Forums :: Resources :: Features :: Photo Gallery :: Vintage Radio Shows :: Archives :: Books
Support This Site: Contributors :: Advertise


It is currently Sep Fri 21, 2018 7:00 pm


All times are UTC [ DST ]





Post New Topic Post Reply  [ 15 posts ] 
Author Message
 Post subject: SX-42 versus SX-62
PostPosted: May Wed 16, 2018 7:28 pm 
Member
User avatar

Joined: Jan Thu 01, 1970 1:00 am
Posts: 3740
Location: Central VA, 23005
I have an opportunity to get either an SX-42 or an SX-62. I understand that both have good FM reception (which I listen to a lot, I do not listen to the amateur bands very often). Which one has the better FM audio - an SX-42 or an SX-62?

TIA,

Terry


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: SX-42 versus SX-62
PostPosted: May Wed 16, 2018 7:42 pm 
Member
User avatar

Joined: Jun Sun 19, 2011 2:31 pm
Posts: 5616
Terry,

Audio will be equivalent between the two. Much of the circuitry is identical and the SX-42 is a more complex and deluxe version of the SX-62.

It has calibrated bandspread via a separate bandspread capacitor for the amateur bands which is also very useful for fine tuning on the shortwave broadcast bands, the SX-62 has a single tuning capacitor assembly.
It has a S meter/FM tuning meter which is useful under many situations
The main tuning is gear driven for the SX-42 and "string" driven for the SX-62 and the SX-42 provides better tuning feel.
The SX-42 has front panel adjustments for its BFO and crystal filter making these functions more useful while the SX-62 are "set and forget" controls during alignment.

The only advantages the SX-62 has over the SX-42 is a built in 500 Khz. calibrator (the 42 has no calibrator) and a less complex tuning drive which isn't an issue unless the SX-42 has been abused.

Cosmetics/beauty is in the eye of the beholder; both are nice looking receivers.

If both were available at the same price and in the same condition I would go for the SX-42 and I would be willing to pay more for a good SX-42 compared to a same condition SX-62.

Both will have some warm up detector drift noticeable on FM so you should do alignment after at least a 10 minute warm up and expect FM detector performance to be best after a short warm up in subsequent operation.

Both use the same limiter/discriminator FM detection system which works very well but can be confusing to new users since it will detect each FM station at 3 closely spaced points on the dial. The center spot is the correct location where it is operating as a true discriminator but it will also "slope" detect FM when slightly offset to either side of center. Until you get used to tuning FM with this type of detector, especially for the SX-62 which doesn't have a tuning meter, you should tune in AM mode for MAXIMUM distortion and then switch to FM. Tuning in AM mode for max distortion centers the signal within the IF where you want it and then switching to FM results in minimum distortion.

Rodger WQ9E


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: SX-42 versus SX-62
PostPosted: May Wed 16, 2018 7:46 pm 
Member

Joined: Jan Thu 01, 1970 1:00 am
Posts: 3075
Location: Seattle WA US
Terry-
For serious FM broadcast reception, which usually means music, get a good quality FM tuner designed for the audio market. Either Hallicrafters receiver will be lacking in audio bandwidth and fidelity in comparison to a set designed for music reception. And, neither Hallicrafters set includes a stereo demodulator. The Halli radios were designed for the shortwave listening market, not music reception.
Just my two bits worth, others may disagree strongly.

-Chuck K7MCG


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: SX-42 versus SX-62
PostPosted: May Wed 16, 2018 9:00 pm 
Member
User avatar

Joined: Sep Wed 10, 2014 2:01 am
Posts: 1777
Location: Costa Mesa, California
I have both and the problem with many SX 62's is that they suffer from cosmetic damage. The metal bezel is thin and easily dented. As Chuck says, neither is great for FM listening. Music reproduction is not ideal and that is the primary use for modern FM. The SX 42 is by far the more sought after receiver.

Norm

_________________
KK6IYM


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: SX-42 versus SX-62
PostPosted: May Wed 16, 2018 9:17 pm 
Member
User avatar

Joined: Oct Mon 05, 2015 10:04 pm
Posts: 563
Location: Worcester Massachusetts
As a second owner of a pristine one (Dad was the 1st owner), I am somewhat partial to the SX-42. I do think it has some inherent advantages to the SX-62, which is undoubtedly also a great radio. For "cool factor" alone, the SX-42 is the one to get. It's a very iconic radio for its industrial design. The SX-62 sports the more traditional slide rule tuning. As you may discover, there is an awful lot more to these radios than FM tuning, although I will admit that FM DX'ing can be quite good on the 42. It is somewhat underrated as an FM receiver, and I think people telling you to get a more modern FM receiver is somewhat of a simplistic response. Tuning FM on these radios does take a little patience, which very few people have in today's Internet/smart phone era. Then again, I would not zero in on either one of these radios simply for FM. Comparing the two takes a lot more into account. I should also add that zeroing the meter on the SX-42 can indeed be helpful for tuning in an FM broadcast, especially distant ones.

_________________
ZTO A600,1000, 3000-1, Hallicrafters SX-42, S-38, S-40, Icom R-71A, Kenwood R-2000, Yaesu FRG-7


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: SX-42 versus SX-62
PostPosted: May Wed 16, 2018 10:15 pm 
Member
User avatar

Joined: Jan Thu 01, 1970 1:00 am
Posts: 3740
Location: Central VA, 23005
Thanks for all of the replies so far.

To add a little more information: I own several high end tube receivers, both multiplexed and otherwise, that have FM (SCOTT [both EH and HH], SABA, EICO, Fisher, Heathkit, etc.) and also, to my ears, a superb FM tube receiver a KLH Eight. In the past, I have read comments primarily from HAM people that the FM on Hallicrafters SX 42's and 62's was excellent and much better than FM on Commercial tube receivers. Both a 42 and 62 were recently made available to me and I was looking here for input.

FWIW, I have often wondered if those HAM folks 42/62 FM comments didn't border on hyperbole.

BR,

Terry


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: SX-42 versus SX-62
PostPosted: May Wed 16, 2018 11:53 pm 
Member

Joined: Jan Thu 01, 1970 1:00 am
Posts: 1337
Location: Morris Plains, N.J. 07950
Terry, a lot of it is perspective. Compared to the average ham receiver, an SX-42 or SX-62 has to-die-for audio, but to the audiophile, it doesn't sound so hot.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: SX-42 versus SX-62
PostPosted: May Thu 17, 2018 12:24 am 
Member

Joined: Dec Sun 14, 2008 3:33 pm
Posts: 719
Location: Tokyo
A review of the SX-62 from a HiFi perspective, p78:

http://www.americanradiohistory.com/Arc ... 955-07.pdf


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: SX-42 versus SX-62
PostPosted: May Thu 17, 2018 12:59 am 
Member
User avatar

Joined: Dec Wed 25, 2013 7:57 am
Posts: 2667
Location: USA
If the primary use will be FM broadcst, also consider a S-36 or S-27.

_________________
"I got a bad feeling about this." (Han Solo)


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: SX-42 versus SX-62
PostPosted: May Thu 17, 2018 1:02 am 
Member
User avatar

Joined: Jan Thu 01, 1970 1:00 am
Posts: 3740
Location: Central VA, 23005
shinkuukan wrote:
A review of the SX-62 from a HiFi perspective, p78:

http://www.americanradiohistory.com/Arc ... 955-07.pdf


どうもありがとうございます - I think that's right, I spent a few years in Yokosuka


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: SX-42 versus SX-62
PostPosted: May Thu 17, 2018 5:35 am 
Member

Joined: Jul Tue 21, 2009 1:38 pm
Posts: 847
Location: SW WA state
Terry,

All good advice... I've owned both the 42's and the 62... I don't like the 62: It appears to be a simplified, cheaper/flimsier model. I'd take the 42 in a heartbeat over the 62!
I also have the S-27: It's been a while since I played with it. The S-27 is more like a late 1930's design (with three acorn tubes), and again, I would pick the 42 over it.

-Tom


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: SX-42 versus SX-62
PostPosted: May Thu 17, 2018 11:25 am 
Member
User avatar

Joined: Jun Sun 19, 2011 2:31 pm
Posts: 5616
The earlier S-27/S-36 style receivers have a 5.25 Mhz. IF section instead of the 10.7 Mhz used in the later SX-42/SX-62 receivers so the IF bandpass is going to be tight for FM broadcast stations at peak modulation. The FM de-emphasis component values should also be changed to meet the current standard in these receivers.

Once you start getting into higher fidelity and the desire for best stereo separation across the range then jump up to high quality tuners and receivers of the mid/late 1970s for improved performance which will still pale in comparison to high quality (not highly compressed) digital audio files reproduced by the best of modern technology. Once you start getting into true high fidelity (in its original meaning of high fidelity as in the most accurate reproduction of the original sound) modern technology has it nailed; if you want to get into the voodoo side of audio with oxygen free power cables, the sound of gray plate vs black plate tubes, and all of the associated silliness then you are heading into an entirely different discussion area.

Rodger WQ9E


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: SX-42 versus SX-62
PostPosted: May Thu 17, 2018 12:28 pm 
Moderator

Joined: Jan Thu 01, 1970 1:00 am
Posts: 19880
Location: Utica, NY 13502 (USA)
Do you have any FM stations in your area that are worth listening to from an audio perspective? If so, you will enjoy listening to them on a properly restored SX-42 or SX-62. Most (but not all) FM stations in my area sound terrible on a decent FM tuner and sound equally as bad on my SX-42 which was my daily driver for many years. The competitive nature of commercial radio has led to the overly processed "AMization" of the FM band save for the few stations who care about their audio. I agree with most of the linked magazine article about the SX-62 FM performance. The SX-42 has identical FM and audio circuitry but it has a tuning meter with special markings for tuning FM.

Dave


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: SX-42 versus SX-62
PostPosted: May Thu 17, 2018 1:24 pm 
Member
User avatar

Joined: Jun Sun 19, 2011 2:31 pm
Posts: 5616
I agree with Dave about the lack of decent quality FM.

By the time the CD format was released with its high dynamic range capability most music was being produced with an artificially compressed dynamic range that was suitable for the primary "audio space" which was a car. A cassette with Dolby NR was fully capable of handling the frequency response and dynamic range of most of what was emerging from music producers. Today most users experience audio from reduced bit rate files reproduced through "ear buds" of questionable quality via their smartphone. FM stations followed the lead of AM stations adding heavy compression so that they sound loud.

For most of us if you want the best quality your receiver can provide you will need to use your own AM and FM transmitters to provide high quality material. But lest we complain too much about what the music industry is providing it is what is needed for the great majority of the market. I have XM in all three of my vehicles and from a critical listening standpoint it doesn't rate well but its compressed dynamic range that saves satellite bandwidth also works well for most vehicles. My new diesel pickup is actually a little quieter than my Cadillac but the noise floor at highway speed is still high enough that there isn't a lot of ear dynamic range headroom before getting into excessive audio levels and in the Z06 even when the exhaust is set to stealth mode the wide ultra summer performance tires make so much noise that the noise floor is like 80 meters during a thunderstorm.

Rodger WQ9E


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: SX-42 versus SX-62
PostPosted: May Thu 17, 2018 2:16 pm 
Member
User avatar

Joined: Oct Mon 05, 2015 10:04 pm
Posts: 563
Location: Worcester Massachusetts
I have had great success tuning in NPR/College Radio/PBS stations. They seem to have better signals, and more than likely, better transmission and studio equipment. I would hesitate to say all FM stations sound bad today. You just have to look harder now. Tuning them on the SX-42 can be challenging, but also, fun and rewarding.

_________________
ZTO A600,1000, 3000-1, Hallicrafters SX-42, S-38, S-40, Icom R-71A, Kenwood R-2000, Yaesu FRG-7


Top
 Profile  
 
Post New Topic Post Reply  [ 15 posts ]  Moderator: Sandy

All times are UTC [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests



Search for:
Jump to:  
























Privacy Policy :: Powered by phpBB