Offline
I recently traded in my 2016 Hyundai Tucson and purchased a "new" 2024 model. The new model had 6800 kms on it when I purchased it and was a demonstrator.
Love the new wheels, a lot more toys than the older model and more power. One thing that is a surprise is that the AM radio is much better and clearer than the old. I am pulling in stations that I never did with the 2016 model like WJR in Detroit, Sauga 960, and all of the Toronto AM radio signals are received with a clearer signal. Same with the FM tuner, more distant signals are coming in.
After cancelling SiriusXM over a year ago, I have the service again for three months. Can't say that I missed the satellite service that much and likely won't purchase after the trial period. Is it me or are some of the stations (70's on 7) low level and at times or at least some songs rather poor quality? 70's on 7 played Beach Baby the other day and it sounded like it was recorded off of Youtube. I have noticed that Sirius sometimes clips songs which is annoying. Just the other day they hacked off the end of Hotel California and chopped Joe's big guitar solo at the end, which is the best part of the song.
Also I forgot that Sirius also plays a lot of songs that don't get much airplay here anymore. Stuff like John Travolta Let Her In, The Night Chicago Died, Eddie Kendricks Shoe Shine Boy and Hey Deanie with Sean Cassidy. Sort of the US version of cancon.
Offline
Glad the radio works well. It seems like the sensitivity and selectivity is good, how about the fidelity of the AM content on a music station like perhaps 740?
I have a 2014 Rav4 and the AM reception is so so, but the fidelity / bandwidth must be all of about 3 khz.
Online!
paterson1 wrote:
Is it me or are some of the stations (70's on 7) low level and at times or at least some songs rather poor quality? 70's on 7 played Beach Baby the other day and it sounded like it was recorded off of Youtube. .
They only have so much bandwidth. Every time they expand the channel lineup, each individual channel gets less of it.
It's a dynamic system, so the quality can go up and down. Overall; it's a poor audio quality service. I mostly stream it from my phone in the car rather than using the actual satellite radio - way better sound that way.
Offline
Thanks for the tip Aaron. Hey darcyh. Yes the sound quality isn't bad on a station like Zoomer. I haven't played much with the entertainment system yet. Don't even have any pre-sets yet. I believe it has HD radio as well but haven't checked into that.
Offline
My last 3 vehicles were Chevy Equinox. AM reception was dismal. I blamed that tiny nub of an antenna on top of the vehicle. Last fall I bought a new Mitsubishi Eclipse Cross. It has that same style of antenna. The AM in this one works great.
Offline
My 2016 Volkswagen radio is excellent on AM and FM. As others have found, AM bandwidth is quite narrow. Great for DXing but bad for sound quality. I have a portable radio that uses the same chip as many car radios and it goes up to 8 KHz bandwidth on AM. It's too bad the car radios don't enable the bandwidth selection.
Offline
mjf wrote:
My 2016 Volkswagen radio is excellent on AM and FM. As others have found, AM bandwidth is quite narrow. Great for DXing but bad for sound quality. I have a portable radio that uses the same chip as many car radios and it goes up to 8 KHz bandwidth on AM. It's too bad the car radios don't enable the bandwidth selection.
What portable radio is that?
Offline
Thanks. I've never seen that one before. Haven't even heard of that brand. Looks pretty impressive in the product review.
Offline
I read a number of reviews on this radio. All of them were pretty much Five Star. I was so impressed I decided to purchase one on Amazon. Including the rechargeable battery, which is sold separately, total cost was a bit over $172. One thing I am curious about. How well does it receive the Buffalo FM's? With todays clogged FM band, this would be a challenge for any radio.
Offline
Here's some good info about this radio including it's origins and more. Includes some band scans. This gent loves it as a DX radio:
Last edited by Fitz (June 3, 2025 5:37 pm)
Offline
In Downtown Windsor the Quodosen radio picked Toledo FM's without any kind of overload getting in the way. The one problem that no radio solves is digital interference from HD Radio. If you were on a first adjacent from a Detroit signal, nothing came through. In Downtown Toronto it might be different because overloading is more likely to happen there.
Offline
mace wrote:
How well does it receive the Buffalo FM's? With todays clogged FM band, this would be a challenge for any radio.
The radio has 17(!) bandwidth settings for FM plus an auto setting that selects a narrower bandwidth as signal strength decreases. In west-central Etobicoke, the only Buffalo FM I can never get is 96.1 with the two HDs on either side of it. I can get 88.7 by selecting a narrow bandwidth and fiddling with the location/antenna. Same for 94.5. Neither is perfect due to the adjacent HD carriers. It's one of two radios I have that can receive 102.7 (between strong 102.5 and 102.9) from Scarborough. It's also the only home radio I had that could receive 93.9 from Oakville when it was on the air. It's a great little set. Two drawbacks, in my opinion, are the digital volume steps (vs analog control on the CC Skywave) and the 18650 battery vs AAs.
Offline
mjf wrote:
mace wrote:
How well does it receive the Buffalo FM's? With todays clogged FM band, this would be a challenge for any radio.
The radio has 17(!) bandwidth settings for FM plus an auto setting that selects a narrower bandwidth as signal strength decreases. In west-central Etobicoke, the only Buffalo FM I can never get is 96.1 with the two HDs on either side of it. I can get 88.7 by selecting a narrow bandwidth and fiddling with the location/antenna. Same for 94.5. Neither is perfect due to the adjacent HD carriers. It's one of two radios I have that can receive 102.7 (between strong 102.5 and 102.9) from Scarborough. It's also the only home radio I had that could receive 93.9 from Oakville when it was on the air. It's a great little set. Two drawbacks, in my opinion, are the digital volume steps (vs analog control on the CC Skywave) and the 18650 battery vs AAs.
The batteries arrived today. The radio and battery charger are due to arrive on Thursday. From what I have read, the operating manual is quite detailed.
Offline
With respect to the DX-286, I see the 18650 battery as an advantage. Never say never but the 18650 under normal conditions should not leak as opposed to alkaline batteries. The 18650 should be fairly easy to source a replacement cell at a reasonable cost, suggest you purchase a well respected brand like Samsung or Panasonic.
Alas, I would love to buy this radio. At one time a new radio purchase was a joy. But I have many radios that never get used. The noise from switching power supplies kills indoor AM reception and there is nothing worth listening to on FM in this area.
Last edited by darcyh (June 5, 2025 12:16 pm)
Offline
Well I got my DX-286 set up. Inside my apartment, basically just the Toronto AM and FM stations. WGR and weak but listenable. I wasn't surprised. Outside in the parking lot [Avenue Rd.and Wilson] I noticed Depending on which way I held the radio, each station could be nulled. All the local stations sounded richer and fuller. CFOS and WJR were weak but could be heard. Couldn't get 1080, 1120, 1230 or 1400. 1270was listenable but weaker than WGR and WBEN. Looking forward to seeing what night reception is like. As for FM, all the Toronto and Hamilton stations plus 91.7 and 97.7 come in stereo with pretty nice separation. South of the border 94.5, 98.5, 99.5 and 102.5 were received in stereo. WBUF was in mono with no interference from The Grand.
Offline
One of the features I noticed on my DX-286 is a spot to insert an external AM antenna. I have seen photos of them. Do they actually improve reception and if so, any models that are better than others?