Number One: Best $70 Table Radio: Sangean PR-D5 Sangean PR-D5, discussed here, (and a one-year report card here) has a huge industry max 200mm internal ferrite antenna. I'm not in love with its tiny stereo speakers but for nearby use radio is good. Just don't expect to fill a room with it. Helpful tip: Turn FM from stereo to mono mode and you'll avoid static. Number Two: Best Clock Radio at Any Price: Boston Acoustics Horizon Solo I don't want a lot of gizmos on my clock radio. I want simplicity, good sound, and small footprint. The $85 Boston Acoustics Horizon Solo fits the bill. Amazing speaker sound, sensitive tuner, and wire pigtail FM antenna, something I usually hate, is actually welcome by bedside as it's easy to knock over a radio with a telescopic FM antenna. I like that you can toggle through FM and/or AM stations without having to switch band mode. Helpful hint: You can change the position of your radio, horizontal or vertical. The latter makes a smaller footprint and is easier to rotate for AM reception. Update: If you're a heavy FM listener, this recommendation stands. But if you like baseball games and other heavy AM listening, I can't recommend the Solo because AM tends to degrade over time. You might look at the CCR-2 for best AM reception. Number Three: Best $160 Table Radio: The C.Crane CCRadio-2 Number Four: Best $45 Table Radio: The RCA Super Port Number Five: Best Portable Radio: The C.Crane CSW (also the Redsun 2100)
(updated August 29, 2009)
Think of the CCRadio-2, discussed here, as a Sangean PR-D5 on steroids. It has the same big ferrite AM antenna but a bigger speaker. Also its FM is stronger with tuning meter and bass and treble controls, which are lacking in the PR-D5. Update: I've been using my CCR-2 as a bedside radio for the last week. I love the AM reception. My only complaint: The preset buttons make noise when you press them. Your sleeping spouse may not approve. Also, the CCR-Plus got complaints for sticky preset buttons. I hope that is not the case with the CCR-2.
A rebranded GE Super Radio III, the RCA version is purported to have better quality control. Incredible AM/FM reception, huge warm sound, but big and ugly and often saddled with an inaccurate tuning dial. But often on Amazon for $42 with free shipping, this is a lot of bang for your buck.
Amazing FM and good AM (but loses to PR-D5 and CCR-2 in AM category), the CSW operates on power plug or 4 D rechargeables. The CSW, discussed here, produces loud sound and is good for washing the car and other outdoor activities.
Post a comment
Your Information
(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)

I'm not going to tell anyone what word to use for anything. If people call sounds of any sort that interfere with clear reception of an FM station static and other people understand what is being said then the word static works. It was not my intention to start a controversy.
Does anyone know how far from the transmitter site the person was who experienced overload?
Posted by: Dennis | August 29, 2009 at 07:47 PM
I agree with almost everything you said. Both of my GE Superadio III's will make a well engineered AM station sound great. With the newest one, which is far inferior, I don't even have to switch to the wideband position for great sound. With the normal bandwith it is completely useless on any frequency near my locals. The old one, one of the oldest, deals with my locals just fine.
Posted by: Dennis | August 29, 2009 at 07:59 PM
The owner of the PR-D5 with signal overload lives very close, a quarter of a mile maybe, from a transmitter.
Posted by: Jeffrey McMahon | August 29, 2009 at 08:30 PM
Scooby - You are correct that if the Solo's ferrite rod runs front to back, it will always be horizontal, even if the face of the radio is rotated. Since this is the simplest thing to do, in all likelihood this is what was done with the Solo.
Posted by: Gary | August 29, 2009 at 08:33 PM
Here's a good review of the PR-D5:
http://www.dxer.ca/latest/64-the-sangean-prd5-comprehensive-review
It's probably the cheapest digital radio with an 8" ferrite bar. It's quite sensitive, but the selectivity could be better.
Posted by: Gary | August 29, 2009 at 08:43 PM
Gary, what's the difference between sensitivity and selectivity?
Posted by: Jeffrey McMahon | August 29, 2009 at 09:12 PM
Jeff,
See
http://www.dxing.com/swrx.htm
A bit hard to go more into detail without some minimal technical discussion on RF engineering.
Posted by: Paul | August 29, 2009 at 09:55 PM
Band width determines selectivity. Thanks, Paul.
Posted by: Jeffrey McMahon | August 30, 2009 at 08:29 AM
Basically selectivity is a measure of a radio's ability to separate a desired signal from nearby competing signals, while sensitivity is a measure of a radio's ability to hear a signal.
Ideally a radio should have both good sensitivity and good selectivity.
Some radios offer multiple bandwidths to allow the user to pick the appropriate selectivity for the situation. Wider bandwidths provide more extended treble response but less selectivity, while narrower bandwidths muffle the treble but provide more selectivity.
Posted by: Gary | August 30, 2009 at 01:29 PM
Thanks, I'll post it.
Posted by: Jeffrey McMahon | August 30, 2009 at 01:57 PM