Nothing can compare with the original Sony ICF 2010
Jess
Gone where the old days when this Sony ICF 2001D/2010 radio was
one of the perfect shortwave communication receivers ever made by Sony
Corporation of Japan.
The Sony CRF-5090 is the basis of the creation of this Sony
ICF-2001D/2010 models. The specifications and basic circuitry design
of both radios are almost the same except the differences are the
tuning systems, one is in traditional analog frequency display
rotating dial scale system and the other is in semi analog /digital
controlled frequency display system, other differences are the size,
weight & appearance of both radios and the components parts from
transistors to IC's. The Sony CRF-5090 model is almost the same as the
Sony ICF-2001D/2010 in performance. But the Sony ICF 2001D/2010 has
more improvements in features and specifications like direct access or
random presetting up to 32 stations. There are 2 types of scan modes,
either auto stop or 1.5 second hold. Plus 3 way scan tuning according
to memory preset, broadcast band or user defined frequency bands.
Naturally, reception is outstanding thanks to some very high powered
Sony circuitry. Like a synchronous detector for noiseless clear sound
and dual loop PLL synthesizer for precise AM tuning in 100hz steps.
You also get the added performance capabilities provided by 2 position
AM selectivity, AM RF gain control, AM attenuator, 3 position tone
control, direct meter band access, 4 event programmable timer and SSB
reception. In short, everything an enthusiast could ever want in a
high performance receiver and that is the finest all round
professional shortwave communication receiver and that can only get
from Sony.
Search no more, buy no more. Don't force the manufacturer to
produce something that is already dying, the component parts they use
now are no longer genuine because Sony has stop producing those
components parts in Japan. Instead they used substitute parts in
replacement for them. The only country who still manufacture this Sony
ICF-2010 is only in America, It's no longer available elsewhere in the
world. So don't expect it to perform as good as the old model Sony
ICF-2010 as nothing can compare with the original Sony ICF 2010 model
which has been produced 20 years ago.
If you did not manipulate or modify your Sony ICF-2010, you
are very lucky. You got a perfect shortwave radio, this model is good
for your collection. But if you have manipulate or modify your radio,
well hasta la vista.
Jess
DXing since 1957
Path:
lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!nntp1.roc.gblx.net!nntp.gb
lx.net!nntp.gblx.net!newsfeed.cwix.com!logbridge.uoregon.edu!newsfeed.stan
ford.edu!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail
From: lozada...@yahoo.com (Jess)
Newsgroups: rec.radio.shortwave
Date: 24 Dec 2002 01:14:46 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com/
Lines: 48
Message-ID: <3735dbf1.02122...@posting.google.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 210.50.228.5
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1040721286 24166 127.0.0.1 (24 Dec 2002 09:14:46
GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups...@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: 24 Dec 2002 09:14:46 GMT
Jess
>>
You forgot about the crappy if filters and the static damaged prone front end.
The "perfect" shortwave communications receiver???? Not hardly.
Les
DX'ing from The Gulf of Mexico
Gary
where close to yours. Although it was a good performer, and even
though it had a selectable sidebank sync detector, my Grundig 650
outperformed the 2010. Sensitivity was about equal on both, but
selectivity was so superior on the 650, I could get clear reception of
stations not listenable on the 2010, BOTH using their built-in whip
antenna. And the sound on the SONY, using the narrow bandwidth, was
so poor I could hardly listen to it. My Grundig Satellit 800 is FAR
better than the Sony 2010. Again, sensitivity being about equal on
the two, selectivity is much better on the 800, sound is superior.
I am not knocking the 2010. It is a good performer.
elfa
says...
Are we comparing apples and organges?
For the px, what costs the same as the 2010 and out performs
it? I just bought one for $289 and would like to know if
I could have picked a better buy for the same px.
elfa
DXing since 1957
Path:
lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!newsstand.cit.cornell.edu!
lnsnews.lns.cornell.edu!newsfeed.stanford.edu!canoe.uoregon.edu!logbridge.
uoregon.edu!pln-w!spln!dex!extra.newsguy.com!newsp.newsguy.com!drn
From: elfa elfa_...@newsguy.com
Newsgroups: rec.radio.shortwave
Date: 24 Dec 2002 12:40:08 -0800
Organization: Newsguy News Service [http://newsguy.com]
Lines: 25
Message-ID: <auagn...@drn.newsguy.com>
References: <3735dbf1.02122...@posting.google.com>
<fc4afcdc.02122...@posting.google.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: p-228.newsdawg.com
X-Newsreader: Direct Read News 4.20
elfa
>>
Well, at $99 my DX-398 has better filters than that 2010!!
RadioGuy
Jess <lozada...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:3735dbf1.02122...@posting.google.com...
> Nothing can compare with the original Sony ICF 2010
>
>
>
> Gone where the old days when this Sony ICF 2001D/2010 radio was
> one of the perfect shortwave communication receivers ever made by Sony
> Corporation of Japan.
> The Sony CRF-5090 is the basis of the creation of this Sony
> ICF-2001D/2010 models. The specifications and basic circuitry design
> of both radios are almost the same except the differences are the
> tuning systems, one is in traditional analog frequency display
> rotating dial scale system and the other is in semi analog /digital
> controlled frequency display system, other differences are the size,
> weight & appearance of both radios and the components parts from
> transistors to IC's.
What...
The Sony ICF-2010/2001D was patterned after the ICF-2001.
Sony engineers and Lawrence Magne discussed improvements to the design of
the ICF-2001 which later became known as the ICF-2010/2001D.
The ICF-2001 was considered a unique design in itself.
R.
-----
starman
The '2001' was the first fully synthesized portable shortwave receiver.
It's main problem was short battery life. This was greatly improved in
the '2010' (2001-D). I'd like to know why Sony used the '2001-D' model
name in every country except the US and Canada, where it was sold as the
'2010'.
*****
RadioGuy wrote:
>
> The Sony ICF-2010/2001D was patterned after the ICF-2001.
>
> Sony engineers and Lawrence Magne discussed improvements to the design of
> the ICF-2001 which later became known as the ICF-2010/2001D.
>
> The ICF-2001 was considered a unique design in itself.
-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 80,000 Newsgroups - 16 Different Servers! =-----
Mark Keith
> << Subject: Nothing can compare with the original Sony ICF 2010
> Path:
> lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!nntp1.roc.gblx.net!nntp.gb
> lx.net!nntp.gblx.net!newsfeed.cwix.com!logbridge.uoregon.edu!newsfeed.stan
> ford.edu!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail
> From: lozada...@yahoo.com (Jess)
> Newsgroups: rec.radio.shortwave
> Date: 24 Dec 2002 01:14:46 -0800
> Organization: http://groups.google.com/
> Lines: 48
> Message-ID: <3735dbf1.02122...@posting.google.com>
> NNTP-Posting-Host: 210.50.228.5
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
> Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
> X-Trace: posting.google.com 1040721286 24166 127.0.0.1 (24 Dec 2002 09:14:46
> GMT)
> X-Complaints-To: groups...@google.com
> NNTP-Posting-Date: 24 Dec 2002 09:14:46 GMT
>
>
>
> Nothing can compare with the original Sony ICF 2010
>
>
>
> Gone where the old days when this Sony ICF 2001D/2010 radio was
> one of the perfect shortwave communication receivers ever made by Sony
> Corporation of Japan.
No radio is perfect.
> The Sony CRF-5090 is the basis of the creation of this Sony
> ICF-2001D/2010 models.
But the Sony ICF 2001D/2010 has
> more improvements in features and specifications like direct access or
> random presetting up to 32 stations.
Whoa daddy, stand back... My 706 has over 100 memories...And thats not
that many these days.
There are 2 types of scan modes,
My 706 has 4 types.
> either auto stop or 1.5 second hold. Plus 3 way scan tuning according
> to memory preset, broadcast band or user defined frequency bands.
> Naturally, reception is outstanding thanks to some very high powered
> Sony circuitry. Like a synchronous detector for noiseless clear sound
> and dual loop PLL synthesizer for precise AM tuning in 100hz steps.
yea, they do ok for a portable, but 100 hz steps? Mine does 12 degrees
of steps, the smallest being 1 hz...You can tune my radio at that rate
and it sounds like an analog. I also have weird steps like 12.5 for
UHF FM, ect...
> You also get the added performance capabilities provided by 2 position
> AM selectivity, AM RF gain control, AM attenuator, 3 position tone
> control, direct meter band access, 4 event programmable timer and SSB
> reception.
Dang.. Even receives SSB...What will they think of next...
In short, everything an enthusiast could ever want in a
> high performance receiver and that is the finest all round
> professional shortwave communication receiver and that can only get
> from Sony.
Professional??? You gotta be jokin me...It's a good portable radio,
but to compare it with a ®real professional quality radio is quite a
stretch. Even an ancient tube collins or drake would probably be
preferable for most bands.
> Search no more, buy no more. Don't force the manufacturer to
> produce something that is already dying, the component parts they use
> now are no longer genuine because Sony has stop producing those
> components parts in Japan. Instead they used substitute parts in
> replacement for them. The only country who still manufacture this Sony
> ICF-2010 is only in America, It's no longer available elsewhere in the
> world. So don't expect it to perform as good as the old model Sony
> ICF-2010 as nothing can compare with the original Sony ICF 2010 model
> which has been produced 20 years ago.
If you say so...
> If you did not manipulate or modify your Sony ICF-2010, you
> are very lucky. You got a perfect shortwave radio, this model is good
> for your collection.
Again, no radio is perfect. Myself, I would find it quite far from
perfect. But I'm fairly anal retentive...
But if you have manipulate or modify your radio,
> well hasta la vista.
Uh oh...
>
> You forgot about the crappy if filters and the static damaged prone front end.
>
> The "perfect" shortwave communications receiver???? Not hardly.
I've never seen a portable that I would consider really high
performance. No matter what brand. Usable ? Yes. Quite so. State of
the art, professional, perfect, and all that? Heck no...My IC-706mk2g
would likely eat that sony for lunch, and it's not "top of the line"
by any means. In fact, it's a fairly low end all band mobile rig. Yes,
I know we are talking $900 apples compared to $200-$300 oranges, but
he does mention "perfect" a couple of times...:/ The 706g is in the
same appx size range...:)
But it does waaaayyyy more than the sony will. And that includes
transmitting. I bet the receiver is better in most all cases too. The
706g is "my" idea of a portable...:)
I guess the point is...Sure, the sony portables are good and usable
and all that, but to confuse them with a ®real high end radio, even
old, makes me wonder if he's ever actually tried any. Heck, even any
of the low-mid range HF receivers from the big three, IE: kenwood,
icom, yeasu, will be far better HF radios. And you can get them fairly
cheap too. I guess it depends on the user needs though...A portable
that runs on internal batteries can be handy at times.
I've got a 20 year old monster JVC boom box that has a quite usable SW
and MW section. JVC made a pretty good radio. Loud sucker too, with
good audio.
But it's a toy compared to even my 706. Just like the 706 is a toy
compared
to any of the ®real high end radios like the government and commercial
users use. A drake R-4245...Now, thats one example of a ®real
professional radio. It would make that sony seem like a fisher price
toy. Yes, overall, you do get what you pay for. And a "professional or
commercial" quality radio costs a lot more than 200-300 bucks.
MK
Jay
goods" from being sold in the US. Gray Goods were once a serious problem
here in the US...companies would import items and sell them. However, since
they were not imported by Sony USA, they weren't officially sanctioned to be
sold here, and the US Warranty Centers wouldn't honor their warranties. Gray
Goods could be brought in without paying usual import fees, thus the prices
were lower, but they were hurting Sony America's profits. The solution
change the name of the model for this country, and Sony was only one of many
companies that did this.
Jay
"starman" <sta...@tech.net> wrote in message
news:3E0941DC...@tech.net...
Jay
I have to agree and disagree with you. I agree that the 2010 is one of the
best portable sw receivers ever made. I disagree that the quality has
slipped. I just obtained a brand new 2010 this week and have finished
comparing it extensively with my old 2010. They perform so nearly
identically I would challenge anyone to tell them apart operationally.
Also, you should realize that, although this set is currently SOLD only in
the U.S., it is still produced in Japan, as it always has been. The internal
parts are similar in most cases to what they always were.
There have been a few modifications over the years...in every case they
IMPROVED performance, consistency or stability of the set.
As for modifications, I have not modified mine, but most of the mods
discussed over the years are both a matter of personal taste (such as how
wide bandwidth is desirable in a radio) and also reversible if the owner
decides he doesn't like them.
Finally, it is important to realize the distinction between "Professional"
and "Consumer" goods. The 2010 is an awesome consumer radio...it is not a
professional piece of equipment.
The bottom line is that you can still buy a brand new Sony ICF-2010 from
current production and it will perform as well or better as a set from years
ago,. sp I'm not sure where your information has come from. Don't worry
about it..it's STILL the best portable sw receiver ever made.
Jay
"starman" <sta...@tech.net> wrote in message
news:3E0941DC...@tech.net...
RadioGuy
>
> The '2001' was the first fully synthesized portable shortwave receiver.
> It's main problem was short battery life. This was greatly improved in
> the '2010' (2001-D). I'd like to know why Sony used the '2001-D' model
> name in every country except the US and Canada, where it was sold as the
> '2010'.
> *****
>
> RadioGuy wrote:
> >
> > The Sony ICF-2010/2001D was patterned after the ICF-2001.
> >
> > Sony engineers and Lawrence Magne discussed improvements to the design
of
> > the ICF-2001 which later became known as the ICF-2010/2001D.
> >
> > The ICF-2001 was considered a unique design in itself.
To add further confusion to the model numbering scheme of the ICF-2001...
I have a partial photocopy of the ICF-2001 service manual (sent to me by
SONY in 1984) and it lists parts for an 'E' model for UK, 'AEP' model
(unknown market) and a the model for US and Canada that has no special
letter model designation---I assume that would be the ICF-2001 model.
R.
-----
Waren
features of 2010 + band-pass.
Michael Bryant
>2010 has no band-pass filtering. SW77 is a better radio, it has all
>features of 2010 + band-pass.
Have you actually used a 2010?
Reasons why the 2010 is better than the SW77 (based off of a decade with both):
1. The 2010 just plain has better audio. The KIWA filters make the better audio
even better.
2. In side-by-side tests, the 2010 is more sensitive on the same external wire.
3. The 2010's continuous RF gain copes with overloading better than does the
three-position switch on the SW77.
4. The 2010's sync doesn't lose lock as easy as does the SW77's on weak
stations.
5. The 2010's sync will shift from high to low (or vice-versa) without having
to push a button.
6. The 2010 offers 32 quick access memories. The Sw77 offers only ten.
7. The 2010 will operate well with active loops, like the ANLP1. The SW77 has a
tendency to develop feedback oscillations.
8. The SW77's antenna rod is far more prone to damage, given it's flimsiness.
9. The 2010's numeric display is larger than the SW77's.
Admittedly there are some strengths the SW77 has over the 2010:
1. Better, more solid, build-quality.
2. Continuous treble and bass controls.
3. Slightly better selectivity.
4. Smaller tuning increments, making SSB resolution better.
5. Page-style tuning (if you're into that!).
Overall, I think the 2010 is slightly better.
Michael Bryant, WA4009SWL
Louisville, KY
R75, S800, RX320, SW77, ICF2010K,
DX398, 7600G, 6800W, RF2200, 7600A
GE SRll, Pro-2006, Pro-2010, Pro-76
(remove "nojunk" to reply)
starman
Now I remember why. I guess that strategy didn't work too well, since
there were quite a few gray market 2010's available when I bought mine
from 'Grove Enterprises' about 11-years ago for $289. Some of the mail
order camera shops in NYC were selling the gray market 2010 for about
$229 but their warranties were questionable. That's why I went with a
legally imported one from Grove.
*****
starman
The original 2001 had no tuning knob, just up/down buttons. It did have
a preselector knob which was nice for peaking the front-end tuning.
*****
Waren
Yes, but all those features as continuous RF gain, 32 quick access memories,
auto sync shift from high to low, a larger numeric display, sturdier antenna,
will not help eliminate interference from outside the band as good as a pass
band filter.
*Overall*, including gizmos like memories and numeric display, 2010 maybe is
really a better piece of equipment, but I wanted to talk about reception which
is the most important, and interference which is always a problem in SWLing.
Waren
And Kiwa filters have to be ordered and installed separately. Wide and
narrow Kiwa filters are not included in the original radio.
Modifications are possible in sw77 too, but out of the box I believe sw77 is
a better radio when it comes to digging a weak signal out of interference.
Jess
> ll...@aol.comnojunk (DXing since 1957) wrote in message news:<20021224124708...@mb-mt.aol.com>...
> > << Subject: Nothing can compare with the original Sony ICF 2010
> > Path:
> > lobby!ngtf-m01.news.aol.com!ngpeer.news.aol.com!nntp1.roc.gblx.net!nntp.gb
> > lx.net!nntp.gblx.net!newsfeed.cwix.com!logbridge.uoregon.edu!newsfeed.stan
> > ford.edu!postnews1.google.com!not-for-mail
> > From: lozada...@yahoo.com (Jess)
> > Newsgroups: rec.radio.shortwave
> > Date: 24 Dec 2002 01:14:46 -0800
> > Organization: http://groups.google.com/
> > Lines: 48
> > Message-ID: <3735dbf1.02122...@posting.google.com>
> > NNTP-Posting-Host: 210.50.228.5
> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
> > Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
> > X-Trace: posting.google.com 1040721286 24166 127.0.0.1 (24 Dec 2002 09:14:46
> > GMT)
> > X-Complaints-To: groups...@google.com
> > NNTP-Posting-Date: 24 Dec 2002 09:14:46 GMT
> >
> >
> >
> > Nothing can compare with the original Sony ICF 2010
> >
> >
> >
> > Gone where the old days when this Sony ICF 2001D/2010 radio was
> > one of the perfect shortwave communication receivers ever made by Sony
> > Corporation of Japan.
>
> No radio is perfect.
>
Its true, no things in this world is perfect. There is a
beginning and there is an ending, like a time to be born and a time to
die. The same applies to the law of the Universe. No things can last
forever, there is an ending.
When you say perfect, it applies within yourself to suits your
needs and within your reach like making a comparison either to buy a
Sony ICF-2010 or Watkins Johnson HF-1000 professional grade receiver.
The price of a Sony ICF-2010 is $379.00 compare with a Watkins Johnson
HF-1000 $ 3,799.00. The considerations that you have to evaluate to
suit your needs to make it a perfect Shortwave radio within your
parameters like:
1) Your financial budget
2) The type of radio you want with full SW coverage.
3) Portability for travel
4) Features
5) Convenience
6) Economical to use
It may not be perfect for you, but it can be a perfect radio
for others. The radio doesn't have to be perfect but it is within
yourself that make it perfect.
The same thing applies when you get married and start a
family, these rules will apply for you to make it a perfect marriage
or family. So you have to make your own parameters on how to choose a
lifetime partner and start a family of your own, for example:
1) Do you have financial stability to support a family
2) What kind of partner do you like to have
3) How many children do you like to have
4) Can you support them in their education
5) How to build a better relationship with your own family.
Its what the essence of perfect means, its within your own parameters
to make it perfect for you. That is life and reality.
Jess
j...@randomc.com
The subject line is right. Nothing can compare to the Sony ICF-2010, there
is not another like it. Unlike many who have frequented this group over the
years, however, I think that radio has always been vastly over-rated and
over-hyped. I have owned two, one made around 1985 or 1986, and the one I
currently have, made some time between 1992 and 1996, and I have seen and
used several other models. If I only compare it to other radios I have
owned, or still own, which are similar in size and weight, several of those
other radios outshine and outperform the ICF-2010 in most respects.
I like the -2010's profile when laid on its back, propped on its short
backstand. I like the dedicated memory buttons. For the most part, I think
the user interface is fairly logical and easy to use.
On the negative side of things, the list is quite long. It was always too
expensive, even when its average retail price was around $300 in the mid
1980's to the early 1990's.
I never did like all those tiny, flimsy, little buttons and switches and
those terrible slider controls. I never could understand why they placed
the connection points for the shoulder strap the way they did, one on the
side and one on the back.
The tuning knob is too thin, and too light to be comfortable to use,
although I like the way you can tune with the knob and still hear what you
are passing by as you tune.
The sound is terrible, on all bands, regardless of which of the stock
filters you choose to use.
Every Grundig Satellit receiver I have ever seen, used, or owned, including
my Satellit 400 and Satellit 700 which are similar in size, and any of the
larger satellit models are better receivers over most of the spectrum than
the ICF-2010. Even the 1964-vintage Satellit 205/5000 is more sensitive on
most bands that both it and the -2010 have in common.
When compared to the flimsy buttons and switches and the loose AC power
connector and the flimsy antenna and battery cover on the -2010, the
Satellit 400 is built like the proverbial battleship by comparison. There
is not one single aspect of actual receiver performance, whether in
listenability or sensitivity and selectivity, where the ICF-2010 beats
either the Satellit 700 or the Satellit 400. Even without a sideband
selectable synchronous detection circuit, the Sat 400 is a better receiver
than either of the samples of the ICF-2010 I have owned.
My Sangean ATS-803A, in addition to being much more rugged and sounding much
better, is a better receiver on the FM band and on the medium wave band than
the mid-1990's-vintage ICF-2010 I have.
Among the receivers of similar size, and similar production period to the
Sony ICF-2010 I currently have are:
Grundig, Satellit 400, and Satellit 700;
Sangean ATS-803A;
Sony ICF-2001, the original "battery eater" that started the portable
PLL-synthesized receiver modern era.
Among portable radios I have, or have had, that are larger than the -2010
are:
Grundig, Satellit 205/5000, and Satellit 210/6001;
Nordmende Globe Traveller VIP;
Zenith TransOceanic Royal 7000, and a TransOceanic vacuum tube model from
around 1957 or 1958;
to mention just a few.
NOw if your frame of referrence for a good portable radio was limited at the
better end to any Zenith TransOceanic model, I can understand why you might
think the ICF-2010 was such a wonderful shortwave radio. Compared to quite
a number of models from at least half a dozen German manufacturers between
the mid 1960's and the mid 1990's, the ICF-2010 does well to rate just about
average to slightly above average for all portables of similar size or
larger.
Yes, I will feel a twinge of sadness to see production stop on the ICF-2010,
especially since Sony is apparently not even willing to keep it going long
enough to have a full 20-year production run. A 20-year production run for
any consumer electronic product has to be something of a record, even if the
unit has not been officially available for sale outside North America since
maybe, 1995 or 1996.
Every so often, I think about possibly offering my ICF-2010 and my ICF-2001
for sale or for trade bait. That could actually happen. If I had to pare
down my portable radio collection to only one or two in the ICF-2010's size
category, the Sony models would not be the ones that would be staying
around.
Reply to: j...@randomc.com
Brent Reynolds, Atlanta, GA USA
Mike S.
In article <fc4afcdc.02122...@posting.google.com>,
Fascinating.
Back in 1987 or so, when the 2010 was first released (I owned one of the
first) I remember the Q&A column in Monitoring Times - then printed
tabloid size on newsprint.
In response to queries as to why Grove wasn't carrying that model, Bob
replied that it was large, expensive, and didn't really have anything
unique to distinguish it enough to sell them.
Now they're calling it their all-time best seller.