My understanding is that single/double conversion has more to do with
sensitivity on higher frequencies than with selectivity.
Steve
----- Original Message -----
From: "Russ Kiehne" <[log in to unmask]>
To: <[log in to unmask]>
Sent: Monday, January 17, 2011 10:10
Subject: Re: bitter disappointment!
> From what I read, both the Superradio 3 and CCradio are single conversion.
> And you won't get much selectivity. My Radio Shack dx-398 is double
> conversion and I get better selectivity.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Pat Byrne" <[log in to unmask]>
> To: <[log in to unmask]>
> Sent: Sunday, January 16, 2011 6:34 PM
> Subject: Re: bitter disappointment!
>
>
>> Kris and Tom,
>> I heard about the Super radios too late to get anything but the
>> three. And I like it a lot.
>> We also have the seven or eight year old C. Crane radio here and the
>> G E outperforms it big time. The Crane has the NOAA frequencies and
>> that is an advantage and it also had the old TV VHF channels which
>> was kinda nice for news and such but the G E has much better
>> sensititivy and selectivity on A M and the F M is probably equivalent.
>> The really sad part of this whole scenario is that night time A M is
>> nothing like it used to be. It's all call in radio which in my
>> opinion is a huge waste of bandwidth and the same ten shows are
>> repeated nationally so all you hear is duplicates of the same
>> crap. And near Chicago and I suspect all major radio markets, HD
>> makes adjacent channel listening about impossible. Won't even go in
>> to the "when I was young" rant cuz. then everyone will know how old I am.
>> Thanks.
>> Pat, K9JAUAt 10:54 AM 1/17/2011, you wrote:
>>>I agree, Tom. I have both the two and the three, also. I like them
>>>both,but the two is far superior to the three in my opinion.
>>>
>>>
>>>I have seen a couple of the C Crane radios and I'm not that impressed.
>>>I'll
>>>take the super radios over them any day. I think the C Crane are way
>>>over
>>>priced. When you see what GE was able to do with the two and three for a
>>>really reasonable price and, you compare them to the C Crane radios at
>>>much
>>>higher prices, for me it is not worth it.
>>>
>>>Kris
>>>----- Original Message -----
>>>From: "tom behler" <[log in to unmask]>
>>>To: <[log in to unmask]>
>>>Sent: Sunday, January 16, 2011 7:23 PM
>>>Subject: Re: bitter disappointment!
>>>
>>>
>>> > Well, I have a 3 and a 2 here, and will use that 2 until it doesn't
>>> > play
>>> > any more! (grin)
>>> >
>>> > And, I do think the sound of the 2 is far better than the 3.
>>> >
>>> > The base and trebble controls really make a difference on the 2, while
>>> > on
>>> > the 3, they are marginal.
>>> >
>>> > 73 from Tom Behler: KB8TYJ
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > ----- Original Message -----
>>> > From: "Lou Kolb" <[log in to unmask]>
>>> > To: <[log in to unmask]>
>>> > Sent: Sunday, January 16, 2011 2:11 PM
>>> > Subject: Re: bitter disappointment!
>>> >
>>> >
>>> > I have a 3 here. It's ok but from what I understand, the 2 was the
>>> > one
>>> > to
>>> > have. The Secrane radios seem to perform well but I doubt they sound
>>> > as
>>> > good as the super radios since they don't have that big case and
>>> > speaker.
>>> > Lou
>>> > ----- Original Message -----
>>> > From: "tom behler" <[log in to unmask]>
>>> > To: <[log in to unmask]>
>>> > Sent: Sunday, January 16, 2011 9:57 AM
>>> > Subject: Re: bitter disappointment!
>>> >
>>> >
>>> >> Wow, that is really troubling!
>>> >>
>>> >> Tom Behler: KB8TYJ
>>> >>
>>> >> ----- Original Message -----
>>> >> From: "Howard Kaufman" <[log in to unmask]>
>>> >> To: <[log in to unmask]>
>>> >> Sent: Saturday, January 15, 2011 8:29 PM
>>> >> Subject: Re: bitter disappointment!
>>> >>
>>> >>
>>> >> It looks the same, but far worse than the GE 3.
>
|
