Tag Archives: Reviews

A review of the Red Oxx Hound EDC Pack

8 Replies

Long-time SWLing Post readers know that I geek out about a number of things: radio, of course, but also travel and packs. No doubt my love of backpacks and carry bags stems from my love of travel…and the need to have a radio or two along. In the past, I’ve reviewed a number of backpacks, travel pouches and cases. What follows is a new pack review.

Introducing the Red Oxx Hound

Last month, Montana-based company Red Oxx sent me their latest small carry bag for evaluation and review. This small crossbody bag, affectionately known as The Hound, is made to stay by your side and carry your important gear––just as you’d expect of man’s (or woman’s) best friend.

Red Oxx is not a new name here on the SWLing Post. In the past, I’ve reviewed the Red Oxx Lil’ Roy and helped Red Oxx  evaluate and review their first-generation Micro Manager pack. I also travel frequently with my Red Oxx Mini Boss, one of my favorite one-bag travel packs. I have several other Red Oxx brand accessories and travel cubes. All of which hold up very well, indeed.

Hazel thinking, “Seriously? Another pack?…Okay, I like the name, but are there any treats in there?”

In the spirit of full disclosure, this pre-production pack was sent to me at no cost for comment, evaluation, and eventual review, assuming no design changes are made before production.

So what is the Hound? I would describe it as a small padded EDC pack with a carry strap, designed to be a stand-alone, to function as a travel pouch––and/or to moonlight as a packing cube, since it easily fits inside another travel pack.

In terms of size, the Hound is somewhere between the Red Oxx Lil’ Roy and Micro Manager. It’s roughly 9” tall, 7” wide, and 3” deep, by my measurements. It’s not quite big enough to hold my Microsoft Surface Go tablet, but it holds my eReader and my wife’s iPad Mini with room to spare.

On the front exterior panel, you’ll find a zippered pocket. While this pocket isn’t pleated, the pack is forgiving and flexible, so it’ll easily hold a thick paperback book as long as the main compartment isn’t packed out densely.

On the inside of the Hound, you’ll find one main compartment with one open pocket opposite the side panel of the external pocket.

The floor and two 7”x 9” side panels are padded and do a great job protecting contents. I like the new super-thin Hyper-Cel padding Red Oxx uses for the Hound because it gives the bag’s contents padded protection without making it too rigid, thick, or unforgiving, if you want to cram a little something extra in.

I posted a small teaser a few weeks ago when I took one of my favorite radios (the Panasonic RF-B65) and a copy of the WRTH to a local park for some relaxed radio listening. Both the Panasonic and WRTH fit inside with just a little room to spare for small accessories like earbuds, spare batteries, a wire antenna, and a snack. The radio fits perfectly in the interior open pocket and is essentially protected on all sides, save the top, which is no problem if you’re carrying it with the strap.

Like all Red Oxx packs, the Hound’s exterior sports 1000-weight Cordura nylon material that’s available in twelve solid color combos (plus 4 extra “Red Eye” colors for a limited time) . This is a proven, incredibly durable material that will surely outlast this bag hauler’s handling.

The Hound also features the Red Oxx standard #10 YKK Vislon zipper on the main compartment, and a #5 zipper on the front pocket. These beefy zipper pulls also have attached “monkey fist” knots made from nylon cording that permit easy zipper operation.  The Hound is designed for and ships with a shoulder strap made of durable webbing. Two D-rings on opposite sides of the main zipper insure balance on the shoulder.

Taking the Hound for a walk

The Hound makes for a great bag to protect your portable tech, but also accommodates other items in your everyday carry (EDC).

In fact, if you’re a bit of an EDC minimalist (ahem…not quite me) you likely don’t want a full backpack or shoulder bag to carry your gear. Something the size of the Hound would make for an ideal lightweight carry companion.

Red Oxx went through a couple iterations of this bag before adopting its current dimensions; the result is an incredibly useful and accommodating pack.

The Hound packed in the top of my GR1

One function I find the Hound ideally suited for is as an in-flight kit bag. Being a one-bag traveler when I fly, I only carry one main travel pack that can fit under the seat in front of me. Having this flexibility means that I don’t have to worry about being first during a boarding call to grab that limited overhead bin space, because I know I’ll always have space for my bag.

Thing is, when my bag is stowed under the seat in front of me or especially in an overhead bin, the last thing I want to do is reach for it during a flight to grab a book, protein bar, water bottle, and the like. That’s why I always pre-pack a removable bag for the flight. When I get on the aircraft, first thing I do is open my backpack, pull out my in-flight bag, stow the pack, and keep the in-flight bag at my seat.

On a recent cross-country trip I packed out my GoRuck GR1 backpack and left room at the top to stow the Hound. The Hound made for an ideal in-flight pack. It carried my reading glasses, a book, a Kleen Kanteen water bottle, granola bars, pencil, pen, paper, earphones, adapters, my iPhone, a small battery pack, and an assortment of cables.  And there was room to spare.

The Hound taking its inaugural flight on an Airbus A321!

Another benefit of carrying a bag-within-a-bag? Say you buy your kiddos or spouse some gifts, or someone gives you a cool item that you plan to carry back home––let’s say, a shortwave radio. By having a separate pack, you can always carry the Hound outside your pack freeing up capacity for the new item(s) in your pack. Since the Hound is designed to be carried over the shoulder, your hands are still free.

You could even use the strap to tie the Hound to your main bag. Since the Hound is so small, you won’t get charged extra, even by unforgiving low-cost carriers.

If you’re into radio gear, then the Hound should easily accommodate most full-featured portable radios (like the Grundig G3, G5, Satellite, Sony ICF-SW7600GR, Tecsun PL-660, etc.) It’s also large enough to hold any HT (handy talkie) on the market, although you might remove long antennas unless you close the zippers around it. No worries, no antenna will poke through this bullet-proof fabric.

And of course, women readers:  the Hound would also make a great casual crossbody purse that would be as comfortable on a hike as touring a European city.  In fact, after I received the Hound, my wife nearly walked off with it. I could tell, she was already mentally sorting out how all her gear would fit inside. Likely the only thing keeping her from declaring this one hers is the fact that this bag is khaki––if it were her favorite shade of Red Oxx red, I’d likely have already been forced to surrender it!

Is the Hound for you?

If this simple, super-sturdy bag is the size and configuration you’ve been looking for to haul your radios and other EDC (or, let’s face it, dog owners:  biscuits and baggies) around with you, then I can recommend it without reservation.

While I truly enjoy doing product evaluations, beta testing and reviews, my time is very limited. I’m picky about what I choose to invest my time in. When Red Oxx contacts me about gear evaluations, I make time. Why?  Because their products have never disappointed me.

Red Oxx build and materials quality is second to none. All their gear is designed and manufactured in Billings, Montana––yep, in the good ol’ US of A–– and will last a lifetime.  Or potentially longer.

Plus: in the unlikely event your Red Oxx gear is damaged due to rough treatment (or even neglect), Red Oxx will fix it. For free…and for life!  Their “No Matter What” warranty requires no receipt and no explanations. No doubt, this is one of the reasons why used Red Oxx gear appears on sites like eBay with prices near what you’d pay for it, brand new. These bags not only hold your gear, but they also hold their value:  a bit of a rarity in today’s disposable world.

This top-notch workmanship comes at what most of us would consider a premium, when compared with mass-produced gear you’ll find on Amazon or a big-box store. But for me, I still find incredible investment value in Red Oxx gear. On top of that, I feel like I’m supporting a company that takes pride in their their simple-but smart innovations, their good work, and their hard-working employees who do it.

The Hound was announced by Red Oxx yesterday, and they’ll be taking pre-orders until September 23, 2019. The price is $95 US, including shipping.

Click here to check out the Hound at Red Oxx.

Preview: The C. Crane CCRadio3 AM/FM/WX and 2 Meter receiver

20 Replies

In early January 2019, C. Crane sent me a pre-production unit of their latest radio for evaluation: the C. Crane CCRadio3.

Since I received the CCradio3, I’ve had it on the air and have been evaluating it in real-life listening conditions, searching for any potential quirks that C. Crane should address before a full production run of the radio hits the market.

Yesterday, C. Crane announced the CCRadio3 in their email newsletter:

So now, finally, I can break my silence to inform you all about this latest iteration of the venerable CCRadio. And, indeed, I have a lot to tell…

CCRadio3 Preview

What follows is a preview of the CCRadio3 based on my time with the pre-production unit. I will not refer to this as a “review” of the CCRadio3, since this is a pre-production unit.  I’ll obtain a first production run unit when available and post a full review at that time.

In the meantime…here are some of my impressions based on the pre-production unit, organized by feature.

Bluetooth

What’s new with the CCRadio3? The major upgrade is the addition of Bluetooth connectivity. In fact, that’s the only obvious upgrade other than the fact you can now toggle between AM/FM band rather than scroll through all the bands on one band button.

With Bluetooth connectivity, you can pair with your smart phone, tablet, laptop, PC or any other Bluetooth device, and use the CCRadio3 as your Bluetooth speaker.

How many radios do you know that include simple operation instructions on the chassis? Very simple.

The pairing is incredibly simple and Bluetooth connectivity most impressive. I find that no matter where I go in my house, the CCRadio3 maintains a solid Bluetooth connection with my iPhone. Most of my other Bluetooth devices will lose connectivity if I put a couple walls between my iPhone and the receiver, but not the CCRadio3.

Audio

The internal speaker on the CCRadio3 provides room-filling audio with clear, rich fidelity. The separate bass and treble controls do help tailor the sound based on the audio source. It reproduces music brilliantly in FM and Bluetooth modes.

2 Meter Ham Radio Band

One unique feature of the CCRadio series is 2 meter ham band reception. This is a great way to monitor local amateur radio repeater traffic.

In truth, I’ve spent comparatively little time with the CCRadio3 on 2 meters thus far, having focused instead on the AM/FM and WX bands, but I have verified that I can receive local repeaters and the squelch functionality is quite effective.

I’ll spend more time on this band in my upcoming full review.

Weather Radio (WX) Band

The CCRadio3 can receive all seven NOAA/Environment Canada radio frequencies.

And here’s something that really surprised me: this pre-production CCRadio3 has the best weather radio reception of any radio I’ve ever tested to date. Normally, at my home, I can receive two NOAA stations with the average weather radio. The best of my weather radio receivers might hear a total of three. The CCRadio3, with antenna fully-extended, can receive five NOAA stations! I can almost WX DX with this rig!

I’m so pleased C. Crane places an emphasis on WX band performance. Their CC Skywave and CC Skywave SSB also have best-in-class weather radio reception.

Like the CCRadio2E, the grab handle is built into the back of the radio.

The CCRadio3 uses four D cells for battery operation which should yield about 120 hours of AM broadcast listening at moderate volume.

FM

Thus far I’m very pleased with FM performance. I’ve noted that the CCRadio3 receives all of my local and distant benchmark stations with ease. I believe it would certainly be an FM benchmark receiver. As I mentioned earlier, audio fidelity is excellent via the internal speaker.

AM/Mediumwave

I consider the CCradio3’s predecessor––the CCRadio2E––to be one of the finest AM broadcasting listening portables currently in production. I’ll admit that when I heard the CCRadio3 added Bluetooth, I feared somehow that would equate to possible noise somewhere in the audio chain…Fortunately, this fear was entirely unfounded. In fact, looking at the CCRadio3 announcement, I note that C. Crane took this concern seriously:

“The CCRadio 3 is one of the few high-performance radios with Bluetooth® that has no detectable noise and some of the best reception available.”

When I first turned on the CCRadio3 and tuned to the AM band, I did what I always do when testing mediumwave performance: In the early morning, as the sun was rising (i.e., grey line propagation), I tried to pull my benchmark station––WAIZ, a 1,000 watt station about 95 miles away as the crow flies––out of the muddle. The CCRadio3 was able to do it; in fact, I could hear the station’s morning crew doing their “Wacky Wake-Up” shenanigans. Turning the radio body, I also gathered, rather quickly, that the CCRadio3’s Twin Coil Ferrite Bar antenna does an excellent job of nulling out unwanted stations.

An impressive start of the evaluation.

Comparing the CCRadio3 with Panny RF-2200

Looking around SWLing Post HQ, I picked up my recently re-capped and refurbished Panasonic RF-2200. I wanted to see how the CCRadio3 would stack up against what I consider one the finest AM broadcast portables ever produced…

I’ve tested the CCRadio3 and ‘2200 at various locations––in the morning, midday, and at night––and can say that not only does the CCRadio3 give the RF-2200 a run for its money, but it even outperforms the RF-2200 at times, in terms of weak station intelligibility.

In fact, I think the CCRadio3 may possibly have a very slight edge on the RF-2200 in terms of sensitivity, as well.

However, note that there are two factors that make this comparison a tough call:

  • First of all, I find that the RF-2200’s AGC is smoother than that of the CCRadio3––the peaks and dips in audio are not as strong when listening through AM flutter. Most of the time, this makes it a little easier for me to discern weak signal audio. I believe the CCRadio3’s AGC and soft mute may be making the troughs in AGC a little deeper, as well. It would be amazing if C. Crane could allow users to disable soft mute like recent Sangean models have.
  • Secondly, the RF-2200 has two AM bandwidth settings: narrow and wide. I almost always use the RF-2200 with the wide bandwidth setting. I find the narrow filter is a little too narrow unless I need it to block an adjacent signal.  In general, I use wider AM filter settings than many DXers because I find that the filter between my ears does a better job of discerning signals with a little more audio information.

The CCRadio3 has only one bandwidth. I’m guessing––based purely on my listening experience––that it’s 4 to 6 kHz in width.  (I’ll try to confirm this with C. Crane).   Obviously this is narrower than the RF-2200’s wide filter. In side-by-side comparisons, the RF-2200’s AM fidelity therefore sounds much richer, especially when music is involved.

That this is so really shouldn’t be a surprise, as the Radio3 and its predecessors were designed around spoken word intelligibility––in other words, making it easy for the listener to understand what’s being said. And, frankly, it works. Most of the time, I find that the CCRadio3 does a better job of making weak signals “pop” out of the static. It’s a little easier catching weak signal station IDs with the CCRadio3, even if you have to listen through a more active AGC/soft mute tug.

So…is the CCRadio3 (at least, this pre-production unit) better than the RF-2200 at weak signal DXing? In some respects, yes. In others, not quite. Yet the fact that it can even compare with the RF-2200 speaks volumes…no pun intended. I would have never guessed that it would have a sensitivity edge on the RF-2200.

Of course, the CCRadio3 has both AM antenna and ground terminals.

I made a few early afternoon videos comparing the CCRadio3 with the RF-2200. In the first video, I’m tuned to a station approximately 20-25 miles away. You’ll note how the RF-2200’s audio fidelity, with the wide filter engaged, is hard to match:

Click here to view on YouTube.

In the second video, I’m tuned to 1290 AM (WHKY), a 50,000 watt station about 95 miles away. [Note that I erroneously give an inaccurate mileage figure in this video; not sure what I was thinking!  Sorry about that, folks.]

Click here to view on YouTube.

In the third video, I’m tuned to 630 AM (WAIZ), again, a 1000 watt station about 100 miles away. As you can imagine, it’s very weak and both radios struggle to receive any intelligible audio through the ocean waves of fluttering radio jumble. [Again, please ignore the distance I give in the video; this station is actually a little over 95 miles away.]

Click here to view on YouTube.

I also did a late afternoon comparison video around sunset using one of my favorite AM radio stations ever: CFZM in Toronto–about 980 miles distant. Here’s the video:

Click here to view on YouTube. 

In these video comparisons, the radios are nearly side-by-side.  I found this had little to no effect on reception. When comparing these radios off camera, I had them spaced at least 40″ apart and always, of course, oriented the antennas identically.

Conclusion

Again, this is merely a preview of the pre-production unit of the CCRadio3. I thought I’d touch on reception and a few of the key points that might help some of the CCRadio3’s early adopters make a purchase decision. I have yet to do testing with headphones or external antennas and still wish to compare it with even more radios, to make my review as thorough as I’d like.

And I’m really looking forward to reviewing the production unit of the CCRadio3, because this pre-production receiver has certainly surpassed my expectations!

This latest iteration of the CCRadio should remain king of AM radio reception, compared with any other portable radio currently in production.

C. Crane has announced that they have a very limited number of first-production-run units available for order right now.  If you order one, use the coupon code CC3B19 at checkout, so that, as the above ad suggests, you can snag it for $179.00–$20 off the future retail price. I suspect this first run will sell out fast.

Click here to check out the CCRadio3 product/order page.

Eager for the full review of the C. Crane CCRadio3? Stay tuned!

Do you enjoy the SWLing Post?

Please consider supporting us via Patreon or our good old Coffee Fund!

Your support makes articles like this one possible. Thank you!

Critical reviews of the $37 HanRongDa HRD-737 shortwave radio

16 Replies

Many thanks to SWLing Post contributors Glen and James Fields who shared their experience after  publishing a post about the HannRongDa HRD-737 portable radio.

Glen writes:

I received one Saturday I had ordered from Aliexpress. In one word, avoid. The performance is really terrible everywhere except the FM broadcast band. Reception there is OK, but it is prone to overload more than my other radios. Aircraft reception is terrible. Only very strong shortwave signals are present. Same with AM broadcast. VHF performance is abysmal. To illustrate, my closest NOAA transmitter is so strong it trips the “close signals” quick scan in my Whistler TRX-1. On the HanRongDa, the NOAA signal is present, but it’s weak. All my other weather band receivers can get signals on all 7 frequencies. The HanRongDa hears only the very close one. This is easily the worst receiver I’ve ever gotten. Perhaps it’s defective. Eager to hear experiences from anyone else.

James Fields writes:

Received mine yesterday. Have only tested in my office which is a challenging, RFI-rich environment, so trying to withhold final judgement. However so far my experience matches Glen’s. Can only pick up the strongest shortwave signals. MW AM so far terrible. FM broadcast passable but not at all remarkable, and most stations have a LOT of hiss in the background. Have yet to pick up AIR band transmission on frequency that I can get on every other receiver I have. Nothing on CB yet. Cannot receive any NOAA frequencies, including two that I get solidly on other radios. Interestingly I can receive local police dispatch frequency pretty well.

Construction is pretty cheap.

Positives? I got mine for $37 shipped from a reseller on Ali Express . If I had paid over $40 I would feel worse about the value. And it really is a shirt-pocket portable. Super small and light.

At this time I cannot recommend this for anyone, for any purpose.

Thank you for sharing! I think I’ll pass on the HanRongDa HRD-737!

Tivdio V-115/Audiomax  SRW-710S: Keith approves of everything save battery performance

5 Replies

Many thanks to SWLing Post contributor, Keith Stephens, who writes:

Regarding the Audiomax  SRW-710S  radio.

I was very pleasantly surprised at more than one aspect of this radio.  First, it sounds like something with a much larger speaker.  It has the base capability of at least a 6″ speaker.  My favorite FM music station comes from a mountaintop repeater over 70 miles away.  The 710S is one of two radios I have tried through the years that brings it in clear and clean.  The other is a much bigger more expensive radio.  And of course, the voice quality of the local AM talk shows is excellent.  I lost my instruction booklet (as usual) but I do want to record the FM station for times when I am out of range.

It is a pity that I have to tell of a bad shortcoming on this wonderful radio.  Alas, I couldn’t believe it the first time it died at the end of three hours.  I thought I had a bad battery, but a fully charged new battery only lasts 3 hours!  I would pay twice the price for the same radio if it had a better battery life.  Please let me know if there is a better battery or the same radio with a larger battery.

Thanks for your mini review, Keith! Admittedly, I’ve never tested the battery performance of this set because I typically use it for short (1 hour) recording sessions.

Click here to read other reviews of the Audiomax  SRW-710S/Tivdio V-115.

Retailers:

Guest Post: Review of the Tecsun AN-07 whip antenna extender

2 Replies

Many thanks to SWLing Post contributor, Nicolás Colla, who shares the following review:

Tecsun AN-70 antenna

 

The Tecsun AN-07 is a whip antenna extender that is approximately 65 cm long. I bought mine from eBay seller Anon-co, and it arrived from Hong Kong in approximately twenty days.

The first thing I noticed with my new antenna is that it probably works only with Tecsun radios.

The antenna on my Degen DE-13 self-powered radio is too thin for the extension; the one on my Panasonic RF-3500 kitchen radio is too thick. I have another Tecsun antenna, the AN-05, which is a 6 m wire with a clip on the end that can be put on the radio’s aerial. I hung the AN-05 indoors, in the place with the least amount of RFI (just next to a window), and decided to compare the performance of my Tecsun PL-310ET with the default whip, the longwire and my new extension, on shortwave and FM.

For that, I made a quick scan of the bands with the Easy Tuning Mode (ETM) function of this radio, between 1330 and 1355 UTC. The results were the following:

Shortwave

  • With the default aerial: 3 stations found.
  • With the AN-07 antenna extension: 9 stations found.
  • With the AN-05 longwire antenna: 23 stations found.

As you can see, the AN-05, which is 6 times longer than the AN-05 (the aerial’s height is 1 meter with the added extension), gives by far the best results. Ironically, another scan with the AN-05 AND the AN-07 at the same time, with the clip adjusted on the extension, gives 29 different stations. I don’t know why, but it works better!

FM

  • With the default aerial: 42 stations found.
  • With the AN-07 antenna extension: 57 stations found.
  • With the AN-05 longwire antenna: 35 stations found.

The AN-07 seems specifically designed for FM reception, and it really shines on this band. The signal of a local station increases approximately +12 dbµV on this set’s signal meter.

In short, if you would like to get outstanding FM reception, or if you want to increase your shortwave signal quality JUST A BIT and don’t want to mess with wires, the Tecsun AN-07 is ideal.

Click here to view the Tecsun AN-07 on eBay.

Thank you, Nicolás, for the quick review! As you say, that’s impressive performance on FM especially. What I like about the AN-07 is that it’s passive and requires no power supply or batteries.  It’s also compact and easy to pack for travels. Many thanks for sharing your evaluation!

Do you enjoy the SWLing Post?

Please consider supporting us via Patreon or our Coffee Fund!

Your support makes articles like this one possible. Thank you!

Dan compares and reviews the Tecsun S-8800 portable AM/FM/shortwave receiver

8 Replies

Many thanks to SWLing Post contributor, Dan Robinson, for the following guest post and review:

Tecsun’s S-8800:  Is This All The Radio You Will Ever Need?

These days, we who still derive enjoyment from listening to shortwave broadcasts, be they larger international broadcasters or smaller stations that remain on the air against all odds in the Internet age, also enjoy using the many types of radio receivers that enable this activity.

One of the cruel ironies is that today’s technological advances have made possible the kind of worldband radios (the term that first came into wide use way back in the 1980’s) that years ago we could only dream of, be they full communications receivers or portable receivers.

Having begun my own DXing/SWL career in the late 1960’s, and pretty much maintained my hobby activities over the decades, I have used pretty much every receiver that ever existed, from tube radios to today’s latest DSP wonders.

I have a soft spot for classics from SONY — my list of portables today includes the fantastic SONY ICF-SW77, SW-07, SW-55s and SW-100.  Panasonic is represented in my portable collection by the wonderful RF-B65.

Only in recent years did I decide to test the main higher end portable offerings from Tecsun:  the PL-660/680, and PL-880. What I discovered, as have most people who own the Tecsuns, and similar receivers such as the XHDATA D-808, are the wonders of DSP chips and the great flexibility they provide, such as multiple selectivity options, along with excellent sensitivity.

Though it’s been on the market for going on three years now, one of the receivers I had not been able to test was the Tecsun S-8800.  There are quite a few reviews already online. Some go into extensive detail in describing the plus and minus points of the radio.

With so many people having already assessed the radio — and most of them in fairly glowing terms — I won’t repeat a long list of technical specs, as you can find those in other reviews, and on the site of Hong Kong-based Anon-co, which is probably the main seller of the S-8800.

Headline

The S-8800 is arguably the best multi band radio portable among portable category offerings on the market today.  It combines superior audio delivered from its superb front-firing speaker, with equally superb sensitivity (triple conversion), and multiple selectivity options, with an amazingly professionally-executed remote control.

I used the S-8800 in a number of physical locations, from public parks where I hoped to avoid high noise levels, to my back yard where noise levels are, unfortunately, quite high.  I have compared the S-8800 to a number of portables in my collection, including: SONY ICF-2010, SW-77, SW-55, along with Tecsun’s 660 and 880, Grundig SAT-500.

Audio

Hands down, the S-8800 wins the audio competition when compared to pretty much every other radio.  Where the competition gets tight is with receivers such as the classic Grundig Satellit 500, and Tecsun’s PL-880.

Sensitivity

This is a TRIPLE conversion radio.  As everyone knows by now, Tecsun did not merely adopt the cabinet of the old Eton S350 but basically stuffed a hot rod racer into the cabinet of what was previously a mediocre radio at best.

Selectivity

Widely used in a number of radios these days, the S-8800 uses a DSP chip that is seen in a number of other receivers.  The best description I have seen so far is in the review by Jay Allen who notes that Tecsun “decided to utilize a combination of DSP (Digital Signal Processing) circuits along with traditional analog circuits . . .most of the AM/SW circuitry is PLL/analog along with the 1st and 2nd IF’s, while the 3rd IF is DSP.”  It appears that after a bit of a rocky period in the beginning when initial units suffered from images and birdies, Tecsun got it right.

Ergonomics

Much has been said about the fact that Tecsun decided not to include a keypad on the radio itself.  I too was skeptical. We have all become accustomed to keypads as standard equipment on portables.

Personally, I do a lot of my listening on the beach during vacations, and am used to being able to hold and operate the radio in such situations, so the thought of having to carry a remote control seemed uncomfortable at best.

However, the reality is that it’s still possible to navigate the shortwave, AM, and FM bands easily even without the remote — call me old fashioned, but I am from a group of older listeners who have most frequencies memorized anyway, so I know where I want to go to hear certain stations.

Tecsun hit it out the ballpark with the remote supplied with the S-8800.  It looks like something you would find with high end stereo equipment and clearly much thought went into making sure it can control every aspect of the receiver, from SW band slewing to selectivity, volume, readout — everything except BASS and TREBLE control, Timer/Alarm, and master volume (i.e. as other reviewers note, you have to set the on-radio master volume to a high enough level first, then use the remote to vary).

Power

The radio requires two 18650 lithium (Li-ion) rechargeable batteries, with individual indicator LEDS inside the battery compartment.  This choice is perhaps one of the most controversial aspects of the 8800. Among other things, 18650s usually receive more attention from airport security personnel if one is taking the radio on a trip — this is something everyone should keep in mind.  Any radio being transported on a flight these days is going to be subjected to added scrutiny, simply because almost no one uses radios anymore.

As for the power needs of the receiver, the 18650s seem to do a good job and last quite a long time, even days.  Included in the box is one of those white USB charger blocks — quite small and convenient. I usually travel with separate 18650 chargers, the kind used with high end flashlights, so having spare sets of charged batteries is not a problem.  But if both 18650’s in the Tecsun are drained, the radio definitely needs to re-charge to a minimum level required for operation.

As I write this, I plugged the S-8800 into a wall outlet (a blue LED indicator on front indicates charging mode) and I was unable to use the radio as the battery level had completely zeroed out.  Also keep in mind that the USB charging brick throws off EMI to other radios in the vicinity, and makes it impossible to use the S-8800 itself — there is just too much interference from the charging process to the radio’s receiving circuitry.

Comparisons

As mentioned, I compared the S-8800 with a number of other portables in my collection.  Each of these other radios, including the classics from SONY such as the SW-55 or SW77 have their strengths.  For example, the SW77 has the best implemented synchronous reception of any portable since the ICF-2010 along with superb sensitivity.  However, even the large speaker on the SW-77 was unable to compete with the S-8800. Only radios such as the older Grundig SAT 500/700 had the advantage when compared to the S-8800’s speaker, with the Tecsun PL-8800 close behind.

Receiving Comparisons

I decided to take the S-8800 out to my back yard for a receiving comparison with the receiver I consider to be among the top five best in what I call the small portable category (which is above the mini-portable category in which we find the SONY SW-100 and SW-07 and similar size radios).

In intensive use over the years, I have concluded that the Panasonic RF-B65 is probably among the hottest small portables.  With its famous amplified whip antenna, the 65 time after time succeeds in allowing me to hear stations that other portables struggle with (see this 3 radio comparison I posted a few years ago in which the B65 outguns the Sangean 909X and SONY SW-07).

Rather than produce several separate videos, I have combined one listening session comparing the S-8800 with the RF-B65.  It’s a bit long, so my apologies, but gives you an idea of how these two fine portables did going head to head.

Click here to view on YouTube.

Leaving aside the obvious superiority of the Tecsun where audio is concerned, the S-8800 competes well with the Pan RF-B65, often superior to the smaller radio, but sometimes inferior in one respect.

While there was nothing the S-8800 could hear that the Panasonic could not, signals seem to jump out of the S-8800 in a way that they did not with the smaller radio. However, there appeared to be an interesting difference when it came to the ability of each radio to deal with interfering stations 5 kHz above or below.

As shown in the video, the Panasonic was able to distinguish more clearly between a station on 9,650 kHz (Guinea) and a station 5 kHz above (in this case, Algeria via France, using 9,655 kHz) than the Tecsun, which seemed to struggle.  Indeed, at one point I was forced to attempt ECSS (Exalted Carrier SSB) mode to separate the two stations, whereas on the Panasonic, being the older and simpler radio design was an advantage in that the RF-B65 was actually able to more clearly separate the two stations by “de-tuning” from the center frequency.

One huge advantage of the S-8800 by the way is that there is a hidden software change that enables one to adjust SSB zero beat to zero or near zero.  This means that in theory using LSB/USB to improve reception is possible, though keep in mind that there may be some variation from unit to unit. So far, after performing the so-called ‘secret’ fix (among a list of tweaks discovered so far) my particular S-8800 appears to be able to zero beat LSB/USB with little or no variation between the side bands, pretty much up and down the SW bands.

Conclusions

For me, the S-8800 has turned out to be the biggest surprise of the last several years.  Coming seemingly out of nowhere, packaged in the cabinet of a receiver that was seen as mediocre at best, we have a triple conversion beauty (it seems to weigh almost nothing by the way) that provides pretty much every tool required these days to tackle what is left of shortwave broadcast reception.  It has superior audio, unless one compares to older Grundig and similar sets.

Drawbacks are quite few to be honest.  A case can definitely be made that using 18650 batteries was a poor choice by Tecsun.  This means, for example, that if you’re out on the beach or elsewhere for many hours, the only way to charge up the radio would be to use a separate phone battery charger rather than simply be able to slip in regular alkalines.  But then, I carry separate battery charge units already for my phone.

The big criticism that synchronous reception could have been included is also valid.  The same was said about the SONY ICF-SW55 — with synchronous reception, and a bit more careful design of the tuning circuit, that radio could have been a heavier hitter, a mini-ICF 2010, something the much more expensive SW-77 was designed to improve upon.

However, so far radios utilizing DSP chips have struggled when it comes to synchronous reception capability.  Indeed, the feature has ended up being discovered only as one of a number of ‘secret’ features. Only the PL-660 has a decent synchronous feature, but that radio is hobbled by limited selectivity options, while sync on the PL-880 is pretty much useless.

Finally, I have to say thank you to Tecsun for doing everything possible to avoid the dreaded ‘MUTING’ problem that has been seen on so many small portables.

As I found to my disappointment when using even the much-praised Eton Grundig Satellit, and even the C Crane Skywave SSB, this problem can be a killer for those of us who consider it absolutely critical to be able to hear EVERYTHING on and between frequencies.

So, the big question — would I recommend the S-8800?  As with almost everything, the answer to that is, it depends on what kind of a listener you are, and expectations.

From a performance perspective, if you are like me, a die-hard DX’er at heart who gets a kick out of searching for the last Peruvians on the air, the S-8800 should be more than sufficient.  If you’re both a die-hard DX’er and enjoy FM and AM, the 8800 should also be a perfect selection, since it’s been reviewed quite well in terms of medium wave and FM capability.

A personal note — for me, part of the fun of shortwave portables has been their ‘cool factor’.  I’m just one of those who likes to carry around complicated looking radios with lots of buttons. The SONY 2010, SW-55, SW-77s, older Grundigs all fit the bill.

I never thought the S-8800 or radios similar to it in appearance would.  So, for me it’s going to require a bit of a change, since the S-8800 looks like, well . . . it looks like a ‘toy radio’!

But it’s one hell of a toy-looking radio.  It’s a triple conversion monster packed in the frame of something that, at one point in the past, you might have considered getting for your kids (if they even knew or know what a radio is!).

As many of us are at this point in our lives, I am also thinking ahead — to the day when my numerous premium Watkins Johnson and JRC radios, and a few boatanchors hanging around, will have to go because of downsizing.

When I’m 65, as the Beatles song goes — or more likely 85 or 90 — what will I be able to fit on a bedside dresser and use easily to tune in whatever is left on shortwave (if anything)?

The answer to that question is a radio that’s small enough and enough of a performer, preferably with a well-designed remote, to bring in anything that’s still on HF, MW, and FM.  With those needs in mind, the answer is already here, in the Tecsun S-8800.

[I want to express sincere thanks to Anna at Anon-co who responded quickly when I proposed a review of the S-8800 and supplied the receiver on which this article is based.  Anna was patient as my original plan to have a review in by September was delayed by unavoidable personal matters. Thanks also to Tom Witherspoon for getting the review up so quickly].

Click here to check out the Tecsun S-8800 at Anon-Co’s website and here via the Anon-Co eBay store.

Do you enjoy the SWLing Post?

Please consider supporting us via Patreon or our Coffee Fund!

Your support makes articles like this one possible. Thank you!

The CommRadio CTX-10 has landed

18 Replies

Yesterday, UPS delivered a much-anticipated package: the CTX-10 QRP transceiver from CommRadio.

CommRadio dispatched this loaner CTX-10 for evaluation and I’m excited to get my hands on it since it’s not everyday I get to evaluate a transceiver designed around field portability (my favorite category of gear).

Yesterday, I took a few shots of the CTX-10 as I unpacked it:

I’ll need to build a fused power cable with the supplied pigtail and also sort out an 8 conductor (Yaesu compatible) modular plug microphone. Of course, I’ll give this radio a thorough review testing it on SSB, CW and digital modes (especially FT8).

Since the CTX-10 is built on the CommRadio CR-1 and CR-1A I anticipate a capable receiver section (in other words, expectations are high). Of course, I’ll test the CTX-10’s ability as a broadcast receiver as well.

Follow my progress by following the tag: CTX-10