The $99 Boston Acoustics Horizon Solo Ushers a New Radio Era

The two radios above are actually one radio, the $99 Boston Acoustics Horizon Solo. As a radio enthusiast for the last 5 years or so, I am going to go out on a limb and say that the Horizon Solo represents a huge leap in radio innovation, reception, ergonomics, and sound quality, especially when one considers its affordable price point. Let us go over the features that make it clearly superior to its competition (I am not an employee for Boston Acoustics; I am simply assessing its quality in comparison to dozens upon dozens of radios that I own or that I have tried):

1. The sound is big, crisp, bright, detailed, and talk radio sounds intimate. I own the Boston Acoustics Recepter that retails for $150 and the Horizon Solo sounds even better with its 3.5-inch speaker.
2. The interface is easy to use. You simply press the mode button and scroll through the radio bands, the clock, the bass, the treble, etc.
3. The size and shape leaves a small footprint by the bedside. No radio of this size comes close to generating this quality of sound.
4. Now for the most impressive part: The AM/FM reception is amazing. I'm sick of suffering mediocre FM on my Tivoli Model One and Three, my Sangean WR-2. The Horizon Solo leaves these other radios in the dust and it's the least expensive by far. With the Horizon Solo's wire FM antenna hanging below (I don't even bother to elevate it.), the Horizon Solo is grabbing tough-to-get FM stations like 89.3, 88.9, and 103.1 with ease--as good if not better than my legendary Kaito 1103. The tuner is so good, I may have to sell several of my radios throughout the house and replace them with the Horizon Solo. As soon as word spreads about the Horizon Solo's tuner performance, the competition is going to have to go back to their tech department and start all over again. Consumers aren't going to fork out good dough for subpar reception when they can buy a Horizon Solo.

Final Thoughts: The very capable Boston Acoustics Recepter, which retails for $50 more than the Horizon Solo, should be on its way out soon. It has less features than the Solo; it doesn't even have a headphone jack and sure enough the Solo has one. The Solo gets even better reception than the BAR and it has a replaceable grill so that you can get a variety of colors that suit your taste. Moreover, as you can see from the photos above, you can configure the read-out bezel so that the radio is either vertical or horizontal. My congrats to Boston Acoustics for making a radio that smart people want to buy.

For the story of how I by chance stumbled upon the Horizon Solo, which inexplicably was stocked on a Torrance, Ca,Target shelf a month before its official release date, CLICK HERE. 

Update: I bought a second Horizon Solo because my Tivoli Songbook and Tivoli Model Three were performing miserably. Due to the amount of computer interference I was skeptical about the Horizon Solo's AM/FM sensitivity but it pulls in most stations that the Songbook and Model Three could not and unlike the Model Three there is no signal fade. The performance in my interference-laden office attests to the Horizon Solo's superior tuner.

Below is another new offering: The Boston Acoustics Horizon Duo, which retails for about $150 and is being sold at Electronic Warehouse.

Comments

[Jeff McMahon]

I'll post your comments so readers can be cautioned. This is a shame. I really love the 3 Horizon Solos I've purchased.

[Joe Marshall]

Another Solo is being returned. Malfunctioning mode control and aux input are the culprits.

I agree it sounds even better than the Recepter (and that's high praise), but the Solo's operation and quality control leave something to be desired. I'm a longtime BA fan and owner, but the Solo has not impressed me as one of their better efforts.

[Jeff McMahon]

I agree this "first year" model is getting a lot of bug complaints. I guess I've been lucky with the 3 I purchased.

[Joe Marshall]

Understand I'm not slamming the Solo, or its fans, or Boston Acoustics in general, but being "first year" doesn't excuse poor quality control. My Recepter is very early "first year", and has operated flawlessly since day one. BA has been around since 1979 so they should have plenty of product launch experience by now.

Herculodge Response: I completely agree with you. I continue getting reports of bugs from readers.

Which begs another question... Since I bought my Recepter, BA has since been acquired by D&M Holdings. Wonder if a new corporate culture is to blame?

(Sorry. I put away my soapbox now.)

[Jeff McMahon]

Thanks for the info: I didn't know there was a new "corporate culture" at Boston Acoustics. Maybe that explains the bugs. Readers continue to send in complaints.

[Gay Rodeo]

No problems with the Horizon Solo. It's a winner.

Maybe someone could find a commonplace with the serial numbers and find bad strings to avoid since they print them on the box.

Oh and Herc, good review, and time to buy some tissues.

GR

[Frank Markase]

I just purchased the Solo but am returning it. Let me tell you why. The tuner sensitivity and selectivity is excellent. The AM does need some improvement in the audio area. What really bothered me is the way this unit sounds. All voice sounds like it's coming from under a pillow. Adjusting the bass and treble controls produces only a marginal improvement. All the audio has a bass booming hollow sound. The midrange is definitely lacking. I set out to find out why the sound irked me so much. I pulled out my trusty analyzer and looked at the response from the speaker. Pink Noise audio was fed to the Aux. input. I was right. There is no setting with the tone controls that will produce a flat response. I am not being critical of this unit but for $100 I feel I should get some decent audio out of it. I have photos of the various settings showing the 1/3 octave analysis. If you like booming mid bass, this is the unit for you. It gets much more noticeable if you put the unit in a corner where there are 3 reflecting surfaces. I notice that the speaker is not visible through the grille holes and this might be part of the upper frequency problem.

[Jeff McMahon]

Frank,

I've been very happy with the sound but your detailed analysis evidences that you have a much more sophisticated hearing palate than I do. Excess bass is a common complain for Boston Acoustics products, so you're no alone.

Let me know when you find a high-performing radio that provides a good speaker. For me, the Tivoli Model One sounds fantastic but the FM tuner drifts. Jeff

[Cyril]

I find the bass (or mid-bass) issue more apparent with the aux input than with radio. In fact it is frankly annoying on aux -- I turn the bass down on aux and keep it flat on FM.

Is it possible that this is due to FM (and AM) transmitting less bass than you would get from a typical MP3/headphone socket?

In which case one would expect the radio to adjust the bass depending on the input.

[Frank Markase]

Hi Jeff,
My listening observations was for the FM band. Radio stations would tend to have less obvious bass due to the audio compression at the station. The signal presented to the Aux. input via a CD or a non- broadcast source would tend to have more dynamic range and thus a more pronounced bass effect. I believed the Aux. input to be the flattest and easiest way to input a test signal to the Solo. The response curves obtained were not smooth but had peaks and valleys and I think that is what I was "hearing". It is possible that the engineers may have compensated the radio curve for some reason but I could not verify this.

[Jeff McMahon]

Thanks for the technical info, Frank.

But any radios that you do recommend based on speaker sound?

I like the sound of my Solo and my Sangean WR-2.

Jeff

[Ed S.]

You would not want to listen to any speaker with completely "Flat" response...the highs would sear the paint off your walls, neighborhood dogs would bark in pain.
We're talking about a hundred dollar clock radio here. Get something with a parametric EQ or 1/3rd octave band adjustments built-in if you want to tailor the response curve to a fare-thee-well. It will cost a few bucks more.
Otherwise, it's axiomatic that most people prefer a warm bass-y sound to a sterile or tipped-up tizzy or tinny sound. If it sounds muffled to you, perhaps your ears have lost a lot of hi-f response, Frank. It sounds fine to me.

[Frank Markase]

Yes I would like to listen to a flat sounding system. Recording studios have done this for years. The bass and treble controls should have a linear effect on adjusting the tonal balance to suit one's listening preference. The Solo has 12 db variation in the response in the flat position and at best 8 db with bass and treble both at -5. This is too much of a variation. I used this for radio station listening and have heard better sounding radios that don't radically modify the sound. However, I have not found a really good one yet since I just started looking. I purchased the Solo (first) based on reviews that I read. When I find one I will let you know. Till then, I put my $24 Sony ICF-24 back on the table. It doesn't have a lot of bass but it does have sound that is intelligible. Oh yes, my hearing is quite normal.

[Ed S.]

I listen to sound, not to frequency response graphs.

[Frank Markase]

Read the text Ed! The listening came first. I proved what the undesirable sound was I was hearing. I don't go testing all the equipment I buy but this one needed investigation in light of the "I Likes" that I read. I guess maybe you can't have anyone disagree with you since you seem to be the "standard". If it weren't for "sound curves", High Fidelity would have never evolved. Flat= Transparent. You should hear the performance and not the equipment. End of thread.