I concur with Gary's review (photo above is my own) and will use his useful info to enhance my WR-2's AM sound:
The Sangean WR-2 has very good sound quality, with powerful bass, clear midrange and crisp highs, and it can be tailored with the full-range bass and treble controls. For my taste, the sound on AM is best with the bass set to -4 and the treble set to 0. I'm glad Sangean provides bass and treble controls on the WR-2. This is something they should have done on the PR-D5 and PR-D7. Many makers of premium table radios leave out the tone controls. I applaud Sangean for including them.
The reception on AM is good, but not great. Weaker signals have a much lower audio level than they should, which implies the AGC design is not good. Also, for some reason the audio level on AM is much lower than on FM (volume level 40 on AM is roughly equivalent to volume level 30 on FM). These levels should be more closely matched. Overall, the PR-D7 has better AM reception, but it doesn't sound nearly as good. From my location, KFI 980 sounds much stronger and quieter on the PR-D7 than on the WR-2. All of my other regular stations are received fine on the WR-2, with very nice sound quality. One thing to keep in mind is that the ferrite bar antenna runs front to back, on the right side of the WR-2. You'll want to point either side of the radio, not the back of the radio, to the station you're listening to, in order to maximize the signal.
The reception on FM is good. For my application, as a kitchen radio, I found the included wire antenna inadequate, so I'm using a "rabbit ears" antenna instead. It is possible to force the WR-2 to tune FM in mono to improve sensitivity, but not permanently, as you can with the switch on the PR-D5. Each time you tune a station, you have to select mono mode again. The inclusion of RDS is a nice feature.
There are some other minor issues with the WR-2. The tuning knob is too recessed, making it hard to use. The time and frequency will not display simultaneously while the radio is on, unlike with the PR-D7. The power LED is far too bright in dim light, and it doesn't dim with the display dimmer. On AM, pressing the front-panel buttons tends to cause static. It seems like the silver buttons "short out" on the silver front panel (bare metal to bare metal).
The build quality of the WR-2 seems good. It is heavy, but the size is reasonably compact. I don't use the small remote control, but it's a nice feature to have if the radio is located out of arm's reach.
Overall, I find that the WR-2 provides good reception of the AM and FM stations I listen to most often, with very good sound quality, at a reasonable price. None of its flaws are "showstoppers" for me, but hopefully Sangean will address them in an updated version of the radio. I've owned my WR-2 for nearly three years, and I still enjoy using it every day.
This review reminded me to comment on a Bose Wave Radio at my workplace. It's out in our front area for the Salespeople and Sales Coordinator to use. I like it----but I noticed something about the sound that disturbs me. If you are NEAR the radio (particularly if the radio is at or below ear level) you get a very full sound----plenty of bass and good volume. But if you move away from the radio---even at high volume, the sound flattens out. In other words, it works best if you're close to it. I have a Panasonic RF 5000. I put that radio in my garage during our huge snowfalls this season. I could crank that radio up on an FM oldies station, and shovel snow fifty feet away----and still get very ample sound and very GOOD audio. There is positively no way the Bose could do that.
Posted by: Angelo | March 27, 2010 at 01:45 PM
Angelo: A lot of other people have noticed that the Bose Wave Radio bass response is a localized effect. I'd be guessing as to why but maybe that's why I like the sound of good front firing speakers and don't use sub-woofers. As a bass player, I know how a band sounds live and Bose speakers never capture that for me. Sub-woofers just muddy music up to my ears. But that's just my opinion.
(Glad to hear somebody else had to shovel snow this winter.)
Posted by: Radio Russ | March 28, 2010 at 05:13 AM
The Bose Wave Radio doesn't have a subwoofer; just two front-firing speakers and a maze of porting behind it. The Acoustic Wave (the big, ugly version) does.
Years ago, Cambridge Sound Works, while still under Henry Kloss, made a similar radio: the Model 88. It did have a subwoofer, was half the price of Wave, and did fill a room. Fantastic sound. I still have mine, and won't part with it. True to Kloss, though, it had no clock or alarm. There was an add-on alarm clock that sat on your bedside table and controlled the 88 by IR.
Posted by: matt | March 28, 2010 at 06:34 AM
Matt: I knew the smaller Wave radio had no subwoofer but didn't know the Acoustic Wave radio has one. Part of the reason they charge so much for their gear is paying for all their stores and the overly aggressive commissioned salesmen that lurk within.
Cognitive dissonance goes a long way in explaining Bose customer loyalty. Confronting them with the inferior performance of Bose versus good radios and speakers can damage friendships.
I agree with you on the Model 88. I almost bought one and regret that I didn't have the cash at the time. I have been a Henry Kloss fan since the day I was given a Model 21 FM radio for graduation. I'd still have it if it hadn't been stolen during a move.
Posted by: Radio Russ | March 28, 2010 at 08:08 AM
I recently found a Henry Kloss Model 88 and it has phenomenal sound and performance. The model 88 is a forgotten gem.
Posted by: Carlos Edwards | January 21, 2011 at 01:06 PM
I just want to add that the exterior of the HK Model 88 is a superb metalic material like the tank like imperviousness of the old IBM Selectric series of typewriters.
Posted by: Carlos Edwards | January 21, 2011 at 01:45 PM
Alas, the Model 88s give out with time. I had one break which I was able to get repaired some years ago, and now our other one (a $20 flea market find I will admit) has started distorting, and I cannot find anyone who can fix it.
Cambridge Soundworks has changed hands, and has new and unhelpful management, and reports of bad build quality abound.
Funny how sometimes you have someone making a near-perfect product, and then they just stop, and start making a vastly inferior one. There was a very similar (downfiring subwoofer in a metal chassis) product on the market, briefly, called the George, but it did not find a niche.
Posted by: Cale Dreck | March 03, 2012 at 06:33 AM