New Uniden's on Starcom

werinshades · #1 (**permalink**) 07-29-2009, 09:17 AM

Anyone have insight into how the new Uniden 396XT and 996XT are handling the Multi-Site Starcom sites? The "T" models appear to have issues with Sites 102, 115 to name a few. It's interesting to watch as the frequency comes up, but no audio at times. I've read on Uniden forums where new users rave about the new "auto" setting for the digital decode and wanted a true Starcom monitor to let us know. Firmware upgrade for us "T' users...?

chgomonitor · #2 (**permalink**) 07-30-2009, 12:00 PM

-Hiya Dave, longtime no chat. I just got a 996XT and its really working superbly on both the North Cook and Lake County problematic simulcast sites. Much, much better than my 396T model. Excellent tracking and excellent digital audio demodulation using a good external speaker. Downright impressive. Happy Scanning! - Ted

werinshades · #3 (**permalink**) 07-30-2009, 02:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chgomonitor

-Hiya Dave, longtime no chat. I just got a 996XT and its really working superbly on both the North Cook and Lake County problematic simulcast sites. Much, much better than my 396T model. Excellent tracking and excellent digital audio demodulation using a good external speaker. Downright impressive. Happy Scanning! - Ted

Hi Ted...thats good to hear. Now if we could just get that same firmware upgrade in our "T' models, we'd be all set !

sixtytwo · #4 (**permalink**) 08-01-2009, 01:10 PM

Ted - are you making an absolute or relative assessment?

That is, is it impressive to what you had before, but still not very good?

Or, put another way, how does it compare to single-site audio, is it on a par with that?

chgomonitor · #5 (**permalink**) 08-08-2009, 05:59 AM

The 996XT sounds slightly better than a Starcomm system actual mobile radio.

The 996XT sounds much better tracking the Lake and North Cook simulcast site systems than my 996T does on single site systems downstate.

The 996XT tracks these two system much more accurately than my 396T.

To my ear the 996XT sounds better demodulating digital than the GRE radios. (A lot better).

Again, I have the 996XT hooked to a very high quality, professional communications speaker and this helps. The audio "oomph" factor should not be overlooked when demodulating digital signals. Even my wife's 296D sounds pretty good when piped through the home stereo system, give it a try.

Happy Scanning! - Ted

RADIOGUY2002 · #6 (**permalink**) 08-10-2009, 08:40 AM

Side by side comparisons, with out the professional speaker the 996XT sounds better then the 396t. Any reviews on the 396XT is that out even, I been out of it for a while. As, I'm looking to upgrade to the GRE or a new version scanner. I can always find a use for the old one. I assume the the 996XT has same wiring harness, so I can swap out the 996T in the car for the 996XT.

RADIOGUY2002 · #7 (**permalink**) 08-10-2009, 09:08 AM

Also, does it display speciffic id's to the radio.

Example 13009 Talkgroup, trooper 1420, radio id 10110122 will it do this, as it does with the gre.

chgomonitor · #8 (**permalink**) 08-10-2009, 08:08 PM

-Neither radio does trunked radio ID's.

RADIOGUY2002 · #9 (**permalink**) 08-11-2009, 03:05 PM

allright

Statevillian · #10 (**permalink**) 08-11-2009, 05:53 PM

The 396XT tracks Starcom far better than the 396T ever did on multi-site. Even in bad weather and foliage, high density urban areas, etc.. My old 396T did not fair well and the GRE500 made it look even worse because the 500 was tracking better...Now the 396XT tracks far better than the 500! Unreal.

sixtytwo · #11 (**permalink**) 08-11-2009, 07:42 PM

Ted - thanks for the answers.

The problems I'm talking about with the 500 really don't have to do with audio quality, as the 500 will simply not "open the squelch" and emit any decoded audio (however bad it might sound) in quite a few places that are covered by simulcast sites. The stretch of I-90 between oh, say Roselle and 59 is a good example. Basically, that's a dead zone for my 500, regardless of what antenna I might use, truck or car.

chgomonitor · #12 (**permalink**) 08-12-2009, 12:47 AM

You'll see a lot of variables as you travel around in any of the Starcomm "multi-site" regions like North Cook and Lake County. About the only thing I can suggest is trying less antenna and/or the attenuator. My 996XT was actually tracking both systems quite well with the antenna accidentally grounded out, I was amazed.

werinshades · #13 (**permalink**) 08-19-2009, 12:28 AM

Very interesting observations. Anyone try Site 102 for an extended period of time...700 Mhz. site. I'm wondering if the improvement is in the input has been tweaked, more than the digital decode? Alot are reporting much improved reception in general.

RADIOGUY2002 · #14 (**permalink**) 08-20-2009, 04:14 PM

700 seems to be going pretty strong in Schamburg the other day when I was driving down IL-53, S2 for me on the 996T with little drop out at all. But, still no comparison to the Starcom 21 systems in central IL, must be the multi-site concept that been so express here. Maybe the scanner is having a hard time decoding a specific site system as opposed to regulator radios by theory.

On that note I will be looking into the 996XT or 396XT for better reception. The 996T with shift to house use or another location.

werinshades · #15 (**permalink**) 08-20-2009, 06:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RADIOGUY2002

700 seems to be going pretty strong in Schamburg the other day when I was driving down IL-53, S2 for me on the 996T with little drop out at all. But, still no comparison to the Starcom 21 systems in central IL, must be the multi-site concept that been so express here. Maybe the scanner is having a hard time decoding a specific site system as opposed to regulator radios by theory.

On that note I will be looking into the 996XT or 396XT for better reception. The 996T with shift to house use or another location.

This has been the question i've asked since I been using the 996T. I've also read that their is a different decoding format used on multi-site systems, which slightly varies from single site system. That would make sense to us monitoring the multi-site systems as we all seem to report the same issues...control channel drop-outs, tracking system no audio..etc. I posed a question on the Uniden Forum about a firmware upgrade for all the T users...but of course, that would mean the XT sales would diminish. I suspect they may have got it right with the Auto feature on the XT models, so maybe us T users could benefit from this.

RADIOGUY2002 · #16 (**permalink**) 08-21-2009, 12:25 AM

yea, kinda makes me wonder as well.....

werinshades · #17 (**permalink**) 08-28-2009, 05:35 PM

After the numerous reports of improved reception with the XT models, I admit my curiousity got the best of me and I purchased the 996XT. As always, purchased it from Communications Electronics, and arrived the next day without any additional shipping charges. Arrived at 1030 Hrs today, and within about 15 minutes had it programmed and took the place of my 996T. I have purchased the ARC software in the last few scanners prior to it arriving, and has beena breeze to set up.
As mentioned in one of the other threads, arrived in a UPS shipping box and not much padding...to me not a big deal, but if you're UPS person is rough and throws your packages around, this will be an issue...LOL.
So I dedicated a few hours to giving this unit a good run through with what I listen to. Starcom site 102 was the first on my list, and must agree with significant improvement, but still not 100%. Still getting some control channel drop-outs and digital garble, but no where near as much with my 996T. For me, the best added feature...Priority Feature on Trunking Systems. For a long time, this was disputed that it couldn't be done, but someone must have discovered the magical formula. I had two talkgroups set to Priority (Chgo.C- Middle, Chgo. D-South) and the scanner flawlessly jumped to them when their was traffic...very nice feature for me. I have tried to change the mode to FM from NFM through ARC and manually, but it appears it defaults to NFM. Maybe in future firmware updates, they will address this as I think it could help with the occasional garbled audio I get.
The convential systems I had, have not noticed any reception changes. Still will be tweaking with what I can, but it's better than the "T" versions, but hope to get this Starcom at 100% someday..

werinshades · #18 (**permalink**) 08-28-2009, 10:47 PM

[QUOTE=werinshades;1144653] I have tried to change the mode to FM from NFM through ARC and manually, but it appears it defaults to NFM. Maybe in future firmware updates, they will address this as I think it could help with the occasional garbled audio I get.

Was able to change this by using Func (Push knob) and 9 button. In the T Models, this was in the Menu...still so much to learn...

werinshades · #19 (**permalink**) 08-29-2009, 03:05 PM

Did some more extensive testing on Starcom Site 102 last night. First I tried going to stock antenna, which made no difference. Try to turn Atteunator on, which changed nothing. The 996XT definitely has better reception, so I decided to add some Site 115 control channels in with my Site 102 control channels. This made it easier to listen to as if 774.34375 temporarily dropped off, 854.9875 picked it right up. This is a major improvement as Site 115's control channels were not strong on my 996T. The drop off was so minimal, it was easy to follow conversations. Added Dist. 15-B (South) as a Priority...so now running 3 priority Talkgroups...a very nice feature. Picked up an external speaker from Radio Shack yesterday, and like Ted mentioned, it sounds great. I'm not big on the base of internal speakers, and have used one before on my 796D. Much easier to listen to.Still have some programming to play around with tomorrow...I have to work sometimes...lol. Recent member of the 996XT Yahoo Group now, so hopefully i'll get more tips and tricks.

RoninJoliet · #20 (**permalink**) 08-29-2009, 03:10 PM

As one other scanner friend said Starcom is still in its infancy and needs still much work so we can't really expect to hear it perfect on $500.00 equipment....I found also programming Uniden scanners by hand is more reliable that software as software changes parameters back and forth as you reload the memory...My Opinion!!...Yesterday around noon i lost the CC on T102 for a half hour and thought the scanner died but then it returned , then T101 was off and retured in about a half hour followed by alot of "ENC" talk on TGID9131...I have not changed any parameters in the scanner and Starcom is great along with NWCD.....Keep us informed "Dave" as how the new unit works in your area=Location,Location, Location, thats important....