Radio Russ' Review of the Sangean LB-100 Lunchbox Radio

 

My first impression taking the box from the UPS man was "this thing is fairly heavy". The LunchBox is built to the same heavy duty standards as its big brother, the Sangean U3. I'll compare these two models since I think we all agree that the U3 is a top-rated radio in all categories. If the Lunchbox survives my 24 hour burn-in and blasting ordeal, it's going to get a lot of use and be a welcome addition to my radio fleet.

The extra-long power cord wraps around two brackets on the back which I like better than the way the U3 handles cord storage. The rear door that covers the wire spool on the U3 looks fragile and easy to break. The latching mechanism seems even more likely to break. The LunchBox setup is simple, quick  and foolproof.

The manual indicates the Lunchbox produces 2 Watts of output power running on batteries and 5 watts plugged into AC. Both specs are rated at 10% THD @ 100 Hz. Power consumption is rated at 10 Watts versus the U3's 25 Watt consumption.

The controls are minimal. The top mounted Volume and Tuning knobs have a nice feel to them. The volume control is analog, so there is no problem setting it for just the right volume if you bring it into the bedroom. The display is also minimal with no clock or alarm display, just the frequency it is tuned to. You can set 5 AM and FM presets. The backlight comes on with any button press and stays on for 15 seconds. The manual has instructions for setting the AM tuning to 9 kHz and setting the FM to tune in steps of 50 or 100 kHz. As noted elsewhere, there is no headphone jack or any other I/O jack on the LunchBox.

The sound is what you'd expect from a U3 with a smaller speaker, but there's still plenty of bass. I might even like the sound better because the bass is cleaner and less muddy but still punches. It isn't as loud as the U3 but it's still plenty loud for outdoor stuff. It appears it can play at full volume with just a hint of distortion. Right now it is doing a great job blasting "War Pigs" by Black Sabbath at full volume. The bass notes are clear and powerful with good highs and midrange. This is all so subjective, but I think anybody will be pleased with the punchy and well rounded sound if listening to music. There's no tone control but I won't miss that. I set the tone control on the U3 all the way to treble most of the time anyway. For Talk Radio, the LunchBox just seems to get it right for a pleasing non-boomy tone. It's a winner as far as sound is concerned.

As far as I can tell in a quick side-by-side comparison, the Lunchbox can get the same FM stations as the U3. My impression is that it may not have quite the adjacent channel rejection but it's close. There's a Christian station very close to here on 94.5 and it even aims its signal in this direction. A poor radio picks this station up at several points on the FM band to the detriment of any station you want to listen to. The LunchBox only exhibits a faint murmur of interference on weak stations close to 94.5 but fiddling with the AC cord can usually get rid of that. The U3 in contrast just rejects the interference - period. I'm more than happy with the FM performance. In fact it's now one of my better radios in this regard.

The only area the LunchBox falls a little short is AM sensitivity. It's just not as good as the U3 but I think it's due to a shorter internal ferrite antenna. If you help it with a CCrane Twin coil antenna or a Select-A-Tenna, the sensitivity is all you could ask for and can equal the U3's performance. The U3 just doesn't need the help. For example, I  listen to a station 60 miles away in Harrisburg, PA on 580 AM rated at 5,000 Watts non-directional in the daytime. I can hear it clearly on the LunchBox but it is somewhat noisy compared to the U3. This doesn't mean that much because the U3 is so exceptionally quiet on AM (at least mine is). 

It's my impression that AM sensitivity drops some as you go down towards the lower end of the band. That's not unusual since having to make do with a shorter antenna means compromises are made as to where in the band it will be most sensitive. If I was really worried about it, I could move the coil on the ferrite bar and optimize it for whatever part of the band I want. Utilizing the helper antennas is obviously much easier.

I can also receive WOR and WABC from New York City very clearly in daytime. A weak station in WIlmington, DE (WILM 1450 AM) comes in clear with some noise and most of the Philly and Baltimore stations come in like they're just down the road. I need to run the LunchBox on batteries and test AM reception outside before I reach a final verdict on AM. Overall, I'm not disappointed at all with the AM performance because it's still better than most radios. Comparing it to the U3 was setting the bar pretty high but it does very well indeed.

In conclusion, buy one with confidence. This is a well made quality radio with great reception and great sound. Your mileage may vary of course.

Comments

[Gary]

Thanks for the nice review, Russ. It sounds like the Lunchbox is worth the money.

I tend to listen to more low band than high band AM stations, so I might be tempted to tweak the loopstick coil accordingly. Hopefully it's not too hard to access.

[Gary]

BTW, are you the Russ who reviews radios on RadioIntel.net?

[Angelo]

E-Bay 270544903164
It's not a bargain price, but it is an interesting old radio.

[Tom Welch]

Russ, can you comment on the form factor of these two radios.

I'm guessing the LB-100 is a bit easier to manage than its bigger brother the Sangean U3.

[Flor]

The Lunchbox has been a favorite in Europe since it was launched 2 years ago. Powerful, easy-to-use, compact, tough and clear reception (Europe is mainly FM focussed as you know). The clean, modest design stands out from the macho looking but less performing competitors. In Europe it now has a number of variations: www.perfectpro.eu

[Tom Welch]

Thanks for the link, Flor.

[Radio Russ]

Tom, The U3 is a big radio. The LB-100 is easier to manage but with a caveat. Due to the rollcage design, you need an 8" by 8" flat surface to get it to sit on the 4 rubber feet with any stability. Certainly not a big deal and I like the off-beat design. Also, the speaker is getting broken in and sounding better every day.

[Radio Russ]

Gary - I know the Russ you speak of but I'm not him.

[Tom Welch]

Radio Russ last post reminds me of the t-shirt I have on that I have on that reads "I'm Not Tiger Woods".

[Gary]

I finally bought a Sangean LB-100. I'm surprised at just how weak the AM reception is. Even the strongest local stations that I regularly listen to -- KFI and KNX -- have an excessive amount of hiss. My CCRadio-SW and Sangean WR-2 get far better reception. Even my little Tecsun PL-380 has better AM sensitivity. The LB-100 doesn't seem to be any more sensitive than my little Sangean DT-400W, which is pretty amazing considering the size difference between the two. The LB-100 has about a 3" ferrite bar, but the one in the DT-400W is much shorter.

When using the LB-100 with my Black Box tunable, passive loop -- a rectangular loop similar in performance to the Terk loop -- the AM is much better, and totally hiss free on the stronger stations. I hadn't intended on using the LB-100 with a passive loop, as this reduces the convenience quite a bit, since you have to move the loop around with the radio, and re-tune the loop for each station.

I find that the LB-100 has a little too much upper bass for talk radio, but it's acceptable. I probably wouldn't be happy with the U3's sound quality on talk radio. I apparently prefer less bass on AM than Jeff does. This is one reason why radios with significant bass response should have a bass control instead of just a tone (treble) control. Of course, the LB-100 has neither.

On the plus side, the FM sensitivity of the LB-100 seems quite good, even with the little rubber duck antenna. And the sound with FM music is very pleasing.

I'm not sure if the AM performance of my LB-100 is typical or not. I'll have to decide whether to keep it or return it. This is pretty disappointing.