Tag Archives: Sony

The Sony ICF-5500W: My morning companion

I spent this morning doing a lot of work around our property. When it was time for a break, I turned on my trust Sony ICF-5500W and tuned to WTZQ: one of my favorite regional AM braodcasters. Though WTZQ is over 30 miles from my home, any good AM radio, like the ICF-5500W, can receive their 1,000 watt signal with ease.

As luck would have it, when I turned on my 5500W, WTZQ started playing Love Me Do by The Beatles. It sounded absolutely amazing via the 5500W’s internal speaker: full-on, rich AM audio fidelity! Absolutely brilliant!

I cranked up the volume so our local black bears could enjoy.

I relaxed a good half hour, and caught up on reading the latest two issues of RadCom with my ICF-5500W playing WTZQ in the background.

Sometimes it’s the simple stuff that starts one’s morning off the right way.

That and plenty of good coffee.

Spread the radio love

Warsan Radio 7750 kHz Baydhabo Somalia; on the Sony ICF-2001D telescopic antenna

1 Reply

Hi there, great to hear this new station broadcasting from Somalia, during an early evening DX’pedition at my usual spot – a local Oxfordshire wood! Even better to hear it with just the telescopic antenna!

The ICF-2001D is renown for being extremely well ‘tuned’ to it’s own telescopic and this has been demonstrated many times over the past year or so that I’ve been using it. This signal from Somalia was recorded on 08/08/16 at 19:15 hrs UTC using just the ‘whip’. Please click on the image below to access the reception video.

Alternatively click here to watch the reception video on Oxford Shortwave Log

I have another video of the same signal which I will upload soon, demonstrating reception with a 50 metre longwre and the ICF2001D. Until then, I wish you all excellent DX!

Clint Gouveia is the author of this post and a regular contributor to the SWLing Post. Clint actively publishes videos of his shortwave radio excursions on his YouTube channel: Oxford Shortwave Log. Clint is based in Oxfordshire, England.

Spread the radio love

Update 4: Sangean DT-160CL v Sony SRF-39FP

2 Replies

If you’ve been following the Sangean DT-160CL versus Sony SRF-39FP battery endurance test, I have some news to report: one of our competitors has finally thrown in the towel…!

Yesterday, while I was on the road for about 1.5 hours, the Sangean DT-160CL at last gave up the contest.

Since I was traveling at the time, I can’t say with absolute certainty what o’clock the DT-160 cried uncle––but roughly, we’re looking at 116 hours, 30 minutes of run time, give or take 30 minutes.

Sangean claims the DT-160 series will operate for 100 hours with two AA batteries. That claim is obviously pretty conservative.

Though I used CVS Max Alkaline batteries (a generic version of Duracell’s Quantum batteries)–an improvement on the standard alkaline battery–I set the volume higher than I believe Sangean or Sony would have set it for testing purposes. This should have drained the batteries faster. The radios were also tuned to a variety of stations: weak AM, strong AM, weak FM and strong FM.

In short: I’m very impressed with the DT-160.

A 116 hour play time from two AA cells on a digitally-tuned receiver is, well, pretty incredible.

Now that the endurance test is over for the DT-160CL, I’ll replace the batteries with a fresh set of CVS Max Alkaline cells and start testing the AM/FM receiver performance.

…And how about the Sony SRF-39FP?

My iPhone’s stopwatch has been tracking progress since last Wednesday.

Even more amazingly, the Sony SRF-39FP is still going strong––!

I actually fell asleep last night listening to the SRF-39FP and woke up this morning with music still in my ears. What a champ!

So, how long has the Sony SRF-39FP now been operating on one AA battery?

At time of posting, this little Sony’s clocked one hundred thirty nine hours.

Though I’ve always known that the SRF-39FP was a true battery miser–one of the reasons it’s been a choice radio in the prison system–I had no idea it could operate this long on one battery.

Of course, I’ll continue tracking the Sony SRF-39FP.

How much longer will the SRF-39FP last? Stay tuned to find out!

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

Spread the radio love

Update 3: Sangean DT-160CL v Sony SRF-39FP

3 Replies

My iPhone’s stopwatch has been tracking the endurance test.

It’s been one hundred nine hours since I started the Sangean DT-160CL versus Sony SRF-39FP battery endurance test and both radio are still hanging in there!

Not knowing which radio will check out first, I’ve been taking them with me everywhere and have been careful to keep their settings identical the whole time.

Last night, I even prepared my Zoom H2N digital recorder to monitor both radios simultaneously. Having passed 100 hours of operating on the same set of batteries, I was certain one would call it quits last night.

Not so.

There was one noticeable change this morning: the Sangean DT-160CL’s battery indicator now shows a depleted cell.

It’s still operating, though–no noticeable difference in volume and reception.

The end must certainly be near! Indeed, it’s hard to believe I started this endurance test last Wednesday!

I’m very interested to see which pocket radio will go first.

Field time

Yesterday, I spent the better part of the afternoon at Mt. Mitchell State Park. Of course, I brought the DT-160CL and SRF-39FP along.

Mt. Mitchell is the highest point east of the Mississippi river. It’s a great place to play radio.

At one point, I tuned both radios to WAIZ 630 kHz: a 1,000 watt AM station about 95 miles east of the park. It’s one of my benchmark daytime stations from Mt. Mitchell.

Though most DT-160 reviewers have given the receiver low marks for AM performance, I found that the DT-160CL did a better job locking onto WAIZ than the venerable SRF-39FP.

Perhaps this is due to the fact that both radios, at that point, were operating on low voltage? Or perhaps the CL version of the DT-160 series has better AGC characteristics and sensitivity?

I doubt the latter assumption, but once the endurance test is complete, I’ll put the 160CL through the paces.

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

Spread the radio love

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

4 Replies

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.

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!

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

Patrick comments on his newly-restored Sony CRF-320

5 Replies

Many thanks to SWLing Post reader, Patrick Mason, who writes from Juneau, Alaska:

I am the owner of the radio that Paul Carlson restored in the video. The serial number is 31358.

I wanted to comment about a statement regarding the receiver’s sensitivity.

After Paul concluded his final tune-up of the radio I can confirm on the shortwave bands, particularly 80 and 40 meters, the sensitivity on AM was better than 0.2 uV/m. That’s outrageous! The VFO is rock solid with no detectable drift whatsoever.

Also, Paul replaced all nylon gears with custom metal gears… they will never fail again.

Anyone considering acquiring this radio, buyer beware! There are many on the WEB who will claim it to be in some ‘totally restored’ condition…when mine arrived from the seller it ‘seemed’ to be ok…..until the counter went fruit loops shortly after unpacking. When Paul got inside the radio it had been ‘tweaked and peeked’….all wrong.

I have a CONSIDERABLE sum invested in this SONY. If I could have known it’s ACTUAL condition BEFORE my purchase, I may have passed….however, I now own what I consider to be the quintessential example of SONY’s best engineering. All I can say, it’s an absolute joy to use

Patrick, you no doubt have a benchmark Sony in that CRF-320.

It’s funny: I was just attending a local hamfest here in North Carolina and a vintage radio vendor pointed out Carlson’s repair video for your CRF-320! He said (and I agree), that your CFR-320 was restored to a level that’s almost in a league of its own. I know you invested a lot in this radio, but you certainly have a fine example now–that is fully-functional–and will most likely outlast us all! Enjoy!

Spread the radio love

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

2 Replies

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.

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