By popular demand: watch the tiny Belka DX blow away the Sangean ATS-909X2 for max SSB audio level!

[@mrx-no4fn]

Nice comparison Clint yes the sangean look’s expensive you would of thought thesangean would be better thanks for the video Clint nice to hear from you 73s from a wet Nottingham

[@OxfordShortwaveLog]

Thanks my friend! 73

[@mrx-no4fn]

@@OxfordShortwaveLog your welcome mate 73s

[@stephank.8453]

Interesting comparison. The Belka-DX is a superb radio on short wave. The latest version, which goes down to 100 kHz, is also an excellent performer on MW. I would love to see a more user friendly version in a bigger case. 73 Stephan

[@OxfordShortwaveLog]

I agree - a large version with a spectrum scope and waterfall would be a no-brainer! 73

[@AD2DU]

Which MW antenna do you use with this? I own the new Bella and love it.

[@b.2221]

This has just blown me away . Thank you for this damning comparison Sir.

[@OxfordShortwaveLog]

I know, Sir. You're most welcome. 73

[@RJDA.Dakota]

Beware of things that look flashy. Sometimes the best thing comes in a simple package.

[@OxfordShortwaveLog]

Wise words my friend! 73

[@Kw1161]

Clint: Thanks for the comparison of the two radios. It just goes to show that the Romain phrase “Let the Buyer Beware “ never is out of style….😢! 73, and have a nice day!

[@OxfordShortwaveLog]

LOL so true! Thanks my friend. 73

[@digitalmediafan]

Just receved my Belka but findind the max volume level quite low. Anyone else ?

[@OxfordShortwaveLog]

Mine is ok for volume...

[@digitalmediafan]

@@OxfordShortwaveLog ah but it's not super loud at max volume with yours is it ? plus bad overloading on mw with the wellbrook here

[@AD2DU]

It’s sad because I love my Sangean AM/FM radios. I have the new Belka and it knocks the socks off any non-ham transceiver I own on ssb. I’d like to see the belka with a waterfall, USBC, and something like the Tecsun PL-330’s implementation of easytune autoscan.

[@OxfordShortwaveLog]

Great ideas there..

[@gerdpfeil]

1. I get the point of the video of course, demonstrating the "low audio" on SSB with the whip. However, in my mind I can already hear people objecting that "it's much better with a proper antenna". Which might be true because from the sound of it, the AGC just isn't pulling up frontend gain sufficiently on SSB and more input voltage might help with that, so the "low audio" is actually a problem with low RF input gain. 2. That's why a comparison of the two radios in a low noise environment (so sensitivity is not limited by QRM), with some kind of substantial antenna (anything putting out some microvolts) and a weak station would be interesting - can the Sangean match the SNR when the signal is sufficient for some audio that actually makes it to the camera mic? In a related matter: 3. You can literally hear how the Belka gains...erm.. gain when you touch it. The problem with the speaker version is that it tends to be operated with no counterpoise, and that can reduce its sensitivity to some degree (depending on the frequency).

[@OxfordShortwaveLog]

Thanks for your comments. I agree with you, but, how could Sangean engineers think this is still ok?

[@gerdpfeil]

@@OxfordShortwaveLog That will remain a big mystery I guess, and like the even bigger mystery of the Eton Elite Satellit HD suggests, the reason might be way beyond plain technical challenges like "you get these particular chips and a cutthroat budget for other parts, now turn that into a radio that sells". I think one of the reasons why the Belka is so stunning is that Alex made a smart choice of pretty ubiquitous, affordable but good parts and turned them into a radio that makes all that fuzzing around with circumventing the shortcomings of the SiLabs DSPs with varying efforts look utterly stupid, particularly when it involves lots of additional parts. A frontend with a smart input filtering arrangement followed by single-conversion SDR architecture, some highly stable LO with a TCXO (!) into a mixer made of some (AFAICR) rededicated TI parts, going into a cool little 24-bit DSP that has proven its capabilities in numerous guitar stomp boxes. Some microcontroller is wiring that all up in a well thought out way and the whole thing is outdoing even some classic tabletop receivers -- how can a small family business pull that all off and sell it for half (before import taxes etc.) the price of the Chinese/Taiwanese flagship radios, of which some are not even close to that kind of performance? Sure, it's a bit apples and oranges too and it should be mentioned that Sangean did try to do better than the Chinese, but it seems obvious that the Chinese and Taiwanese companies keep on milking a budget design conceived more than a decade ago and get away with it because they don't have to fear competition, no matter how many small businesses offer superior and more modern designs at competitive prices. That might be your answer I guess: Their sheer presence on the market is working for them, so before people even think about "is there a better radio?" they are happy with the umpteenth 80 bucks iteration of a Si473x-based radio they got conveniently off Amazon, then when they want to "step up" they buy what's basically the same (but less downscaled) radio and most are not trying very hard to look beyond that horizon. Even if they do - in the meantime 3 more buyers decided to start the hobby with one of the Chinese or Taiwanese entry-level DSP radios.

[@OxfordShortwaveLog]

Thanks for your comments. My view is this: many of those people happy with their budget Chinese - and slightly better Taiwanese receivers...if they had owned an ICF-SW77 or ICF-2001D or an original E1...well they would have a completely different perception of what represents a good receiver - even just in terms of sensitivity, selectivity, AF bandwidth options and dynamic range. Oh, what about synchronous detection? None of the current manufacturers have gotten that right for years. Thanks again and 73.

[@vanillacoffee]

More Casio G Shock action - this time - the Casioak ?

[@OxfordShortwaveLog]

It's not a G-Shock but similar. 73!

[@DXPedro]

Hey Clint, thanks for this. I’m keeping an eye on the belka since gen one, but I still can’t afford it. Anyhoo, is it possible to use the belka like an SDR? I remember watching something a while back but I can’t find it. 73s and regards from Portugal

[@OxfordShortwaveLog]

Hi Pedro, there is a way, but I would have to look on the internet to find it. If I do, I'll let you know my friend. 73

[@geo2472]

If you mean connecting it to a computer to get a graphical display then yes. 👍

[@winstonchurchill6506]

I think one of your crystal hobby kits could do the sangean.cheer sir have a good week....

[@OxfordShortwaveLog]

Ha ha I think it would lol! 73

[@marcosmza1962]

I cannot believe it 🙇‍♂️

[@STR82DVD]

Dear Lord lad, that's embarrassing for Sangean. Is there no firmware fix for this or is this issue hardware related resulting in a receiver that is just deaf on telescopic? 73

[@OxfordShortwaveLog]

I don't believe there is a firmware upgrade for this issue - but perhaps one will be released - the radio needs it! Thank you Sir and 73

[@STR82DVD]

@@OxfordShortwaveLog Is it a sensitivity issue or simply volume? I'm curious lad. 73

[@OxfordShortwaveLog]

It's definitely audio volume - you can tell the Sangean has superior SNR to the PL-365 in particular, you just can't hear the signal properly! 73

[@gerdpfeil]

@@STR82DVD Audio gain and RF gain are very closely entangled on SSB, low input gain results in low audio gain. Since the radio can produce sufficient volume in all other modes, it's quite likely not an issue with audio gain but RF gain, or more precisely with the AGC. How much that actually affects sensitivity (=MDS or SNR in general) is yet another question.

[@Ronin-Tongor]

Cool😊

[@OxfordShortwaveLog]

Thanks!

[@johnsheedy5772]

Wow

[@OxfordShortwaveLog]

Cheers!

[@macchi205]

sangean seems a toy radio respect the belka

[@OxfordShortwaveLog]

Yeah the Sangean is only ok for broadcast stations really

[@macchi205]

@@OxfordShortwaveLog Yes but for strong broadcasting stations not for week signal as Little stations on tropicale band 90 and 60 meters

[@OxfordShortwaveLog]

Not correct - at least as far as mine is concerned - I've copied many low power tropical stations - I think you might have a problem with yours.

[@macchi205]

​@@OxfordShortwaveLogif signals on tropical band are free from rrty interference on adjacent channell