The MLite-880: A more thorough performance assessment

By 13dka

Following up on the article I recently wrote about the MLite-880, I still had a comparison with a reference radio on a proper antenna on my to-do list. I wasn’t in a hurry because I got pretty fascinated with exploring what I can get out of various magmounts on my car with this radio, which is quite a lot and it never gave me the feeling of missing out on something. I was also a bit hung up on the idea of comparing the MLite with the Belka because, you know, same price level and all, but that’s a bit iffy with my little passive splitter and 2 different input impedances.

Then a claim was made on the interwebz that the MLite-880 would be just a mediocre radio that would not stand scrutiny without its outstanding noise reduction, to summarize that in my own words. My experience is obviously very different and it made me curious how much truth could be in this claim. So I just took the ingenious Icom and the mediocre MLite to the dike to slip in a little shootout and then maybe give the loser a Viking funeral on a little raft I improvised out of flotsam and jetsam while making a lot of recordings to give my findings a whiff of evidence.

Both radios were connected to my lazy 10m/33′ monopole antenna via a Diamond SS-500 splitter and 15m double-shielded and common-mode choked coax. Both were recording to their own SD cards, but unfortunately, the recorded audio from the Icom does not represent the live audio off the radio on AM recordings because it records to an SD card with an 8 kHz sample rate, and that limits the audio bandwidth to at best 4 kHz. The deciding thing to listen to in these recordings is the noise and sometimes the pure existence of a signal, though, and lower bandwidth is almost an advantage in this context.

oznorWO

Sensitivity Test

Since the question is really the practical sensitivity and, therefore, how dependent this radio is on its noise reduction to get good results, I’ll start with the IBP beacons, which were recorded without NR, of course. To spot and quantify SNR/sensitivity differences you can use the four -10dB stepped (100W, 10W, 1W, 0.1W) dashes the IBP beacons transmit after their callsign.

The most grassrootsy first: OA4B in Peru (10,800km/6,700mi) on the 17m-band. MLite first, then the Icom. Both radios receive the second (10W) dash as faintly as the 100W dash, but with too little SNR left.

5Z4B beacon in Nairobi, Kenya (6,600km/4,100mi with a 3rd dash = 1W!) informing a silent 15m band about the opportunity around sunset. MLite starts again, then the Icom. The latter has the 3rd dash faintly but clearly and the former leaves some more ambiguity about that. Demonstrates again the minuscule difference.

5Z4B again, but on 20m with a 4th dash to count, whether or not the last one is really from 5Z4B or just interference doesn’t matter; what counts is that both radios heard it. The 1W dash was clearly received by both, starting with the MLite.

Here’s one where only the MLite heard an interference, and I’m not sure it imagined it (absolutely unavoidable pun) – VK6RBP in Australia for the 10,000 miles bragging rights.

I think the conclusion here is that we could probably agree on “same ballpark”, right? I don’t know about you, but imagine my surprised Pikachu face!

The AF SNR difference, which is probably all that counts in sensitivity tests, is within 3dB between the two, not to be confused with RF power decibels (but reflected on the RF side in comparably small amounts). For the interested:I did take day/night variations of the noise floor above 10MHz into consideration, with a decreased noise level around midnight on 21MHz, the MLite still matches the Icom, which is all that counts in this comparison (not absolute measurements) context.

The magic button

Another claim was made about the noise reduction, that it would only work with signals of a certain strength. While it is technically correct that it needs a minimum SNR to improve upon, my experience is that it is effective with almost any remaining SNR, provided the signal is fed into the NR with sufficient levels, and it exceeds all my expectations at that. Here are a few recordings of CHU demonstrating both points:

CHU 14670 kHz in Ottawa (5,800km/3,600mi) in bad enough conditions. The same announcement from the IC-705, then the MLite with NR at ? of its range. Note how difficult the French announcement at the end of the transmission is for both radios. I will miss that station. The noise, not so much.

This is just the announcement a minute earlier, when the signal dipped below the noise floor. Nothing gets really recovered, but nothing gets lost either, and what’s left stands out more:

However, if you only look at its inability to cheat physics, you could be missing the point of a good noise reduction in this particular “shortwave radio” context. Restoring fidelity, removing masking noises and generally increasing the SNR and thus ease of listening is having a massive impact on how at least I can enjoy programs or conversations and there’s more: After a few decades many of us (particularly 2-way) radioheads have gotten their auditory cortices hardwired to make a connection between noise and signal strength and then pushing this NR button might feel like witchcraft when it makes a bloke driving around on the other side of the globe sound like he’s just passing your local highway intersection.

In the following sound clips you will hear both radios taking turns in 5-second chunks as if I switch forth and back between them, in some of them I will play the same bit of transmission twice, first from the one, then the other radio so you can e.g. make out differences quite precisely. Continue reading →

Tecsun PL-520: An Excellent Upgrade

14 Replies

by Dan Robinson

The Tecsun PL-520 has been out for some time now though units have been getting into the hands of more reviewers such as myself in recent weeks. There are a number of excellent overview videos available on YouTube, so my purpose here won’t be to dive into sensitivity level and similar comparisons with the PL-330, rather just to give prospective buyers my take on this radio.

First the headlines: Tecsun certainly knows what its buying public is all about. They have added some important features that really make the 520 an attractive option. At the top of the list: a kickstand where none existed before on the PL-330 makes it very easy to use the radio on a desk (though the kickstand does seem a bit vulnerable to breakage). The cabinet of the 520 has been substantially improved — no more sharp corners seen on the PL-330. There is now a USB-C port, another welcome change.

Tuning and VOL knobs have been made slightly wider. HOWEVER, they are still bothersome — trying to rapid tune across frequencies remains a challenge. One suggestion: Tecsun should add a TURBO mode, similar to what has now been done on the Malahiteam MLite-880 that could easly allow fast tuning across the ranges — this would obviously be more useful on shortwave than MW or FM.

Addition of a Favorites button, which forced LSB/USB to be combined into one key, is somewhat puzzling, but I suppose this has some appeal for some users. ETM+ mode provides the ability to save stations based on time of day. This is another appealing feature though I am not sure how many people will actually make regular use of it.

Back to the unified LSB/USB button — this means there is a slightly different approach to recalibration requiring a double press to be sure you know what sideband you are adjusting. The PL-330 was quite easy, but in the 520 it’s a bit more involved. I have found stability after recalibration to be very good, though my PL-330 was excellent in this regard.

Tecsun has provided additional filter choices on AM/LW/SW: 6 khz on SW and 5 khz on MW. Not a critically important upgrade but certainly welcome. There is also a ATS Scan/Stop Sensitivity adjustment. As for synchronous (SAM), it works well on the 520 as it did on the 330. It’s nice that Tecsun understands the need for selectable sideband in SAM — some people think it’s a useless feature but it avoids having to fine tune while in SAM.

I find that sensitivity to touch on the 520 (this is an important issue on portables with some people using additional lengths of wire to avoid drops in sensitivity when a radio is not being physically held) is not a big problem. With the whip antenna fully extended any difference in level is not extreme — I am unaware of what changes may have been made in the physical structure of the cabinet vis a vis the 330, but I doubt there has been much change other than rounding the corners.

In late afternoon here in Maryland I did brief test of the PL-330 and PL-520 at about the same location inside my home tuned to the strong signal from Spain on 15,500 khz. I did another quick comparison of the PL-520 with an MLite-880:

https://youtube.com/shorts/tC3u633Xsws?feature=share

https://youtube.com/shorts/kt95hF3CPCU?feature=share

The comparison between the 520 and 330 shows in my view a bit better audio on the new receiver than on the 330. The comparison between the PL-520 and MLite-880 shows that the Tecsun is quite good at producing quality audio — but there’s a need to understand that the MLite-880 is really a different animal. The PL-520 produces some super audio with clarity; the MLite-880 is not inferior by any means but has a different kind of sound (not to mention extensive tools beyond the 520’s capabilities).

My concluding views on the PL-520 (and thanks to Anon-co for providing the test unit): for someone who wants the smallest possible receiver but one that really hits balls out of the park in performance, I have no hesitation recommending this radio.

The key improvements over the PL-330 make it even more attractive, especially the backstand, sleeker cabinet, and additional bandwidths. At the low price the 520 is sold at, this is pretty much a no-brainer and in today’s — shall we say — diminished world of international broadcasting, if you’re going on a trip the PL-520 is all you really need, unless you already have a PL-990 or H-501 and insist on having those with you for better sound. The one thing one needs to be aware of is the need to carry extra BL?5C 3.7?V batteries and perhaps a charger that handles them, though charging can be done internally with USB-C.

Tecsun has stuck to the pattern of using what I’ll call old-style displays and making incremental improvements in known best sellers, such as the PL-330, and now with the PL-520. One wishes that Tecsun would make the leap that we have seen from Malahiteam in Russia to perhaps provide a spectrum display.

Perhaps in a future PL-1000 or H-600 we will see that happen, but for now we have extremely reliable performers in the Tecsun line that provide such features as recalibration along with multiple bandwidths and SYNC (though that feature remains a bit hobbled due to chip limitations).

Radio Bulgaria: QSL Card Features Radio Sofia’s 1939 Broadcast Van

More 250 year celebrations and WHFM

Shortwave Memories — Ghana’s North American Service

2 Replies

by Karl D. Forth

Many of the African nations achieved independence in the 1960s, and as they raised their new national flag they wanted to be connected to the outside world. One of the first things they often did was build an airport so they could be accessible. The second was setting up a shortwave radio station so their national voice could be heard both domestically and internationally.

Radio Ghana, an early independent country (1957), took this a step further by establishing a North American shortwave service, audible in the mid-afternoon in the eastern United States. In my early listening months, this was one of the more exotic places I could receive on my portable shortwave radio.

I sent them a letter, seeking a QSL card verifying reception, and more information. Employees at the Accra General Post Office gathered letters, rather infamously so, and a few weeks later I received a pen pal aerogram from a postal worker in Accra. At the time, this was welcome and a little bit exciting. I remember showing the first letter to my mother and father. They seemed to approve, with a reaction of “this hobby may not be so bad.”

My correspondence with the postal employee continued for a year or two, beyond the life of the North American service. He never did ask for money or anything else (many other listeners received requests for money from other postal workers), but he did dispense a bit of advice that I’ve always remembered. After learning that I was a high school student, he advised: Don’t Play With Books. That means don’t screw around with your educational opportunity.

Ghana Broadcasting Corp. had a number of frequencies for domestic broadcasts in places such as Ejura and Tema. The external service was based in the capital, Accra, and its broadcasts included two frequencies to North America from 2000 to 2100 GMT daily.

For many years after the North American service ended, Ghana could be heard on several 60 meter frequencies in the late evening and sometimes during late winter afternoons.

Karl D. Forth has been interested in radio and DXing for more than 50 years. This story was included in the book Radio Nights and Distant Signals.

Please note: all Amazon links are affiliate links that support the SWLing Post at no cost to you.

A New Media Tech Museum Opens in Kansas City

Did the Miyako earthquake affect Medium Wave reception at a Japanese DXpedition?

3 Replies

by Satoshi Miyauchi, JP1SCQ, with Nick Hall-Patch, VE7DXR

Introduction

In early November 2025, several members of our Totsuka DXers Circle in Japan (TDXC https://www.tdxc.net/abouttdxc/ ) traveled from the Tokyo area to Tanohata village in Iwate prefecture on northern Honshu island in order to take part in a medium wave (MW) DXpedition that took place on the 8th and 9th of the month. The site was about 500m (1/3 mile) from the Pacific Ocean, overlooking Kitayamazaki cliffs, a very scenic area (Figure 1), but also one from which a great deal of long-haul DX had been heard in the past, including trans-polar WBZ-1030kHz, as well as the farthest possible Antipodes DX such as R. Nacional in Argentina on 870kHz and Radio Monte Carlo in Uruguay on 930kHz.

Figure 1

Our listening post was a meeting room in the Tanohata Nature Training Center, where we set up our receivers, such as Perseus and Airspy HF+discovery, plus our recording gear and accessories (Figure 2).

Figure 2

My recording software was SDR Console, but playback and analysis also used WavViewDX. We set up a TDDF (Twisted Double Delta Flag) antenna with a northeast directional pattern in order to receive medium-wave broadcasts from North America. (Figure 3)

Figure 3 – TDDF antenna; note that low-noise pre-amplifier with bias-T is a must.

Directional patterns from Kazu GOSUI

On the second evening, November 9th, while enjoying the reception, an emergency earthquake alert was issued, and shaking struck. Inside our building, nearly 200 meters above sea level on the solid bedrock of Kitayamazaki, the shaking felt less intense than the reported magnitude of 6.9, even with an epicenter only 140km away. (Figure 4)

Figure 4

However, since earthquakes had been occurring even before that day and numerous aftershocks were felt afterward, it left us with a vague sense of unease. Later, a tsunami advisory was announced on the radio, plus the Tohoku Shinkansen train back to Tokyo had also stopped, and I myself couldn’t help worrying about whether it might affect my return home the following day. At that moment, I had a conversation with the members there, thinking, “If there’s something related to the earthquake recorded, that would be amazing.” However, during the real-time reception, we were targeting signals from North America in 10kHz steps, and there was no effect noticed upon those receptions.

Unusual Signal Dropouts Observed

I played back the SDR files using WavViewDX (https://rweiss.de/dxer/tools.html), a software with many capabilities, including a choice of displaying all signals across the MW band at 9 or 10kHz channel spacing, but, because I was looking for North American DX, I only realized a week after returning home that the reception conditions for the 9kHz spaced domestic Japanese stations had significantly changed around 0715 to 0745UT (16:15 to 16:45 Japan time) on 9 November, based on our recordings. The dropouts on various channels over 0715 to 0745UT are quite obvious in Figure 5; I had never seen such sudden attenuation before. For those not familiar with WavViewDX, the green vertical lines on the display represent stronger signals being received on broadcast channels, while gray or black areas represent weak or no signal. (For a more detailed description of WavViewDX and its capabilities, see https://swling.com/blog/2025/10/an-introduction-to-wavviewdx-sdr-playback-software-a-totsuka-dxers-circle-article-by-kazu-gosui

Figure 5 – WavViewDX display of signal dropouts. X-axis is frequency of received signal, Y-axis is time UTC

A first look at the data led to a couple of other observations:

Signals originating north of the receiving site, primarily from the island of Hokkaido, were largely unaffected by the attenuation. (It is true that our antenna’s directionality was northeast, but it also received the stronger domestic stations from southwest of the antenna.)
Regarding signals from North America, even during the same time period, the intense attenuation observed in domestic stations was generally not seen. It is unclear, however, whether some dips in North American signals around that time were due to normal fading or to the same cause that brought about the attenuation in domestic stations.

What Could Have Caused These Dropouts?

Local sunset?

These sudden drops in signal strength corresponded quite closely with local sunset at 0722UT, normally a time of disturbed propagation (see Figure 6), so the most straightforward possibility is simply the well-known change in ionospheric propagation conditions that occurs at sunset. Was that all that there was to it? However, we had been listening and recording the previous day as well, and analyzing those recordings with WavViewDX yielded no sign of dropouts in domestic signal strength at sunset on that day. Examining recordings that had been made at the same site, using similar equipment, on 24 October 2024, also showed no dropouts taking place at local sunset.

Figure 6

In fact, over many years in Japan, not only at this location but across various areas, records have been accumulated during the same time window, because good trans-Pacific DX occurs around local sunset. Nowhere in these records has a situation such as observed this time—a significant attenuation of domestic stations at local sunset—been found. Therefore, it seemed unlikely that sunset was the cause of the dropouts, but what else could it have been? Continue reading →