PRO-197 / PSR-500 - Horrific VHF-Lo Performance

[mtindor]

I have both the PRO-197 and the PSR-500. They excel on 800 Mhz, trunked or nontrunked, EDACS, Moto, P25.

However, in my experience they are prone to significant overload on VHF-Hi. I have a PAR filter to counter some of this. I recently started scanning VHF-Lo (30-50 Mhz) regularly chasing skip.

The performance on VHF-Lo is terrible. The squelch is so damned loose that you have to turn it up halfway just to squelch out the random noise that the damned scanner picks up. I've tried multiple outside antennas, various grounding methods, etc. to try and reduce the insane amount of noise heard on VHF-Lo. I've found it impossible to scan VHF-Lo reliably without it constantly stopping on various noises that it comes upon.

If there is any sort of band opening on VHF-Lo, it's inevitable that I will start hearing all kinds of strange signals on 30 Mhz. I'll switch over to AM mode and those signals end up being HF AM stations (religious stations, etc. from various locations between DC and 30 Mhz). Everythign and anythign seems to swamp VHF-Lo, or at the very least generate signals that are nearly unsquelchable.

Forget it if you have a few 100 mbit ethernet devices around. I've had a Zoom DSL modem, a Linksys WRT54G and now a 2-Wire (from ATT) that all easily ruin VHF-Lo on this scanner. I can switch to the BCT-15 and rarely if ever have a problem with any of the aforementioned things.

Yep, the PSR-500/600 and PRO-197/106 are very sensitive. But you pay a helluva price for that sensitivity on VHF-Lo/Hi.

Sorry for the rant - but one can only take so much and then they have to vent!

I'd be interested in hearing anybody else's thoughts on these scanners when scanning VHF-Lo.

Mike

[edmscan]

In my opinion .. handheld scanners come with some disadvantages compared to base unit scanners.

I have been listening to scanners for over 30 years and I live by 2 rules ... don't hook outside antenna to them and they are not as good as base unit scanners.

So ... I am not surprised by your findings. I would expect that VHF / UHF performance would be fine as well as 800 MHz.

VHF Lo .. I would expect to see performance like HF frequencies, very likely to be very noisy.

[N8IAA]

I have found that the newer digital TT scanners are made to follow the VHF, UHF, and 800Mhz trunked systems better than their older versions. I tend to keep around older non-trunking scanners for monitoring VHF-lo. Even my newer analog trunker has problems in this area. There is more noise out there than we can count on fingers and toes
JMTCW,
Larry

[icom1020]

I have as much, optimized the reception regarding antenna, coax(lmr200) when hooked up to my 197. I do get a noise floor on vhf lo but the only way to receive is to use a Larsen lo band whip. I get a front end overload on 800 around cell sites. The rebanded CC's seem to have solved most of this.

[smokeyjones666]

I have what I believe to be similar problems with my PSR-500 as well. I also use a PAR filter because of my hostile RF environment (in my case, a farm of powerhouse TV and FM transmitters a few miles to the northeast of me), I never considered the possibility of my ethernet setup causing me trouble though - I'll have to do some experimentation one of these days when I have the time.

I have decided, like all purpose-built tools, that it is good for certain things and not so good for others. 800MHz and UHF trunking seem to be what this unit excels at, VHF can be a little rough unless I'm well outside of the metro area. Air band is virtually useless and I usually find myself grabbing my Pro-97 if I want to listen to that as it seems to perform marginally better (My clunky old Pro-2006 is the real winner for this at home).

I have good days and bad days with the local P25 system, so much that I was considering the Uniden 396XT for a minute. However, after reading the Uniden forum it seems like users are having some similar frustrations with that particular unit. I'll probably just keep on keepin' on for now, I just wish it could be better.

I can only wish that someone would make a scanner this awesome, but with the selectivity of the venerable old Pro-2006.

[mtindor]

Originally Posted by smokeyjones666

I have what I believe to be similar problems with my PSR-500 as well. I also use a PAR filter because of my hostile RF environment (in my case, a farm of powerhouse TV and FM transmitters a few miles to the northeast of me), I never considered the possibility of my ethernet setup causing me trouble though - I'll have to do some experimentation one of these days when I have the time.

Yes, do. You may be surprised. The ethernet transceivers on most routers will cause some racket on 30-50, and definitely below. Some are better than others, but most of the common ones these days will produce a lot of trash. You'll know it when you hear it because (a) it re-appears every x # of kiloherts in long swaths of spectrum and (b) it'll disappear when you unplug all ethernet-connected devices.

In the three cases I've experienced with my equipment, with the ethernet unplugged from anything/everything, the routers/modems had no discernable effect on 30-50 Mhz. So, at least in my case, it's all ethernet-generated noise. If you end up experiencing this same phenonomen and cannot go to a wireless router for all of your devices, then try to set the ethernet interface on as many of your devices as possible to 10 Mbit. There is a significant decrease in 30-50 Mhz trash when the ethernet transceivers are running at 10 Mbit.

I have decided, like all purpose-built tools, that it is good for certain things and not so good for others. 800MHz and UHF trunking seem to be what this unit excels at, VHF can be a little rough unless I'm well outside of the metro area. Air band is virtually useless and I usually find myself grabbing my Pro-97 if I want to listen to that as it seems to perform marginally better (My clunky old Pro-2006 is the real winner for this at home).

I agree completely with your assessment. However, I never really bother to grab another scanner because either the other scanners I have dont do PL/CTCSS (and I like to find that out, especially when DXing), or they aren't as easy to use as the PSR-500 or PRO-197. (ex: I find the BCT-15 to be the most difficult scanner to use for simple random searches and tuning to frequencies).

I have good days and bad days with the local P25 system, so much that I was considering the Uniden 396XT for a minute. However, after reading the Uniden forum it seems like users are having some similar frustrations with that particular unit. I'll probably just keep on keepin' on for now, I just wish it could be better.

I'm going to guess you're trying to monitor a simulcast P25 system. I also have problems, but so does everyone when it comes to multicast P25.

I can only wish that someone would make a scanner this awesome, but with the selectivity of the venerable old Pro-2006.

Strangely enough, I find that the PSR-500/PRO-197 do pretty good as far as selectivity. Sure, they overload very easily on VHF and 800 Mhz with xmitters in close proximity, but when it comes to isolating traffic on one freq when there is also traffic on another freq 10-15 khz below, I find these scanners do a mucch better job than the BCT-15. My BCT-15 has really crappy selectivity.

I do wish I still had a 2004/5/6. I have had all three at one point. I always liked the 2004's metal case. But my favorite was probably the 2006. I probably would have kept them had I had all the "extras" that some people get for them, like the aftermarket stuff for handling PL tones and such.

Mike

[weeksben1]

I'm surprised at the issues with the networking equipment. The reason is that I'm running a Speedstream DSL modem (from AT&T), a Cisco 860 Ethernet router, and Windows Server computer, along with 2 other windows boxes within 3 feet of my GRE PSR500 w/o any real problems. As for the wireless, I've also got a Linksys WAP01 access point within 5 feet of said PSR500, again w/o any real problems. I've also got it connected to an external anntenna, which (I find) really improves the reception. Granted there is a bit of overload in the frontend, but I can live with it. As for the network cables, I'm simply using regular unshielded twisted pair cables, (granted, the longest one I'm using is about 15 feet total). I'd also like to hear others views/opinions on this issue.

[mtindor]

Originally Posted by weeksben1

I'm surprised at the issues with the networking equipment. The reason is that I'm running a Speedstream DSL modem (from AT&T), a Cisco 860 Ethernet router, and Windows Server computer, along with 2 other windows boxes within 3 feet of my GRE PSR500 w/o any real problems. As for the wireless, I've also got a Linksys WAP01 access point within 5 feet of said PSR500, again w/o any real problems. I've also got it connected to an external anntenna, which (I find) really improves the reception. Granted there is a bit of overload in the frontend, but I can live with it. As for the network cables, I'm simply using regular unshielded twisted pair cables, (granted, the longest one I'm using is about 15 feet total). I'd also like to hear others views/opinions on this issue.

Although the networking equipment itself (internals) may cause problems, it generally is more likely that the ethernet causes the problem. Could be that the ethernet cabling is acting like a nice antenna to radiate any of the emissions that are usually kept relatively quite inside the device - or it could be that specifically the ethernet transceivers are noisy.

But I've had this problem with an old D-Link hub (which I specifically used at one point to force 10 mbit on links for which the devices themselves could not be forced 10 mbit - such as speedstream modem, linksys router, etc.). Sure, I could have wired up a cable that specifically only supported 10 mbit FD to force it, but it was easier to put the hub in place. The problem was less into the hub, but not because of anything other than the fact that all the equipment was forced to 10 mbit, which will inherently lessen the problem.

If you're using an external antenna and it's a fair distance from the networking devices and coupled to your receiver with good coax with decent shielding, then you may not suffer so bad simploy because of that.

When I have the handheld on INSIDE the house about 20 feet away in the basement, I hear way less noise using the ducky than I do using my DPD OmniX (mounted outside about 20 feet up and 20 feet away, with the coax (LMR400) running right back in to the house about 10 feet from the networking equipment.

I'm sure some people don't experience these problems, even with the same devices, depending upon how they have everything else set up. In my particular circumstance, my receiving configuration is working against me when it comes to trying to eliminate the noise from the networking devices. I'm pretty confident that the devices in general are still emitting the noises even if you don't hear them with your particular receiving configuration. Linksys routers are really famous for this. The 2wire causes problems to a lesser [but still noteworthy] extent.

I've had a lot of recommendations for resolving this [most of which I have not tried, but many of which I'm sure would at least help the problem]. I'm just too pissed off about it in the first place. My solution was to go completely wireless, with 54 mbit across the board on all the computers in the house. When I want to listen down low, I unplug the IP phone (connected via ethernet).

Mike

Mike

[SOFA_KING]

I have no problem receiving on low band with my PRO-197. I get lots of skip. Weak signal too. Picks up better than my old Uniden 785D. At times I get power line leakage that degrades reception, and in the past I had an eathernet router that made noise on all my radio stuff (nixed that sucker fast!), but none of this is the fault of the scanner...It's inteference! It will intefere with any scanner. I do use an FM broadcast filter, and that helps my VHF hi band to work 100% normal. Maybe that helps low band too...I dunno. But really, if anything causes RFI/EMI noise on the frequencies you want to hear, it has nothing to do with the scanner. It's just inteference. Find it and fix it. Lucky my computer is quiet, but I have had noisy computers before that degraded low band to UHF. As far as the power line noise, I could call the power company and tell them they have a leakage problem and have to fix it by FCC rules and regs. They came out once before by my old house because HF was 20 over S-9 with power line noise. But the scanner is not the problem...the noise is.

Phil