DAK MR-101 receiver summary
Jon Brinkmann
receiver, so I decided to pare down my file on it and post what I have
along with my own observations (mine arrive on Monday 5/14). First, my
observations:
It's noisy and not very sensitive. I guess it works better than my old
Heathkit GR-64 five tube set, but definitely not up to the better
sets. With a 50 foot long wire, it is not the equal to my Hammarlund
HQ-180 with a 3 foot wire dropped on the floor. The Hammarlund was
pulled from a dumpster and with the exception of cleaning,
straightening the tuning cap plates and replacing the VFO tube, it
hasn't been touched. I have no idea how out of alignment it really
is.
AM and FM performance is VERY bad. My daughter's $39 Emerson boom box
pulls in stations (and sounds better) than the DAK set. Sound quality
is harsh and garbled on some stations.
I monitored a pile-up on 40 meters last night with my Hammarlund. It was
able to separate stations quite well with the 2kHz selectivity. The DAK was
hopeless.. my guess is at least 10 kHz selectivity. I also tuned it WWV
at 15 mHz with a good signal and found an image at 14.100 mHz that was
almost as strong as the original. Reminds me of the GR-64 ;`) I also get
an RTTY signal on the AM band at 1260 kHz, so image rejection there must
be poor also.
I also monitored several stations that had severe fading. The ANL on the DAK
radio has about a few second time constant, so that it didn't help much.
The Hammarlund worked fine!
My recommendation: If you're a casual listener and don't care to listen
to anything but strong stations (WWV, VOA, BBC, etc), this is a bargain,
otherwise, look elsewhere.
Jon
Jon Brinkmann Astronomy Department
Internet: jv...@Virginia.EDU University of Virginia
UUCP: ...!uunet!virginia!jvb7u P.O. Box 3818
SPAN/HEPnet: 6654::jvb7u Charlottesville, VA 22903-0818
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Sun, 1 Apr 90 17:13:06 edt
From: Peter J. Dotzauer <p...@hpuxa.ircc.ohio-state.edu>
To: ka...@amarna.gsfc.nasa.gov
Subject: Re: Request for Info on DAK radio
Newsgroups: rec.radio.shortwave
In-Reply-To: <14...@dftsrv.gsfc.nasa.gov>
Organization: Ohio State Univ IRCC
I've had one for two weeks now. I ordered it because of the digital
frequency readout, and that 'PLL' stuff that supposedly is the best
for SW (although I don't excatly know what it is).
However, the shortwave is disappointing. I don't know if it is the
receiver or the antenna, or something else. I have a 14 year old
Telefunken radio casette, and although I have to play patiently with
the analog dial (and never know what frequency is exactly tuned),
I usually get the Deutsche Welle as clear as a bell, whereas on the
DAK I often don't get it at all, or it's with a noisy background.
I'll keep the DAK, though, for other reasons. It's a neat little AM/FM
receiver with digital frequency readout and station buttons, and it's
also a radio alarm clock (when it's turned off, you see the clock in
the digital display). It has adapters for AC, external antenna (for
better shortwave reception, I suppose), and headphones). With good
headphones, it has a reasonably good sound, and the amplifier has
plenty of reserves you'll never use.
Regards
--
Peter Dotzauer, Numerical Cartography Lab, Dept of Geography, OSU, Columbus, OH
VOICE (614) 292-1357 FAX (614) 292-6213 DATA (614) 293-0081
BITNET pjd@ohstvmb UUCP ...!osu-cis!hpuxa.ircc.ohio-state.edu!pjd
FIDO 1:226/330 INTERNET p...@hpuxa.ircc.ohio-state.edu [128.146.1.5]
Date: Sun, 1 Apr 90 22:41:36 edt
From: Peter J. Dotzauer <p...@hpuxa.ircc.ohio-state.edu>
To: KA...@amarna.gsfc.nasa.gov, p...@hpuxa.ircc.ohio-state.edu
Subject: Re: Request for Info on DAK radio
Kavan:
No, it has just one timer. Actually, the SW is not quite as bad as I
may have described it. Especially if you go outside and play around
with the antenna, you get quite a few stations, at least in the 49 m
band (my favorite band), with reasonably low-noise reception. So the
problem may actually be in the antenna; at this point, I don't know.
On the other hand, my old Telefunken keeps astonishing me. When I
bought it in 1976, I didn't even worry about shortwave, I just needed
a portable radio recorder. Then I find that it has not only quite good
short-wave reception. You'd have to get an expensive stereo to match
the sound quality (over good earphones). I really wish I'd find a
similar compact unit with all these qualities, PLUS digital frequency
readout. ... Well, just got carried away a bit.
Regards,
Peter
Article 1307 of rec.radio.shortwave:
Path: murdoch!uvaarpa!haven!aplcen!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!nisca.ircc.ohio-state.edu!hpuxa.ircc.ohio-state.edu!pjd
From: p...@hpuxa.ircc.ohio-state.edu (Peter J. Dotzauer)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.shortwave
Subject: DAK details & experiences
Message-ID: <9...@nisca.ircc.ohio-state.edu>
Date: 6 Apr 90 02:01:39 GMT
References: not bad for a $50 unit?
Sender: ne...@nisca.ircc.ohio-state.edu
Distribution: usa
Organization: Ohio State Univ IRCC
Lines: 52
Due to popular demand, here are some details about the $50 DAK MR-101. First,
I was positively surprised to find that the small unit (7 x 4 1/2 x 1 1/2 ",
one pound) not only had an external antenna jack, but also a headphone jack
and a connector for a 6V DC power converter, such that you don't have to
'subside' on batteries alone. Normally, the thing is powered by six AA cells.
The amplification is more than adequate, and the sound is reasonably adequate
with headphones. When it is off, the time shows in the LCD display, with
a 'ticking' mark for the seconds. So far (for about 2 weeks), the clock has
been accurate.
Shortwave tuning is in 5 Khz increments. There is nothing to show signal
strength. Since I don't have much experience with SW radios and nothing
suitable to compare it to, I submit a test of the 49 m band (5,800 to
6,200 Khz). The test was done at 9:30 p.m. EDT in Columbus, OH. I am listing
the stations with what I consider 'usable' reception. That includes
stations with various levels of background noise, but not that much that
you can't make out the actual broadcast anymore. I just categorize them
into 'relatively noise-free' (default) and 'noisy' (I did not attempt to
identify the stations - just happen to know that at 6040 Khz was Deutsche
Welle).
Khz reception
---- ---------
5850 noisy
5945 noisy
5950
5960
5975
5980 noisy
5985
5995
6040
6050 noisy
6130
6145 noisy
6165
6175 noisy
6180 noisy
6119
Some stations came in as clear as a bell. On other days, and later at night, I
received Deutsche Welle at 6075, and Swiss Radio Int'l at 6135 (the latter a
bit noisy).
I hope this amateurish benchmark test gives the pros among you some idea
about the DAK. Given the above, I would also like to know what YOU think.
-=-
Peter Dotzauer, Numerical Cartography Lab, Dept of Geography, OSU, Columbus, OH
VOICE (614) 292-1357 FAX (614) 292-6213 DATA (614) 293-0081
BITNET pjd@ohstvmb UUCP ...!osu-cis!hpuxa.ircc.ohio-state.edu!pjd
FIDO 1:226/330 INTERNET p...@hpuxa.ircc.ohio-state.edu [128.146.1.5]
Article 1317 of rec.radio.shortwave:
Path: murdoch!uvaarpa!haven!aplcen!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!brutus.cs.uiuc.edu!psuvax1!psuvm!cunyvm!ndsuvm1!plains!KSRAO@POWER
From: ks...@power.eee.ndsu.nodak.edu (K. Sankara Rao)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.shortwave
Subject: DAK Radio
Message-ID: <00934C3D.3A5C25E0@POWER>
Date: 6 Apr 90 00:39:03 GMT
Sender: Unk...@plains.UUCP
Reply-To: ks...@power.eee.ndsu.nodak.edu (K. Sankara Rao)
Organization: EEE dept. NDSU
Lines: 33
I received my DAK radio, finally, this afternoon. Here are my first
imressions:
The sensitivity seems pretty decent. Something similar to Sony 2001. I
was able to receive BBC (15260), RA (21470) and some other station. A notable
one was All Idia Radio External Service at 1300 UTC on 15110. The weather and
prpagation were good today. I have thirty days to see whether it is worth
keeping.
On the negative side:
It has two bands The upper band starts at 9500 and goes to 26000. So
some of the 31 meter stations (like 9400) cannot be picked up.
It does not have direct tuning. So it is not very quick to go from one
station to the other unless it is one of the six preset frequencies.
The frequency steps are in 5 kHz and not 1 kHz.
All in all it seems to be good radio to take along to office or on
atrip so as not to miss your favourite BBC sports roundup or some some such
program.
It is made in China and I do not know if it is a licensed clone of the
Phillips radio.
I'll give a detailed account of my impressions in a day or two if
nobody does it so by then.
K. Sankara Rao ks...@power.eee.ndsu.nodak.edu
Department of Electrical Engineering
North Dakota State University, Fargo
Article 1349 of rec.radio.shortwave:
Path: murdoch!uvaarpa!haven!aplcen!uunet!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!snorkelwacker!husc6!m2c!umvlsi!dime!forster
From: for...@cs.umass.edu
Newsgroups: rec.radio.shortwave
Subject: DAK radio
Message-ID: <12...@dime.cs.umass.edu>
Date: 8 Apr 90 03:25:14 GMT
Sender: ne...@dime.cs.umass.edu
Organization: COINS, UMass, Amherst
Lines: 15
I heard a review of the DAK receiver on Radio Canada International this
evening. I don't remember all the details, but there were pluses and minuses.
It's apparently a very good deal for the $49.90, but there are some caveats: 1.
it's made in the PRC (they're having cash flow problems since that little
`incident' with the tanks, not surprisingly), 2. there's no tuning knob
(instead they have a few station select buttons and a couple of buttons to scan
with), 3. it's not very sensitive (apparently only people in coastal areas
will do well with reception), and 4. the 5 kHz jumps between frequencies limit
its useability outside of North America. Caveat number 1 was enough to kill it
for me.
Disclaimer: I am only reporting what I remember of the review. I have never
seen the DAK receiver myself, and have nothing to do with DAK or the PRC.
- David Forster
Article 1390 of rec.radio.shortwave:
Path: murdoch!uvaarpa!haven!aplcen!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!dali!milton!uw-beaver!cornell!chandra
From: cha...@mimir.cs.cornell.edu (Tushar D Chandra)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.shortwave
Subject: DAK shortwave blues.
Keywords: Lemon.
Message-ID: <39...@cornell.UUCP>
Date: 12 Apr 90 18:28:47 GMT
Sender: nob...@cornell.UUCP
Reply-To: cha...@cs.cornell.edu (Tushar D Chandra)
Distribution: usa
Organization: Cornell Univ. CS Dept, Ithaca NY
Lines: 30
Hello world!
While playing around with the DAK I discovered some strange anomolies:
1. It performs quite well WITHOUT its antenna extended.
2. When I use the antenna, its reception improves marginally (if at all).
3. When I use an external antenna and plug it into the external antenna
socket, its reception DEGRADEs dramatically.
4. When I attach an external antenna to the regular antenna, reception
improves.
5. If I partially insert the external antenna into the headphone socket,
reception improves.
To give you an idea of how it performs: I compared the DAK with a SONY SW1S
and a 2001 and found that the reception on the DAK is much worse than the
SONYs. As noted above, my DAK without its antenna extended receives better
than the SW1 without its antenna but then who cares about that?
Further when I tuned into BBC at 5975 Khz, the DAK added a loud whine to
the BBC transmission. I'm certain this whine is introduced by the SW rather
than some external source because neither SONY picked it up.
All in all I'm pretty disappointed by the DAK. I'd like to know what other
people feel about their DAKs - maybe I got a lemon. I suspect that my
antenna is grounded. Any suggestions, comments?
Going back to TV
-Tushar Chandra
email-...@cs.cornell.edu
Article 1394 of rec.radio.shortwave:
Path: murdoch!uvaarpa!haven!aplcen!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!usc!venera.isi.edu!mittal
From: mit...@venera.isi.edu (Vibhu O. Mittal)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.shortwave
Subject: The DAK Radio
Message-ID: <12...@venera.isi.edu>
Date: 12 Apr 90 23:30:37 GMT
Reply-To: mit...@venera.isi.edu (Vibhu O. Mittal)
Distribution: usa
Organization: USC/Information Sciences Institute
Lines: 11
Well, my $50 DAK radio has conked already. The Power switch stopped working,
so I used the "Sleep" button to turn it on, and even that went today. I
can not turn on the radio now at all. It'll go back to DAK today.
What I'm wondering is -- how is the $200 unit by Sangean that DAK advertises
in its latest catalog ? The one with direct entry tuning and so on? How would
that compare with the SONYs/PANASONICs in that price range?
Thanks in advance,
Vibhu Mittal
Article 1412 of rec.radio.shortwave:
Path: murdoch!uvaarpa!haven!aplcen!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!mips!prls!pyramid!infmx!marc
From: ma...@infmx.UUCP (Marc Kenig)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.shortwave
Subject: DAK radio
Keywords: cheap imitation
Message-ID: <38...@infmx.UUCP>
Date: 13 Apr 90 17:10:38 GMT
Organization: Informix Software Inc., Menlo Park, CA.
Lines: 58
In article <27...@hudson.acc.virginia.edu> (Jon Brinkmann) writes:
>...The DAK is not
>the Philips AE-3805 (although my bet is that it's a clone!)...
Right you are. I had hoped to post a review of the receiver by now, since
mine finally came last week. Unfortunately, I had a case of infant
mortality: somethings blown in the radio's amp, and even turning it up
full blast I barely get any sound.
Since it could have been a simple short or loose wire or something, I couldn't
resist opening it (if anybody tells DAK, I'll scream since I'm returning it).
The answer is:
ACE ELECTRONICS, China. Printed on the circuit board.
Mini review:
The radio *feels* cheap. The volume slide pot is extremely wimpy, and slides
all too easily. The keys and case are all hard plastique, no texturing,
which combined with the light weight, also adds to this perception. The
"dial" light is almost no help, illuminating the edges of the display too much
and not enough on the center. It also created an audible pop when I hit the
"Light" button, but that may have been an artifact of the other problems my
specimen had. The speaker is real wimpy, I wouldn't expect much fidelity
of any sort (.5 watt amp 8 ohms, 2 inch speaker); there's no tone control.
Basically the radio has all the advertised features, and they all work. The
central computer module, which I bet is OEM'd from Phillips, has all the
features of the Phillips radio including standby, clock, timer, alarm, etc.
I don't understand why the "Lock/Unlock" key is there. It's in the same
place as the on/off, the same kind of switch, and doesn't stop the radio from
turning on anyway, just from changing freqs. When the radio is off the display
shows the time, and when it's on, you can toggle from time to alarm to freq
display. The major controls were all unbelievably wimpy in design (on/off,
lock, volume) except the "computer" keys (tuning, alarm, memory) which
are a rubber membrane with studs shorting points on the upper computer circuit
card).
From the little I could hear, the radio could get the major stations, but
was much susceptible to noise (no shielding and a dozen patch wires on the
circuit board) and fading. So I'm used to my Sony 2010, and it's wonderful
Synchronous circuit, sue me. I heard to BBC (5975 & 9640, Moscow(15425)
WWV (5&10) and Australia on 9580. Fine. I could get these with a tin can with
an antenna, but it lent credence to the fact that this really was a SW radio.
I couldn't hear CFRB (6070), Tahiti (15171) or anything of moderate DX
difficulty, but given the radio was barely putting out any sound, I can't
tell whether it's the radio design defficiency or the audio amp problems.
Tuning via the slew keys takes some getting used to. Holding the slew key
puts the radio into a scan mode, stopping at loud stations. If you want to
stop at a particular frequency, you have to time it right and hit the opposite
slew key to stop the radio from scanning. The memories worked, but there is
no backup battery - you lose the settings whenever you change batteries :-(.
Now for the real test. I get to return it and see how long it takes to get
a replacement or repair from DAK. So whaddya want for $50?
marc
Article 1416 of rec.radio.shortwave:
Path: murdoch!uvaarpa!haven!uflorida!rex!samsung!uunet!decwrl!fernwood!portal!cup.portal.com!HAVANAMOON
From: HAVAN...@cup.portal.com (Havana - Moon)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.shortwave
Subject: Re: DAK radio
Message-ID: <28...@cup.portal.com>
Date: 14 Apr 90 21:52:16 GMT
References: <38...@infmx.UUCP>
Organization: The Portal System (TM)
Lines: 10
I suspect the DAK radio performs just about as well as the thirty nine
cent cigarette lighter I just purchased at a local drugstore. Made in
China and --you guessed it-- no flame no matter how many times you
flik! Maybe if I attached a long-wire . . .
At least you stand a chance of getting your money refunded.
As for the lighter . . .
Havana Moon
Article 1455 of rec.radio.shortwave:
Path: murdoch!uvaarpa!haven!aplcen!samsung!hubdub!ellie
From: el...@merrimack.edu
Newsgroups: rec.radio.shortwave
Subject: A Brief Review of the DAK Shortwave
Message-ID: <18997.2...@merrimack.edu>
Date: 18 Apr 90 18:03:29 GMT
Organization: Merrimack College, No. Andover, MA
Lines: 13
You get what you pay for...
DAK shortwave radio for $49 is not very sensitive, but does lock onto the
stations reasonably well. The FM sound is very good, but alas, it really is
just a fifty dollar shortwave radio. Its battery consumption is surprisingly
high, and the unit is not stable on the table (it tips easily). It serves
well as a second portable, but one of the first things I had to do for it was
purchase an AC adapter from Radio Shack (approx. $8).
For serious portable shortwave listening, I recommend Sony Pro-80 ($350-$400).
-This is not the voice of Ellie, this is Max.
--
Jon Brinkmann Astronomy Department
Internet: jv...@Virginia.EDU University of Virginia
UUCP: ...!uunet!virginia!jvb7u P.O. Box 3818
SPAN/HEPnet: 6654::jvb7u Charlottesville, VA 22903-0818
Paul Elliott x225
We took one of the DAK MR-101 rcvrs outside and compared it's performance
to a Sony ICF-2003. Immediately obvious was the DAK's low audio level (this
was using the built-in whip antenna on both units). We plugged the Sony
long-wire antenna (hardly a long-wire electrically, but you know what I mean),
into both radios and noticed that the Sony output changed little, but the
DAK's increased dramatically. The AGC on the DAK seemed marginal, either
a poor control range/slope or a ridiculously high threshold. The audio
quality was not much worse than the Sony.
With the external antennas, both radios seemed to have similar sensitivities.
All this testing was done at 3:00PM PST, receiving stations from 5MHz to
21MHz. The comments made in other postings seem to match our experience,
especially in regards to the lack of "quality feel" to the radio.
--
Paul M. Elliott Optilink Corporation (707) 795-9444
{uunet, pyramid, pixar, tekbspa}!optilink!elliott
"Less than perfect, that's what I've been aiming for all along."