{"id":12349,"date":"2015-02-22T15:39:27","date_gmt":"2015-02-22T19:39:27","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/swling.com\/blog\/?p=12349"},"modified":"2020-05-17T08:33:51","modified_gmt":"2020-05-17T12:33:51","slug":"a-review-of-the-tecsun-pl-680-with-reader-survey-results","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/swling.com\/blog\/2015\/02\/a-review-of-the-tecsun-pl-680-with-reader-survey-results\/","title":{"rendered":"A review of the Tecsun PL-680 with reader survey results"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"Tecsun-PL-680\"<\/a>When I heard early reports about the new Tecsun PL-680<\/b>, I was already wondering how\u00a0it would\u00a0stack up alongside\u00a0other Tecsun portables. An early photo of the Tecsun PL-680 revealed how very similar it is, indeed,\u00a0to the Tecsun PL-600<\/a>, which has been on the market for many years. Moreover, the features of\u00a0PL-680, which I heard about only a few weeks ago, sounded to me like a carbon copy of the venerable PL-660<\/a>. \u00a0I investigated further, and spoke with Anna at Anon-Co<\/a>; she\u00a0was given to understand that the\u00a0Tecsun 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<\/a> as soon as they were available, even paying for expedited shipping in order to have it in hand a bit sooner.<\/p>\n

The Tecsun PL-660<\/a> has been on the market for several years now; it’s one of the most popular shortwave portables on the market. \u00a0And for good reason: the\u00a0PL-660 is relatively inexpensive, simple to use, packs all of the most vital and desirable\u00a0functions\/modes, and is available from a variety of retailers that ship worldwide. I have reviewed it numerous times<\/a> and often used it as the basis for comparison with other shortwave portables<\/a>. It’s China-based manufacturer, Tecsun, has emerged over the past few years as the dominant manufacturer of shortwave radios.<\/p>\n

First impressions<\/b><\/h2>\n

I posted a few unboxing photos<\/a> the day I received the PL-680.<\/p>\n

\"Tecsun-PL-680-6\"<\/a><\/p>\n

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.<\/p>\n

Let\u2019s cut to the chase…<\/b><\/p>\n

Question: <\/i>So, <\/i>d<\/b>oes the PL-680 have more functions than the PL-660?<\/b><\/p>\n

Answer:<\/i><\/b> No.<\/b> It appears to be, and likely is,\u00a0identical<\/em>\u00a0in every (functional) respect to the Tecsun PL-660.<\/strong>\u00a0No surprises here,\u00a0unless there are hidden features I haven\u2019t discovered…!<\/p>\n

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):<\/p>\n

\"DSC_0187\"<\/a><\/p>\n

\"RightSide\"<\/a> \"LeftSide\"<\/a><\/p>\n

The similarity is so striking, in fact, that\u00a0I believe the PL-680 is the first radio I’ve ever turned on for the first time, only to\u00a0find\u00a0I immediately\u00a0knew\u00a0every<\/i> function. I\u2019m so familiar with the PL-660 that I could even use the PL-680 in the dark the first night I used it.<\/p>\n

It also helps, of course, that the PL-680 is nearly identical to the PL-600, too, which I’ve owned for many years.<\/p>\n

\"PL-600\"<\/a><\/p>\n

Here’s how I see the PL-680 product development equation:<\/p>\n

\"PL-600-PL-660-PL-680\"<\/a><\/p>\n

In truth, I was quite disappointed that Tecsun did not add a line-out jack to\u00a0the PL-680.<\/p>\n

The PL-660, alas, lacks line-out, and though my Tecsun PL-880<\/em> 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<\/a>. \u00a0Unfortunately, this is not the case.<\/p>\n

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.<\/span><\/p>\n

But here’s what everyone wants to know…<\/em><\/strong><\/p>\n

Question:<\/i><\/b> Does<\/em> the PL-680 have any performance advantages over the PL-660?<\/b><\/p>\n

Short Answer: <\/i><\/b>Yes! (But keep your PL-660.)<\/b><\/p>\n

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. <\/strong><\/em><\/p>\n

Otherwise, help yourself to\u00a0a cup of coffee, and let’s talk radio…<\/p>\n

Shortwave\u00a0performance<\/h2>\n

Since I spend 95% of my listening time on shortwave, I\u2019ll begin with shortwave performance. Again, we\u2019ll compare the PL-680’s performance with that of the PL-660.<\/strong><\/p>\n

Reader survey results<\/strong><\/p>\n

Having had\u00a0such great results from radio comparison shoot-outs in the past (check out our shoot-out between top portables<\/a> and ultra-compact radios<\/a>), I decided it would make sense to invite\u00a0our informed\u00a0readership 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<\/a>.)<\/p>\n

Shortwave AM broadcast listening<\/strong><\/p>\n

In most circumstances, you\u2019ll find that the PL-680 has better sensitivity<\/em> than the PL-660. It\u2019s 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\u00a0reception survey<\/a>.<\/p>\n

The survey<\/a> had recordings from a total of three broadcasters: Radio Prague, WWV, and Radio France International.<\/p>\n

The PL-680 was “Radio A,” and the PL-660 was “Radio B.”<\/strong><\/p>\n

The Radio Prague recording<\/strong> was quite strong and was the only<\/em> broadcast in our survey in which\u00a0the PL-660 and PL-680 ran neck-and-neck.<\/p>\n

Radio Prague on the PL-680<\/a><\/p>\nhttps:\/\/archive.org\/download\/25MHz2RadioA2\/9395-RadioA-1.mp3<\/a><\/audio>\n

Radio Prague on the PL-660<\/a><\/p>\nhttps:\/\/archive.org\/download\/25MHz2RadioA2\/9395-RadioB-1.mp3<\/a><\/audio>\n

In truth, I believe strong signal reception on both these radios is excellent and nearly indistinguishable from each other.<\/p>\n

Survey results from the\u00a0WWV<\/strong> and Radio France International<\/strong> recordings showed\u00a0a strong preference for\u00a0the Tecsun PL-680. Again, here are the original recordings:<\/p>\n

PL-680\u00a0– 1st WWV recording<\/a><\/p>\nhttps:\/\/archive.org\/download\/25MHz2RadioA2\/25MHz-RadioA.mp3<\/a><\/audio>\n

PL-660 – 1st WWV recording<\/a><\/p>\nhttps:\/\/archive.org\/download\/25MHz2RadioA2\/25MHz-RadioB.mp3<\/a><\/audio>\n

PL-680 – 2nd WWV recording<\/a><\/p>\nhttps:\/\/archive.org\/download\/25MHz2RadioA2\/25MHz-2-RadioA-2.mp3<\/a><\/audio>\n

PL-660 – 2nd WWV recording<\/a><\/p>\nhttps:\/\/archive.org\/download\/25MHz2RadioA2\/25MHz-2-RadioB-2.mp3<\/a><\/audio>\n

Based on comments from those who participated, the PL-680 came out\u00a0ahead of the PL-660\u00a0in 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.<\/p>\n

Here is a chart with the full survey results based on 194 listener reports. The number of responses are represented on the vertical axis.<\/p>\n

\"AM-SW-Shootout-PL680-PL660\"<\/a><\/p>\n

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.<\/p>\n

There is a downside to the improved sensitivity, however: the PL-680 has a slightly<\/em> 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<\/a>. Personally, if increased sensitivity\u00a0and stability\u00a0means 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.<\/p>\n

Synchronous detection\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n

\"PL-680-Sync-Detector\"<\/a><\/p>\n

The second survey focused on synchronous detection<\/a>, which is a very useful receiver tool that\u00a0mitigates adjacent signal interference and improves a signal’s stability. Perhaps it was my good fortune that the same day I tested synchronous detection,\u00a0fading on even strong stations was pronounced at times. Perfect!<\/p>\n

The first recording set was from Radio Australia,\u00a0<\/strong>a relatively strong signal here in North America. Still, QSB was pronounced–making for an unstable signal–and there was hetrodyne interference\u00a0in 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.<\/p>\n

PL-680 – 1st recording Radio Australia<\/a><\/p>\nhttps:\/\/archive.org\/download\/RadioAustrailiaWBRadioB2\/RadioAustrailia-WB-RadioA.mp3<\/a><\/audio>\n

PL-660 – 1st recording Radio Australia<\/a><\/p>\nhttps:\/\/archive.org\/download\/RadioAustrailiaWBRadioB2\/RadioAustrailia-WB-RadioB.mp3<\/a><\/audio>\n

PL-680 – 2nd recording Radio Australia<\/a><\/p>\nhttps:\/\/archive.org\/download\/RadioAustrailiaWBRadioB2\/RadioAustrailia-WB-RadioA-2.mp3<\/a><\/audio>\n

PL-660 – 2nd recording Radio Australia<\/a><\/p>\nhttps:\/\/archive.org\/download\/RadioAustrailiaWBRadioB2\/RadioAustrailia-WB-RadioB-2.mp3<\/a><\/audio>\n

The second set of recordings were of\u00a0Radio Riyadh<\/strong>–a much weaker station–also affected by QSB:<\/p>\n

PL-680 – 1st recording Radio Riyadh (wide band filter)<\/a><\/p>\nhttps:\/\/archive.org\/download\/RadioAustrailiaWBRadioB2\/Radio-Riyadh-WB-RadioA.mp3<\/a><\/audio>\n

PL-660 – 1st\u00a0recording Radio Riyadh (wide band filter)<\/a><\/p>\nhttps:\/\/archive.org\/download\/RadioAustrailiaWBRadioB2\/Radio-Riyadh-WB-RadioB.mp3<\/a><\/audio>\n

PL-680 – 2nd recording Radio Riyadh\u00a0(narrow band filter)<\/a><\/p>\nhttps:\/\/archive.org\/download\/RadioAustrailiaWBRadioB2\/Radio-Riyadh-NB-RadioA.mp3<\/a><\/audio>\n

PL-660 – 2nd recording Radio Riyadh (narrow band filter)<\/a><\/p>\nhttps:\/\/archive.org\/download\/RadioAustrailiaWBRadioB2\/Radio-Riyadh-NB-RadioB.mp3<\/a><\/audio>\n

While I have always considered the PL-660 to sport\u00a0one 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\u00a0sync lock was on Radio Australia, that I disconnected the PL-660\u00a0from the recorder and moved to a different location to verify that something nearby wasn’t causing the sync lock instability. It was not;\u00a0it was solely due to unstable band conditions.<\/p>\n

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\u00a0recordings. I chart the results, below, from a total of 85 responses:<\/p>\n

\"Syn-Lock-Shootout-PL660-PL680\"<\/a><\/p>\n

Very good, PL-680! \u00a0Someday I’d like to compare the PL-680 with the Sony ICF-SW7600GR, which I’ve always considered to have, among\u00a0current portables, the strongest sync lock.<\/p>\n

Single Sideband<\/strong><\/p>\n

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.<\/p>\n

Meanwhile, I’ve spent time listening to both radios in SSB mode and comparing the models. To my ear, both\u00a0are very<\/em> 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.<\/p>\n

SSB audio fidelity is\u00a0very similar in\u00a0both radios.<\/p>\n

FM Performance<\/h2>\n

While I haven’t spent more than, let’s say, an hour with the PL-680 on\u00a0the FM band, I have concluded that\u00a0it is very sensitive–able to receive all of my benchmark local and regional FM stations.<\/p>\n

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.<\/p>\n

Medium Wave Performance<\/h2>\n

\"Tecsun-PL-680-MW\"<\/a><\/p>\n

I’ve also posted a medium-wave listener survey<\/a>\u00a0since many of you asked that I provide\u00a0an evaluation of the medium-wave band.<\/p>\n

In short, here is where the PL-680 loses to the PL-660: whereas, on the shortwave bands, the PL-680 is\u00a0more sensitive, \u00a0it lacks the same sensitivity on the medium-wave bands.<\/strong><\/p>\n

Though I believe the PL-680 does a marginally\u00a0better job than the PL-660 of handling the choppy conditions of nighttime<\/em> MW DX, the PL-660 still pulled voices and music out of the static and made them noticeably more intelligible.<\/p>\n

The survey result swung very hard in favor of the PL-660, which has long been one of the more notable medium-wave\u00a0performers among shortwave portables.<\/p>\n

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.<\/p>\n

PL-680 – 940 AM<\/a><\/p>\nhttps:\/\/archive.org\/download\/150217122635740AMRadioB\/150217-123118-940AM-RadioA-.mp3<\/a><\/audio>\n

PL-660 – 940 AM<\/a><\/p>\nhttps:\/\/archive.org\/download\/150217122635740AMRadioB\/150217-123203-940AM-RadioB-.mp3<\/a><\/audio>\n

You can listen to all four recordings in the original survey<\/a> (again, note that Radio A is the PL-680, B is the PL-660).<\/p>\n

Survey results were definitive, with a total of 116 responses:<\/p>\n

\"MW-Shootout-Results\"<\/a><\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

In all but the strong station sample (750 AM – WBS Atlanta), the PL-660 was preferred by a wide margin.<\/p>\n

Summary<\/h2>\n

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:<\/p>\n

Pros:\u00a0<\/strong><\/p>\n