WS1098: LSM Distortion Issues

Status
Not open for further replies.

w5rah

Member
Joined
Jun 16, 2003
Messages
89
I have this like/dislike relationship with my WS1098. I'm monitoring the TxWARN system in the Houston, Texas area, which in my area utilizes simulcast sites. In reading the forums, it seems like Whistler products seem to have a challenge with LSM in many areas utilizing simulcast sites. It is a balancing act with the DSP, ADC, and DAC settings. When its dialed in, its very good and the audio is nice. However, with a scanner in a mobile environment that moves around, the settings are not always relevant to that location and the signal becomes distorted and the settings need to be changed, which is not a good idea while driving, etc. The Uniden scanners have an auto setting that adjust within a range that seem to work pretty good for the most part, as I have not had to make any adjustments to receive the simulcast sites with them. Would it be possible for Whistler to develop a system that would be able to make auto adjustments and include it in future firmware updates? I'm not expecting them to have perfect receive all the time, but something to make it more usable would be great.
 

radio3353

Active Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2003
Messages
1,497
Welcome to LSM distortion. Unless you are in a sweet spot, no consumer scanner will work properly with LSM distortion. Talking to Whistler or Uniden about it will get you nowhere. They both ignore the problem. There is so much written on RR about this that you need to search and you will learn much.
 

w5rah

Member
Joined
Jun 16, 2003
Messages
89
Totally agree there is much written on it on RR and quite frankly what works good for one may not work for another, especially with the Whistler products. My Uniden scanners do pretty good with it in my area, but Whistler gives me fits. Plus I agree that no consumer scanner works great with LSM. I just think Whistler could develop firmware to make their scanners better handle LSM. I know it won't be perfect, but hopefully better than what they have in place. When monitoring non simulcast sites, my 1098 and 1080 work very well and have a nice receiver, but the LSM throws it for a loop. I've tried the Comet miracle baby on them and it helps, but some firmware that can make some auto adjustments would be welcome.
 

ecarvalho

Member
Joined
Feb 23, 2005
Messages
759
Agreed. No consumer grade “scanner” handles LSM out of the box. You will teak them until frustration wins. Neither major manufacturers of these scanners take it seriously as it is an evident issue that exists for ages. They don’t care, its a hobby so, not serious enough to justify an attempt to fix L$M
 

JD21960

Active Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Oct 31, 2007
Messages
1,368
Location
ILL-annoyed
WS1098 LSM fun

Instead of getting mad? I simply got a Unication G5. Whistler shrugged their shoulders when asked about the LSM issues at an expo recently. I shrugged mine at them and bought a fix. I'm happy now. I expect them to never address it.
 

BrianG61UK

Member
Joined
Nov 13, 2016
Messages
355
Location
England
Something else I would expect to help, though it might be impractical or too expensive, would be a directional aerial (like a yagi or a log periodic) aimed at the transmitter delivering the strongest signal at your location.
 
Last edited:

K9DAK

Active Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Dec 16, 2010
Messages
688
Location
Wauconda, IL
Yep! I used one for a couple years with my PRO-197... aimed at the closest tower to me, with ATT on, and achieved probably 98% good decode (Phase I). Only times I heard bad decode, the dispatcher also asked the officer for a repeat because he "went digital." Then the PD went to an encrypted system, but that's a whole 'nother topic.

Something else I would expect to help, though it might be impractical or too expensive, would be a directional aerial (like a yagi or a log periodic) aimed at the transmitter delivering the strongest signal at your location.
 

Ensnared

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 24, 2004
Messages
4,438
Location
Waco, Texas
Why I Bought The Other One

I have this like/dislike relationship with my WS1098. I'm monitoring the TxWARN system in the Houston, Texas area, which in my area utilizes simulcast sites. In reading the forums, it seems like Whistler products seem to have a challenge with LSM in many areas utilizing simulcast sites. It is a balancing act with the DSP, ADC, and DAC settings. When its dialed in, its very good and the audio is nice. However, with a scanner in a mobile environment that moves around, the settings are not always relevant to that location and the signal becomes distorted and the settings need to be changed, which is not a good idea while driving, etc. The Uniden scanners have an auto setting that adjust within a range that seem to work pretty good for the most part, as I have not had to make any adjustments to receive the simulcast sites with them. Would it be possible for Whistler to develop a system that would be able to make auto adjustments and include it in future firmware updates? I'm not expecting them to have perfect receive all the time, but something to make it more usable would be great.

Yes, TxWarn can be a challenging system to monitor with a GRE/Whistler radio. I own a PSR 500. Some have contended there have been slight improvements made in these Whistler radios with respect to handling LSM. But, I remain unconvinced. I bought a 436HP.
 

W8RMH

Feed Provider Since 2012
Joined
Jan 4, 2009
Messages
8,110
Location
Grove City, OH (A Bearcat not a Buckeye)
I went with a Unication pager as well to reliably obtain a 100 percent decode in my area. You may want to try scanning just one site at a time.

Something else I would expect to help, though it might be impractical or too expensive, would be a directional aerial (like a yagi or a log periodic) aimed at the transmitter delivering the strongest signal at your location.
This is not going to help you as it is not practical while mobile.
 

radio3353

Active Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2003
Messages
1,497
Instead of getting mad? I simply got a Unication G5. Whistler shrugged their shoulders when asked about the LSM issues at an expo recently. I shrugged mine at them and bought a fix. I'm happy now. I expect them to never address it.

Yes, but tell the whole story. The G4 and G5 do not handle Phase 2. Unication has been promising it for 1.5 years now and it is still MIA. Also, the Unication products are not scanners and have some serious limitations for some (many) people. Like only being able to listen to one trunk system at a time.

The Unication pagers do solve the LSM problem (at least for Phase 1 systems), but they are not scanners.
 

w5rah

Member
Joined
Jun 16, 2003
Messages
89
Yes, the lack of Phase 2 on the Unication G4/5 is their main drawback for me. As far as monitoring one site at a time, I am doing so, but the issue is that its a simulcast site. If it were just a single site, it works pretty good, but the simulcast gives it fits. I've also found moderate success with a small antenna such as a Comet Miracle Baby, which helps out a lot. With LSM I have found you either have to have one extreme or the other with signal strength in some situations. One would think they could develop some firmware to make some auto adjustments when the BER rate gets to a certain point. Granted it would not likely solve the issue, but it could help make it much better than now.
 

radio3353

Active Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2003
Messages
1,497
... As far as monitoring one site at a time, I am doing so, but the issue is that its a simulcast site. If it were just a single site, it works pretty good, but the simulcast gives it fits. I've also found moderate success with a small antenna such as a Comet Miracle Baby, which helps out a lot. With LSM I have found you either have to have one extreme or the other with signal strength in some situations. One would think they could develop some firmware to make some auto adjustments when the BER rate gets to a certain point. Granted it would not likely solve the issue, but it could help make it much better than now.

I'm confused with this part of your post. Are you talking about the Unication product or Whistler/Uniden scanners? I wouldn't think what you wrote would apply to the Unication. It decodes LSM just fine regardless of location according to users.
 

w5rah

Member
Joined
Jun 16, 2003
Messages
89
Sorry for the confusion Radio3353...I was referring to the Whistler product when I was discussing monitoring one site at a time. From what I understand the Unication products do not have any LSM issues at all. The only thing I hear critical about Unication is the lack of Phase 2 at this time.
 

w5rah

Member
Joined
Jun 16, 2003
Messages
89
Well the Relm KNG-P800 does appear to to do that, but it runs a couple of thousand new, so I would hope that it would do so. lol

I would like Whistler to re-examine their approach to the LSM and hopefully come up with something that is better than what they have now. I really want to like the 1098, but the LSM issues in my area make it hard to do. The detachable head and DMR capability are really nice features, but otherwise if they can't improve the issues with LSM, I may have to try to trade it for a HP2.
 

Ed6698

Active Member
Joined
Feb 19, 2011
Messages
1,262
Location
Evansville, Indiana
Well the Relm KNG-P800 does appear to to do that, but it runs a couple of thousand new, so I would hope that it would do so. lol

I would like Whistler to re-examine their approach to the LSM and hopefully come up with something that is better than what they have now. I really want to like the 1098, but the LSM issues in my area make it hard to do. The detachable head and DMR capability are really nice features, but otherwise if they can't improve the issues with LSM, I may have to try to trade it for a HP2.

Trading for a HP2 is more then likely not going to help with LSM. All a matter of location and how the system is setup. I have a WS1080 and 1095, they both work fantastic on a 700mhz P25 Phase II simulcast system.
 

radio3353

Active Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2003
Messages
1,497
...
I would like Whistler to re-examine their approach to the LSM and hopefully come up with something that is better than what they have now. I really want to like the 1098, but the LSM issues in my area make it hard to do...

We can only hope :wink: But their silence on the issue is deafening.
 

DJ11DLN

Member
Joined
Mar 23, 2013
Messages
2,068
Location
Mudhole, IN
We can only hope :wink: But their silence on the issue is deafening.
Don't expect either of the scanner manufacturers to put out very much in the way of "coming attractions" info. Sometimes things don't develop as expected, and when new radios or new features from updated firmware/DSP don't come to light as announced, the maker of such claims tends to wind up with egg on their face. There are reams of posts in regards to this, concerning a certain model of "all-new flagship" scanner released a few years back.

I would hope as well that new radios, with the features we've all asked for, are in development at Whistler...but nobody but Whistler knows about this. And they pretty obviously ain't-a talkin.'

Ditto all of the above for "the competition" across the aisle.:D
 

dniitani

Newbie
Joined
Oct 26, 2008
Messages
3
For me to receive a clear conversation on a P25 phase 2 network, I needed to add a duplexer that I retuned to uses as a filter to keep cellular signals out and a yagi antenna. All these added expenses was required for me to understand what they were saying.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top