Tag Archives: Sangean

Tom Servo reviews the Sangean DT-160

Many thanks to SWLing Post contributor, Tom Servo, for sharing the following review of the Sangean DT-160. His review was originally posted on the radio discussions forum:


Sangean-DT-160

Got my Sangean DT-160 today. Thanks, Santa Claus!

Initial impressions are positive, both in the build quality and performance.

It’s a lot bigger than I thought it’d be, though.

I was picturing in my mind something closer to the SRF-M37 but it’s bigger than a pack of cigarettes — taller and wider.

Some of the performance issues others have noted, I’ve noticed as well. The FM reception is superb and outperforms the Insignia HD portable that’s my benchmark FM radio. It can hold its own with the Grundig G8 in that regard.

The sound quality is weird, though. It sounds “crunchy” or watery. Like everything is being played via a low bit rate mp3. Granted, most my local stations ARE playing low bit rate mp3s and sound terrible (which is why I don’t listen to local radio much anymore) but the few stations that aren’t still sound “weird”. Crispy. It could be the DSP or just some odd EQ’ing on Sangean’s part. It’s not a deal-breaker by any stretch but when side-by-side with a different radio the audio differences were stark. The Insignia sounds truly “flat” while the Sangean sounds treble boosted. And crispy. Did I mention that?

[At first] the wide-narrow setting [seemed to make little] difference on FM. The only station that narrow mode improved was while listening to WTGF out of Milton, FL. It’s a mono station and I’m on the fringe, and the narrow cleared up a bit of static. It makes a much more noticeable different on AM, though. Not as much as a well calibrated “wide/narrow” filter might but enough to help some talk radio stand out from the noise.

[I did eventually] figured out where the wide-narrow setting makes the most difference on FM. It’s when you have two signals on adjacent channels, the narrow really does help cut out adjacent channel splatter. Not that there’s much of a problem to begin with, but it is a little extra added oomph.

With the narrow activated, I was able to pull in 93.1 WGDQ and 94.3 WKZW from the Hattiesburg, MS market. Two stations I haven’t heard in probably a year or better, and both are first-adjacent to local 100 kW sticks that are less than 15 miles from me.

Selectivity even in wide mode is fine. Definitely better than the Insignia and on par with the Grundig. We have a crowded dial here on the Gulf coast and sometimes you need a selective radio to pull out all the stations side by side. Here’s an example of what is possible to hear on a decent night:

98.1 – WHWY – Fort Walton Beach
98.3 – WLVM – Mobile
98.5 – WYLD – New Orleans
98.7 – WYCT – Pensacola

Sangean-DT-160I was surprised to hear WYLD coming in this afternoon. In fact, at first I thought it was an image of local 99.9 WMXC, because it was the same song/DJ. But the IDs were different. That’s a good pull and something neither the Grundig nor Insignia could pull off.

The dynamic bass boost is a horrible sounding gimmick, though. It makes everything sound muddy on my “real” headphones. I didn’t try the ones that came with it. I hate it that it lacks RDS, since so many Sangean radios have that and it makes DXing more interesting. The AM has a weird squelch like damping when it’s on an empty channel. If there’s a weak signal there (like my semi-local but hard to hear WABF out of Fairhope) it just sits there, perfectly quiet. It’s not until I used the Tecsun loop with it that reasonably clear audio came out of nowhere. I strongly suspect it’s “muting” weak signals on purpose on AM.

WWL is a moderate but noisy target here; the signal strength is usually good enough for even basic radios to pick it up… Not this Sangean. It took careful alignment before I heard anything. The slightest bit of movement and it went almost completely deaf again. Very odd.

It’s a shame that conditions for FM DX have been so poor on the coast this year, I think this would be a killer DX machine on FM. My friend in Florence has heard Mexico and Wyoming this year. I’ve barely made anything further west than New Orleans, which is pitiful.

Another plus is it drives my large Sennheiser headphones louder than any other “pocket” radio in my collection.


Thanks for sharing your review, Tom! 

I sounds like the DT-160’s AGC or soft mute on the AM broadcast band is causing otherwise intelligible signals to drop out.

At time of posting, I’m still running the battery endurance test of the Sangean DT-160CL vs. Sony SRF-39FP, so I haven’t really given the DT-160CL (the correctional version of the DT-160) a proper receiver performance test. I will soon enough, though!

 

Spread the radio love

Update 2: Sangean DT-160CL v Sony SRF-39FP

Sangean-DT160CL and Sony SRF-39FP

It’s been eighty seven (!!!) hours since I started the Sangean DT-160CL versus Sony SRF-39FP endurance test and both radio are still going strong.

My iPhone stopwatch has been tracking the test.

My iPhone stopwatch has been tracking the test.

I’ve tuned both radios to my SSTran AMT3000 AM transmitter which is currently re-broadcasting the UK 1940s Radio Station on 1570 kHz.

The Sangean DT-160CL still shows two of three segments on the battery indicator (see above).

The Sony SRF-39FP seems to have no indication of quitting anytime soon–it’s still sensitive and audio sounds great.

I believe the Sony SRF-39FP is rated for 80 hours of playtime, and I’m sure if I had turned it on and off numerous times during the test, it might have had an impact on battery performance. It’s still going strong, though.

I am using advanced alkaline (CVS Brand) batteries in both radios. These should give each radio better battery life than standard alkaline or rechargeables.

Regardless which radio wins this test: both have already proved themselves “Holy Grail” battery misers!

I’ll be monitoring the radios very closely today as we pass the 90 and 100 hour mark!

Sangean-DT160CL-BatteryIndicator

UPDATE: Shortly after making this post–at almost exactly 88 hours and 30 minutes into the test–the Sangean DT160CL’s battery indicator lost a battery indicator segment. It’s now only showing one of three battery segments. Could the end be near for our DT-160CL? Stay tuned!

Follow this review thread by bookmarking the following tag: Sangean DT-160CL v Sony SRF-39FP.

Spread the radio love

Update: Sangean DT-160CL v Sony SRF-39FP

Sangean_DT-160CL_21

It’s been thirty seven hours since I started the Sangean DT-160CL versus Sony SRF-39FP endurance test and both radio are still going strong.

Sangean-DT-160CL_and_Sony-SRF-39FP

So far, the DT-160CL’s battery indicator still shows full voltage. The SRF-39FP has no battery indicator, but through experience I know it’s nowhere close to quitting.

I’ve spent some time tuning both radios and comparing them on mediumwave/AM and FM.

The DT-160CL does an amazing job on the FM band and has a definite edge on the SRF-39FP.

On AM, however, the SRF-39FP seems to wipe the floor with the DT-160CL.

In truth, though, it’s tough to evaluate performance and audio while the endurance test is ongoing, so I should reserve judgement. During the battery endurance test, I’m using the supplied earbuds from both radios. The Sangean’s earbuds a fairly large and uncomfortable in the ear–they make the audio sound hollow and too focused on mid-range tones. In truth it’s pretty much the same thing for the 39FP’s buds.

I can’t wait to use some of my proper in-ear buds on the DT-160CL and evaluate its audio characteristics on AM and FM.

Follow this review thread by bookmarking the following tag: Sangean DT-160CL v Sony SRF-39FP

Spread the radio love

The Sangean HDR-16: Dan takes notice

HDR-16

Many thanks to SWLing Post contributor, Dan Hawkins, who comments in reply to our post about the Sangean HDR-18:

Darn. Just when you thought you read a review of the latest Sangean radio another one comes out. I have yet to find a review of the Sangean HDR-16.

[The] HDR-16 is a portable AM-FM HD radio with stereo speakers. Runs on household AC power or four C cells. At 10? long this is not exactly pocket sized but small enough for beach or nightstand duty. I wonder how fast it eats up the C batteries?

I don’t think HDR-16 will hit the shelves until mid-September.

Dan then followed up with pre-order prices:

That Adorama price is correct! I just noticed that Universal Radio also has a pre-order price of $99.99.

$100 US is not a terrible price for a quality portable AM/FM stereo analog/digital radio. Indeed, that may be the best price I’ve seen for that particular feature set. I bet four C cells will power it for quite a long time, too.

At second glance, the HDR-16 has an impressive feature list (via Sangean):

  • HD Radio digital and analog AM / FM-Stereo reception
  • 10 Memory Presets (5 FM, 5 AM)
  • PAD (Program Associated Data) Service
  • Support for Emergency Alerts Function
  • Automatic Multicast Re-Configuration
  • Automatic Simulcast Re-Configuration
  • Auto Ensemble Seek
  • Real Time Clock and Date with Alarm and Sleep Function
  • 2 Alarm Timer by Radio, Buzzer
  • HWS (Humane Wake System) Buzzer and Radio
  • Snooze Function
  • Tone & Bass Control
  • Information Display for Channel Frequency, Call Sign, Radio Text, Audio Mode, Service
  • Mode, Signal Quality and Clock Time
  • Easy to Read LCD Display with Backlight
  • Battery Low LED Indication
  • Auxiliary Input for Additional Audio Sources
  • Record Output for Connecting to Hi-Fi System or Recording from Audio Program
  • I/O Jacks: DC In, Line-Out (Rec-Out), Aux-In, Headphone and HD / FM Rod Antenna

The feature set sounds like something that would appeal to my buddy Jeff McMahon. He’s been looking for a bedside radio for quite a while. This one has a “Human Wake System”–perhaps meaning the alarm gradually increases the volume? Of course, I question if the HDR-16 will perform well on the AM broadcast band–I suppose it depends on how well the receiver is shielded from CPU noises, etc.

I might be tempted to grab one of these and test it. I like the price tag much better than that of the HDR-18, though I’m not sure its audio fidelity will be comparable. While I doubt I can receive an HD broadcast from my home, it might be fun trying.

Have any SWLing Post readers pre-ordered the HDR-16? Care to do a review?

Spread the radio love

Unboxing the Sangean DT-160CL and setting up an endurance test

Sangean_DT-160CL_1

Yesterday, I received my Sangean DT-160CL–the correctional version of the DT-160–from AmazonSangean_DT-160CL_2

Even though the Amazon product page showed 5 units in stock on July 29, and though I get free two day shipping via Amazon Prime, my  DT-160CL took four business days to arrive. Out of curiosity more than anything else, I asked Amazon why the delivery would take four business days instead of two my Prime membership promises.

Amazon replied that stock levels weren’t correctly displayed on the product page at time of ordering since the DT-160CL was selling so quickly.
Sangean_DT-160CL_3

Amazon apologized for the confusion and–though I wasn’t seeking one at all–they issued a $10 credit!  Wow–thanks, Amazon!

Sangean_DT-160CL_4

The DT-160CL is supplied with a set of clear earbuds, an owner’s manual and a warranty card.

Sangean_DT-160CL_6

Sangean_DT-160CL_8

The Sangean DT-160CL is very close in size to the venerable Sony SRF-39FP–the SRF-39FP has slightly more depth and a little less height.

Sangean_DT-160CL_16

The DT-160CL’s clear case, while sturdy, feels marginally more supple than that of the Sony SRF-39FP.  Though I haven’t been able to confirm, the DT-160CL chassis feels like a polypropylene product while the SRD-39FP feels like polycarbonate. From the photos above, one can see that the DT-160CL’s case is a touch more opaque/cloudy than that of the SRF-39FP.Sangean_DT-160CL_10

Endurance test

Other than overall receiver performance, I’m very interested in battery performance since Sangean touts a 100 hour run time on two AA batteries (for the DT-160 series).

Having used the Sony SRF-39FP for a few years, I can attest to an incredibly long battery life as well. No doubt, those purchasing the DT-160CL for use in a correctional facility place a lot of value on battery performance.

Sangean_DT-160CL_13

I stopped by our local CVS pharmacy to purchase fresh alkaline batteries for both radios. CVS had a sale on their own (generic) version of the Duracell Quantum alkaline batteries.  I purchased a set and popped them in both radios.

Sangean_DT-160CL_14

The DT-160CL has a hinged battery cover and holds two AA cells.

Sangean_DT-160CL_15 Sangean_DT-160CL_16

The SRF-39FP only needs one AA battery.

Sangean_DT-160CL_17

After plugging in the supplied clear ear buds, I turned both radios on and adjusted the volume to a comfortable, moderate listening level.

I matched the audio levels for both units and tuned to my favorite classic rock FM station: WXRC 95.7 MHz.

WXRC is a fantastic benchmark FM station as it’s about 130 miles away (as the crow flies), but has an exceptional propagation footprint. My best FM receivers, when ideally-placed in my home, and telescoping antenna fully-extended, can receive WXRC in stereo lock with no interference.

Sangean_DT-160CL_21

I’m happy to report that both the DT-160CL and the SRF-39FP can receive WXRC quite easily when I’m holding the unit in my hand and standing in a part of my house where the signal is strongest.

In truth, I didn’t have time to evaluate receiver performance last night–I was more eager to begin the endurance test which, by the way, officially started yesterday (August 3, 2016) at 22:30 UTC.

I can’t wait to discover which radio will win!

Follow this review thread by bookmarking the following tag: Sangean DT-160CL v Sony SRF-39FP

Spread the radio love

Jeff reviews the Sangean DT-160

SAngean-DT-160-Jeff-McMahon

My buddy, Jeff McMahon, has just published a review of the Sangean DT-160 on his blog, the Herculodge. It’s well-worth reading if you’re considering a DT-160.

Overall, Jeff believes the DT-160 is a keeper and he’s very pleased with FM performance. He notes one major annoyance:

“The toggle tuning wheel on the radio’s right side. You hold it to set the time. You wait for the hour number to flash, then set with preset 1. You do the same for the minute. You have to click downwards to scroll through the numbers. The toggle feel is awkward.

You use the same toggle for tuning, and here I really dislike the tune/set jog wheel because it’s impossible to scroll through the stations without prompting the set button to flash. It’s like my wife doesn’t like me brushing my teeth in the shower. Don’t mix the tuning with the time set. They belong in separate chambers, so to speak.”

Wow–what a poor design decision on the part of Sangean. I suppose they did this to eliminate the need for extra clock set buttons?  Still.

But as Jeff says, once presets are assigned, no more tuning woes.

Click here to read Jeff’s DT-160 review.

On a side note, I’m looking forward to receiving my DT-160CL later this week. Since I think the “CL” version lack a clock, I’m curious if tuning will be more pleasant.

Spread the radio love

Sangean DT-160CL: The correctional version of the DT-160

Sangean-DT-160CL

After publishing a post referencing the new Sangean DT-160 AM/FM radio, a number of readers noticed that Sangean has also produced a clear-cased version of the DT-160: model number DT-160CL.

This version, no doubt, was designed for sale in prison commissaries and is probably seen as a replacement for the venerable Sony SRF-39FP (which has been discontinued). The SRF-39FP is widely regarded as a superb mediumwave (AM) DXing ultralight.

In reference to the Sangean DT-160CL, SWLing Post contributor, Dan Hawkins recently commented:

Which begs the question: is this prison-quality radio really that good? I ask the question only because a good AM-FM prison radio must perform exceptionally well behind formidable prison walls. After all, nearly one percent of the US population is currently behind bars (down slightly from 2008) which is a substantial pocket radio market. Prison radios are typical sold in prison commissaries and prisons are big business nowadays. How does this radio compare to the famous Sony SRF-39FP? Inquiring minds want to know. Sangean is legendary for build quality. Does it beat the Sony?

After reading Dan’s comment, I couldn’t help but order the DT-160CL from Amazon.

The Sony SRF-39FP

The Sony SRF-39FP

I, too, am very curious how it will compare with the SRF-39FP in terms of battery longevity, audio fidelity, and overall performance.

I suspect the SRF-39FP will remain dominant on the AM broadcast band and possibly have better battery life (keep in mind, the SRF-39FP only uses one AA battery–the DT-160CL requires two).

As soon as I receive the DT-160CL (Amazon notes delivery will be Wednesday, August 3), I’ll pop fresh batteries in the DT-160CL and the Sony SRF-39FP, set them to the same volume level and frequency, then allow them to run continuously until the batteries are depleted. Of course, I’ll use the opportunity to compare performance on both AM and FM.

I’ll post comparison updates with the tag: Sangean DT-160CL v Sony SRF-39FP.

Spread the radio love