Angelo Defends the C.Crane EP Radio As Delivering Good Quality for the Money

 

 

 

(Re=post)

Measuring the value of the C.Crane EP Radio and defending it from charges that it's poor in quality, Richard writes:

True, the SONY 5900, Panasonic RF-2200 were more expensive 35 years ago than the current EP. That isn't necessarily a useful yardstick. Current day shortwave radios are lower in price than models that offered similar features 35 years ago. This is true in many areas of electronics. I have the original Hewlett Packard HP-35 calculator, the 1st calculator in the world that could calculate trigonometric and logarithmic functions. When it came out in 1972, it cost close to $400! You can go to any general department store and find calculators with greater capability for perhaps $5!

This EP radio, is marketed as one of the best am radios ever, and, as result, in my eyes, makes it fair to compare with the classic portables that were meant for a general audience seeking a great am reciever. I don't agree with the comments that depict the EP as awful. This is not to understate things. It will not be a good performer in a high RF urban location. Local stations, in fact overload the radio, and are heard with distorted audio. A company such as Crane should recognize that the majority of folks live in urban settings, and should keep that in mind when designing a supposedly outstanding set. Like Wayne, I happen to be in an urban setting. I'm keeping the set, however, as it is a great radio below about 1260 KHz in my location during the day (a bit better behaved at night when the locals go to lower power although still dificult between 1440KHz and 1600 KHz even then). The noise floor is quite low, the audio is nice, the night light is cool. The EP most likely is an outstanding radio in a more rural setting(I'm looking forward to taking it along when I anticipate visiting away from local transmitters).

But Angelo disagrees with Richard and those who said the EP was marketed as the best radio ever or hyped:

Guys, please. Richard: Your calculator comparison doesn't hold water. When you bought that calculator in the early 70's, ALL calculators were expensive. I remember getting a "Unisonic" calculator from a discount store (Kings, which was a rung or two below K-Mart) and I think it cost around $30.00. Unisonic was a poor brand and it was purchased from the cheapest of the cheap as far as stores go. It had five functions---addition, subtraction, multiplication, division and fractions. And it couldn't do what calculators today do---ones that are given away for free at trade shows. But even back then, there were radios that cost under $10.00 and radios that cost in the hundreds. Those higher end Panasonics and Sonys (and Zeniths) were more expensive, even in today's deflated electronics dollars, than the CC-EP, which is very modest in features and price by comparison. Robin: C Crane has not promoted this as the "hottest thing out there." They have said it is a "classic" high performance radio. It's been promoted as an old school radio (i.e. analog, no L.E.Ds, manual tuning) and good performance, good sound. The one delivered to me meets all of the criteria. And a fraction of one percent of people buying new radios are going to open up the cabinet and start soldering. Ask the guy who runs this blog if he has any intention of doing modifications like this to any radio he buys. You can't defend the SRIII by saying it's good if only you modify things by taking apart and soldering. You and a few other really serious hobbyists are the only people doing that.

 

Comments

[Bob C]

I have to side with Angelo here, particularly where the SRIII is concerned. For years, I've read what a hot radio it is. And, I own two of them and recently returned a third. None even came close to meeting my expectations. And these weren't particularly lofty expectations (as beautifully expressed by Herculodge); no, I merely expected the SRIII to be an excellent performer. Not one has been. Perhaps you can realign the tuner and make it so - but you shouldn't have to do this. That people are forced into such modifications to obtain the expected performance tells me that it's a poor radio. A good or great radio performs as such right out of the box - barefoot.

Now, I have not had the pleasure of trying out a CCraneEP Radio as yet. Thus, I cannot comment on its performance at this time. However, in making comparisons, I would set the performance bar higher than the GE SRIII. The S350DL is a good radio for comparison as is the CCraneSW (which offers even better reception). Both are more expensive, but if the EP's performance is comparable to each - that would make it a great value.

[Gary]

Bob C - As a point of reference, my CCRadio-EP (with the defective FM) is more sensitive across the AM band than either my CCRadio-SW or PR-D5.

Here is the ranking at various frequencies, with the twin-coil fine tuning adjusted optimally for each signal on the CCRadio-EP:

530 kHz
1. CCRadio-EP
2. PR-D5
3. CCRadio-SW

980 kHz
1. CCRadio-EP
2. PR-D5, CCRadio-SW

1700 kHz
1. CCRadio-EP
2. CCRadio-SW
3. PR-D5

BTW, Amazon is sending me a replacement CCRadio-EP.

[Bob C]

Gary, this is very good to know! Now, the EP is on my "wish list". Thanks for the info!