Pablo has apprised us of this RF-9000 currently bidding for over $1,500.
Post a comment
Your Information
(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)
« Reader Defends the New Grundig Satellit 750 | Main | First Look: Panasonic RF-1200 Multiband Radio »
As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.
Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.
Your Information
(Name and email address are required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)
| Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | ||||||
| 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 |
| 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 |
| 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 |
| 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 |
| 30 | 31 |
There have certainly been radios in the past that ought to have been good but weren't really (The Sony ICF-2001 comes to mind). But one look at this radio and it seems like it ought to be a performer. Yet DXing.com only gave it one star. Can anyone attest to its performance (or alleged performance, if you've heard something)?
I'm amazed by how much the top third looks like a classic Pioneer AM-FM tuner, except for the digital readout. Very classy styling.
Posted by: Michael Salmons | March 08, 2010 at 02:54 PM
Michael:
What 's wrong with the Sony ICF-2001 ?
I've bought one 20 years ago and it seemed an excellent radio in SW, very good on FM and so so in AM until someday it died 'cause the humid of the weather and I didn't use enough.
Posted by: Huesby | March 08, 2010 at 10:26 PM
Loose fitting, dinky little buttons, with dinky little contacts behind them, scare me. The myriad of square buttons along the bottom of the display are probably smaller and more fragile than Jeff's twins' pinky nails. Sometimes, bigger is better.
Posted by: Angelo | March 09, 2010 at 04:58 AM
Huesby, maybe I had a bad one. It seemed on the deaf side and didn't respond too well to help from external antennae. Could this model also have been vulnerable to frontend damage like the 2010? Not there there was any sort of dramatic loss of sensitivity while I owned it, it just always seemed weak.
Posted by: Michael Salmons | March 09, 2010 at 06:33 AM
Didn't think of that, Angelo. Yeah, lots of little button make me nervous too. Though there are some nifty ones. A "time signal" button? I wonder if it was smart enough to look for the best signal or just went dumbly to 5000 khz (or other WWV freq)? Or does it mean something completely different...
Posted by: Michael Salmons | March 09, 2010 at 06:37 AM
On an animal this size, they could have easily employed big, beefy buttons with more tolerance for damage. Of course, I have no evidence that there was ever a reliability problem with these contacts----but my experience with 1980's era receivers (separate components) is that the little metal buttons would fall out or fail faster than larger knobs/pushbuttons. But it's an observation without data.
Posted by: Angelo | March 09, 2010 at 07:40 AM