Pro-106 and CQPSK

[halatos]

All,

I recently purchased a Pro-106 with the intent of monitoring two digital systems in Phoenix, AZ, one of which is the "Phoenix Regional Wireless Network". It is a simulcast P-25, 9600 control channel and many of the digital channels are, if my information is correct, CQPSK encoded. The other site, Maricopa County, uses the older control channel and C4FM, again, if my information is correct, and it comes in fine.

I cannot get good reception on the PRWN regardless of which site I use, the one closest to my house isn't that far away, and while the control channel always comes in strong, the moment someone keys up I get a few syllables and that's about it. The radio display flashes between VC and DG, occasionally staying on "DG" for a few seconds but I get no audio even though it says it is locked on with a good signal.

So I emailed GRE, since they made the thing..and they basically shot back with a "We can't help you, go to radio shack". Pffft, thanks so much, GRE.

I'm about ready to return it since for my needs it is a $500 paperweight. But before I do, has anyone else in Phoenix had this problem and found a solution? Or are there somethings anyone can suggest I try? I've played with the attenuation and some other setting designed to 'enhance' digital reception without any improvement.

Chris

 

[PolarBear25]

9600 Settings

Set the TSYS to P25 Auto.

 

[n8dhw]

I live near Cincinnati and my Pro-106 does a good job on there P-25 simulcast as well as the Hamilton County. The county I live in Butler which borders Hamilton County to the North is in the process of setting up a P-25 simulcast system right now and so far no problems with it either when I hear conversations between system admins and radio techs conducting testing.

And I have my TSYS's set to P-25 Auto by the way.

 

[rdale]

I'm about ready to return it since for my needs it is a $500 paperweight. But before I do, has anyone else in Phoenix had this problem and found a solution? Or are there somethings anyone can suggest I try? I've played with the attenuation and some other setting designed to 'enhance' digital reception without any improvement.

There is nothing you can do to, or within, the scanner. A directional antenna pointed at your closest tower is the ONLY way to get good reception.

 

[kb8rvp]

I have been using the Pro-106 for two weeks now and it works great on the Michigan state 800MHz APCO-25 system at my house and I beleave this is a CQPSK system too. A friend of mine works at Radio Shack and he lives near a cell tower and the Pro-106 wouldn't work at his house but the Pro-96 would sitting side my side. Sometimes it programming and sometines it location. Is this your first digital scanner or have others worked at your location?

Thanks,
Mike

 

[GTO_04]

I have been using the Pro-106 for two weeks now and it works great on the Michigan state 800MHz APCO-25 system at my house and I beleave this is a CQPSK system too. A friend of mine works at Radio Shack and he lives near a cell tower and the Pro-106 wouldn't work at his house but the Pro-96 would sitting side my side. Sometimes it programming and sometines it location. Is this your first digital scanner or have others worked at your location?

Thanks,
Mike

In this particular situation maybe the Pro-106 is getting overloaded due to the sensitive front end. The Pro-106 is supposedly very similar to the PSR-500. I own a PSR-500 and it is way more sensitive than the Pro-96 which I also owned.

GTO_04

 

[rdale]

I have been using the Pro-106 for two weeks now and it works great on the Michigan state 800MHz APCO-25 system at my house and I beleave this is a CQPSK system too.

You're at the fringe of the coverage though, and that helps. If you were take your scanner to Flint, you wouldn't say the same thing.

 

[iMONITOR]

My location is surrounded by towers on Michigan's MPSCS / Macomb County P25 simulcast network using CQPSK modulation. Both my PRO-106, and PRO-197 are working flawlessly using stock antenna mounted directly on the radios.

 

[rdale]

That's because your radio is getting a strong enough signal from one of the towers.

Again - the original poster's problem will not be solved by anything in the radio, exchanging for another one, or standing upside down. It is completely connected to location.

And then another important part - location.

And the final step of the puzzle - location.

 

[iMONITOR]

That's because your radio is getting a strong enough signal from one of the towers.

Again - the original poster's problem will not be solved by anything in the radio, exchanging for another one, or standing upside down. It is completely connected to location.

And then another important part - location.

And the final step of the puzzle - location.

I think the first two words in my post were; "My location", so what's your point? I didn't make any mention of all the other gyrations you pointed out either. :roll:

 

[rdale]

My point was that your location has nothing to do with his problem... Most people post in a thread because they think their info would help the original poster.

 

[iMONITOR]

My point was that your location has nothing to do with his problem... Most people post in a thread because they think their info would help the original poster.

The problem is not just the OP's problem. Numerous members have posted similar frustrations. My post was to show that your claim in post #4 is not always necessary, where you said: "There is nothing you can do to, or within, the scanner. A directional antenna pointed at your closest tower is the ONLY way to get good reception."


What I am saying is the newer GRE PSR-500/600, and Radio Shack PRO-106/197's cope with the simulcast/CQPSK systems much better than the previous Unidens, and Radio Shack scanners. A directional antenna pointed at your closest tower is not always the ONLY way to get good reception. Sometimes just relocating the scanner within your home can make all the difference in the world. Metallic objects such as heating ducts, electrical wiring, even file cabinets, in the average home can reflect signals. If I move my scanner about one foot to the right of where it sits, it's not so good. But I certainly do not need a Yagi antenna.

Rob your unusual behavior and comments I've read in numerous threads prompts me to ask, have you ever been diagnosed with narcissism?

 

[rdale]

For the original poster - there is nothing you can do other than change your location or add an antenna.

 

[detroit780]

Cqpsk

Some have had luck playing with the Multi-Site settings adjusting the upper and lower limit numbers for signal quality. Another thing to try is only use the control channel of the tower nearest you. This way the scanner will stay on that channel and not go to another that may add to your issue.

The beam antenna has ben mentioned here already. So I won't spend time on it. GRE told you to go to Radio Shack since it is a Radio Shack branded scanner. Even though GRE made it I am sure the price they sell it to Radio Shack is low enough for Radio Shack to support it. The Radio Shack firmware does not work in the GRE and vice versa.

Good luck.

Les

All,

I recently purchased a Pro-106 with the intent of monitoring two digital systems in Phoenix, AZ, one of which is the "Phoenix Regional Wireless Network". It is a simulcast P-25, 9600 control channel and many of the digital channels are, if my information is correct, CQPSK encoded. The other site, Maricopa County, uses the older control channel and C4FM, again, if my information is correct, and it comes in fine.

I cannot get good reception on the PRWN regardless of which site I use, the one closest to my house isn't that far away, and while the control channel always comes in strong, the moment someone keys up I get a few syllables and that's about it. The radio display flashes between VC and DG, occasionally staying on "DG" for a few seconds but I get no audio even though it says it is locked on with a good signal.

So I emailed GRE, since they made the thing..and they basically shot back with a "We can't help you, go to radio shack". Pffft, thanks so much, GRE.

I'm about ready to return it since for my needs it is a $500 paperweight. But before I do, has anyone else in Phoenix had this problem and found a solution? Or are there somethings anyone can suggest I try? I've played with the attenuation and some other setting designed to 'enhance' digital reception without any improvement.

Chris

 

[rdale]

Some have had luck playing with the Multi-Site

NO. Do NOT use multi-site on a simulcast system.

Another thing to try is only use the control channel of the tower nearest you.

NO. In a simulcast CQPSK system, all control channels are EXACTLY the same for all towers in the network. That's where the problem lies.

 

[wlmr]

May I suggest an alternative to the general debate that you're getting here. Why don't you ask a moderator to move this thread to the Arizona forum where this issue is by no means a new discussion. If you provide them with the major streets near your location they may be able to help you out.

 

[rdale]

There's really no debate.

Location.

Antenna.

Nothing changes no matter where you discuss CQPSK