SHOOTOUT: Yaesu FRG-7 and Kenwood R-5000 Receivers

[@johnatkinson5693]

FRG7 is the winner for me.

[@SB-mi2ii]

FRG-7 was clearer on every example, at least to my ears. The Kenwood sounded muffled, but as you were using the default settings it may well have been possible to clean up its audio. However with the settings you used, definitely preferred the Yaesu. Thanks for an interesting video 👍😊

[@broadcast-monitor508]

Dear Mr. Rob, a very nice video, really. In my ears in nearly all test-cases the FRG-7 sounds more full and brighter. My father owned one before years and combined it with a tunable bandwith filter 1 to 5 khz. That combination was a real joy ! Thank you for the video. All the best from Broadc.-Monitor, Austria

[@RobVK3BVW]

Thank you for your observations. Much appreciated! Stay well and keep away from that COVID thing!! :-) Rob

[@wd3c]

I picked up the Sears branded FRG-7 last fall. After a good cleaning to get all the switches and pots clean it works very well. As most I own a lot of radios.. but the FRG-7 is usually the one I turn on first. It sits right over top the work bench and I use a old 7" homemade external speaker which make it sound even better.

[@RobVK3BVW]

Yes, I bet with the external speaker the FRG7 sounds great! I do something similar with my FRG7. In the video, you saw my little mixer and the two powered speakers. Putting the Yaesu through those, with some adjustment of highs, mids and lows on the mixer, and you have hi-fi shortwave! 73, Rob VK3BVW

[@ic0mr75]

I enjoyed this video. I found that the FRG 7 had clearer audio, and to my ears, was nicer to listen to. I’ve always watched for a deal to come along on the R5000, but it hasn’t worked out yet. I owned the FRG 7 for about 5 years, and replaced all of the capacitors. It was a great performer. I eventually traded it for a JRC NRD-525. Wish I’d have kept it, but only so much real estate on the desk. Thank you for the nice video

[@andyleigh343]

Excellent review, thank you! I have a FRG-7000 with the built in front speaker and the sound is better than any of my other gear!!!!

[@215alessio]

Frg 7000 is said to be superior as the frg 7

[@chronobot2001]

I have a R5000. It was given to me broken and I fixed it. It's still a very nice radio and a good performer. The frg-7 does sound better in a side by side comparison.

[@Joe_KS1I]

From my perspective the FRG-7 audio was more pleasant to my ears.

[@vk3ye]

Rob - prefer FRG7 under good receiving conditions. Kenwood sounds like a receiver designed by a ham DXer so it's better under poor conditions. It should have had a wider filter option for audio comparable to the Yaesu.

[@paulsengupta971]

Quite. The FRG7 sounds like a good broadcast receiver where you can listen to radio shows. The Kenwood shows off its ham radio origins, sound much more like your average ham radio set...i.e. a bit muffled, but a bit more able to bring out the speech from the noise if what you want is to understand what someone at the other end is saying. I've recently been given a 1960s (comparatively cheap) valve radio, and I've put a bit of wire down the garden for an antenna. If I'm not trying to DX and just want to listen to the (stronger) shortwave broadcasts, that makes a fairly nice sound compared with my handheld receivers or ham radio sets.

[@RobVK3BVW]

Thanks Peter. In the video, I had completely forgotten to mention that a few years ago, I replaced the pretty terrible stock 6 kHz filter in the Kenwood with an INRAD 4 kHz filter which also has a much better shape and improved the sound. It was an expensive upgrade but was worth the effort and cost. I picked up the FRG-7 at the Rosebud Hamfest late last year. It was a fair price and is in great condition. I wanted to see what all the fuss was about with this rig and to own a piece of receiver history. :-) Did you sell those FRG-7s when you were working at DS, or were they before your time? Cheers, Rob VK3BVW

[@RobVK3BVW]

@@paulsengupta971 Hi Paul! Thanks for your observations, with which I agree! Yes, the sound of the old valve rigs are usually delightful. Kind regards, Rob.

[@vk3ye]

@@RobVK3BVW Way way before my time. I was there when the FRG100 was the one to get.

[@ke4drj912]

Excellent comparison. I prefer the wider, fuller sound from the frg-7. But I suspect I'd get used to the narrower filter on the R-5000.

[@RobVK3BVW]

Thanks for that. Yes, you do get used to the narrower filter. The fuller sound on the FRG-7 is probably more noticeable on music rather than speech. 73 OM.

[@carlson1664]

Hi Rob, I liked the sound of the FGR-7. The Kenwoods AGC seamed to be to fast and did not flatten out the signal fade. The Yaesu was much smoother making it easier to listen to. Thanks for the videos, keep them coming. Tom, W7GER

[@RobVK3BVW]

Good on you, Tom! All the best, mate. Rob VK3BVW

[@Dreamwoodinternational]

I was gifted an FRG-7 from a SK estate and have only just set up my first Shack - the Frog was the first radio I activated. It was comforting to hear all the background noise on both your Rx's as I was worried my Fritzel OCF was faulty. I agree with comments that the 'harsher' response from the KW would probably help extract more information from a weak signal. However I am happy to give a plug for the Frog's 'smooth tone', and hope to have it re-capped and spruced up one day. Really appreciate the effort you went to in setting up this test - it's great to hear 'real life' examples of what the Bands should sound like on my Rx's. 73 VK2FALF

[@RobVK3BVW]

Thanks for taking the time to check out the video. Rob VK3BVW

[@falcon6622]

For me the Yaesu sounds much better ,clearer and wider sound ,and seems to be able to block more of the noise than the kenwood.I own a FRG-7 and own many high end kenwood transceivers ,I have compared the Frog to several other receivers and found Its hard to beat .Thanks Rob for the video ,73s KL0MP

[@RobVK3BVW]

Cheers, Bruce. Take care. - Rob VK3BVW

[@grahamkent2868]

I do prefer the tone from the frg7, very smooth, great video - really enjoyed it.

[@RobVK3BVW]

Thanks, Graham. Appreciate it! Rob.

[@michaeledmonds3027]

Excellent presentation, thanks for all your work. I'd want both receivers and several antennas to tinker with. I listen with a Kenwood R2000, an Kiwi moded COM R75 and an I COM 7410...all through an external filtered ICOM SP23 speaker. Each has its own personality, but the R2000 has the most pleasant audio with a strong signal. Steve KZ5MSE

[@RobVK3BVW]

G'day, Michael. Thanks for your comments and taking the time to watch the video. You have a good set-up there with your Kenwood and the Icoms. Good stuff! All the best, mate! Rob VK3BVW

[@RickCutter]

I enjoyed this. After reading all the comments, I am amused no one pick-up on the concept you were testing two different technologies; Wadley Loop vs Double SuperHeterodyne.

[@maxpi11]

The audio from the FRG-7 is just so much better to my ears. I'm wondering if there isn't a problem with a normal superhet in the form of audio-induced instantaneous frequency drift? Perhaps the audio modulates the power rail and that modulates the vfo and local oscillators? The FRG-7 might be cancelling that.

[@vtradio]

I found the Yaesu FRG-7 more pleasant to listen to. I thought that the Kenwood R-5000 sounded muffled. Great job equalizing the two receivers for the test! 73 Paul AA1SU

[@RobVK3BVW]

Thanks Paul. The wider filter on the Yaesu makes a difference. Cheers, Rob VK3BVW

[@FrancoDX]

Enjoyed the video and I agree with your analysis. For me the FRG-7 was much more pleasant to listen to, as a longtime music fan and radio listener, audio really matters. I thought the audio was much more clear and more natural on the FRG-7 than the Kenwood. Also less processed, perhaps? Having said that I bet the Kenwood performs better on weaker SSB or broadcast signals and obviously easier to tune. I also own a FRG-7, I have a Lowe HF-125, NASA Target HF-3 and various Sangean, Tecsun portables. They all have their qualities, most good portables these days would most likely outperform these two radios but not on audio quality or that ‘hands on’ feel whilst tuning around. Thanks for the video. 73 Franco

[@alainbibi0047]

Hey incredible kenwood mush, bravo for your rigor, few OMs are sensitive to this aspect that modifies judgment. 73

[@goldensquaredrycleaners3717]

Rob I installed a 16 to 1 drive on the tuning dial. My model is one of the first, with out the fine tune nob. Been very happy with it for the last 45 years. Thanks for the video all the best from Andrew VK3KFK 73s

[@RobVK3BVW]

Glad to hear that yours is still going strong, Andrew! All the best, Rob VK3BVW

[@clif9710]

Hi Robert, I'm WA7MAD though I haven't been on in many years. I owned a FRG-7 and purchased a digital readout for it made by Bob Grove of Grove Enterprises...remember him? The FRG-7 clearly has a wider audio bandwidth, going both higher and lower than the Kenwood (I haven't used the Kenwood). For audio quality, then, the Yaesu wins but as a communication receiver intended to dig out a signal from the noise, the Kenwood would be my choice. The love of my SWL-ing life was the Drake R7A with both synchronous detection that eliminated selective fading distortion and 5 filters to choose from, very wide down to a 300 Hz that would pull through CW in the worst conditions. But it had terrible drift, cured with an RV75 synthesized VFO. Thanks for your well done video.

[@RobVK3BVW]

Hi Clif, thanks for your comments. Yes, I know of Bob Grove. We occasionally saw his books here in Australia. Yes, I believe the Drake R7A was a fine receiver, although I never had the opportunity to use one. Thanks for checking out the video, much appreciated. Best wishes from VK3. - Rob

[@aureliusprimus]

Very fine ! What sort of antenna did you use ?😀

[@daveminchella5342]

The following is my opinion; I've been listening to shortwave for over 60 years. Owning both receivers (as well as many other well-respected radios), for me, the FRG-7 is the receiver that has a permanent position in my hamshack. It's the one I use when DXing, due to it great audio and intelligibility. The only other radio I own that has better audio is the NR5Q Ultimate Regen.

[@RobVK3BVW]

Thanks for your thoughts, Dave. All the best, mate! Rob VK3BVW

[@MirlitronOne]

When the microprocessor in the R-5000 fails, the FRG-7 will still be easily repairable. Plus it sounds better.

[@SpectreOZ]

*Spoken like a true FRG-7 aficionado* 👍

[@PieroDg]

Yes, it absolutely sounds better! I had r5000 and re sold after few months. 73 I3DGF

[@brendantrott5118]

Good review Rob, would be interested to compare a Barlow Wadley as well which I regret selling, I have a FRG-7 which I fire up from time to time and I wonder how the R-5000 compares to a TS-440 which I compared to my SDR's the other day and it stood up rather well.

[@RobVK3BVW]

G'day Brendan! Great to hear from you! Thanks for the comment. I've never had a Barlow Wadley, so I can't comment on that. You don't see too many of them around here these days, do you? Re. the TS-440 and R-5000, I had an article on the 5000 published in Feb issue of The Spectrum Monitor magazine, and part of the article covered the differences between the 440 and the 5000. I'll be posting that article on my Mount Evelyn DX Report blog in May, so watch out for that. Are you still tootin' that trumpet of yours? All the best, mate. Rob VK3BVW

[@brendantrott5118]

Yes Rob still playing with the trumpet & the stick. The BW's are a great little receiver but when I saw a couple around many years ago they were too pricey to pick up another one. Look forward to the article.

[@jandejong6498]

I had some years ago the FRG-7. Very good receiver. Now i use a Kenwood R-5000; it has absolutely a better sound quality. Greetings from the Netherlands.

[@tlebryk]

Have you compared an SDR like an Airspy HF+ to the Kenwood? I find my HF+ somewhat addicting.

[@twoodruff01]

Sound aside, which receiver is more sensitive. Thanks, Tom

[@MCruzDXer]

Thank you, friend. 73 and Good DX from Mexico. XE1007SWL, Mr. Magdiel Cruz.

[@RobVK3BVW]

Hi Magdiel. Thanks for watching the video. Best wishes from Australia.

[@claynicolsen5401]

Interesting video! I currently own both receivers. I purchased my FRG-7 brand new, and it's still mint. My father purchased the R-5000 brand new, and gave it to me when he lost interest in SWL. I recently sent it to Jahnke Engineering for a refurb and alignment. I'm also an amateur radio operator; NF7X. For general SWL-ing, I'll take the FRG-7 hands down. The audio quality is much more pleasant. For digging tough stations out of the noise, the R-5000 has the edge. In that situation, the R-5000's poor audio is no longer the key consideration. But, for listening to SSB, well, no contest there at all. The R-5000 is superior in its ability to tune SSB signals. Love 'em both, and I'm keeping them both!

[@RobVK3BVW]

Nice summary, Clay! Agreed on all counts, except I wouldn't describe my R5000's audio as poor - just not as high fidelity as the FRG7. Cheers, mate. Rob VK3BVW

[@claynicolsen5401]

@@RobVK3BVW Ok, I'll have to agree. AM on the R-5000 is much nicer than on my R71a.

[@MrMartinRose]

A very nice and helpful comparison, thank you for the effort! The FRG-7 is what I like, but the R5000 sounds better.

[@RobVK3BVW]

Thanks for your observations, Martin. All the best for 2021. - Rob VK3BVW

[@MrMartinRose]

My best wishes for 2021 to you also, Rob! Due to your video I contacted a guy near Berlin (I am German) who offers an FRG-7, hopefully he will answer. I have no amateur radio certificate so I just listen, but I do this since I was 12 years and now I’m 64. I still enjoy this. Take care!

[@sreekumarUSA]

Greetings from California, once again. I have viewed only about 50% of this segment. AND the winner is ...... YAESU FRG-7. Not trying to comment negatively at KENWOOD R-5000. You know what I mean. FRG-7 has a charm of its own, the receptions are always crisp depending on signals, of course. The audio through 120mmX70mm elliptical 4 Ohm speaker with tiny magnet is appreciably marvelous with even low frequency output. (Music/Jazz) You can count me in as YAESU FRG-7 enthusiast. Cheers, Sir. Stay safe and 73s.

[@peterread6447]

I enjoyed your production and agree completely with your own assessment. BTW I have just acquired an R-5000 - it works on AM broadcast, but I only get noise on the shortwave bands. i have a lot of work to do.

[@RobVK3BVW]

Good luck with the R5000, Peter!

[@richardmillican7733]

Im a devout trio/kenwood "rx" guy!! First radio (aged 10) was the Trio 9r59de. I do have an R5000 now for rx. I have a yaesu ft-920 transceiver but despite its DSP, Filtering, and far more updated receive tuner.... Well, the R5000 is an R5000..... and i dont care how fast your car is!! Shes a beaut.

[@MrRJS27]

I owned an FRG-7 for 10 years and used it mostly for DXing rather than program listening. From this comparison, I would have been happier with the Kenwood, not that it existed for much of the time I owned the other one (starting in 1977) because it has a narrower passband, but the FRG-7 is certainly more pleasurable to listen to. I replaced the FRG-7 with an old SPR-4!

[@nixraff7802]

SPR-4 rules :) Much better audio as the FRoG7 ;) (by the way, I own either the FRoG7 as well as the SPR4 as well as the R5000. they all have their right to exist ;) ans sometimes the fun factor predominates 73!

[@RGC198]

Hi Rob, thanks for a most interesting and informative video. I actually own a Yaesu FRG-100, which works quite well. Prior to that, I had an FRG-7700, which was eventually used as a trade in for the FRG-100 at Dick Smith, after the receiver completely broke down. I also have a Kenwood Tuner KT-6040. With your receiver comparison, the FRG-7 seems to have the clearer sharper sound. Wishing you the very best from Robert.

[@tonsmulders5218]

Good video, thats for shure. I have had the FRG7, FRG7000, and now twice the R 5000. But, they have the best filters. The sound is good, i use an external speaker, R 5000, if you can get one,... take it. This is a great radio.

[@RobVK3BVW]

Good comments!! Normally I use the R5000 and the FGR-7 through external powered speakers via a small mixer. That's about as good as it gets given the lo-fi shortwave quality. Thanks for taking the time to watch the video!

[@radioman140]

I liked the Frog personally. I find that the Kenwood (I have the little R600) just has more hiss that can get a bit tiresome for program listening. Sometimes it's hard to beat analog technology, but then I am also partial to the tube (valve) boatanchors (had a r390 non-a after college and hearing Radio India International with that super quiet background from California was a real treat!. But just try moving that around looking for different jobs and apartments! Just picked up a Barlow Wadley XCR30 and am anxious to see how the wadley loop performs on the little beast. Really enjoyed your high quality video. Yes, having said all that above, memories and quick easy tuning make the Kenwood a very good band scanner, and of course the IF filters matter and there the Kenwood has the 7 beat. Thanks again.

[@RobVK3BVW]

Great! Thanks for taking the time to post your feedback. Much appreciated! 73, Rob VK3BVW

[@AdamSWL]

Great comparison Rob! My ears found the FRG-7 much nicer to listen to. It seemed that the AM filter on the R5000 is too narrow and seems to cause distortion. Never owned an FRG-7, since I do not like the tuning method which prompted me to get the FRG-7700 instead. I am envious of your local noise, or lack thereof!

[@RobVK3BVW]

Hi Adam. Thanks for your feedback. A few years back, I replaced the filter in the Kenwood. Got rid of the old stock standard 6 kHz and installed an INRAD 4 kHz specifically for DXing the tricky stuff. You get used to the sound after a while.....so much so that sometimes I find the FRG7 too wide, hehehe :-) The noise level used to be even better here about 2 years ago, it's actually got worse!! But not as bad as some parts of Melbourne. 73, Rob VK3BVW

[@cobraxspeed]

A great comparison there. The R5000 is where put my money, having had a Frog7, I like the ease of use of the Kenwood vs The time it takes to tickle a good signal reception from the FRG. 73"

[@RobVK3BVW]

Agreed! :-) Thanks for taking the time to check out the video. - Rob VK3BVW

[@kenbaird7067]

I have owned both. The FRG7 was easy to listen to, but the R5000 was much easier to operate. My R5000 was probably the best RX I ever had.

[@RobVK3BVW]

Good observations, Ken. Thanks.

[@Alessioalessio-qv1ff]

The frog sounds very natural similar tona tube receiver. the r5000 sounds more processed. Some digital processing going on to save components? And narrower roofing filter 6khz? Add also an external speacker to the r5000 since the stock is crappy

[@RobVK3BVW]

Thanks.

[@daleneurauter2810]

Very close race. As you say, they both have their pros and cons. In a real world situation, sitting on a table with no external audio connections, I would think that the larger speaker on the FRG-7 would be a big advantage.

[@boscoguns]

I liked the Frog 7. The sound quality seemed better to me.

[@jamesttk488]

I really like Yaesu FRG7. It does not introduce additional noise while R5000 did. In short I will buy FRG7 for my SWL experience.

[@jaym1301]

My first SW radio was a Zenith Transoceanic from the early 1960s. I replaced it with a Kenwood R-1000, which I wish to this day that I'd kept and still owned, but I sold it to a friend when I upgraded to an R-5000 with the better replacement filters. I've been dreaming about getting another Kenwood but after watching this and hearing the much clearer audio of the Yaesu I'm starting to want a Frog 7 instead. Besides, the purely analog tuning controls and frequency readout are intriguing. (Sadly I can't afford either one on my pension. I'll have to be satisfied with my Tecsun PL-680 and my various software-defined radios instead.)

[@smeuse]

I couldn't find the specs for the FRG, but this sounds more like a filter width issue. Then Kenwood I think is 8Khz, the FRG is probably 15KHz.

[@kamilsp7fll]

Very, very good comparison. Obviously FRG-7 sounds better as a BC radio. I haven't own (yet) FRG7 or R-5000, but I have got similar results when comparing R-1000 to NRD-525 or IC-R71E, not mentioning bunch of "world band radio" including various Sony ICFs, Tecsuns, etc. Kenwood R-1000 being the simplest to operate and the less sophisticate radio sounds best for AM/SW b-cast. I have sold JRC and Icom, but I will never sell R-1000.

[@stevenaustin2860]

keep up the great videos rob 73 and stay safe

[@RobVK3BVW]

Cheers, Steve. Best wishes from OZ. Rob

[@timcollingwood6158]

Hi Rob ,very interesting well done Regards Tim

[@RobVK3BVW]

Cheers, Tim!

[@maestherc]

Recovered audio in R-5000 sounds much more congested and unnatural as compared to the more open and less-distorted sounding FRG-7. For AM mode listening, I’d say the FRG-7 is the clear winner in terms of providing more pleasant, more natural -sounding recovered audio.

[@Theoobovril]

Hi Rob, did you re-cap the Frog-7 prior to this test?

[@RobVK3BVW]

Hi. No. I looked at the caps and they were all good. Surprising for a receiver of this vintage, isn't it? 73, Rob

[@geoffh784]

I had a small collection of full size classic short wave receivers before I had to downsize my QTH, the only one I still own is a FRG-7. The tuning is slower and the lack of a digital display means that it's hard sometimes to be exact about what frequency you're listenin to and the filtering is a bit wide sometimes. But it's just so damn pleasant to listen to (and I've got 2 ham rigs with general coverage if I need something with tighter filtering). I thought the same about your comparison, the Kenwood has the edge on dragging the most readability out of the noise (and that's without you using the filters) but the FRG-7 just sounds nicer to listen to most of the time. Thanks for the video it was interesting and well shot. VK3LZ and KJ7LJJ

[@RobVK3BVW]

I agree with all your comments, Geoff. Much appreciated. Cheers, Rob VK3BVW

[@lacemi]

Hello Rob, It is a nice video and comparations. I like the sound in Yaesu. Yaesu had a base old tecnology reception (1940). It is easy repair and I like this chases as a hood of that old car. If you open the case, Kenwood have a lot of component, the tecnology is higher but But I think that sometimes listening to the signal in an original way through fewer filters and processes is better, it is closer to the original tone of voice, but everything depends on many factors such as the transmitting and receiving antenna and the atmospheric and propagation conditions. Kenwood It is more easy and confortable tune un station bit It have old microprocesador, I think better It have both receivers 😁😁😁😀. The video watch in my phone and the sound maybe sounds different on live. Sorry for my english and muy spanish digital phone keyboard. Greetings from the north of spain, thank you very much for the video.

[@RobVK3BVW]

Hi Miguel. All your comments noted, very good and thanks for the feedback! ¡Tu inglés está bien! ¡Mucho mejor que mi español! 73, de Rob VK3BVW

[@cbiz8]

Excellent comparison!!!

[@dxace1]

Hard to judge on this one -- the 5000 has far better selectivity options if you get the right filters...but of course the 5000s almost all suffer from the keypad bounce problem...this does show how good the FRG-7 was in its day..

[@RobVK3BVW]

Dan, not all 5000s suffer from key bounce, but it is a common problem amongst those machines. It has not been a big problem for my rig. But they can be fixed! Fiddly job, but can be done. And worth doing, too, because it's a very good DX machine! Re. the FRG7, it's interesting to note that Yaesu dropped the Wadley design for later models because new circuit designs went to the next level with frequency stability. Cheers, mate. Rob

[@relucotoi5314]

If you had selected/pressed the "NOTCH" button on the R5000 you would have had the same sound type as FRG7. Most of the time the "richer"/normal sound of the R5000 sounds better. All the best!

[@SSN515]

Kenwood has "warmer" audio.Nice to listen to for long periods. The Frog will dig out signals very well, but can get tiring to listen to, especially with headphones.

[@RobVK3BVW]

Thanks for your comments, John!

[@BillboardPenguin]

Some might say I've ruined it, but I replaced the stock filter in my FRG-7 with a Murata CFS455J, rated as a 3 kHz filter. I like the improved selectivity. If I want "hi-fi" shortwave, I turn to my Kenwood R-1000, which has all its original filters.

[@RobVK3BVW]

Interesting!! I might toy with the idea of "ruining" my FRG-7 with the same filter!! :-) It's tempting!!

[@BillboardPenguin]

@@RobVK3BVW Just do an internet search for "FRG-7 Gilfer mods" and you'll see several sites featuring the old instructions for Gilfer Shortwave's do-it-yourself mod kit for the Frog-7. The filter they sent with that kit was the 4 kHz CFS455I (I think that was it), but the same type of installation would apply with the CFS455J. A man with your background would likely be able to further improve on their mods.

[@stephenwade8093]

As a hearing impaired person I found the R5000 easier to understand Vk3hjw

[@RobVK3BVW]

Agreed, Stephen. My old rock n' roll ears prefer the R-5000, too! :-) Thanks.

[@kn9ioutom]

The YAESU has a better audio !

[@RobVK3BVW]

Yes, the FRG-7 is a more natural sound. But the Kenwood's filter enables better reception in tricky conditions when there is adjacent channel interference. As I said in the video, each has it's positives and negatives. :-)

[@Alessioalessio-qv1ff]

The kenwood has way better locking and stability. Sound is a bit muffled due to Filters? Can you listen unfiltered or with a wide filter 12khz on the Ken?

[@b.2221]

Got to be bloody honest with you, but the two of them would be a pleasure to own Sir 👍 73s Tam.

[@RobVK3BVW]

Thanks Tam. Rob

[@redsky1433]

The Yaesu FRG-7 sounds a bit fuller and warmer than the Kenwood R-5000. Could be due to different audio 'tone control' in the two radios. Also there may be differences between the IF bandwidth filters. But the reception quality seems pretty much the same. Not any easy test to compare radios but thanks for your interesting video.

[@RobVK3BVW]

Some good observations there, redsky! Indeed, there is a difference in the filters, which I had completely forgotten about when I made the video! I replaced the original Kenwood filters with narrower INRAD filters. You picked that up! Well done. 73 de Rob VK3BVW

[@26trc155]

The bandwith sounded wider on the FRG-7, to my ears the R-5000 sounded quite narrow.. It would be interesting to hear the difference on a DX station on SSB where the bandwith wouldnt make too much difference in sound as SSB is narrow anyway...

[@HamAndShortwaveRadio]

I wonder how many views would be changed if it was a blind test.....

[@RobVK3BVW]

Who knows, Greg? hahaha. Cheers, mate. Rob

[@SpectreOZ]

That is actually an excellent suggestion for semi-interactive content Greg 👍

[@pavil58yt]

I think both receivers seem pretty darn close performance-wise. The audio from the R5000 seemed to have a bit more treble to it. Filtering or audio stage difference I don't know. Either rig would serve well I'd guess.

[@RobVK3BVW]

Thanks for your observations, pavil58yt. Yes, the performance regarding sensitivity and selectivity is pretty close. Hard to choose. Best wishes!

[@odenwaldcyclist8182]

Strange. This R-5000 sounds more like SSB in AM Mode. I also use the R-5000 and it sounds better. I have the INRAD 6kHz Filter in it and did some Audio-Mods für the analog output stage. I also completely recapped mine with Panasonic FC Caps. I always use a homebrew external Speaker on it.

[@nealbeach4947]

For DXing I prefer a bright, crisp tone like the Yaesu. The Kenwood sounds like it's playing through a wet rag.

[@ludo9234]

Strangely enough i have both of those models. Just getting used to using the frog.

[@RobVK3BVW]

Hi Ludo. Yes, the FRG7 does take a little time to work out the controls. Well worth it in the end. 73, Rob VK3BVW

[@stevenaustin2860]

just a thought instead of doing brordcast bands when your doing the test use the ham bands i think ppl will enjoy it more just a thought rob

[@RobVK3BVW]

Thanks for the comment, Steven. I have a mix of subscribers that like SWBC or Ham, and those that do both. I probably should have included some ham excerpts as well. I guess when I'm doing Ham work, I use my Ham gear, and I never use the FRG7/R5000 for the Ham bands here.

[@215alessio]

The r 5000 wins hands down (even somewhat muffled and digitally processed) that wistle in on the from was annoying. The downside is that you could lose clarity or information when digitally processing info

[@ruchem71]

Like others, I slightly prefer the FRG-7

[@Hunkiralyfi]

It begins at 3:05.

[@winstonchurchill6506]

Why don't they do a modern retro frg 7 on to a winner long over due cheers uk...

[@kitswithkaren5003]

Has to be the frg7👍

[@hallieboy]

According to my ears, the good old Frog beat the Kenwood hands down!

[@DCDura]

FRG no question

[@maurofox4935]

FRG 7 sena dubbio il migliore.

[@chronobot2001]

Frg-7 takes the win.

[@ON5ALE-Alessio]

6k hz filter is too narrow for good adio

[@RobVK3BVW]

I disagree. For shortwave, any wider than 6 kHz invites more of the typical background noise you get on shortwave bands. Also, any stations operating on channels 5 kHz away may impact the desired signal's reception. However, this is, of course, a matter of personal preference. I'm not expecting high-fidelity audio quality when I listen to shortwave broadcasters. So, I'm happy with 6 kHz or even 4 kHz wide filters if it allows me to hear the information without side channel interference. Perhaps your preferences are different. That's OK. To each his own! Thanks for taking the time to comment. 73 de Rob VK3BVW

[@ON5ALE-Alessio]

@@RobVK3BVW you really need that 16 kHz option on AM besides the 6 and 4 but constructors leave as many filter options out as they can to make it more cheap. Only the unpayable high end receivers get 16, 14, 8, 6, 4, 2.5, and CW super narrow. That's why the r5000 sounds like crap compared to the unfiltered or wide filtered Wadley architecture.

[@fabio6935]

For me FRG wins

[@davidwilliamson2115]

Throw the R5000 away!!

[@RobVK3BVW]

Nupe!

[@stevenaustin2860]

good day mate lol

[@juansanchezcabrera7227]

👍EA7FKI 73dx