Hello Tempus,
Comparison of DT-200 and DT-210V using Sony EX71:
FM:
Sensitivity: about equal. The DT-210 might be just a hair better.
Selectivity: DT-200 is superior. Has better alternate channel selectivity (400khz). The DT-210V even modified with a 150khz IF filter is not as good. If I recall the DT-200 utilizes two FM IF filters, the DT-210V one.
Overload rejection: DT-200 is superior. The DT-200 utilizes a separate FM RF/Mixer chip that is superior to the single chip FM design of the DT-210V
Circuit noise (hiss): DT-210V is superior. As pointed out, different headphone/earplugs may have different results. But with all thing being equal, I believe the DT-210 is better. With the EX-71, the stock DT-200 sounds very, very hissy.
Sound quality. Subjective. Ignoring the DT-200 hiss, both have very good sound quality. The DT-210V might be a bit better, but then it has only one wide FM IF filter so there is a tradeoff in selectivity.
Features: DT-210V has bass boost, the DT-200 does not. The DT-210V has memories of 10FM, 10AM, 5TV. The DT-200 has 19 or 20 (I forget) and can be utilized as wished. Both have a built in speaker. Both have an FM stereo indicator. Both have belt clip.
AM:
The DT-200 is superior overall. A bit better sensitivity. Both sound fine and perform quite well.
Overall, the DT-200 is the superior RF performer. It can receive more stations more clearly. Soundwise, the DT-210V is a bit better and has the advantage (for some people) of bass boost. An urban area dweller may prefer the DT-200 because it does perform much better in dealing with many strong signals which will swamp inferior receivers such as the Sony SRF-M35. What's the point of sound quality if the station is buried under two or three other stations? If one is not in an urban area, the DT-210V may be ticket. RF-wise it is still pretty good and has a less hissy headphone out.
Best regards,
Paul
Comparison of DT-200 and DT-210V using Sony EX71:
FM:
Sensitivity: about equal. The DT-210 might be just a hair better.
Selectivity: DT-200 is superior. Has better alternate channel selectivity (400khz). The DT-210V even modified with a 150khz IF filter is not as good. If I recall the DT-200 utilizes two FM IF filters, the DT-210V one.
Overload rejection: DT-200 is superior. The DT-200 utilizes a separate FM RF/Mixer chip that is superior to the single chip FM design of the DT-210V
Circuit noise (hiss): DT-210V is superior. As pointed out, different headphone/earplugs may have different results. But with all thing being equal, I believe the DT-210 is better. With the EX-71, the stock DT-200 sounds very, very hissy.
Sound quality. Subjective. Ignoring the DT-200 hiss, both have very good sound quality. The DT-210V might be a bit better, but then it has only one wide FM IF filter so there is a tradeoff in selectivity.
Features: DT-210V has bass boost, the DT-200 does not. The DT-210V has memories of 10FM, 10AM, 5TV. The DT-200 has 19 or 20 (I forget) and can be utilized as wished. Both have a built in speaker. Both have an FM stereo indicator. Both have belt clip.
AM:
The DT-200 is superior overall. A bit better sensitivity. Both sound fine and perform quite well.
Overall, the DT-200 is the superior RF performer. It can receive more stations more clearly. Soundwise, the DT-210V is a bit better and has the advantage (for some people) of bass boost. An urban area dweller may prefer the DT-200 because it does perform much better in dealing with many strong signals which will swamp inferior receivers such as the Sony SRF-M35. What's the point of sound quality if the station is buried under two or three other stations? If one is not in an urban area, the DT-210V may be ticket. RF-wise it is still pretty good and has a less hissy headphone out.
Best regards,
Paul
