Herculodge

When You Live in a No-Radio Zone, What Do You Do?

My wife's grandfather lives in a beautiful beach town, San Clemente, which is between Los Angeles and San Diego. He loves listening to the radio, but the signals from San Diego and Los Angeles can be weak, especially AM at night. He's not eager to tinker with the computer or a WiFi Internet radio (which has a long learning curve) so he's asked me what he might do. The more I looked into his special situation, the more I found that a simple, high-quality solution would cost big money. I'm talking about the $960 Sonos BU130 Digital Music System Bundle. He could then listen to Internet radio stations anywhere in his house. The bundle comes with 2 speakers. He could put one speaker in his living room and the other in his bedroom and he'd be all set. I could set up the system in less than an hour. And he'd have something that really works. But I'm afraid to tell him how much it costs. Maybe he'll want to learn how to use the interface on something like a $235 Sangean WFR-20  WiFi Radio after all.

Not Enough Bling in Your Boom Box? No Problem: The Lasonic X Famous i931

Wired Gadget Blog reviews the Lasonic X Famous i931 for those who can't get enough ostentation in their lives. Or for those who want to make an ironic statement about conspicuous consumption. Just make sure everyone else is in on the joke lest you're dismissed as a poser.

For a YouTube presentation of the Lasonic, CLICK HERE.

Photo from Gizmodo.

First Look: The Kaito 2100

About a month ago, I was on the Universal Radio website, which sells the Kaito 2100 for $99 plus shipping. Deciding that an authentic radio enthusiast/blogger should own what by all accounts is the "best" radio in its class, I ordered a 2100. As it the normal protocol of Internet commerce, I expected an e-mail notification of confirmation of my order with confirmation number, but nothing happened. I checked for credit card activity and there was no sign of the transaction either. I shrugged the incident off as a glitch in the system and was consoled by the fact that I had just pre-ordered a Grundig Satellit 750. But then today the UPS driver stopped in front of my house while I was walking my dog. I had no idea what was in the box and then saw the Universal Radio logo on it and realized I had bought a 2100 after all.

In many ways the 2100, with its dial layout and pseudo-military look, shares its DNA with the Eton S350, a digital radio with no presets. While the 2100 is digital and has presets, you have to press the preset button and go "up" or through the preset cycle. This is annoying and seems like a design flaw. Also when you use the tuner dial there is an annoying beep, which apparently can be eliminated by holding the snooze button, according to someone addressing this problem for Cobalt Pet. I did this and indeed the annoying beep vanished, much to my satisfaction.

The speaker sound is no upgrade from the S350. The sound is loud but hardly refined or sounding like anything that one might consider "high fidelity."  One person on eBay was selling his and he admitted that his radio sounded "harsh." That might be overstated; however, this is not lush sound for listening to jazz or classical. One more peeve: The on button is sticky. Even if you press it firmly, it may or may not turn the radio on. It's common to have to press the on button twice or three times. Same sticky state with the preset button. Fun. Don't despair, though. Simply pinch the radio when you want to turn it on, putting your thumb on the "on" button with your other fingers pressing the radio's back side.

Aside from these criticisms, the 2100 has a solid, rugged feel to it. Its AM/FM reception is fantastic. While its FM is similar to the S350, I'd say there is less background noise on AM. Also consider the $99 I spent on the 2100. That's the same price of the S350 and you're getting a lot more radio with the 2100.

Final Thoughts: For a beginner to radio who doesn't need short wave, the 2100 is probably not the one to get. You'll get far easier preset ergonomics, better sound from its 3-inch monoaural speaker, and similar reception with the Sangean PR-D7, which sells on Amazon for about $80 and I assume free shipping. As I don't need short wave, I may sell the 2100 and replace it with the PR-D7.

Clear Radios Are Made for Prison Population

Tom Welch has informed me that clear radios are not so much a design choice as they have a utilitarian or security purpose--being used in prisons where their transparency must adhere to prison code and regulations as stated on  Universal Radio's Sangean SR-33. And all this time I simply thought the radio's were being marketed to the youth market as being cool. 

Another New Sangean Sighting: The Sangean PR-D5CL

Looking like a see-through silver version of the Sangean PR-D5, the Sangean PR-D5CL (featured on 123.Radios.com) has the same 200 mm AM ferrite antenna as its PR-D5 sibling. Appears to be targeting a younger crowd. It should be available in late May of 2008.

Sangean is offering other "clear" models, such as the WR-1 and the WR-2 as seen below (taken from 123.Radios.com website):

Has the Sangean PR-D5 Been Dropped for the PRD7?

I noticed the Sangean PR-D5 is no longer available on Amazon, but soon the PRD7.  It has some different control buttons for tuning and is 8.5 inches across compared to the 10-inch PR-D5. Unlike the dual-speaker PR-D5, the PRD7 has one speaker. I hope it's the same 3-inch one used for the Sonido and the WR-2, but I'm not sure. I assume it provides similar performance on AM and FM as the Sonido and the PR-D5. Also readers tell me a black version of the PRD7 is available in European markets.

Regarding the PRD7's smaller size and the possibility that the internal AM ferrite antenna might be smaller than the PRD5's, Tom Welch writes: "The long dimension on the D7 is 215mm so technically there may be room to put a 200mm antenna as in the PR-D5. Of course just speculations."

Warning: Once You Cross the Gates of Radio-Philia, There Is No Going Back

Through this website, I have been in communication with a recent "radio convert," someone who suddenly loves radios and, like me, demands the best performance in them. He has recently written me:

Indeed, radio lovers can't be cured.

I'm perilously close to pulling the trigger on an Eton S350DL, even though I'm perfectly satisfied with my Kaito KA2100.

I should be all set. I have the perfect bedside radio, an ideal all-purpose radio, and a good pocket-sized portable. And yet I want the Eton S350DL. Sheez.

Notice the reader writes, "I should be all set." He is wrong. Radio lovers, myself included, are never "all set." There is always a new radio we think we can't pass up. We love to fall in love with radios. Sometimes we'll fall out of love with a radio only to fall in love with it, inexplicably, all over again.

I don't even know why I love radios so much. I'm not an engineer. I didn't grow up collecting radios. It's a mystery. One Fall day in 2004 at the age of 43 I walked into Circuit City on a whim. I didn't really want to buy anything with any urgency, but there it was, a blue Tivoli PAL for $130. I told my wife I wanted it and she approved. The incident seemed innocuous, but I had no idea that I had just entered the Gates of Radio-Philia for which there is no return. Two months later, I walked into Circuit City intent on buying a digital radio with presets. I was less than impressed with the speaker sound on the little Grundig radios, so I instead bought a Grundig S350. The S350's pseudo-military design ignited sparks in the reptilian centers of my brain. After that, I started reading radio reviews on RadioIntel and soon I had to get all the radios featured on the site including the Kaito 1101, 1102, and 1103. I'm sure I purchased over 50 radios and have spent around $5,000 during the last four years. I've sold many of them. I keep buying new ones.

The good news: I don't collect super expensive items like espresso machines, tailored suits, titanium watches, sport cars.

A possible explanation: I sometimes think radio lovers are looking for escape. Like everyone else, we get frustrated with all sorts of things and we feel helpless as we watch the news about our world going to hell in a hand basket. The radio is a refuge, an escape, and gives us a sense of control. I'll say to myself, "Yeah, the world is going to hell, but, wow, doesn't my Eton S350 really grab 89.3 FM with boldness and clarity!"

An annoying thing about being a radio lover: One thing that I find laughable about myself is that I see myself as having superior radio knowledge to the average person and stupidly I feel that this knowledge gives me a significant "advantage." I'll go to someone's house and sniff with contempt at their crappy Teac radio and think to myself, "What a poor lost soul. This is definitely someone who needs my help." So in fact being a radio lover has turned me into a supercilious know-it-all. How very annoying.

To conclude, I will continue to pursue my radio passion on this website, as my radio virus remains strong and there is not a vaccine or antidote on the horizon. At the same time, I laugh at myself as I am surely not blind to the absurdities of my obsession.

A Reptilian Critique of Peter Singer’s “What Should a Billionaire Give—and What Should You?”

Peter Singer's persuasive essay strips us bare of our selfish wants as he equates our tendency to accumulate all the stuff we don’t need with ignoring the plight of drowning children and as such being responsible for the death of those children. We are, Singer convincingly argues, products of our fortunate “social capital”; therefore, we have an obligation to those who do not have a social capital.

Furthermore, because we patronize and live in a state of interdependence on international corporations for our goods and services, we are obliged to help the poor in developing countries. For after all, these countries, led by despots and other unsavory characters, make deals with international corporations, selling raw materials for a higher price than they would by keeping their resources in their own countries. The result is that people living in developing countries starve as their resources are leeched by international corporations.

Now if we follow Singer’s logical moral imperative to its ultimate conclusion, then we are forced to accept that we must renounce our worldly desires and achieve a spiritual condition that is so disdainful of personal comforts and luxuries that we must live only on bare necessities while giving all else to the poor. Anything short of this ideal would be, to use Singer’s analogy, equivalent to being responsible for the deaths of drowning children.

While part of me would like to embrace Singer’s moral imperative and spread Singer’s gospel of uncompromising charity throughout the world, the skeptical part of me questions just how realistic Singer’s ideal is. For what Singer is arguing for is nothing short than a form of spiritual socialism, that is a condition in which human beings renounce their selfish desires for the “finer things in life” in order that they distribute their wealth as evenly as possible. This is a noble, saintly ideal indeed, but it contradicts our reptilian hard-wiring.

I’m sad to say this, but without selfish motivation, most of us will not be creative or innovative. A world in which we all share our things in a communal potluck and don’t aspire to materialistic excellence is a banal and dreary and colorless world without creativity and innovation. Only when we are enticed by technological razzle-dazzle and model dream homes and exquisite clothing glorified by the silky-tongued fashionistas do we find the reptilian sparks in our brains’ creative nerve centers exploding in glorious paroxysms and it is in these nerve explosions that we create and innovate. Sad as it is, my friends, selfishness is high-octane rocket fuel for creativity. 

I’m not arguing that we should be selfish pigs in order to encourage our creativity and aspiration. What I am arguing for is a balance. It was Aristotle who wrote about finding the golden mean. If we error too much in selfishness, we’re thoughtless imbeciles, moral gnats, and reptilian subhumans. On the other hand, if we strive to become spiritual socialists, we will become drab, stagnant and bovine. The truth lies somewhere in the middle. 

Peter Singer's persuasive essay strips us bare of our selfish wants as he equates our tendency to accumulate all the stuff we don’t need with ignoring the plight of drowning children and as such being responsible for the death of those children. We are, Singer convincingly argues, products of our fortunate “social capital”; therefore, we have an obligation to those who do not have a social capital.

Furthermore, because we patronize and live in a state of interdependence on international corporations for our goods and services, we are obliged to help the poor in developing countries. For after all, these countries, led by despots and other unsavory characters, make deals with international corporations, selling raw materials for a higher price than they would by keeping their resources in their own countries. The result is that people living in developing countries starve as their resources are leeched by international corporations.

Now if we follow Singer’s logical moral imperative to its ultimate conclusion, then we are forced to accept that we must renounce our worldly desires and achieve a spiritual condition that is so disdainful of personal comforts and luxuries that we must live only on bare necessities while giving all else to the poor. Anything short of this ideal would be, to use Singer’s analogy, equivalent to being responsible for the deaths of drowning children.

While part of me would like to embrace Singer’s moral imperative and spread Singer’s gospel of uncompromising charity throughout the world, the skeptical part of me questions just how realistic Singer’s ideal is. For what Singer is arguing for is nothing short than a form of spiritual socialism, that is a condition in which human beings renounce their selfish desires for the “finer things in life” in order that they distribute their wealth as evenly as possible. This is a noble, saintly ideal indeed, but it contradicts our reptilian hard-wiring.

I’m sad to say this, but without selfish motivation, most of us will not be creative or innovative. A world in which we all share our things in a communal potluck and don’t aspire to materialistic excellence is a banal and dreary and colorless world without creativity and innovation. Only when we are enticed by technological razzle-dazzle and model dream homes and exquisite clothing glorified by the silky-tongued fashionistas do we find the reptilian sparks in our brains’ creative nerve centers exploding in glorious paroxysms and it is in these nerve explosions that we create and innovate. Sad as it is, my friends, selfishness is high-octane rocket fuel for creativity. 

I’m not arguing that we should be selfish pigs in order to encourage our creativity and aspiration. What I am arguing for is a balance. It was Aristotle who wrote about finding the golden mean. If we error too much in selfishness, we’re thoughtless imbeciles, moral gnats, and reptilian subhumans. On the other hand, if we strive to become spiritual socialists, we will become drab, stagnant and bovine. The truth lies somewhere in the middle. 

Yes, the $50 GE/RCA SuperRadio III Is Gone, But Don't Fret

The GE Superradio, AKA the RCA Super Port Radio, is no longer produced for the US market, so a high-value $50 radio will soon be gone. But let's forget the tears. The big, ugly, cheaply-built radio with the inaccurate tuning dial can be replaced, for about $20-25 more with the far superior Sangean PR-D5. Same great AM reception as the Superradio. Same great FM reception. It has smaller speakers, but at least they're stereo. And the PR-D5 is digital with presets. For my review of the PR-D5,  CLICK HERE.

Update: Sangean will also soon be offering the single-speaker PR-D7.

Do Radios Get Better?

I was one of the first to get the Sangean WR-2, an upscale clock radio with excellent AM. If my memory serves me, I bought it in late spring of 2005. I finally sold it in February or March of 2008 because its FM pigtail antenna wasn't getting 89.3 KPCC as often as I wanted it and I despise external antenna hook-ups because they take up too much space and are downright ugly. However, I'm getting reports from other WR-2 owners of great FM reception with its stock pigtail antenna and I'm wondering if the radio has improved over time.

Another case of an improved radio is the  Eton E5, arguably the best small portable on the market. When it first came out there were reports of bugs, not the least of which was a buzzing from the AC adapter. Additionally, the makers of the E5, Degen/Kaito, have been reported to improve on their same models as newer models are made.

If this is the case, I'll probably be sorry for forking out $300 and pre-ordering the Grundig Satellit 750. Who knows what kind of bugs and glitches this new model might have? If I were smart, I'd learn my lesson from the WR-2 and wait a year before I buy the 750, but then again radio lovers can't be cured.