Re: Question about GE Superadio III and batteries
Steven
> Hello radio enthusiasts,
>
> I own a General Electric "Superadio III" that I purchased new back around
> 2001. I've never had any problems with it until this June when I was
> vacationing on the beach down in Florida. The FM band suddenly went out and
> only a low static sound could be heard, but the AM band seemed to pick up
> as normal. Turning the radio off and back on again didn't fix the problem.
> But when I tried it indoors the next day, the FM seemed to pick up fine.
> But when I was at a local beach yesterday, the same thing happened.
>
> My question is, could weak batteries possibly cause this kind of behavior?
> The 6 "D" batteries it uses were put in around 2003 or 2004, and I've just
> replaced them with fresh Duracells (it also has an AC cord, BTW). I just
> assumed if it was the batteries, normally strong stations would begin to
> come in very weak -- not just not be received at all.
>
> Or, could intense heat in the direct sun possibly cause this problem? This
> radio has pretty good reception when it's working properly and I'd hate to
> think it's gone south. TIA for any input.
It's probably in need of tweaking, cleaning or maybe the screw fell
out of the antenna (mine fell out I don't know when so don't laugh too
hard. Thing's made in China/mondodogkillerland)
Brenda Ann
"Dennis M" <den...@dennmac.net> wrote in message
news:dennmac-ya0240800...@NNTP.InfoAve.Net...
> Hello radio enthusiasts,
>
> I own a General Electric "Superadio III" that I purchased new back around
> 2001. I've never had any problems with it until this June when I was
> vacationing on the beach down in Florida. The FM band suddenly went out
> and
> only a low static sound could be heard, but the AM band seemed to pick up
> as normal. Turning the radio off and back on again didn't fix the problem.
> But when I tried it indoors the next day, the FM seemed to pick up fine.
> But when I was at a local beach yesterday, the same thing happened.
>
> My question is, could weak batteries possibly cause this kind of behavior?
> The 6 "D" batteries it uses were put in around 2003 or 2004, and I've just
> replaced them with fresh Duracells (it also has an AC cord, BTW). I just
> assumed if it was the batteries, normally strong stations would begin to
> come in very weak -- not just not be received at all.
>
> Or, could intense heat in the direct sun possibly cause this problem? This
> radio has pretty good reception when it's working properly and I'd hate to
> think it's gone south. TIA for any input.
Make sure you have all the batteries installed properly. how long till it
goes out?
William Sommerwerck
number of things.
Now this is a stretch, and a guess, but... Some classic GE transistor radios
of 30+ years ago (such as the P975A) had completely separate AM and FM
tuners. * If this is true for the SupeRadio, it might simplify
troubleshooting.
I'd recommend taking a screwdriver and a can of freeze spray with you to the
beach.
* GE made its own transistors, and as separating the tuners didn't increase
the number of RF and IF elements required, the cost of wholly separate
tuners was only a bit higher than combining them.
Lou D
Lou D
> Hello radio enthusiasts,
>
> I own a General Electric "Superadio III" that I purchased new back around
> 2001. I've never had any problems with it until this June when I was
> vacationing on the beach down in Florida. The FM band suddenly went out and
> only a low static sound could be heard, but the AM band seemed to pick up
> as normal. Turning the radio off and back on again didn't fix the problem.
> But when I tried it indoors the next day, the FM seemed to pick up fine.
> But when I was at a local beach yesterday, the same thing happened.
>
> My question is, could weak batteries possibly cause this kind of behavior?
> The 6 "D" batteries it uses were put in around 2003 or 2004, and I've just
> replaced them with fresh Duracells (it also has an AC cord, BTW). I just
> assumed if it was the batteries, normally strong stations would begin to
> come in very weak -- not just not be received at all.
>
> Or, could intense heat in the direct sun possibly cause this problem? This
> radio has pretty good reception when it's working properly and I'd hate to
> think it's gone south. TIA for any input.
Salvation Army in new condition for $5 I use for a work radio on
construction jobs. What a great sounding radio and so easy on batteries.
Brenda Ann
"William Sommerwerck" <grizzle...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:qtadnSKAhsRfMC7b...@comcast.com...
The SRIII doesn't have a tuner at all. It's a supremely crappy varactor
tuned set. If only the FM is going out, it's likely that the heat is
building up enough that the LO is failing. One thing to try is take a white
towel with you the next time you go out, and fold it over at least once and
let it on top of the radio to prevent the UV from the sun reaching that
lovely black (solar collector) cabinet.
ibocis...@yahoo.com
> Hello radio enthusiasts,
>
> I own a General Electric "Superadio III" that I purchased new back around
> 2001. I've never had any problems with it until this June when I was
> vacationing on the beach down in Florida. The FM band suddenly went out and
> only a low static sound could be heard, but the AM band seemed to pick up
> as normal. Turning the radio off and back on again didn't fix the problem.
> But when I tried it indoors the next day, the FM seemed to pick up fine.
> But when I was at a local beach yesterday, the same thing happened.
>
> My question is, could weak batteries possibly cause this kind of behavior?
> The 6 "D" batteries it uses were put in around 2003 or 2004, and I've just
> replaced them with fresh Duracells (it also has an AC cord, BTW). I just
> assumed if it was the batteries, normally strong stations would begin to
> come in very weak -- not just not be received at all.
>
> Or, could intense heat in the direct sun possibly cause this problem? This
> radio has pretty good reception when it's working properly and I'd hate to
> think it's gone south. TIA for any input.
The radio is Chinese-made garbage - the Eton/Grindig/Tecsun radios are
garbage too...
RHF
> In article <vOudndhiV7yqVC7bnZ2dnUVZ_uygn...@giganews.com>, "Brenda Ann"
>
> <bren...@shinbiro.com> wrote:
> >The SRIII doesn't have a tuner at all. It's a supremely crappy varactor
> >tuned set. If only the FM is going out, it's likely that the heat is
> >building up enough that the LO is failing. One thing to try is take a white
> >towel with you the next time you go out, and fold it over at least once and
> >let it on top of the radio to prevent the UV from the sun reaching that
> >lovely black (solar collector) cabinet.
>
> one of these babies,
- looks like some vendor on Amazon is selling them for
- $46.44 (and evidently, they're called "RCA" radios now).
http://ec1.images-amazon.com/images/I/41g75Dl9qyL._SS500_.jpg
>
> Some people might swear off this model or even the brand if they had a
> problem like mine but I figure if a portable radio lasts a good 7 years and
> after you've drug it through hell & half of Georgia you've gotten your
> money's worth.
Knut Otterbeck
I like the great sound on FM and the good reception on AM in a radio that
it costs little next to nothing. A combination hard to find elsewhere...
The large built-in antenna (AM ferrite-bar) makes for good AM-reception,
an the "well balanced" (though very cheap) set of speakers makes the sound
unmatched for a light footprint radio this cheap.
I do have better sounding portable radios (older, genuine Grundig
Satellit's)
but they are totally different class and price range all together.
Greetings,
Knut Otterbeck
"Dennis M" <den...@dennmac.net> skrev i melding
news:dennmac-ya0240800...@NNTP.InfoAve.Net...
> In article <1186198129.6...@q3g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
> ibocis...@yahoo.com wrote:
>
>>The radio is Chinese-made garbage - the Eton/Grindig/Tecsun radios are
> garbage too...
>
> Just curious, what do you consider "not garbage" -- some exotic radio you
> shelled out $500 for?
>
> Or built by you in your basement with your very own schematics?
>
> Not everybody's into that.
>
> About 90% of the people who own this radio on Amazon agree it's by far the
> best sounding portable radio available for the money if you can live with
> a
> rotary tuning wheel and without a lot of digital bells & whistles.
>
> They rate its AM reception particularly high and most thought the FM was
> almost as good.
>
> But thanks anyway for sharing.
Steven
>
> - Show quoted text -
For two dollars that I gave for one, the bandwidth switch is a big
help, even and the varactor does slip around if you aren't there well
enough on AM and either switch AFC on or off.
That AFC is sloppy and seems to be a big part of it's DX so-called
atrributes. It's really good for zeroing in on weak, mostly LOCAL AM
stations and improving them against splash or harmonics.
William Sommerwerck
doesn't Thomson go all the way and include full digital tuning? Given the
current cheapness of electronics, it should add no more that $10 or $15 to
the price.
Jeffrey D Angus
Varactor tuning is no different from using a mechanical tuning
capacitor. You're just rotating the shaft on a resistor instead.
To make the leap to digitial tuning, you have to have a PLL (Phase
locked loop) and all the attendant dividers, and the display and
lastly, some degree of accuracy for the reference. If the display
reads 930 AM, it really should be 930, not somewhere else.
It really isn't as simple as "Just a couple more parts."
Jeff
--
RESTRICTED AREA. Anyone intruding shall immediately become subject to
the jurisdiction of military law. Intruders will be subject to lethal
force, without warning, and on sight. USE OF DEADLY FORCE IS AUTHORIZED
under the Internal Security Act of 1950.
John Stone
On 8/4/07 10:39 AM, in article 46b49d88$0$30629$4c36...@roadrunner.com,
"Jeffrey D Angus" <jan...@socal.rr.com> wrote:
>
>
> William Sommerwerck wrote:
>> It seems odd that, as this radio (supposedly) uses varactor tuning... Why
>> doesn't Thomson go all the way and include full digital tuning? Given the
>> current cheapness of electronics, it should add no more that $10 or $15 to
>> the price.
>
> Varactor tuning is no different from using a mechanical tuning
> capacitor. You're just rotating the shaft on a resistor instead.
>
> To make the leap to digitial tuning, you have to have a PLL (Phase
> locked loop) and all the attendant dividers, and the display and
> lastly, some degree of accuracy for the reference. If the display
> reads 930 AM, it really should be 930, not somewhere else.
>
> It really isn't as simple as "Just a couple more parts."
I don't think Thomson is even involved in consumer electronics products
anymore. I believe they sold off the RCA name to Audiovox, and when you go
to the GE brand, you only get info on telephone products. Brand names are
totally meaningless these days.
Steven
I've got a Sansui T-80 that proves that. It will shift frequency and
often goes completely out of band then sometimes back to the wrong
frequency on the band and the counter is given voltages that create a
gibberish reading for the LCD display driver. All for a varactor or
two that are tweaked or fed an out-of spec signal. I don't have any
dual displays with a similar problem...my SX-3600s are always
displaying the STEREO graphic but that seems to be a common thing for
that model.
Brenda Ann
It would also add to the noise floor, and make most of the advantage of the
tuned RF amp front end null. My biggest gripe about the SRIII is the abysmal
dial calibration. I've yet to see one that tracks across the dial. And any
time I've attempted to calibrate one (I've done dozens) the best I can get
it to do is be semi-accurate at the top and bottom, while off by several
10's of KHz in the middle.
William Sommerwerck
>> It seems odd that, as this radio (supposedly) uses varactor tuning...
>> Why doesn't Thomson go all the way and include full digital tuning?
>> Given the current cheapness of electronics, it should add no more
> Varactor tuning is no different from using a mechanical tuning
> capacitor. You're just rotating the shaft on a resistor instead.
It's fundamentally different -- you can change the rotational "position" of
the "capacitor" _electrically_, without moving parts.
> To make the leap to digitial tuning, you have to have a PLL (phase
> locked loop) and all the attendant dividers, and the display and
> lastly, some degree of accuracy for the reference. If the display
> reads 930 AM, it really should be 930, not somewhere else.
> It really isn't as simple as "Just a couple more parts."
I didn't say that. But I'll gladly allow myself to retroactively be accused
of having said that.
Once you have varactor tuning, not much is needed to convert to digital
tuning. How about just three parts -- a reference crystal, a custom IC, and
an LCD? Digital tuning is pretty simple stuff.
I have a Sony Discman with a complete stereo-FM + AM digital tuner crammed
into a tiny case about the volume of your thumb, dangling from the end of
the headphone cord. The complete unit sold for $180; the replacement
tuner/cable assembly went for $100. Because this device is a cleverly
miniaturized piece of electronics, one can assume it's rather more expensive
than what a larger, bulkier device would cost.
William Sommerwerck
> I've got a Sansui T-80 that proves that. It will shift frequency
> and often goes completely out of band then sometimes back
> to the wrong frequency on the band and the counter is given
> voltages that create a gibberish reading for the LCD display
> driver. All for a varactor or two that are tweaked or fed an
> out-of spec signal. I don't have any dual [sic] displays with a
> similar problem... my SX-3600s are always displaying the
> STEREO graphic but that seems to be a common thing for
> that model.
Uh... you seem to be talking about a defective product.
William Sommerwerck
>> Why doesn't Thomson go all the way and include full digital tuning?
>> Given the current cheapness of electronics, it should add no more
>> that $10 or $15 to the price.
> It would also add to the noise floor, and make most of the advantage
> of the tuned RF amp front end null.
Is that _necessarily_ so?
On the AM band, the added "noise" would be primarily FM modulation, creating
sideband noise not unlike the sideband noise generated by flutter on analog
audio recorders. How audible would that be?
John Stone
On 8/4/07 4:40 PM, in article E9OdnX4hu8fQbynb...@comcast.com,
"William Sommerwerck" <grizzle...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> William Sommerwerck wrote:
>>> It seems odd that, as this radio (supposedly) uses varactor tuning...
>>> Why doesn't Thomson go all the way and include full digital tuning?
>>> Given the current cheapness of electronics, it should add no more
>>> than $10 or $15 to the price.
>
If you're referring to adding $10-$15 to the retail price, on the
manufacturing level that would be about $1 to $1.50 in additional parts.
Possible, but I'd guess the addition of a crystal, a microcomputer, and a
display, would probably add more than that. In the end, you would have a
very different radio, and not necessarily a better one. Microprocessors add
their own problems. These radios do offer great bang for the buck, but
honestly I think the term "super" is misapplied.
george conklin
"Brenda Ann" <bre...@shinbiro.com> wrote in message
news:JtednV2QnqR9bSnb...@giganews.com...
Does anyone know what the actual AM senitivity of these "super" radio might
be. Healthkit used to provide sensitivity for its AM tuners, but so far all
they talk about for the GE radio is doubletalk.
Brenda Ann
"george conklin" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote in message
news:13b9veu...@corp.supernews.com...
I've not seen any quantification of the AM sensitivity on the radio.
However, with the tuned RF stage, it is much more sensitive than most of the
AM/FM only portables on the market. I have one out in my shop on the shelf
that I use for verification of stations when I'm trying to realign a set
that's been overtwiddled. I'll see if I can get at least a uV reading from
my o-scope for a good listenable by-ear signal. I don't have the equipment
for a fancy uV/m or dBuV reading.
Brenda Ann
I've yet to hear a cheap (or even a multi-hundred dollar) radio with a
perfectly noiseless PLL. My Grundig (a REAL Grundig) Satellite 650 even has
PLL generated noise that brings up the noise floor at least 2-3dB, and it's
filtered and sheilded to the max (and cost $1100 new).
cuh...@webtv.net
Supposedly, according to the model number on my radio, it is a
G.E.Superadio 1.But nowhere on my radio does it say Superadio and the FM
whip antenna has a plastic covering which encloses most of the first
metal tube section of the antenna.So, what radio do I own? It is an
original Superadio, or a forerunner of a G.E.Supeadio 1? I bought the
radio back in the 1980s at a local Service Merchandise store.I think it
was in the 1980s, might have been earlier than that.
cuhulin
Steven
> "William Sommerwerck" <grizzledgee...@comcast.net> wrote in message
I haven't looked at mine in a couple weeks but as I figured the PLL
would make tuning in some stations more difficult. As they are, the
bandwidth position being in wide actually hinders tuning in a little 1
kw signal at 1450 in Notus called KIOV, 1350 KTIK that's more than a
kilowatt and even 1490 KCID in Caldwell (*because I live next to a 5
kw DA-N at 1380). If the station was running a narrower signal to
start you have to tune in narrow mode first anyway. It's picky that
way. Batteries affect that too, FM more pronounced than AM, of course.
The FM antenna screw fell out a long time ago too, tried to replace it
and at some point the thing got broken anyway. Good thing it has screw
terminals for FM.
Scott W. Harvey
>>
>
> It would also add to the noise floor, and make most of the advantage of the
> tuned RF amp front end null. My biggest gripe about the SRIII is the abysmal
> dial calibration. I've yet to see one that tracks across the dial. And any
> time I've attempted to calibrate one (I've done dozens) the best I can get
> it to do is be semi-accurate at the top and bottom, while off by several
> 10's of KHz in the middle.
>
>
There WAS a digital version of the GE superadio, called the superadio
plus, made in 1982. It is rumored to be noisier than the analog version
(big surprise) and was double the price, which kind of negated the whole
cheap-but-sensitive idea behind the superadio series. It was not a big
seller, and is somewhat rare today.
-Scott
Steven
GREAT
horney toads...
Are you on union time?
RHF
SWH,
I have one of the "Digital" versions of the GE Superadio
Model # 7-2882A that was made in Hong Kong an you
are right on all counts.
But it is 'nice' to be able to push a Preset and Listen
to one of your Favorite Radio Stations - Especially
when the GE Superadio III has such a badly aligned
Analog Tuning Scale.
David Moisan's - GE SuperRadio FAQ - Technical Information
http://mysite.verizon.net/vze20h45/radio/superadio/gesr_tech.html
http://mysite.verizon.net/vze20h45/radio/superadio/gesr_faq.html
Currently for the $-Money-$ the Redsun RP2100 AM/MW
Shortwave Radio seems to be one of the 'better' AM/MW
Radios that would 'fit' the Super-Radio characteristics and
has a very good 'mono' FM Tuner and Sound Too !
The "Redsun Shortwave Radios" Group at Yahoo
REDSUN => http://groups.yahoo.com/group/redsun-shortwave-radios/
~ RHF
.
.
. .
William Sommerwerck
> model 7-2882A, that was made in Hong Kong, and you
> are right on all counts.
This model was likely the outgrowth of the 7-4650 clock-radio, which had
direct-frequency entry through a keypad plus six presets. Its list price was
around $90.
Whoever designed this radio was actually thinking. As the AM and FM bands
have numerically unique frequencies, you simply punched in the one you want,
and the band automatically switched. You don't have to select AM or FM
first.
William Sommerwerck
"Unlike most AM/FM radios the SR III has additional RF stages..."
I've never seen an FM tuner that didn't have an RF stage (with the exception
of a weird direct-conversion circuit shown in the GE Transistor Manual). It
would be less-incorrect to say
"Unlike most table or pocket radios, the Superadio's AM tuner has an RF
stage for greatly improved sensitivity."
Brenda Ann
Most AM/FM radios don't have an RF stage. Only higher end home systems and
car radios do anymore for the most part. The front ends on your average
portable are just an LO section and an input tuning section (antenna). Even
average home systems don't have the additional RF stage. Makes for horrid
sensitivity and even worse overloading problems close in.
george conklin
Well, it seems to me we need to check the GE radios against a radio which
has a known sensitivity level on the AM band. I have to use my so-called
Superradio with a tunable external loop to picked up most stations I want.
So it is not very super. And I have the Radio Shack version too. About
half the time it has distored audio, and other half it works ok, but with
inferior tone. Ok, they are cheap, I'll grant you that. C. Crane and
Company advertise a real super radio, the Mini CC radio. Has anyone tried
it for $149.95?
maa...@panic.xx.tudelft.nl
> I don't think Thomson is even involved in consumer electronics products
> anymore. I believe they sold off the RCA name to Audiovox, and when you go
Maybe not in the US, but as far as I know their CE division is still
alive.
--
Met vriendelijke groet,
Maarten Bakker.
Brenda Ann
>
> Well, it seems to me we need to check the GE radios against a radio
> which has a known sensitivity level on the AM band. I have to use my
> so-called Superradio with a tunable external loop to picked up most
> stations I want. So it is not very super. And I have the Radio Shack
> version too. About half the time it has distored audio, and other half it
> works ok, but with inferior tone. Ok, they are cheap, I'll grant you
> that. C. Crane and Company advertise a real super radio, the Mini CC
> radio. Has anyone tried it for $149.95?
If you need an external tuned loop, then you need an alignment. If it's an
SRIII, then you're probably out of luck. If it's an SRII or SRI, then you
can get it properly aligned and it would be pretty much unbeatable for AM
and FM reception.
Stephanie Weil
wrote:
>
> Whoever designed this radio was actually thinking. As the AM and FM bands
> have numerically unique frequencies, you simply punched in the one you want,
> and the band automatically switched. You don't have to select AM or FM
> first.
I have a Grundig portable with shortwave that allows you to do that
too. Type in 1130 and the radio automatically switches you to 1130
khz MW. Type in 95.50 and it tunes to 95.5 Mhz FM, And so on....
You can also just enter something like 31 or 25 or 49 and it switches
you to that desired shortwave band directly. I like that radio. :)
Stephanie Weil
On the other side of the planet
Steven
> "Brenda Ann" <bren...@shinbiro.com> wrote in message
>
> news:-b6dnZuhoOxqgijb...@giganews.com...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > "george conklin" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote in message
> >news:13b9veu...@corp.supernews.com...
>
> >>news:JtednV2QnqR9bSnb...@giganews.com...
>
> >>> "William Sommerwerck" <grizzledgee...@comcast.net> wrote in message
Brenda Ann has a National or two and a well-modified Pioneer TX-6500
tuner she built as I understand (I donated to it). All of the above
would run rings around this thing I am certain. A great DX set by GE
was probably made and it had tubes and was a tombstone.
Steven
When did you move to New Jersey?
William Sommerwerck
> systems and car radios do anymore for the most part. The front ends
> on your average portable are just an LO section and an input tuning
> section (antenna). Even average home systems don't have the additional
> close in.
Show me any commercial FM radio or tuner, at any price, that _doesn't_ have
an RF stage. I find it very, very, very hard to believe that there are such
radios.
I can think of only one _good_ reason for omitting a RF stage, and that only
in digital tuners. As such tuners require a varactor-tuned front end, and
varactors aren't especially linear... Fill in the blank.
I'd like to comment on the phrase "additional RF stage". An RF stage is, of
course, an additional stage compared to a radio without one, but in this
phrase "additional" modifies RF, not stage. I believe a few radios have had
multiple RF stages, but this is uncommon.
After writing the above, I pulled out the manual for my Yaesu ("joy of Hams'
desiring") FT-1000D. It seems the RF stage can be bypassed for reception of
very strong signals. I'm not sure what this proves or disproves with respect
to this discussion, but it's interesting.
Steven
wrote:
It explains why two-three of my tuners (more) have a hard time with
1350 and 1450 when 1380 is nearby and a couple would bleed 1450 in two
other spots when KIOV was still on Clay Peak. Thanks much!
cuh...@webtv.net
Superadio11, Superadio111 and Superadio Plus (Digital) But, how about
the Superadios that do not say Superadio anywhere on the radio like the
one I own?
I own a big old heavy (and I do mean heavy, it weighs a ton) Sears
Travler AM FM Shortwave portable radio.I bought it at a Goodwill store
years ago.The mechanical push buttons assembly inside of the radio and
the Off/ON/Volume switch are worn out.(it was like that when I bought
the radio for a few dollars) I have to play with it a long time to get
the push buttons and the On/Off/Volume switch to work and when I change
stations on the radio.When the radio does work though, it is much, much
better than my Superadio for AM DXing.A lot of those old tube type
radios (of which I own many of them) are very good for AM DXing too.
cuhulin
dxAce
cuh...@webtv.net wrote:
As far as I know the Superadio I only indicated "Superadio" on the front, not
"Superadio I". After all, at that point GE (or whoever), didn't know if there
would be a II or not.
dxAce
Michigan
USA
Jeffrey D Angus
William Sommerwerck wrote:
>>Most AM/FM radios don't have an RF stage. Only higher-end home
>>systems and car radios do anymore for the most part.
>
> Show me any commercial FM radio or tuner, at any price, that _doesn't_ have
> an RF stage.
Brenda was refering to the AM section of the radio I think.
Most commercial "broadcast" radios now _are_ crap. The
manufacturers figured (probably rightly) that there's nothing
worth listening to on AM, so they don't waste the money in
production to make the AM portion decent.
> After writing the above, I pulled out the manual for my Yaesu ("joy of Hams'
> desiring") FT-1000D. It seems the RF stage can be bypassed for reception of
> very strong signals. I'm not sure what this proves or disproves with respect
> to this discussion, but it's interesting.
Bypassed? Look again, I suspect it has a 20 dB attenuator switched
in ahead of it.
Jeff
--
RESTRICTED AREA. Anyone intruding shall immediately become subject to
the jurisdiction of military law. Intruders will be subject to lethal
force, without warning, and on sight. USE OF DEADLY FORCE IS AUTHORIZED
under the Internal Security Act of 1950.
William Sommerwerck
>> ("joy of Hams' desiring") FT-1000D. It seems the RF stage can
>> be bypassed for reception of very strong signals.
> Bypassed? Look again, I suspect it has a 20 dB attenuator
> switched in ahead of it.
Nope. The manual -- apparently written by 'murcans -- explicitly says
"bypassed". The schematics are so complex I don't have time to unscramble
them to confirm or deny.
John Stone
On 8/5/07 7:05 AM, in article 46b5bd1b$0$231$e4fe...@news.xs4all.nl,
"maa...@panic.xx.tudelft.nl" <maa...@panic.xx.tudelft.nl> wrote:
> In rec.antiques.radio+phono John Stone <jms...@comcast.net> wrote:
>> I don't think Thomson is even involved in consumer electronics products
>> anymore. I believe they sold off the RCA name to Audiovox, and when you go
>
> Maybe not in the US, but as far as I know their CE division is still
> alive.
From Wikipedia:
Later in 2004, Thomson set up a joint venture (TTE) with China's TCL, giving
to TCL all manufacturing of RCA and Thomson television and DVD products and
making TCL the global leader in TV manufacturing. (Thomson still controls
the brands themselves and licenses them to TTE.) At the time, TCL was hailed
as the first Chinese company to compete on the international stage with
large international corporations. Thomson initially retained all marketing
of TTE's products, but transferred that to TTE in 2005.
In December 2006, Thomson agreed to sell its consumer electronics accessory
business, including rights to the RCA name for consumer electronics
accessories, to Audiovox.
So, I guess they are still "alive", if you want to call it that.
jim menning
"Scott W. Harvey" <NOT_M...@email.com> wrote in message
news:f93u6...@news5.newsguy.com...
>
>>
>
> There WAS a digital version of the GE superadio, called the superadio plus, made in
> 1982.
Was it originally named that by GE or just by later aficionados in their comparisons?
I've got one right here in front of me (GE 7-2882A), and it's labeled as an
"electronic tuning FM-AM receiver", not a "superadio plus" or "superadio+".
As far as I know, this was never touted by GE top be a "superadio". Does anyone have
pictures of a box or advertising they can share to show GE called it one?
cuh...@webtv.net
definetly isn't a Superadio II or Superadio III or a digital
Superadio.The radio has one big speaker and no other speakers, only
one.Let me reach over behind that pile of big portable radios on the
floor behind my old antique pump organ (no puns please) which serves as
a stand for my two tv sets and check it again.(Sheesh, I really do need
to vacuum behind there one of these days)
OK, on the left hand side of the dial, it says, LONG RANGE on the right
hand side of the dial, it says HIGH SELECTIVITY.On the speaker grill, it
says GENERAL ELECTRIC.To the right hand side of the dial and arranged
vertically is a big knob for tuning the stations.Just below that knob
are toggle lever switches.Left hand side toggle switch for BAND.Right
hand side toggle switch for AFC ON OFF.Below those two toggle switches
is a knob for TREBLE.Just below that knob is a knob for BASS and just
below that knob is a knob for LOUDNESS.On the rear panel, Model
NO.7-2880B
cuhulin
dxAce
cuh...@webtv.net wrote:
At any rate, that is what is known as a "Superadio I", as you've been told
several times in the past.
dxAce
Michigan
USA
Brenda Ann
"jim menning" <jmenni...@new.rr.com> wrote in message
news:46b60644$0$31254$4c36...@roadrunner.com...
I distinctly remember a digital Superadio Plus. It sold for a very short
time around 1983 or 84? It clearly said "Superadio Plus" on the front panel.
Brenda Ann
>> Most AM/FM radios don't have an RF stage. Only higher-end home
>> systems and car radios do anymore for the most part. The front ends
>> on your average portable are just an LO section and an input tuning
>> section (antenna). Even average home systems don't have the additional
>> RF stage. Makes for horrid sensitivity and even worse overload problems
>> close in.
>
> Show me any commercial FM radio or tuner, at any price, that _doesn't_
> have
> an RF stage. I find it very, very, very hard to believe that there are
> such
> radios.
>
> I can think of only one _good_ reason for omitting a RF stage, and that
> only
> in digital tuners. As such tuners require a varactor-tuned front end, and
> varactors aren't especially linear... Fill in the blank.
>
> I'd like to comment on the phrase "additional RF stage". An RF stage is,
> of
> course, an additional stage compared to a radio without one, but in this
> phrase "additional" modifies RF, not stage. I believe a few radios have
> had
> multiple RF stages, but this is uncommon.
Again, if you open up the average portable, or most cheap home stereos, you
will find only two sections to the FM tuner:
1) Local oscillator
2) Antenna tuning
Same for the AM section.
I have seen very very VERY few portables with an RF amp section for FM. Less
rare were ones with an RF amp for AM, such as the Channel Master 8
transistor sets.
Brenda Ann
"Jeffrey D Angus" <jan...@socal.rr.com> wrote in message
news:46b5dd8b$0$30672$4c36...@roadrunner.com...
>
>
> William Sommerwerck wrote:
>>>Most AM/FM radios don't have an RF stage. Only higher-end home
>>>systems and car radios do anymore for the most part.
>>
>> Show me any commercial FM radio or tuner, at any price, that _doesn't_
>> have
>> an RF stage.
>
> Brenda was refering to the AM section of the radio I think.
> Most commercial "broadcast" radios now _are_ crap. The
> manufacturers figured (probably rightly) that there's nothing
> worth listening to on AM, so they don't waste the money in
> production to make the AM portion decent.
>
Nope, was referring to both FM and AM sections.
Shoot... a lot of current generation boom boxes and such not only don't have
an RF amp in the front end (well.. they sort of do.. more to come), they
don't even have an IF. All they are is a very high gain amplifier with a
detector. To make an AM radio, they connect an antenna, single section
variable capacitor, a power source, and a small audio amp. The whole
receiver section is in a three lead package (TO-92?)
jim menning
As I said, I have the GE 7-2882A sitting right here in front of me, and that is the
model previously claimed to be the "Superadio Plus". There is no "Superadio Plus"
nametag anywhere on it. The front reads "GENERAL ELECTRIC electronic tuning FM-AM
RECEIVER"
The reason I ask is that I have heard this radio called a "Superadio" in the past in
other threads and several places on the internet, but no one has ever provided a
picture of this radio's nameplate or any box or literature supporting the claim.
Thus I have to question whether it was marketed as such, or if the name was just
attributed to it later by Superadio fans. I also have the cassette recorder version
of this radio, and with it came a little flyer describing the new "electronic tuning
FM-AM receivers", with no "superadio" mention.
Sorry Brenda Ann, I guess I need to see some proof, not someone's 20+ year old
memories to convince me.
Maybe RHF can photograph his radio and share the picture with us if his has the name
somewhere on it.
Uncle Peter
Here you go... the original price, timeframe and model number are
discussed. Pretty much supports Brenda's recollections. They also
have some info on the frontends of the other models on the website.
Pete
jim menning
"Uncle Peter" <radioco...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:%ttti.4947$Pv4....@newsfe19.lga...
Yes Pete, I have been there many times before, but no one has provided any pictures,
box art, or advertising to indicate it was indeed marketed as such. Others are
claiming the name is right on the radio itself. Mine is sitting right in front of
me, it has no Superadio nameplate. I only want confirmation I can verify, not to
start a battle.
RHF
wrote:
-
- http://mysite.verizon.net/vze20h45/radio/superadio/gesr_plus.html
-
- Here you go... the original price, timeframe and model number are
- discussed. Pretty much supports Brenda's recollections. They also
- have some info on the frontends of the other models on the website.
-
- Pete
.
Pete - TYVM for the Link/URL ~ RHF
.
The GE Superadio Plus : A Report -by- T. David Zimmerman
.
http://mysite.verizon.net/vze20h45/radio/superadio/gesr_plus.html
.
{ The GE Superadio Plus= The "Digital" GE Superadio }
.
.
. .
RHF
> "Uncle Peter" <radioconnect...@cox.net> wrote in message
JM,
You are Right a the GE Model 7-2882_; the so called
"Digital" GE Superadio -or- GE Superadio Plus; does
not have the "Superadio" name on the Radio.
-But- It does have a few of the Superadio features like
the 200mm Ferrite Antenna and the 5-Inch Speaker.
- - - The Look of a GE Superadio ! ? ! ?
However - What Defines a GE Superadio is the RF
and IF Circuitry that is 'internal' to the Radio and
whether the GE Model 7-2882_ has it or not is . . .
To-Be-Determined [.]
? Question ? Does anyone 'know' for sure -if- the
GE Model 7-2882_ has the same 'internal' RF and
IF Circuitry as the GE Superadios I and II ? ? ?
i want to know ~ RHF
.
.
. .
RHF
> "Brenda Ann" <bren...@shinbiro.com> wrote in message
>
> news:YrednR1hFNEurSvb...@giganews.com...
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > "jim menning" <jmenningS...@new.rr.com> wrote in message
> >news:46b60644$0$31254$4c36...@roadrunner.com...
>
> >> "Scott W. Harvey" <NOT_MY_R...@email.com> wrote in message
> >>news:f93u6...@news5.newsguy.com...
>
> >>> There WAS a digital version of the GE superadio, called the superadio plus, made
> >>> in 1982.
>
> >> Was it originally named that by GE or just by later aficionados in their
> >> comparisons?
>
> >> I've got one right here in front of me (GE 7-2882A), and it's labeled as an
> >> "electronic tuning FM-AM receiver", not a "superadio plus" or "superadio+".
>
> >> As far as I know, this was never touted by GE top be a "superadio". Does anyone
> >> have pictures of a box or advertising they can share to show GE called it one?
>
> > I distinctly remember a digital Superadio Plus. It sold for a very short time
> > around 1983 or 84? It clearly said "Superadio Plus" on the front panel.
>
> As I said, I have the GE 7-2882A sitting right here in front of me, and that is the
> model previously claimed to be the "Superadio Plus". There is no "Superadio Plus"
> nametag anywhere on it. The front reads "GENERAL ELECTRIC electronic tuning FM-AM
> RECEIVER"
>
> The reason I ask is that I have heard this radio called a "Superadio" in the past in
> other threads and several places on the internet, but no one has ever provided a
> picture of this radio's nameplate or any box or literature supporting the claim.
> Thus I have to question whether it was marketed as such, or if the name was just
> attributed to it later by Superadio fans. I also have the cassette recorder version
> of this radio, and with it came a little flyer describing the new "electronic tuning
> FM-AM receivers", with no "superadio" mention.
JM - I Can Confirmed Your Findings ~ RHF
>
> Sorry Brenda Ann, I guess I need to see some proof, not someone's 20+ year old
> memories to convince me.
>
> Maybe RHF can photograph his radio and share the picture with us if his has the name
> somewhere on it.
Sorry all the Photos of the various GE Superadios
that I had posted to the "longrange" Yahoo Group
{ GE Superadio Group For Connoisseurs ] a few
years ago are gone; and i do not know where the
originals are . . . ~ RHF
.
.
. .
Steven
Where are the PICTURES?
Steven
That's pretty stupid, and I'm sorry that I have to say it. Still, one
does not enter evidence into a court with a statement that "I know
where it is".
Please corroborate your statements in the future, wherever/whenever or
you'll have credibility trouble in a lot of places.
Radio Abby
cuh...@webtv.net
to anyway) that I like so much.Then, KVOO went from AM to FM
broadcasting.Almost any of my old AM radios would pick up KVOO at night
time only.My G.E.''Superadio'' wouldn't pick up KVOO any better than my
other AM radios.One of the reasons I bought a C.Crane Sangean AM FM
Weather two tv channels radio (as most of y'all know, I sent that radio
back to C.Crane, a week later) about eight or nine years ago was because
of Art Bell and George Noory and Popular Science magazine lieing about
how good those C.Crane radios are.I even bought a Sangean ATS 909 (I
think that was/is the model of that radio) from C.Crane about eight or
nine years ago, I sent that over rated piece of junk back to C.Crane
too) The only way to know if a radio is any good or not is to buy it and
try it out.Of course, almost all of the over three hundred old radios I
own, I bought them at thrift stores and junk shops and fleamarkets many
years ago.
cuhulin
cuh...@webtv.net
size antenna in a radio and call it Super.
cuhulin
RHF
>
> - Show quoted text -
Radio Abby,
I am so sorry that you are having reading comprehension problems.
I simply confirmed JM"s statements and findings.
Please follow the Posts in the Thread so that you
can make intelligent contributions without resorting
to calling someone "Stupid" when you can not keep
up with the topic as it evolves.
Scott W. Harvey
>
> Well, it seems to me we need to check the GE radios against a radio which
> has a known sensitivity level on the AM band. I have to use my so-called
> Superradio with a tunable external loop to picked up most stations I want.
> So it is not very super. And I have the Radio Shack version too. About
> half the time it has distored audio, and other half it works ok, but with
> inferior tone. Ok, they are cheap, I'll grant you that. C. Crane and
> Company advertise a real super radio, the Mini CC radio. Has anyone tried
> it for $149.95?
I have a CC radio...It's pretty good, but I wouldn't pay $150.00 for one
(I paid $20.00 for mine). Like the superradio, It exploits the rather
poor sensitivity of most tabletop radios of today by adding an RF stage.
If I were a consumer shopping for a sensitive radio, I'd buy one of the
many shortwave portables on the market in the same price range. They
have just about everything the C Crane radio has and shortwave to boot.
I also have the GE superradios I, II and III. my superradio III is
sensitive but is just about inferior in every other way to the other two
earlier sets. The superradio II is the best of the three for AM DX. I
also have the radio shack version-it appears to be a superradio III with
sloppy attention to proper alignment at the factory.
-Scott
Scott W. Harvey
>> Most AM/FM radios don't have an RF stage. Only higher-end home
>> systems and car radios do anymore for the most part. The front ends
>> on your average portable are just an LO section and an input tuning
>> section (antenna). Even average home systems don't have the additional
>> RF stage. Makes for horrid sensitivity and even worse overload problems
>> close in.
>
> Show me any commercial FM radio or tuner, at any price, that _doesn't_ have
> an RF stage. I find it very, very, very hard to believe that there are such
> radios.
>
no RF stage for either AM or FM.
-Scott
Scott W. Harvey
original box I think as well. That was a couple of years ago.
-Scott
RHF
>
> - Show quoted text -
Radio Abby,
? Evidence ?
? Court ?
! Time for a Reality Check !
. This is a Usenet NewsGroup .
oops reality - oh never mind ~ RHF
.
.
. .
Omer Suleimanagich
Is this the mother of all AM radios that is being sold today?!
Omer
"Brenda Ann" <bre...@shinbiro.com> wrote in message
news:zeWdna4bAIP3Iijb...@giganews.com...
>
> "george conklin" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote in message
> news:13bbena...@corp.supernews.com...
>>
>> Well, it seems to me we need to check the GE radios against a radio
>> which has a known sensitivity level on the AM band. I have to use my
>> so-called Superradio with a tunable external loop to picked up most
>> stations I want. So it is not very super. And I have the Radio Shack
>> version too. About half the time it has distored audio, and other half
>> it works ok, but with inferior tone. Ok, they are cheap, I'll grant you
>> that. C. Crane and Company advertise a real super radio, the Mini CC
>> radio. Has anyone tried it for $149.95?
>
>
> If you need an external tuned loop, then you need an alignment. If it's an
> SRIII, then you're probably out of luck. If it's an SRII or SRI, then you
> can get it properly aligned and it would be pretty much unbeatable for AM
> and FM reception.
>
Steven
>
> - Show quoted text -
I've been here almost eight years. Go be Jack Handy for others.
Thank you kindly, shalom and aloha
Steven
wrote:
> http://www.hardwaremaniac.com/reviews/ccrane/ccradioplus_01.htm
>
> Is this the mother of all AM radios that is being sold today?!
>
>
> news:zeWdna4bAIP3Iijb...@giganews.com...
>
>
>
>
>
> > "george conklin" <nos...@nospam.com> wrote in message
> >news:13bbena...@corp.supernews.com...
>
> >> Well, it seems to me we need to check the GE radios against a radio
> >> which has a known sensitivity level on the AM band. I have to use my
> >> so-called Superradio with a tunable external loop to picked up most
> >> stations I want. So it is not very super. And I have the Radio Shack
> >> version too. About half the time it has distored audio, and other half
> >> it works ok, but with inferior tone. Ok, they are cheap, I'll grant you
> >> that. C. Crane and Company advertise a real super radio, the Mini CC
> >> radio. Has anyone tried it for $149.95?
>
> > If you need an external tuned loop, then you need an alignment. If it's an
> > SRIII, then you're probably out of luck. If it's an SRII or SRI, then you
> > can get it properly aligned and it would be pretty much unbeatable for AM
>
> - Show quoted text -
That's a Crosley WLW
William Sommerwerck
>> that _doesn't_ have an RF stage. I find it very, very, very hard
>> to believe that there are such radios.
> They exist, and they suck. Look at a low-end boombox and you
> will find no RF stage for either AM or FM.
If this is so, then the manufacturer must assume the product will only be
used in areas of high signal strength.
William Sommerwerck
> stereos, you will find only two sections to the FM tuner:
> 1) Local oscillator
> 2) Antenna tuning
> Same for the AM section.
That goes without saying, as AM radios have generally lacked an RF stage for
nigh-on to 70 years. It just isn't needed for most local reception.
> I have seen very very VERY few portables with an RF amp section
> for FM. Less rare were ones with an RF amp for AM, such as the
> Channel Master 8 transistor sets.
I'm in a bad position to argue this point, because I rarely (ie, at this
point in my life, never) service radios. But what you're saying goes
completely against my experience -- and the service manuals for equipment I
own.
The 40-year-old Sony FM/AM radios I own (TFM 825 / 850, EFM 117, & others)
have RF stages for FM, and none for AM. The schematic for the GE P975A
(which I don't own) shows an RF stage for the FM section, none for the AM.
Ditto for all the GE clock-radios I've owned.
I went through the Sams TSM-47 transistor-radio book (dated 12/1964), which
I purchased to get additional data on the Sony EFM-117 I hoped to restore.
Of the 28 models covered, only two AM radios (Ross RE-1902 & Truetone
DC3429B) had an RF stage, and _no_ FM radio lacked one.
The RF stage in an FM tuner * performs a number of functions, one of the
most-important being to bring up the RF signal to a level where it can
override the noise generated in the conversion process. Has the conversion
process, and the transistors used to perform it, improved so much that the
RF stage can be discarded? I don't know, but I doubt it.
Another function is gain. The lost gain has to be made up somewhere,
presumably with another IF stage, which requires parts and has to be
aligned, just as an RF stage. The net savings aren't going to amount to
much.
An FM tuner without an RF stage would be hopelessly insensitive, to the
point where few consumers would find it acceptable ("This-here goddamn radio
don't pick up no stations").
I don't like gainsaying someone who regularly services electronic equipment
(and who usually knows what they're talking about). But I just don't buy
this. (I read Scott Harvey's comments before posting this, and I still find
it hard to believe.) Throughout the history of FM radios, an RF stage has
been the normal state of affairs.
* By "tuner", I mean the electronics preceding the audio stages. All radios
have tuners.
Brenda Ann
That's pretty much the case, as radio stations are no longer protected, nor
do they give a damn about listeners, outside the city grade contour.
John Stone
On 8/6/07 7:33 AM, in article EKOdneWqjIVhiSrb...@giganews.com,
"Brenda Ann" <bre...@shinbiro.com> wrote:
But I have to agree with William on this. I can't remember an FM set that
didn't have an RF amp. Even the cheap tube German sets, known for their
"gutless wonder" circuitry all used 1/2 of an ECC85 for RF amplification on
FM. Transistor sets too. I worked for Sony in the 70's and every FM set had
an RF amp. Granted, most weren't tuned RF stages, but still there was an
amplification stage ahead of the oscillator/mixer.
Brenda Ann
> I don't like gainsaying someone who regularly services electronic
> equipment
> (and who usually knows what they're talking about). But I just don't buy
> this. (I read Scott Harvey's comments before posting this, and I still
> find
> it hard to believe.) Throughout the history of FM radios, an RF stage has
> been the normal state of affairs.
Beitman's 1950, pp. 10
Beitman's 1950, pp. 14
Beitman's 1950, pp. 40
Beitman's 1967-69 pp. 42 (note the antenna input going directly into the
base of the mixer transistor)
Lots more where those came from.
To be fair, a lot of the early SS stuff did have an RF stage, but beginning
sometime in the late 60's, it was almost universally dropped, again, accept
for better car radios and home stereo tuners/receivers. I have an early
Sony FM stereo portable with no RF stage in it. It does OK for what it is,
but almost deaf as a post outside a strong signal area.
jim menning
I had asked for pictures here and in other forums in the past, but to date haven't
seen any. I have the radio here, and contrary to other claims, there is no
indication on it that it is a "Superadio".
Michael A. Terrell
>
> Radio Abby,
>
> I am so sorry that you are having reading comprehension problems.
>
> I simply confirmed JM"s statements and findings.
Ignore Skippy. He's the new:rec.antiques.radio+phono version of your
'Coon Hauler'. He is a bipolar twit who likes to send threatening
e-mails, and make crank phone calls to cause problems for people he
doesn't like.
--
Service to my country? Been there, Done that, and I've got my DD214 to
prove it.
Member of DAV #85.
Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida
radio...@gmail.com
>
> But I have to agree with William on this. I can't remember an FM set that
> didn't have an RF amp. Even the cheap tube German sets, known for their
> "gutless wonder" circuitry all used 1/2 of an ECC85 for RF amplification on
> FM. Transistor sets too. I worked for Sony in the 70's and every FM set had
> an RF amp. Granted, most weren't tuned RF stages, but still there was an
> amplification stage ahead of the oscillator/mixer.
Two classic examples that are common as dirt in the 'old radio' world
are the RCA 68R* series and the Philco 49-905. They are everywhere
so they must have sold millions. Granted they have an additional IF
stage on FM but they are really poor performers.
Philco apparently rethought it with the 50-925 the following year
(same case, etc) and its a pretty good radio.
I live 40-50 miles out from most any FM stations and the difference in
having an RF amp or not means hearing something ...or not...without an
outdoor antenna.
-Bill
Steven
> "Scott W. Harvey" <NOT_MY_R...@email.com> wrote in messagenews:f96e...@news5.newsguy.com...
>
>
>
>
>
> > jim menning wrote:
> >> "Uncle Peter" <radioconnect...@cox.net> wrote in message
> >>news:%ttti.4947$Pv4....@newsfe19.lga...
> >>>http://mysite.verizon.net/vze20h45/radio/superadio/gesr_plus.html
>
> >>> Here you go... the original price, timeframe and model number are
> >>> discussed. Pretty much supports Brenda's recollections. They also
> >>> have some info on the frontends of the other models on the website.
>
> >>> Pete
>
> >> Yes Pete, I have been there many times before, but no one has provided any
> >> pictures, box art, or advertising to indicate it was indeed marketed as such.
> >> Others are claiming the name is right on the radio itself. Mine is sitting right
> >> in front of me, it has no Superadio nameplate. I only want confirmation I can
> >> verify, not to start a battle.
> > Someone posted pictures on the binaries of the radio, and also the original box I
> > think as well. That was a couple of years ago.
>
> I had asked for pictures here and in other forums in the past, but to date haven't
> seen any. I have the radio here, and contrary to other claims, there is no
>
> - Show quoted text -
It's a tag of legend. Something people add by association and it
sticks. Counsel may step down.
Michael Black
it had no RF stage, which did make it stand out at the time it
was made (I have a Popular Electronics review of the unit, which
says as much). It was lacking in sensitivity, but it was the best
FM receiver I had up to that point (late eighties).
The trick was that the average FM radio is overly sensitive. It
has more than is needed, and does nothing to compensate for that.
Hence they tend to overload where there are strong signals, so you
never get to receive the non-local signals that would require the
extra sensitivity.
Henry Kloss made this point in one interview I read. He said too
many FM receivers were designed for non-urban use, while much of
the time they were used close to strong signals.
That Sony, because it didn't overload, was actually better at
receiving distant stations because if they were receivable, they
weren't covered over with overload from local stations.
It wsa the first FM receiver I had that I could actually DX with.
I found a boombox a few years ago, and was unable to receive the
"local" NPR station (ie down in Vermont), while the station
otherwise is reliable in reception here. I thought it needed a
better antenna, but in fiddling with it, I noticed putting my hand
on the whip improved reception of the non-local station. I removed
the whip, and that station came in fine. Clearly the boombox was
overloading on the local stations, and the otherwise strong enough NPR
station was not getting past that overload. Reduce the strength of the
local signals by removing the whip, and there was no overload, yet
sensitivity was still good enough for the relatively strong non-local
NPR station to get through.
It's easier to design a sensitive receiver (which looks good in the
specs, if specs were discussed much anymore) than it is to design
a receiver that has good overload resistance. Car radios tend to
have it, since they can't count on local stations yet since they
aren't in a fixed situation they may get very close to stations.
And of course you can pay for something quite fancy that will have
both good sensitivity and good overload resistance.
Michael
cuh...@webtv.net
cuhulin
Stephan Grossklass
Hmm. An FM/AM IC that might be found in a boombox is Sony's CXA1238, and
even that includes an RF preamp for FM in common-base configuration and
allows connecting a bandpass (or rather bandstop) between RF amp and
mixer.
As far as the poor overload rejection is concerned, this has to do with
weak mixers inside ICs and insufficient RF filtering. A typical config
for a low-end FM receiver would look like this (tuning via varicap
diodes or tuning caps with plastic dielectric):
fixed bandpass for all of FM -> RF amp -> 1 tuned tank circuit -> mixer
^
. |
LO
It typically takes a frontend chip with a balanced mixer like the
venerable TA7358P/LA1185 to achieve good results in such a config
(actually the datasheet suggests this and it's commonly used that way).
The most fancy configuration I've seen with this chip is the 4-gang one
found in the Redsun RP2000/2100 and its rebadges:
1 tuned tank circuit -> RF amp -> 2 tuned tank circuits -> mixer
^
. |
LO
Unsurprisingly, its FM frontend is reported to be just about bulletproof
for a portable.
FM frontends in dedicated tuners historically had up to 7 or so tuning
gangs, but with later advances in mixers in particular, there are some
models with seemingly modest 4-gang frontends but not so modest
sensitivity and overload handling; many 5-gang tuners in the later 1980s
actually used the additional gang for a tuned LO buffer.
Stephan (F'up2 rrs set)
--
Home: http://stephan.win31.de/
Weniger Meer ist mehr Mehr.
cuh...@webtv.net
radio(s) for AM DXing.I just might have one sitting around here
somewhere,,, as many old radios that I own.
cuhulin
The Shadow
<cuh...@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:867-46B7...@storefull-3254.bay.webtv.net...
Years ago we bought the Father-in law a Sears Silvertone AM Only Tube Radio
with a Tuned RFStage. The All Americn 5 AC/DC sets won't hack it.
Old Dad had to receive his baseball games - night or day, throughout the
basball season. Even when his team(s) came on TV, he shut off the TV sound
and listened to the AM announcers --- he was so used to them.
Bottom line -- look for a 1960's Sears Silvertone with a tuned RF stage or
other brand with the tuned RF stage.
In the winter months, at night, the Silvertone would pick up AM stations
from all over the USA and of course the big Mexican blasters of the 60's as
well.
We did add an outdoor random wire antenna (with a lightning arrestor) and a
good ground.
And as you probably know -- auto (car) radios mostly had tuned RF stages and
at night in the winter, again the big clear channel stations all across
country would come rolling in -- and lots of small stations as well -- many
piled up on each other.
Also a gadget that works well was developed in Alaska - to receive the 48
states. See URL:
http://www.ccrane.com/antennas/am-antennas/select-a-tenna-regular-model.aspx
Several Models Available
Good Luck with AM DXing - my Radio Shack DX-398 and GE super radio with the
Select-A-Tenna do very well.
PS the remains of the Clear Channel AM stations are at URL:
http://ac6v.com/clearam.htm
Da Shadow Knows - Lamont
craigm
It is not that the radios are too sensitive, they just have poor dynamic
range or a poor ability to handle strong signals.
>
> Henry Kloss made this point in one interview I read. He said too
> many FM receivers were designed for non-urban use, while much of
> the time they were used close to strong signals.
>
> That Sony, because it didn't overload, was actually better at
> receiving distant stations because if they were receivable, they
> weren't covered over with overload from local stations.
>
> It wsa the first FM receiver I had that I could actually DX with.
>
> I found a boombox a few years ago, and was unable to receive the
> "local" NPR station (ie down in Vermont), while the station
> otherwise is reliable in reception here. I thought it needed a
> better antenna, but in fiddling with it, I noticed putting my hand
> on the whip improved reception of the non-local station. I removed
> the whip, and that station came in fine. Clearly the boombox was
> overloading on the local stations, and the otherwise strong enough NPR
> station was not getting past that overload. Reduce the strength of the
> local signals by removing the whip, and there was no overload, yet
> sensitivity was still good enough for the relatively strong non-local
> NPR station to get through.
Reducing the antenna reduces the signal, it does not change any
characteristic of the electronics. Again, this radio is poorly designed in
that it cannot handle large signals.
The Shadow
<cuh...@webtv.net> wrote in message
news:808-46B5...@storefull-3253.bay.webtv.net...
> www.devilfinder.com Which radio came before the G.E.Superadio?
>
> Supposedly, according to the model number on my radio, it is a
> G.E.Superadio 1.But nowhere on my radio does it say Superadio and the FM
> whip antenna has a plastic covering which encloses most of the first
> metal tube section of the antenna.So, what radio do I own? It is an
> original Superadio, or a forerunner of a G.E.Supeadio 1? I bought the
> radio back in the 1980s at a local Service Merchandise store.I think it
> was in the 1980s, might have been earlier than that.
> cuhulin
>
FOR super radio models see URL:
http://mysite.verizon.net/vze20h45/radio/superadio/gesr_tech.html#N5
Lamont
The Shadow
More on GE Super Radio Models -- back to 1979
http://mysite.verizon.net/vze20h45/radio/superadio/gesr_plus.html
http://mysite.verizon.net/vze20h45/radio/superadio/gesr_tech.html#N5
http://mysite.verizon.net/vze20h45/radio/superadio/gesr_tech.html
Lamont (I have the GE II and the Radio Shack versions)
Scott W. Harvey
William,
There are two factors at work here:
1. IC technology has improved to the point where it is possible to throw
together a converter with cheap parts that will behave itself well
enough for a manufacturer to eschew an FM RF stage.
2. What we're talking about here is NOT a quality radio. Such an
arrangement (FM with no RF stage) will only appear to work well in an
big-city urban environment with a whole bunch of 100 KW monster FM
stations close by. In the USA, that means places like NYC, Chicago, LA
San Francisco, and the like. These radios are sold in grey-market shops,
flea markets, and other bazaar-like places in urban centers to
unsophisticated and undiscriminating consumers. Take them out of that
environment and their shortcomings quickly become apparent. No
name-brand manufacturer such as Sony or GE would ever stoop so low on
the cheapness scale as this-it is strictly a domain for the no-name
brands from China.
BTW, I would say that the Sams book you got underrepresents the number
of 1960s transistor sets with AM RF stages. There was a real competition
among manufacturers back in those days, and sensitivity was a major
selling point. I'd say about 75% of the 1960-1965 era transistor sets I
own (most of which are larger than pocket size) have an AM RF stage, and
a lot of those are amazingly hot on the AM BC bands-as hot as my better
1930s tube radios in many cases. If you take stock of those that also
have shortwave bands, the percentage with AM RF stages jumps to almost 100%
Later on in the decade, the desire for sensitivity seemed to wane in
comparison to the desire to market and sell a radio at a low price. For
most radios thereafter, that meant bye-bye to an RF stage-which is
exactly why the Superradio and CC radios have their market niche now.
-Scott
Steven
> On Aug 5, 7:28 pm, Steven <thisjukeboxplays33...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Aug 5, 8:08 pm, RHF <rhf-newsgro...@pacbell.net> wrote:
>
> > > On Aug 5, 2:10 pm, "jim menning" <jmenningS...@new.rr.com> wrote:
>
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
>
> I am so sorry that you are having reading comprehension problems.
As a devout, well established bipolar walking fool, sir I had no
READING comprehension problems WHATSOEVER. I asked you simply to do
your homework first, typing second.
My reluctant colleagues will probably agree to themselves and answer
other questions without comment for the most part.
Thou havest nary the piss to join the vinager union, thus verily I
urge your reduction of cocksurity to commence in the uncouth slang of
children past--"chill out, dude".
Steven
Quoth the Raven: "Stink op shit is nog geïnstalleerde norm bij de
fabriek en altijd bij geen extra last aan de ontvanger.
take it up with a TV judge, Steven, old enough but capable so there.
William Sommerwerck
about dirt-cheap FM radios aimed at urban listeners, I'm not upset.
The Sony EFM-117 in this manual -- which I have several non-working samples
of, and owned as a teenager -- has a long ferrite rod, but no AM RF amp.
maa...@panic.xx.tudelft.nl
I imagine the design as a whole would be a bit different from the usual
concepts, as I seem to remember it uses one or more tunnel-diodes.
--
Met vriendelijke groet,
Maarten Bakker.
William Sommerwerck
>> talking about dirt-cheap FM radios aimed at urban listeners,
>> I'm not upset. The Sony EFM-117 in this manual -- which I have
>> several non-working samples of, and owned as a teenager --
>> has a long ferrite rod, but no AM RF amp.
> I imagine the design as a whole would be a bit different from the usual
> concepts, as I seem to remember it uses one or more tunnel diodes.
Not really. You'd think the tunnel diode would have been used for the LO,
but it's the mixer! Perhaps the tunnel diode was significantly less noisy,
but the EFM-117 is not an exceptionally sensitive radio -- merely good.
Uncle Peter
"jim menning" <jmenni...@new.rr.com> wrote in message
news:46b66b57$0$29666$4c36...@roadrunner.com...
>
> "Uncle Peter" <radioco...@cox.net> wrote in message
> news:%ttti.4947$Pv4....@newsfe19.lga...
>> http://mysite.verizon.net/vze20h45/radio/superadio/gesr_plus.html
>>
>
> Yes Pete, I have been there many times before, but no one has provided any
> pictures, box art, or advertising to indicate it was indeed marketed as
> such. Others are claiming the name is right on the radio itself. Mine is
> sitting right in front of me, it has no Superadio nameplate. I only want
> confirmation I can verify, not to start a battle.
>
jim menning
There should still be some pretzels and chips from the last time I was there.
Jeffrey D Angus
jim menning wrote:
> "Uncle Peter" wrote:
>>
>>I'll go stand in the corner again. Sniff...
>>
>
> There should still be some pretzels and chips from the
> last time I was there.
You left chips and pretzels? The only ones I could find
were under the seat cushions.
Jeff
Michael A. Terrell
You weren't quick enough! Randy beat you to them, and the cooler of
beer.
Michael A. Terrell
Tunnel diodes were supposed to be excellent mixers, with low noise
and good IMD characteristics. In fact, the IEEE proposed a sat TV
service in the late '60s, using 30 foot sat dishes, and a tunnel diode
mixer front end. I was so expensive that it was never built.
jim menning
"Jeffrey D Angus" <jan...@socal.rr.com> wrote in message
news:46baa1ba$0$4731$4c36...@roadrunner.com...
That's why I didn't eat them.