Herculodge

The Comfort Radio Awards

Not all radios should be “comfort radios.” For example, some radios should be outdoor sportsman radios. The best of this class is the Tivoli PAL with its rubber coating, rugged cube shape, and rechargeable battery. But such a radio is not the focus here. We’re looking at the comfort radio, which, like comfort food, is a soothing presence that often resides by the bed. What makes a radio comforting? We can break down its distinguishing features as thus:

1.    The radio has a handsome, intelligent, elegant appearance that evidences a well-thought design with logical and intuitive ergonomics.
2.    The radio is built low to the ground so that it doesn’t tip over.
3.    The radio has a heavy feel suggesting high quality materials and craftsmanship.
4.    The radio is easy to toggle in the dark of the night.
5.    The radio has strong reception so that the owner isn’t discomforted by constant antenna adjustments.
6.    The radio has reliable, easy-to-use alarm features.
7.    The radio illuminates at the level you want it to, not too much, not too little.
8.    A warm, full speaker that doesn’t sound distant or tinny.
9 . The radio, unlike the analog Tivoli Radio 3 photograph above, must have presets since sleepy heads don't want to use a rotary dial when they're changing stations.
 

With this criteria in mind, let us grade some popular table clock radios.

Third Place: The Eton Sound 100. $100-150 depending on vendor and sales. Grade: B. Strengths: Handsome retro styling, strong AM/FM reception, telescopic FM antenna, built not to tip over, warm speaker. Weaknesses: Can’t read toggle buttons at night; can’t toggle up and down, just up so you have to move through all the presets; remote isn’t practical to use in a dark room. Some owners complain about the bright blue illumination. Speaker not as full as the Sangean WR-2 or the Boston Acoustics Recepter. Some owners complain of the cheap plastic feel.

Second Place: Boston Acoustics Recepter (spelled "Receptor" on Amazon). $100-150 depending on vendor and sales. Grade: B +. Strengths: Compact, smart looking style, excellent AM/FM reception, stable build won’t tip over, easy-to-use toggles and alarm; incredible sound; in fact, the sound is my favorite because voices seem like they’re in the room. The sound, in other words, creates a sense of intimacy and closeness that is unmatched. Let me be clear. For speaker sound, especially for talk radio, the Recepter is my favorite. In fact, one of my weakest AM stations, 710 ESPN, comes in with no interference on my BAR while even my strong Sangean WR-2 can be subject to birdy noise. Weaknesses: No headphone jack. This is a real shame because a headphone jack would earn the Recepter an A grade, which would make it the Comfort Radio King. Alas, this oversight continues to plague this otherwise wonderful product. I wonder how many thousands of radios Boston Acoustics isn’t selling because they failed to include a headphone jack. If you don’t need a headphone jack, this is the best of the 3 radios. But if you need a headphone jack, read on:

First Place: The Sangean WR-2. $140. Grade: A-.  Strengths: Looks good in all colors, especially black. The AM/FM sounds great though I sometimes suffer a compromised 89.3 FM signal with the WR-2’s piggy tail wire FM antenna. Usually, though, the piggy tail works fine. I toggle the presets easily at night. The radio feels heavy and well-made. Weaknesses: Would benefit from a telescopic FM antenna; alarm system is complicated to the degree that I use a cheap 10-dollar alarm in its place.

Final Thoughts: If Boston Acoustics, which provides a sense of closeness and intimacy with its wonderful speaker, sticks a headphone jack on its Recepter, it will surpass the WR-2. If you want to spend less and don’t mind a lightweight radio with slightly less speaker fullness, check out the very capable Sangean PR-D5.   

Eton P'9110 Earns Poor Review

I'm sad to report that in spite of its revolutionary future look, the gadget people at Crave have justly skewered the radio for its abysmal performance. Link on the Crave Review.

Kaito 1102 Review

I've had my Kaito 1102 for 3 years as of now and while it's relegated to the master bathroom because its small size fits so well on my shampoo cart, it is a radio worth more than its humble designation in my house. The problem with my 1102 is that its small speaker cannot stand up to other radios in my house--my Boston Acoustics Recepter, my Sangean WR-2, and my Tivoli Model 3, to name a few premium radios. However, we must not judge the 1102 against those aforementioned radios for they belong to the "geriatric family" of radios, big premium sound radios with no shortwave. While I'm not "geriatric" by any sense and while I am no shortwave listener, I want to recommend the 1102 for what it is: a compact shortwave/AM/FM radio. In this brief review, I will be comparing the 1102 to its Kaito cousins, the 1101 (which I gave to a friend 2 years ago) and the 1103 (which sits atop my Sangean WR-2). Of the three mentioned Kaitos, the 1102 is, on balance, the best. It is not the best in FM, however. In fact, both the 1101 and 1103, which get A's for FM, have better FM reception than the 1102, which I'd give a B plus. I say this because 89.3 KPCC can be troublesome for most of my radios, but not the 1103, the 1101, or my Sangean PR-D5 (reviewed on this blog). But the easy-to-use ergonomics of the 1102 (one-push for a preset change anywhere on AM or FM) and the superior AM sound over both the 1103 and 1101 make the 1102 the clear winner here. For a final note, let me say the 1102 pulls in 89.3 fine. The only difference is that I have to adjust the antenna more. In contrast, the 1101 and 1103 are so strong on FM that I rarely even have to move the telescopic antenna. The small inconvenience of moving the 1102's antenna is tiny compared to the ergonomics nightmare of the 1103, which requires several "steps" just to change a preset or even adjust the volume. To make things worse, the 1103's AM sounds muddled. So I'd give the top ranking to the 1102 in the battle between the compact Kaitos.

Final Thoughts: While on balance I prefer the 1102 to the 1103, most radio buffs will take the 1103's superior FM reception in spite of its ergonomic flaws over the 1102. In the final analysis, it's a matter of how tolerant you are of the 1103's idiosyncratic controls.

Boston Acoustics Needs a New Radio

I bought a Boston Acoustics Recepter about 10 months ago and love its small size and huge sound. I love its FM/AM reception in spite of its lack of a telescopic FM antenna. It's easy to toggle through the presets. The clock and alarm functions are super easy. It has an auxiliary for my iPod. However, it cannot sit by my bedside because it has no headphone jack. I started exploring other Boston radios and came across the promising Boston Microsystem. It goes for about $350 on Amazon. But I don't need a CD player as like most people I rely on an iPod. Also reviewers complain about glitches with the CD function, which seems common on CD players. Why can't Boston Acoustics make their award-winning Microsystem without the CD player and sell it for $200? I would love to see Boston Acoustics sound with stereo speakers and a headphone jack, which would be, like the Microsystem, in the front panel. That would rival and perhaps dethrone the current clock radio king the Sangean WR-2.  I'd be in the market for that.  A favorable review of the Microsystem can be found at CNET Editor's Review. For an even more thorough review, see Audioholics.

Best Radios for the General Listener Revised and Updated

Category #1: General Use Radio with Great Reception.

The Sangean PR-D5 boasts 2 stereo speakers and RDS as evidenced on the Sangean Website.  Buying from a vendor, one can purchase the new PR-D5 for about $75-89 plus 7 dollars shipping on Amazon.

After reading about the PR-D5's exceptional AM ferrite antenna I could not resist buying it for 70 dollars (after I applied a 25-dollar coupon) on Amazon. The radio was delivered a few days later. I've been using it as a bedside clock radio in place of my Sangean WR-2 and here are some initial impressions.

One: The FM reception is very strong, better than my Sangean WR-2 because the PR-D5 has a telescopic antenna. To give you an example of superior FM reception, 89.3 comes in clear on the PR-D5 whereas you have to hold the piggy tail wire antenna on the WR-2 to get 89.3 clearly. Also the very weak 88.9 comes in fairly strongly on the PR-D5 and barely comes in at all on the WR-2.

Two: The AM reception is very strong, as good as Sangean advertises. I'd say it's a tie with the very strong Sangean WR-2. Both radios are tied for first for my very best AM performers.

Three: In theory, the PR-D5's dual stereo speaker should sound richer, fuller than the WR-2's monoaural speaker but I can't tell the difference. The sound is equal for me. Of course, sound is very subjective. In fact, I actually prefer the single monoaural speaker of the WR-2, especially for AM talk radio. The voices seem slightly muddled with the dual speakers of the PR-D5 yet the voices are clear for FM talk radio. With the stereo speakers, the PR-D5 doesn't seem suitable for "quiet" AM bedside listening, but for filling a room, like a den or a kitchen, the PR-D5 is highly recommended.

Category #2: Clock Radios That Have Great Reception and Rich Sound

. 1. Sangean WR-2, about $140; rich sound, solid heavy construction so it won't tip over; easy to toggle presets in the dark. Weakness: No telescopic FM antenna. Strength: AM.
2. Eton Sound 100, about $150 but I bought a new one on sale for $99. Beautiful retro modern design but some don't like the plastic case. Strength: Has telescopic FM antenna, unlike the WR-2 but its speaker, though adequate, is not as rich as the WR-2. AM is very good.

Category #3: AM/FM Shortwave Portable Radio:

1. The Eton/Grundig E5; about $140. Ergonomically speaking, a much improved version of the Kaito 1103. Unbelievable FM. However, I don't like the AM sound much.

Category  #4:  Military Style Analog Radio

1. Eton S350 Deluxe; $99; Easy to use, big sound but overloads easy on AM. Great FM reception.

Category #5: Outdoor Radio with Rechargeable Battery

1. Tivoli PAL; I bought for $130 in 2004 but has gone up to $200 recently. Rich sound and automatically recharges.

Conclusions: If I could only choose one of the above radios and found myself on a budget, I would definitely go with the Sangean PR-D5. With better sounding AM than the big Eton S350 and equal if not better FM reception, with dual stereo speakers providing adequate sound, with clock radio features, the PR-D5 offers the most bang for the buck out there.

Boston Acoustics Recepter Review

The first thing I notice about the Recepter (spelled "Receptor" on Amazon so I've used that spelling in other posts about this radio) is what a rich sound comes out of such a small radio. Better yet, with talk radio you feel as if the voices are in your room as the sound affords a sense of closeness and intimacy that is unmatched. The Recepter is only 7.5 inches wide and 4.25 inches in height. Like most upscale radios, the designers opted to put the dreaded piggy tail wire FM antenna in the back as if to imply that the upscale radio buyer is a white bread philistine who focuses more on looks and flashy speaker sound than he does powerful reception. So I anticipated average reception. I was wrong. Even with the piggy tail in the back, the FM is very strong as it pulls in 89.3 KPCC, a usually troublesome station, with great ease. AM also sounds great and I would say AM is well above average. The ergonomics are easy to use. You turn a dial clockwise or counter-clockwise to toggle through the presets. However, this radio inexplicably has one glaring weakness: It has no headphone jack. A clock radio without a headphone jack is like pesto without garlic. If Boston Acoustics would please put a headphone jack in the model's next incarnation, I might use it by my bedside in place of my Sangean WR-2. Until then, the very reliable WR-2 must remain by my side while the Recepter fills my kitchen quite well.

Tivoli Model Three Review

This is an attractive radio, with wood cabinet and huge monoaural speaker that produces great sound. How great is the sound? Let me point out that the speaker is richer and fuller than my Boston Acoustics Radio, my Eton Sound 100, my Tivoli Songbook, my Tivoli PAL, and my Sangean WR-2. The aforementioned radios are all of premium quality and have nice speakers but not as nice as the Tivoli Three's. It also has the treasured Tivoli nameplate. But $200 for an analog radio? No presets? You've got to be kidding. So I was resigned to not getting the Tivoli Model Three until I found a new one being sold by a vendor on Amazon for $66. I've had the radio for about a month now and while the speaker is incredible, the tuner is a nightmare because of signal fade on FM and AM. When I'm locked into the station's "sweet spot," the sound is fine but there is no stability here. The only remedy is to stay close to the radio and let your body work as an antenna since the piggy tail wire antenna in the back is mostly worthless. Another solution would be to hook up a Kaito 1103 (featured below as it sits atop my Sangean WR-2)with a ten-dollar cable to the Tivoli and simply use the Tivoli's speaker while using the Kaito's tuner. One reader suggested that I remedy the signal fade by hooking up a dipole antenna. I might try that. Update: 10-17-07: I replaced the provided wire antenna with a 15-dollar Terk FM antenna and the FM drift is now gone. So I'm happily using my Tivoli Three in the living room. Its speaker trumps all the other radios in the house. But to make this radio worth $200, it should be digital with presets and have a telescopic antenna. A telescopic antenna need not be too long. My Eton Sound 100's telescopic antenna is a mere 30 inches, and the FM reception is fantastic. 

Boston Acoustics Receptor Vs. The Sangean PR-D5: A Comparison Test

Two premium radios, The Boston Acoustics Receptor  and the Sangean PR-D5, are pitted against each other in the following comparison.

Sound: Dual speakers make stereo sound in the PR-D5 while the Receptor's monoaural speaker, though lacking stereo sound, is richer and fuller. While I find the sound to be excellent on both, I give a clear edge to the Receptor.

Reception: Telescopic FM antenna and 200 mm internal ferrite AM antenna in the PR-D5 make it the winner. In fact, my PR-D5 beats my trusty Eton/Grundig S350. However, even though the Receptor has a piggy tail antenna that hangs in the back, its reception is excellent. The winner: The PR-D5.

Presets and general ergonomics: You get only 5 presets on AM and another 5 on FM for the PR-D5, but you can toggle the precise preset without going through the full range. On the other hand, the Receptor has more presets, 20 to be exact. Remember, though, you have to dial through all of them, moving up or down. The winner: A tie.

Alarm clock features: The Receptor is easier to use, the clear winner.

Battery back-up: Both have it, a tie.

iPod connectivity: The PR-D5 has it; the new Receptor model has it. Tie.

Headphone jack: The PR-D5 has it; the Receptor doesn't. The PR-D5 wins.

Radio Data System (RDS ): The PR-D5 has it; the Receptor doesn't. The PR-D5 wins.

Appearance: Many complain about the PR-D5's white "girlie" look. The lower-stance Receptor looks better but I personally don't have a problem with the PR-D5's appearance. Verdict: Personal tastes are subjective, no clear winner here.

Price: Currently, you can purchase the PR-D5 for $75 on Amazon; the Receptor is going for $120. The forty-five dollar difference makes the PR-D5 the clear winner.

Conclusion: Both radios are excellent and either would make a good choice. But cost-wise the PR-D5 offers more features and better reception at less cost, a clear winner, unless you have a major love-on for the Receptor.

My full PR-D5 review is here.