[ARC5] Way OT -- SX-28

Fri Aug 6 16:03:15 EDT 2021

I have never understood the need for "big audio" in a communications receiver.  Who needs it unless for distribution to remote speakers.  A Zenith Transoceanic portable will fill the shack with more volume than you can use with only 730 mW output from its 3V4 audio amp.  Mike, W6MAB

> On August 6, 2021 at 3:43 PM Rich Post <kb8tad at gmail.com> wrote:
> 
>     Todd wrote: "A point of interest: many(most?) FCC models utilized only single-ended audio output, apparently as a cost cutting measure."
> 
>     AFAIK, the move was less for cost-cutting but more for power consumption.  The FCC used a lot of these in portable application, run off vibrator packs.  A single-ended audio would significantly reduced B+ current demand.
> 
>     I thoroughly agree that the SX-28 is the top-of-the-line and arguably best looking of the pre-war Hallicrafters sets (exception being the rare and unusual DD-1 which was in a class by itself)
> 
>     Rich KB8TAD
> 
> 
> 
>     On Thu, Aug 5, 2021 at 9:53 PM Todd, KA1KAQ <ka1kaq at gmail.com mailto:ka1kaq at gmail.com > wrote:
> 
>         > >         On Tue, Aug 3, 2021 at 8:12 PM MICHAEL BITTNER <mmab at cox.net mailto:mmab at cox.net > wrote:
> > 
> >         <snip>
> > 
> > 
> >             > > >              Of course those are asking prices and we don't what they will sell for if at all. i see one presently has 17 lookers and I'm one of em. Mike W6MAB 
> > > 
> > >         > > 
> >         Precisely. If you use the Advanced feature next to the Search function and search for completed/sold items only, you'll see that all of the SX-28s sold recently have sold for *under* $500. Only one sold over $400, the rest under and most under $300. Searching under Completed items shows that the high priced examples have been listed numerous times without sale. I suspect someone decides to list one for a crazy amount to test the waters (or, in many cases, because they're clueless) and others then jump in, resulting in several 'extraordinarily priced' sets.
> > 
> >         As the owner of a later SX-28A I can say that it is one of my favorite receivers - definitely top 10 and probably top 5 - due to a number of things. As others have mentioned, for it's time it was overall a really nice receiver. Not the best by any means, I'd agree that the early Super Pros (SP-10, -100, -200) take that honor followed closely by the HRO. Like the Super Pro, the SX-28 shares a wonderful 'shove-yank' audio output feature that, combined with a decent speaker, can fill a room or even a home with audio of excellent fidelity. This from a 1930s design, long before 'Hi-Fi' became a thing. It also offers all the mod-cons of the day including weighted flywheel tuning, bandspread, and a large, easy to read meter.
> > 
> >         But again to echo Richard, the SX-28 is, in the opinion of many, easily the best looking receiver of the day, maybe ever. The Art Deco influence, overall dimensions, and excellent symmetry all work together perfectly. Those steering wheel tuning knobs don't hurt, either. Sure, it has its shortcoming, but overall it worked/works pretty well for when it was designed and for what. I do think that the AR-88 story has gotten mixed in somewhere, because SX-28s are not at all rare or even scarce. At one time I knew production figures but want to say something like 20-40K were made. Some were sold here prior to WWII and many 28As were sold after. In fact, the military-tagged examples (GRR-2?) are harder to find. IMO a clean, complete, restored or unmolested working example is a $500 radio all day. If you have to fix it or (gulp) re-cap it, the price drops.
> > 
> >         I've always thought that the later SX-115 bears a striking resemblance dimensionally to the SX-28. The cube look along with the two large knobs and so on.
> > 
> >         A point of interest: many(most?) FCC models utilized only single-ended audio output, apparently as a cost cutting measure.
> > 
> >         As to the SX-88, well....clearly driven by the limited numbers/collector market. Apparently the performance didn't match the price tag, or they certainly would've sold more.
> >         They are waaaay down from their $10K high water mark some years back. Have seen $2K offerings languish for months without selling and know of several selling in recent years for 'mere hundreds'.
> > 
> >         ~ Todd,  KA1KAQ/4
> > 
> > 
> >         ______________________________________________________________
> >         ARC5 mailing list
> >         Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/arc5
> >         Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
> >         Post: mailto:ARC5 at mailman.qth.net mailto:ARC5 at mailman.qth.net
> > 
> >         This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
> >         Please help support this email list: https://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> > 
> >     >     ______________________________________________________________
>     ARC5 mailing list
>     Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/arc5
>     Help: http://mailman.qth.net/mmfaq.htm
>     Post: mailto:ARC5 at mailman.qth.net
> 
>     This list hosted by: http://www.qsl.net
>     Please help support this email list: https://www.qsl.net/donate.html
> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.qth.net/pipermail/arc5/attachments/20210806/ad614623/attachment-0001.html>