Modern radios, with their IC chips and digital displays, are certainly and absolutely better than the older units. But what is it about the old radios that make them "seem" better. Something Very satisfying about snapping on that power switch with that solid "Chinck" sound. The dial casting a subtle amber hew. The tubes, after taking several moments to warm up, lighting up the wall behind the set, with a dim halo. Is it the anticipation? The glow of the tubes and that unmistakable electronic type smell that can only come from the dust covered chassis of tube gear? It really is a neat sensation!:music::scratch2:

Are they really? I had a semi modern Icom IC-R71a shortwave receiver, with all the bells, whistles, digital tuning and presets memories. I absolutely hated the sound and it wasn't that sensitive either.
i consistently get better reception and sound quality with old analogue receivers most of which are 40 to 60 years old. Logan

Part of it IS the smell. You tube guys know it. Hot dust, carbon resistors, wax capacitors, paint fumes, varnish on transformer windings, slightly scorched bakelite, that 25 watt resistor in the B+ line that's been pouring out 30 watts for the last 60 years.

While the sound may not be accurate, it is pleasing. A lot of them give off an aura of quality. They have mass, which suggests quality. Much of the construction was done by hand by someone who cared. They come from a time when there was still magic in radio, and, for me at least, a little of that magic still happens when I fire up my old Hallicrafters or Hammarlund. Not so much with my solid state stuff.

There is also the memory of when I was a kid hunched over an old Western Auto console trying to pick up stations from somewhere I never heard of.

I like the older tube and early transistor stuff because of it's usually nice build quality and very good to excellent performance. I will say that for AM use, most any '60's 5 tube radio will blow the doors off of the average consumer radio made today. Back in the tube era, most radios were made in the USA with pride. Now, it's "build it as cheap and as crappy as possible so we can make more money off of the initial sale and again when the customer comes back to buy a new piece of crap to replace the 1 year old piece of crap that just died". Even as far back as the early '70's, consumer radios had taken a giant nose dive. I've got an early '70's Korean Zenith AM/FM clock radio that is no where near as good as my late Uncle's '68'ish Zenith USA built radio. Also, the older equipment was made to be serviced. Most modern consumer electronics are built to be thrown away when they fail. I see this more and more with newer TVs, stereos, etc. In fact, the more I see of this new crap; the more respect I have for the old tube stuff.

Now, manufacturers do not give a damn about how AM sounded (or even FM). But the old tube radios were meant to sound good even with AM. They just have that warm sound that is great. A lot of them had great tuners to do some long distance DX'ing with them.

Love all your comments!

Plus, the connection to the past. I remember my Grandma's clock radio on top of her refrigerator, which brings back a lot of memories of piles of cookies and glasses of cold milk!

My Grandpa's workshop, with an old radio covered with sawdust and little speckles of white paint. I swear, every single tool that man owned was covered with little speckles of white paint! I should know, I still have them.

I've got a 40 year tuner that is my daily driver. It pulls in a LOT more stations than my two modern tuners.. With that said, I am going to say the statement about the newer tuners being better is going to be false..

I can't put it into words either but I'm with everyone else who feels that a 60 year old whatever brand of receiver has a certain something which has been engineered out of modern rigs. I've used or owned several flashy digital rigs which just don't sound or perform anywhere near the level of even the most basic 5-tube tabletop radio built for a casual user ca 1935-55. I'll grant that a newer digital rig has a definite edge where stability is concerned and it is kinda nice to be able to hit 9.655mHz exactly either with the tuning knob or keypad, but for sensitivity and overall sound quality my heart is with hollow-state rigs. The smell... the weight... the presence...the authority of an old tube rig is undeniable.

I don't have a fireplace, but the warm glow from my HQ-160 is a nice substitute. :thmbsp:

John

newer stuff...push buttons..menu's..so impersonal.. feels cheap. give me a metal switch...a freaking knob..substantial...wood not pseudo wood. things are what we perceive.

You can feel an old radio! The new ones are a just some boxes...
Well, not to forget about the light given by the lights bulb from the dial... it's a God given wonder. Not to forget about the magic eye (tuning eye), another splendor!

You also have to remember what those wooden table radios cost, in terms of how many months typical wages. Modern radios are cheap, and the quality reflects the price.

I have three wood-cabinet Zenith radios I would not give up for anything. As others here have said, today's solid-state transistor sets cannot hold a candle to the older radios, the latter being made, in most cases, with all-metal chassis and well-designed circuitry. The sound of these older sets is better than the new one-chip radios as well. My Zenith C845 (the radio shown in my avatar looks almost like it) has two speakers, an 8" for low- and midrange and a 5" for highs; the radio also has tone and loudness compensation, a true tone control that alters the response curve of the entire audio stage, not just cuts down the highs as do the tone controls in today's cheap portables (those that even have tone controls at all), and the cabinet is made of solid wood (my other two Zeniths, K731 and MJ1035, have solid-wood cabinets as well).

I like the sound and the looks of the cabinets of all three of my Zeniths, although at the moment the MJ1035 has an issue with the volume control (resulting in very low, almost inaudible sound, but the radio works very well otherwise, bringing in loads of stations just using a hank of wire on the FM antenna terminal). These radios were built for long-distance reception and excellent sound quality today's cheap plastic portables cannot hope to match. The C-845 works very well and also sounds 1000 times better than any of today's cheap sets, which is why I intend to keep all three sets as long as they work as well as they do. I also have a Zenith H511 table set (the "racetrack" model, so named for the shape of the cabinet) that was made in 1951, and still works quite well; no hum, good sound and quality construction, qualities for which Zenith radios (and later, televisions) were known for decades.

These radios, not to mention my Royal 1000 eight-band portable and R-70 AM/FM set (the latter very likely having been one of the last quality Zenith portables--it's built like a tank, even though the entire radio is on a PC board) are keepers as far as I am concerned. I don't know what got me so interested in collecting these, but I'm glad I did start a collection seven years ago. These radios represent a level of quality (of build and sound) we will never see again, in this age of outsourcing, offshoring and manufacturers of almost everything these days being much more concerned with their bottom line than with the quality of their products.

My wife "got it" the first time she turned on my first tabletop restoration. The switch went CLUNK and she said "WOW! It's real!"

Here's part of a sheet I wrote to accompany a gallery display of antique radios I did for a community radio station's 30th anniversary:

The Lure of Antique Radios

These machines are the remnants of a society that valued things. Things that could last, that were repairable, with owners who treasured them. They weren’t made, or bought, to throw out in a few years or when they broke.

The lure of glowing vacuum tubes brings back memories of our youth, our parents, our grandparents. Radio design in the Golden Age (1920-1950) reflected industrial design and technology of the time. These radios were designed by the same engineers who made the Empire State Building, the Golden Gate Bridge, the automobile, the great trains and airplanes. Their designs combine form, function and beauty, and the result is a timeless allure.

Vacuum tube radios often perform better than modern equivalents. Radio stations were fewer and farther away in those days, and receivers were more sensitive. Worldwide broadcasts on shortwave frequencies were very popular listening in the 1930s as the US came out of the isolationist 20s and began to pay attention to the brewing conflicts in Europe and Asia. Even a simple 5-tube radio can pick up the high-powered clear-channel AM stations in Chicago, Dallas, Cincinnati, Atlanta, Detroit or Denver on a clear night.

Wood cabinets – walnut, mahogany, and others - were dominant through the 20s and 30s. Plastics such as Bakelite, beetle plastic, plaskon, and the beautiful translucent Catalin began to take over around WWII, especially for table sets. These plastics are all but extinct today.

The radio was the center of the household. These were the days before television, and most news and entertainment came into the household via the radio. Radios were furniture, an essential piece of the living room, kitchen, den.

Who owned these radios? What did they listen to? The Roaring 20s, the Great Depression, WWII, the Cold War. The Jazz Era, the big bands, rhythm & blues, the beginnings of Rock ‘n Roll. If only they could talk…

:thmbsp:

Tube equipment is more "alive" than solid state. It has to warm up, it drifts and floats a little bit, and occasionally requires a little work under the hood to keep it going. They tend to not be dead on precise like a digital display, so there is a bit of user interaction required to get the intended results. I think thats part of the allure, the need to actually operate the radio. I get some of that out of analog tuned solid state units, but a tube set just has a certain something to it.

You also have to remember what those wooden table radios cost, in terms of how many months typical wages. Modern radios are cheap, and the quality reflects the price.

That's true. In the past you payed a lot for an good radio, but you use it for a lot of time! No you pay less, but if it'll last for 10 yrs is good :sigh:

gadget73: you took the words out my mouth. You can feel an tube apparatus coming alive. A semiconductor stuff... you just simpley turn on. One of the reasons for which I sitll like vinil, reel to reel and audio cassettes is that I can see them moving - so I can feel them; I can't see the m.p. 3 moving :no:

You boys are all FULL OF IT. I dunno why anyone in their RIGHT MIND would want one of those old crocks...Dam tubes burn out, ain't reliable, they drift, motorboat, & get entirely too hot, use entirely too much juice. Prolly oughta be outlawed, 'cos they have DEADLY voltages in 'em, too. So there. N'yah....(grin)

You boys are all FULL OF IT. I dunno why anyone in their RIGHT MIND would want one of those old crocks...

For a second there I thought you were talking about you Sandy...:D

I see you're back to your old self. :thmbsp:

Tube equipment is more "alive" than solid state. It has to warm up, it drifts and floats a little bit, and occasionally requires a little work under the hood to keep it going. They tend to not be dead on precise like a digital display, so there is a bit of user interaction required to get the intended results. I think thats part of the allure, the need to actually operate the radio. I get some of that out of analog tuned solid state units, but a tube set just has a certain something to it.

I think You hit it! It's as they say about steam locomotives verses modern diesel engines where the say the steam locomotives are breathing machines that have personality. These old radios, at least mine, seems to impart a sort of personality characteristic that is attributable to generations of operating. You sort of have to coax them into their groove.:banana:

This comparation is not quyete good.
In the case of an tube radio, you don't feel only the apparatus, you feel also the clear and worm sound provided by the tubes.
P.S. I'm not an old man... I'm only 26. :banana:
P.S. 2 I'm curios, will any digital stuff ever match this: http://www.50er-radios.de/satu-563.html (see the image above).

never

From what i've read online, my Telefunken Opus 7 cost $299 back in 1956/7 when it was released. Using an inflation calculator, that would come out to about $2400 in today's rates, without tax. And i'm sure that there were far more expensive sets out there than this too. I can't imagine any consumer radio coming anywhere close to that today. It just goes to show just how much people were willing to pay for good build quality back then, something that they would be proud to own.

This one was in our house as long as I can remember. It is the one that got me hooked on this damn hobby. As a kid in the mid 50s, I was totally blown away by the fact I could actually listen to Radio Moscow, The BBC, AM radio from all over the country. I have since added many of its older and younger cousins from other manufacturers but this RCA 128 (1934) is the one that got me started.

I will say that for AM use, most any '60's 5 tube radio will blow the doors off of the average consumer radio made today.

I have 3 tube radios in my house that are the only things I listen to AM on.I get much better reception on them than any of my newer solid state radios or receivers.
Jimmy

This one was in our house as long as I can remember. It is the one that got me hooked on this damn hobby. As a kid in the mid 50s, I was totally blown away by the fact I could actually listen to Radio Moscow, The BBC, AM radio from all over the country. I have since added many of its older and younger cousins from other manufacturers but this RCA 128 (1934) is the one that got me started.

That's a super neat radio!:thmbsp: How many tubes?

Any of the Zenith radios from about the '40s to the '60s would be excellent sets for AM DXing and even just plain listening to local stations. I have a C845 (circa 1960), which has a 6BJ6 RF stage (works on AM as well as FM) and two IF stages plus a limiter stage. This radio pulls in stations like a magnet on AM after sundown (with its built-in Wavemagnet antenna), and will receive FM stations from 80-100 miles away under favorable conditions, again simply using the built-in antenna. The sound is fabulous as well with an 8" main driver and a 5" HF driver. When Zenith quit making the 800 series (C/H/Z-845, Y832, et al.) they broke the mold, which is too bad as these sets represented some of the best table radios Zenith ever made. The 1963 K-731 is also a great-sounding and performing radio, even though it does not have an AM RF stage. It has been said by another AK member that, with the introduction of the K731 in the early 1960s, Zenith had reached its....well, zenith as far as quality in small radios was concerned. I have one of these sets (in the Early American cabinet) and am very favorably impressed by the sound quality (the bass response is excellent), not to mention RF sensitivity, even without an AM RF stage. This radio has two IF stages for both bands and a limiter stage on FM.

The only places to find these great old sets today are on eBay, Craigslist and at garage, yard and estate sales; once in a while one of these may show up (gasp!) in someone's trash as well. If you find one, grab it! As I have said many times regarding vintage and antique Zenith radios, they don't make them like that anymore.

That's a super neat radio!:thmbsp: How many tubes?
six tubes in this one, here is a nice write up on the RCA

http://www.tuberadioland.com/rca-128_main.html

These radios back in the 20's and 30's (before television) would have been the most sophisticated and advanced piece of electronic gear in the household - hence their 'hey-day'. They were expensive and valued then and were thus built with quality and attention to style. They really bring one back to another era and their physical presence of wood, metal, and glass and the glow of the tubes and the dial lamp in the dark certainly can transport you back into a different time for an evening.

I was born in the 60's, so never experienced the family huddled around a big console radio (or ever even had one in the house growing up) but I've got enough of an imagination to appreciate what that must have been like.

I have a 1948 Philco mono console, TOTL with 13 tubes, that's chalked on the back with a 1948 date and "$399". Serious money back then. There were pre-1930 deluxe sets with elaborate cabinets that were $500+. A L-O-T of money.

Saratoga: Very nice RCA 128.

JeffHS: I have a C845 that I've never been able to fix. FM is dead. Sitting in pieces. Nice radio though.

AM on.I get much better reception on them than any of my newer solid state radios or receivers.
Jimmy

It's possible to improve the sound of AM on modern SS receivers, by changing the IF filters in the Am section. A filter wide enough to pass the 10KHz audio an AM station broadcastrs, instead of just 5KHz most of those ceramic filters pass. See
http://pw2.netcom.com/%7Ewa2ise/radios/feedback.html#solidstate

You all are just highly biased towards the old stuff....

And I'm right in there with you.

You all are just highly biased towards the old stuff....

And I'm right in there with you.

I love 'new' stuff too... I have a 1977 Sansui that I wouldn't part with :D

Depends on the use.

For all of the attractiveness of a tubed radio, if I had to pick one for dedicated DXing it'd be a modern DSP rig...no problems sacrificing audio quality for selectivity and adjustability on the front end.

For simply listening to a station where I know reception isn't going to be an issue, I'd pick the tubed one.

Boston Dave: your "new" stuff is 37 years old! :yes:

Reece

(I know, but it runs on rocks instead of tubes: that makes it "new.")

I have found that although the electronics on modern day electronics is better(at least on FM, etc), the quality of the cases, etc is much better on the older ones.

As has been said in previous posts, the performance of modern radios on AM, is horrible compared to the older sets. I just purchased a table model from Target(labeled Crosley, but made in the far east). FM is fine, but all except the cheapest of my tube AM sets will beat its AM performance.

I have only a little 'old stuff' that came from family members who bought it new. The rest was all bought second hand, and THAT is an interesting part of it: who listened to it, what they did with it, where it has been, why they sold it, etc.

I have only a little 'old stuff' that came from family members who bought it new. The rest was all bought second hand, and THAT is an interesting part of it: who listened to it, what they did with it, where it has been, why they sold it, etc.

Yeah, I always ask the seller what he knows about the history of any old radio I buy.

I bought a Philco 39-25 recently from a guy for $10. He said that it had been in his attic for about the last 40 years and that it (he had to kind of whisper this part... in case his wife overheard, I guess) had belonged to his ex-girlfriend's father. He'd taken it to the flea market to sell a few times but hadn't sold it.

He also told me it used to get just one station until about a year ago (a lot of people selling old radios around here tell me that...assuming the radio is broken, but in reality we only have 1 am radio station here).

the lights cast on the back wall, the design...everything :D:music:

I have a 1948 Philco mono console, TOTL with 13 tubes, that's chalked on the back with a 1948 date and "$399". Serious money back then. There were pre-1930 deluxe sets with elaborate cabinets that were $500+. A L-O-T of money.

Saratoga: Very nice RCA 128.

JeffHS: I have a C845 that I've never been able to fix. FM is dead. Sitting in pieces. Nice radio though.


Thanks Chris

As one who has had the old family Crosley 124 since 1972, and that is what started my radio, tv and electronics collection. Listening to the thrilla in manilla fight on my Dad's Zenith trans oceanic and realizing I was hearing things across the earth just made a huge impact on me. For me, it is all still magic and I love it. I still listen to all my radios, and most have their sweet spot. The radio I grew up with is an Emerson 541and it sits behind me right now playing the Grand Ole Opry. My Grandmother who lived with us bought it new in 1947. Treasures, pure treasures. I have enjoyed this thread.
Dan

;2639108']Depends on the use.

For all of the attractiveness of a tubed radio, if I had to pick one for dedicated DXing it'd be a modern DSP rig...no problems sacrificing audio quality for selectivity and adjustability on the front end.

For simply listening to a station where I know reception isn't going to be an issue, I'd pick the tubed one.

Uhhh...I beg to differ on that one. You've obviously never worked w/a properly set up R-390A, SX-73 Hallicrafters, SP-600 Hammarlund, RACAL RA-17 or even the "Mount Everest" of boatanchors, the Rohde & Schwarz EK-07.

Like many, as a family, we sat around the old Philco in the evenings listening to the radio shows, The Shadow, Hornet, Hallmark theater, etc.. It was the content of the program, the talent of the actors that made you use of your imagination and made you part of the show. The dull glow from the dial, the smell of hot tubes....it all was magic for young minds and the magic of radio. Now I sit in front of my 46" flat panel a spectator, brain dead for the most part.

I love old radios - the best of them were designed by engineers, not accountants. It is true that some solid-state designs can be better than tube designs, but a good analogy is, I have made about 200 flights on business, nothing memorable. But the last time I was on a plane, it was a joyride on a Stearman biplane with a 7-cylinder radial engine. Modern airliners are airborne cattle cars. The old biplanes were were for larger-than-life F. Scott Fitzgerald heroes. I have an album of this flight on the Ballzboard:

http://stormlarge.com/ballzboard/viewtopic.php?f=11&t=4221

No one could call a Stearman "better" than a modern aircraft, but guess what I would rather be in? There is a romance to the old tube designs, not to mention the inherent linearity of tubes, that has kept us collectors faithful to the old designs.

Don't want to forget tube CAR radios, either! Very sensitive, stable, great bassy tone from that dash-mounted 6X9. You'd be out "parking" and have the volume turned low and the vibrator buzz would be louder than the audio! One problem when "parking", though...current draw. A LOT. You had to remember to start the car once in a while, otherwise it was a long, embarassing walk back to town.

i have several "suicide boxes" ive restored around the house. i currently fall asleep to a 1947 majestic AM wood cabinet set that i listen to coast to coast radio with. i have a 1939 bakelite GE, and a 1946 RDR wood cabinet set that are also in regular use.

its amazing when you think about how old these radios are and they are still putin' along.

I've always loved the old tube radios. I bought my first when I was only about 7 years old. It was already an "old" thing, a Philco from the early fifties. I carefully cleaned it up and would listen to that thing, staring at the tubes... When a teenager studying in Germany, I got a huge old Grundig set with the names of dozens of European cities on the dial, instead of just numbers; each city used to have one main station with an assigned frequency! While limited resources (mostly space) keep me from building up any significant collection, I nearly always have at least one or two tube radios around.

The oldest I've ever found is one I got just a couple years ago, if that long: a 1923 Stromberg-Carlson Neutrodyne. It appeared just a year after the first-ever public radio broadcast, so I don't know if I'll ever find an earlier one than that. Due to the need for multiple voltage inputs and careful log-keeping, etc... just to be able to find stations, it is more of a decoration these days than a daily listener, but the build quality of it (thick, solid hardwood slabs for the case, machines brass and bronze fittings, etc...) puts to shame even the mid-century plastic-and-metal ones that so many here (including myself) love so much.

I don't know any better than anyone else just what it is that makes the old tube radios so much more attractive; probably everything that has been mentioned. I get the same feeling about many other types of things, too, though: solid, durable, simple enough to repair by yourself -- these are the characteristics which I prefer in almost any product.

I have a medical floor lamp that is probably 40-50 years old. It works superbly and looks almost brand new, and should work for more decades to come than I'll be around to see. I have a bunch of old desk fans that date back as far as the 1920s, that needed only a little cleaning and lubrication to run as-new, and they'll undoubtedly run for decades to come, with just a bit of occasional TLC. Perhaps eventually the insulation on the motor wiring will fail from age... but the quality to last a LONG time was built right into them. Yes, modern computer-designed fan blades run a bit more quietly; some of the old "propeller blade" fans were a bit noisy... but those modern, plastic fans tend to break within a few years of use (if they last even that long!).

On my desk, next to one of the fans, I recently put a gooseneck desk lamp that has to be quite old, too. I'm guessing 1950s era, although the design of the base harks back to considerably earlier pre-war times. It was very dusty and the gooseneck part had some corrosion, when I bought it for a few bucks from a trash-scavenger lady, but it works just fine as-is, even with the original wiring and plug (which I may replace soon, for safety reasons). The lamp that it replaced was less than ten years old, and already didn't work reliably.

There are still a few manufacturers making GOOD QUALITY products that can last a lifetime. Duralit toasters and Le Creuset cookware come to mind as examples. Of course, they are VERY expensive today, too: far too expensive for 90+ percent of households to buy them. Yet years ago, many households managed to have similar-quality items, because even the cheaper brands were better-made than most things are today (although there was always also some real "rubbish", it wasn't the mainstream products that most households bought).

Part of the difference is quality vs. quantity. Today most households have computers, multiple TVs, multiple phones, umpteen kitchen gadgets (most of which are seldom used), tons of toys (including expensive electronic games) for each kid, etc... We have traded quality for quantity. We wanted cheaper, cheaper, cheaper, and the "Wal-Mart Effect" has given us what we (well, a lot of us) voted for with our dollars. And we bury ourselves in the clutter of it, in the name of "lifestyle".

Personally, I'm gradually moving back the other direction, reducing the clutter and looking always for high-quality, well-built stuff to replace less-well-made "junk". Sometimes that can mean new stuff, but often good-quality new stuff just isn't available. IF getting quality means I have to find and restore something that is 50+ years old already, then so be it. In a way, I'm also doing something for "the environment" (although not for the economy) by recycling things that might otherwise be discarded --or less efficiently recycled into other products. I'd rather invest the in the cost of a restoration once and use the thing 'for life', than be stuck buying something anew every few months or years, because stuff today just isn't made to last.

My worst/best example of 'being stuck' like this is a very simple thing that we don't often give much thought to: I wish like heck that I could find some of those old unbreakable hard-rubber men's pocket combs, that used to be sold just about everywhere on the planet, and for relative peanuts! I'm sick and tired of scratching my scalp and picking from out of my pocket the bits of plastic that have broken off my embarrassingly falling-apart comb, that I have to pay too much as it is, once every several weeks! I'd gladly pay ten times as much for just one of those (once very cheap!) unbreakable hard-rubber ones! :yes: Whatever happened to them? How could something so well-done, that lasted for OVER EIGHTY YEARS in the market-place, suddenly (well, within just a few short years) DISAPPEAR, without comment or really much notice? If a better product had superseded it, I would understand, but that has NOT happened here. :no: Just as with so many other things, the consumer has been "shafted" for the sake of, presumably, lower production cost and a higher rate of repeat sales. After all, an unbreakable comb is only replaced when it is lost, whereas a highly-breakable one gets replaced at least several times a year!

Might be time to revive the rubber comb thread. :scratch2: :D

I blame WW2 for a lot of it. That's when mfgers learned how to make stuff, cheap, nasty, & quick...I have several "El Cheapo" pre-war radios-Little Arvin 2,3, & 4 tube sets- & they still work satisfactorily. Admittedly, I had to have them "gone thru", but that's not necessarily the fault of the radios themselves-a bad wax cap is a bad wax cap, whether its in a 1938 Arvin that cost $9 new, or in a RCA AR-60 from '35, that was $495 new...That's all they HAD back then. Even the really nasty AA5 sets from the tail-end of the tube era-Say, circa 1965 or so-CAN be fixed if you really want to. But all but the really TOTL stuff today is about shazbot if it dies-could be some "dedicated" specialty IC or some wonky plastic casting that has "dried out" & crumbled away-I've run into that quite a bit, too.

Tubes are part of the alure. And they weren't massed produced (build quality, although they didn't have quality standards like they do today), like many of the later units today. And then there's the 'part of history' aspect.

I happened to open the doors of my seldom used 1961 console recently. The thing that immediately sent me into paroxysms of ecstacy was the smell!

Working on old sets, the solder back then had a wonderful smell that modern solder doesn't. Instant flashback when I get it up my nose.

I just wish the programming was as good as the radios. AM, in my area is mostly junk(talk, etc.) The only AM music station that I like is 60 miles away. In addition, the interefence sources here just keep on muliplying, making it more and more difficult to listen to AM(on any AM radio-new or old).

Recently, I have been restoring mostly AM/FM sets so as to be able to be able to use them.