{"id":18326,"date":"2016-04-18T11:44:48","date_gmt":"2016-04-18T15:44:48","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/swling.com\/blog\/?p=18326"},"modified":"2016-05-15T18:14:06","modified_gmt":"2016-05-15T22:14:06","slug":"the-icom-ic-7300-vs-winradio-excalibur-which-do-you-prefer","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/swling.com\/blog\/2016\/04\/the-icom-ic-7300-vs-winradio-excalibur-which-do-you-prefer\/","title":{"rendered":"The Icom IC-7300 vs. WinRadio Excalibur: Which do you prefer?"},"content":{"rendered":"

\"Icom-IC-7300-Front\"<\/a><\/p>\n

[UPDATE:<\/strong> Read the full IC-7300 review–along with listener survey results–by clicking here<\/a>.]<\/p>\n

In the past, receiver shoot-outs<\/a>\u00a0in which I’ve provided\u00a0sample audio for “blind” comparison\u2013\u2013meaning, the listener does not know which audio sample is associated with\u00a0which radio\u2013\u2013have\u00a0produced particularly positive feedback from Post<\/em> readers.<\/p>\n

\"The<\/a>

The WinRadio Excalibur<\/p><\/div>\n

So I’ve decided to do this for the new Icom IC-7300 transceiver<\/a>. I’ve pitted the ‘7300 against a benchmark receiver: the WinRadio Excalibur<\/a>.<\/p>\n

I have a number of SDRs (software defined radios) in the shack at the moment, but I picked the Excalibur<\/strong> because it’s the closest in price ($900 US) to the IC-7300<\/strong> ($1500) as compared to my Elad FDM-S2<\/a> ($520) or the TitanSDR Pro<\/a> ($2500).<\/p>\n

Recording notes and disclaimers<\/h1>\n

Both the WinRadio Excalibur and the Icom IC-7300 offer\u00a0native\u00a0digital audio recording<\/strong> (nice touch, Icom!). The Excalibur simply records the AF to a file on my PC’s hard drive, while the IC-7300 records the audio to an SD card which I can later\u00a0transfer to my PC.<\/p>\n

\"IC-7300\"<\/a><\/p>\n

I’ve been using the Excalibur since 2012, so I’m very familiar with its recording feature. I was not, however, familiar with the IC-7300’s digital recorder, so prior to making recordings, I checked to make sure its\u00a0recorded audio was a fair representation of its live audio. To my ear, the IC-7300 recorded audio was nearly identical to that of the live audio, so I used the 7300’s internal recorder rather than one of my external recorders.<\/p>\n

Both receivers shared my large outdoor omni-directional horizontal delta loop antenna<\/strong>\u00a0for each test.<\/p>\n

\"The<\/a>

The Elad ASA15 Antenna Splitter Amplifier<\/p><\/div>\n

To keep the comparison on as\u00a0equal footing\u00a0as possible, the receivers shared the same antenna through my Elad ASA15 antenna splitter amplifier<\/a>.\u00a0Though the ASA15 has both 12dB amplification and \u201315dB attenuation, I employed neither.<\/p>\n

The ASA15 allowed me to make the following recordings simultaneously<\/em>.<\/p>\n

In each case, I tried to set up both radios using the same filter widths, gain, AGC settings, and (as much as possible), audio level. I didn’t engage\u00a0a\u00a0noise-reduction feature on either rig.<\/p>\n

Note: \u00a0the only exception to the radios’ equal treatment\u00a0was\u00a0in the AM mode recordings, in which\u00a0I used the WinRadio’s AM Sync (AMS) mode.<\/em> Why? Frankly speaking, 99% of the time\u00a0during\u00a0which I use\u00a0the Excalibur, I do employ its\u00a0AMS\u00a0mode as\u00a0its AM mode often sounds “hot” and over-driven when band conditions are as noisy, as they were last night.<\/p>\n

The IC-7300 does not have AM synchronous detection (AMS mode), but I felt it compared very<\/em> favorably to the Excalibur in AMS mode. \u00a0The IC-7300 would have easily beat the Excalibur in this test had I only used the Excalibur’s AM mode. In the end, as a shortwave listener, the goal is to\u00a0compare the total\u00a0capabilities of broadcast performance between the two receivers\u00a0(thus using sync mode if available, to maximize broadcast listening performance).<\/p>\n

Please vote!<\/em><\/h1>\n

At the end of this post, I have an embedded a survey in which\u00a0you can vote for the sample recordings you like best.<\/strong> Each recording is clearly labeled to denote that it’s\u00a0either from “Radio A” or\u00a0“Radio B” (I had my wife draw names from a hat to determine which radio would be labeled as A or B).<\/p>\n

Since there are quite a few recordings, I’d suggest jotting down your notes separately before completing the survey.<\/p>\n

Or, alternately,\u00a0you can open the survey in a separate window by clicking here.<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n

And now…here’s the recordings.<\/p>\n

Ham Radio Band recordings<\/h1>\n

The following recordings were made on the 40 meter ham radio band yesterday evening. Both radios have the same filter width: 250 Hz in CW, 3 kHz in SSB.<\/p>\n

Weak Signal CW (40 meter band)<\/strong><\/p>\n

Radio A<\/a><\/p>\nhttps:\/\/archive.org\/download\/SSBRadioA40MB\/CW-Weak-RadioA-40MB.mp3<\/a><\/audio>\n

Radio B<\/a><\/p>\nhttps:\/\/archive.org\/download\/SSBRadioA40MB\/CW-Weak-RadioB-40MB.mp3<\/a><\/audio>\n

Weak\/Strong SSB QSO (40 meter band)<\/strong><\/p>\n

Radio A<\/a><\/p>\nhttps:\/\/archive.org\/download\/SSBRadioA40MB\/SSB-RadioA-40MB.mp3<\/a><\/audio>\n

Radio B<\/a><\/p>\nhttps:\/\/archive.org\/download\/SSBRadioA40MB\/SSB-RadioB-40MB.mp3<\/a><\/audio>\n

\n

Shortwave Broadcast recordings<\/h1>\n

The following recordings were made on the 31 meter broadcast\u00a0band yesterday evening. Both radios have the same filter width: 9 kHz and 8.2 kHz.<\/p>\n

Weak Shortwave AM (Radio Bandeirantes 31 meter band)<\/strong><\/p>\n

Radio A<\/a><\/p>\nhttps:\/\/archive.org\/download\/SSBRadioA40MB\/AM-Weak-RadioA-RadioBand.mp3<\/a><\/audio>\n

Radio B<\/a><\/p>\nhttps:\/\/archive.org\/download\/SSBRadioA40MB\/AM-Weak-RadioB-RadioBand.mp3<\/a><\/audio>\n

Strong Shortwave AM (Radio Romania International, French 31 Meter Band)<\/strong><\/p>\n

Radio A\u00a0<\/a><\/p>\nhttps:\/\/archive.org\/download\/SSBRadioA40MB\/AM-Strong-RadioA-RRI-French.mp3<\/a><\/audio>\n

Radio B<\/a><\/p>\nhttps:\/\/archive.org\/download\/SSBRadioA40MB\/AM-Strong-RadioB-RRI-French.mp3<\/a><\/audio>\n

\n

Mediumwave\u00a0Broadcast recordings<\/h1>\n

Note that the following mediumwave recordings were made during the morning hours (grayline). The strong station is the closest AM broadcaster to my home;\u00a0it’s not a blow-torch “Class A” type station, merely the closest local broadcaster.<\/p>\n

In the “weak” sample, I\u00a0tuned to 630 kHz, where multiple broadcasters could be heard on frequency\u2013\u2013but one was dominant.<\/p>\n

Both radios are set to a filter width of 9.0 kHz.<\/p>\n

Strong Mediumwave AM (1010 kHz)<\/strong><\/p>\n

Radio A<\/a><\/p>\nhttps:\/\/archive.org\/download\/MWWeakMorningRadioB630kHz\/MWStrongMorning-RadioA-1010kHz.mp3<\/a><\/audio>\n

Radio B<\/a><\/p>\nhttps:\/\/archive.org\/download\/MWWeakMorningRadioB630kHz\/MWStrongMorning-RadioB-1010kHz.mp3<\/a><\/audio>\n

Weak Mediumwave AM (630 kHz)<\/strong><\/p>\n

Radio A<\/a><\/p>\nhttps:\/\/archive.org\/download\/MWWeakMorningRadioB630kHz\/MWWeakMorning-RadioA-6300kHz.mp3<\/a><\/audio>\n

Radio B<\/a><\/p>\nhttps:\/\/archive.org\/download\/MWWeakMorningRadioB630kHz\/MWWeakMorning-RadioB-630kHz.mp3<\/a><\/audio>\n

\n

We want to hear from you!<\/em><\/h1>\n

Use the form below to vote for the recordings you prefer in each section.<\/p>\n

I’ll close voting\u00a0at 12:00 UTC on Thursday April 21, 2016.<\/strong> Thank you in advance for your participation in this survey!<\/p>\n