owned the past two versions of the Traveller, and having learned to appreciate these, was eager to get my hands on the newest Traveller III. As the name implies, this is a great little radio for the international traveler; it not only has shortwave, AM and FM bands, but it also has a world clock that can easily be switched from the front panel, a useful alarm function, and great built-in speaker. New to the Traveller III is FM RDS: a great way to capture FM station identification when visiting a new city. The key lock is prominent on the front panel and the included padded nylon case is one of the most rugged I’ve seen in years. Performance is what I’ve come to expect from the Traveller series: superb AM (mediumwave) reception, great FM reception, and capable shortwave reception. It lacks the multiple bandwidths found in other similar DSP radios, but my impression is that the default bandwidths are adequate for multi-band listening.
The Eton Traveller III is available from Universal Radio, Amazon.com and more outlets via Eton. Pricing ranges from is $55-60 US.
The C.Crane CC Skywave
CC Skywave
Only a couple of weeks before the Christmas holiday of 2014, C. Crane introduced a compact portable that truly impressed me: the CC Skywave. The Skywave is as compact as any other ultralight radio, but adds a host of features that has made it an invaluable radio for my one-bag air travels. The CC Skywave covers the following bands: Shortwave, AM, FM, Weather, and Aviation. It’s a comprehensive toolbox of frequency bands and listening modes which only lacks, sadly, SSB.
Ergonomics are excellent for such a small portable. It’s easy to use, as well: I only needed to reference the well-written manual for a few functions. I find the CC Skywave to be very sensitive on shortwave and mediumwave, rivaling radios that cost much more.
One negative I’ve learned through readers of the SWLing Post is that the first production run of the CC Skywave was prone to overload in the presence of strong local broadcast stations. C.Crane have confirmed that this has been addressed in the latest CC Skywave production run and is no longer an issue. To insure you’re receiving a unit from the latest production run, consider purchasing directly through CCrane.
The CC Skywave is sold by Universal Radio, Amazon.com and directly by C.Crane. Price is $89 US.
The CountyComm GP5/SSB
CountyComm GP5/SSB (Tecsun PL-365)
CountyComm––a retail distributor of products created primarily for use by the US government––introduced a new shortwave portable late in 2014: the GP5/SSB. The GP5/SSB came about as a result of a large order CountyComm received from a US government department for an “inexpensive, small portable, AM/FM/SW radio with SSB” for emergency supply caches and diplomatic posts. Like its predecessor, the GP5/DSP, the GP5/SSB has a vertical form factor, much like a handy-talky, and a detachable/rotatable ferrite bar antenna that greatly improves AM/mediumwave reception. The GP5 series is limited by a small internal speaker that sounds somewhat tinny; it also lacks a direct entry keypad. Still, with a pair of headphones and some careful memory allocation, the GP5 is a pleasure to use.
If you’re looking for an ultra-portable radio with SSB, then the GP5/SSB is a very good choice. (It may, in fact, be the only ultra-portable SSB choice currently on the market). While the SSB performance can’t compare with larger, pricier receivers, or ham radio transceivers, it’s very good for $80 US. If you’re looking for an emergency communications receiver––something to stash in your vehicle, emergency kit, or bug-out bag––the CountyComm GP5/SSB is a great choice and value. Indeed, that’s who the GP5/SSB was designed for, and why this rig has excellent frequency coverage in all modes, with good sensitivity/selectivity and designed for portable, one-handed operation. In fact, CountyComm has even designed and manufactured (and in the USA!) a robust, protective 1000-Denier case for the GP5/SSB. This case makes it very easy to strap the GP5/SSB to your belt or backpack securely.
The CountyComm GP5/SSB is available from Universal Radio and directly from CountyComm.
The Sangean ATS-405
Sangean ATS-405
I was surprised this year when Sangean introduced its latest compact/travel receiver, the ATS-405. I had heard rumors that Sangean may have been leaving the shortwave radio scene, so was pleased to learn that Sangean was not only still invested in the hobby, but innovating. Indeed, the ATS-405 has features that have not yet been included on small DSP-powered portables: specifically, the ability to control squelch, tuning mute, and soft mute.
The ‘405 is a decent little radio with a great deal of functionality and features for a rig in its price class. But overall, its performance seems rather mediocre. If you primarily listen to FM, you’ll be pleased. If you’re a mediumwave listener, you’ll be pleased only if you don’t mind the 800/1600 kHz DSP birdies which plagued both of my review units. If you’re primarily a shortwave listener, you’ll need to carry a clip-on wire antenna to bring the sensitivity up to the level of similarly-priced receivers. I also found performance variations between my two review units; an indication that quality control is somewhat inconsistent at the factory.
The Sangean ATS-405 is available via Universal Radio and Amazon.com. Price is $89 US.
Other compact/travel radios
In the 2014 Buyer’s Guide we included several other compact travel radios worth considering: The [original] Kaito KA1103/Degen DE1103, Tecsun PL-310ET, and the Tecsun PL-380 to name a few.
In the portables market, I believe you get the most value and quality in the $90-250 price class. Most beginners and seasoned SWLs prefer a radio that includes everything necessary to get on the air immediately; all of these radios provide just that. Straight out of the box, you’ll have everything you need to listen to shortwave bands. All of these recommended radios are designed to pick up major shortwave broadcasters with ease, and offer the following features: good frequency coverage; circuitry that helps in the detection of weaker stations; and with a few notable exceptions, the ability to receive single-sideband.
The Tecsun PL-680
Tecsun PL-680
The latest Tecsun full-featured portable––the PL-680––appeared on the market in February this year. Cosmetically, the receiver is nearly identical to the Tecsun PL-600, but with the added features of the Tecsun PL-660. Indeed, in terms of features and comparing them with that of the venerable PL-660, there are no obvious additions on the PL-680. The PL-680 has been improved, however, in its shortwave reception. The PL-680 is both slightly more sensitive and has a more stable AGC (Automatic Gain Control) than the PL-660. If you are primarily a shortwave radio listener and wish to have one of the best sub-$200 receivers currently on the market, the PL-680 may be the rig for you.
On the other hand, if you are primarily a mediumwave DXer and already own the PL-660, you will likely want to pass on the PL-680. The PL-680’s mediumwave reception is simply not as good as that of the PL-660. The PL-660 is both more sensitive and has a lower noise floor on mediumwave.
Note that since its introduction, inventory of the PL-680 has fluctuated; the primary retailer is Anon-Co in Hong Kong and on eBay. Price is $95 US (plus shipping from China).
The Eton Satellit
Eton Satellit
Last year, Eton released the Satellit: a new full-featured portable, essentially replacing the venerable Grundig G3, but carrying the name of the flagship Grundig Satellit series.
The Satellit has many of the same functions as the Grundig G3, and has a near-identical form-factor, but sports a new amber backlit display, multiple bandwidths, and a double-jointed telescopic antenna. The Satellit performs admirably on the AM/mediumwave bands, quite well on the shortwave band but, most notably, performs brilliantly on FM. The audio fidelity from the built-in speaker is quite robust; indeed, it’s among the best in its class. The key layout and ergonomics are similar to the Grundig G3 and G5; meaning, the radio is quite simple to use. One negative is that the Satellit mutes between frequencies while tuning, however, this is minimal in the most recently-updated production runs. I’m very pleased that all of the new Eton radios lack the tactile rubber coating found on some previous models, for while the coating works excellently to improve one’s grip on the radio, over time it can become sticky to the touch (if you find this to be a problem, here are several techniques to clean the sticky residue: http://bit.ly/1KQN8TX).
At time of print, the Satellit is generally available for about $180-190 from a variety of retailers, including Universal Radio and Amazon.com.
Other full-featured portables
In the 2014 Buyer’s Guide, we included several other full-featured radios that are still certainly worth considering: The C. Crane CCRadio-SW, Sangean ATS-909X, Sony ICF-SW7600GR, Tecsun PL-600, Tecsun PL-660, and the Tecsun PL-880.
While tabletop receivers have started to decline with the advent of SDRs, there are many listeners who still prefer a simple, dedicated, stand-alone high-performance receiver with a good tuning knob and clear display, which is to say, a tabletop receiver. Tabletops are designed to perform best with a resonant external antenna.
The Elad FDM-DUOr
Elad FDM-DUOr
If you’ve been thinking of purchasing an SDR, but really want a traditional front-panel tabletop receiver, the Elad FDM-DUOr may be for you. I’ve included the FDM-DUOr under the tabletop heading because it is, in fact, a tabletop receiver, with the features of a tabletop such as a front panel, knobs, display, and capability to operate independent of a PC. However, if you choose to hook it to a PC, you unleash a full-fledged SDR and a wide array of features. The FDM-DUOr is built on the same receiver and software as the FDM-S2, one of my favorite sub $1000 SDRs. The FDM-DUOr also sports 10 selectable and customizable filter preselectors and an internal switch box for use with an external transceiver.
At time of print, Elad is seeking FCC approval for the FDM-DUOr in order to distribute these units in the USA. The FDM-DUOr is currently available in Europe via the Elad online store: Price is 899.00 €.
The CommRadio CR-1a
CommRadio CR1-a
US-based manufacturer CommRadio introduced the CR-1 in 2013––an amazingly rugged, portable receiver, and essentially a small tabletop SDR. I’ve used mine in travels and at home; the built-in rechargeable battery will power it for hours, it’s built to a mil-spec standard, and it performs like a champ.
In 2014, CommRadio increased the SDR potential of the CR-1 by updating with a new model: the CR-1a. In 2015, CommRadio continued to add features to the CR-1a through firmware and software upgrades, such as a new Spectrum Viewer SDR application, and 3D-Waterfall for Windows PCs.
CommRadio CR-1a owners only need to update their firmware and download software to use the new feature. The CR-1a is priced at $599.95 US, shipped, and includes a battery through Universal Radio––good value for a quality piece of kit. CommRadio also sells the CR-1a directly through their website.
Other tabletops
In the 2014 Buyer’s Guide, we included several other tabletop radios, including the Alinco DX-R8T and the Icom IC-R75.
If you’re searching for maximum performance for the price, software-defined radios (SDRs) and IF receivers are hard to beat. These small “black box” radios require a computer to unlock performance, none are stand-alone. But while I was never a fan of combining my PC with radio listening, once I starting using an SDR, I never turned back. Now, 90% of the time that I’m on the air, it’s with an SDR. The ease of doing so is incomparable, and the functionality simply incredible.
The Elad FDM-S2
Elad FDM-S2 and the new SPF-08 preselector
If you read the Elad FDM-S2 review in the November 2014 issue of TSM you’ll know that this little SDR packs a powerful punch for the price. FDM-S2 performance is uncompromising, comparing favorably to receivers $300-400 more in price. The S2 also provides native DRM decoding; it’s a fine DRM receiver.
Users who live in the vicinity of high-powered AM stations will be pleased to know that Elad has developed an outboard preselector box that pairs with the FDM-S2––the new SPF-08, which covers the amateur radio bands. Elad already has a broadcast band version of the SPF-8 in development. The SPF-08 enclosure is the same size as that of the FDM-S2 and couples with it directly via a port on the back of both units.
Both the Elad FDM-S2 and SPF-08 are available via Elad’s online store: http://ecom.eladit.com/
The SDRplay RSP
SDRplay RSP
The SDRplay RSP was one of the most pleasant surprises I encountered in the world of software defined receivers this year. I published a review of the RSP in the May 2015 issue of TSM; in short, I was amazed at the performance of this $149 SDR. While it doesn’t have its own proprietary SDR application, it is compatible with some of the most popular free applications on the market: SDR Console, SDR Sharp, and HDSDR to name a few. SDRplay developers are even testing a Raspberry Pi application for the RSP.
Since the time of my review, SDRplay has updated the RSP to include gapless coverage from 100 kHz to 2 GHz––talk about wideband coverage!
If you have been hesitant to invest in a benchmark SDR, or simply want to explore the world of SDRs on a small budget, the SDRplay RSP is a no-brainer. Without a doubt, it packs a lot of performance in a tiny, affordable package. The SDRplay user community is also very active and routinely pushes the boundaries of this little receiver.
The SDRplay RSP is available at SDRplay.com and, in the US, at Ham Radio Outlet.
The RFspace Cloud-IQ
RFSpace CloudIQ
The Cloud-IQ is the latest software-defined receiver from the US-based company RFSPACE. The Cloud-IQ offers two modes of operation:
RFSpace is essentially one of the first SDR manufacturers to include built-in SDR streaming functionality, something that has been somewhat complicated to implement in other SDRs.
The price point is also favorable at $629.95 through Ham Radio Outlet, Amazon, Astroradio and ML&S. Availability has been quite limited this year, but more production runs are planned for the near future. I plan to review the RFSpace CloudIQ in late 2015 or early 2016, as soon as a unit becomes available.
Other SDR/IF receivers
In the 2014 Buyer’s Guide we included several other SDRs and IF receivers worth considering, including the Bonito RadioJet IF-Receiver 1102S, Microtelecom Perseus, and the WinRadio Excalibur. Additionally, note that the affordable Airspy SDR will soon have a new converter to cover HF down to 1kHz–look for a review in 2016.
If you would like to view a comprehensive list of all shortwave radios currently on the market, check out the Shortwave Radio Index (http://swling.com/db).
