Handheld Two Way Radio Support?

[RalphIII]

Hello All,
I'm not sure if this forum is appropriate or the proper thread, but here it goes.

We have some Midland BR200 Business class two way radios (2 watt) for Church security and our headset audio quality is poor when communicating between two buildings. Communication between the two buildings represents the longest distance that we use the radios. I think the issue is due to distance or interference from walls/electrical in this area. Consequently, there is just enough static/noise introduced that it makes use of headsets difficult. It's just hard to make out what is being said with the headsets, whereas there is no issue with what is being said with the radios themselves.

I have a few options and I would like some input.

1) Midland makes a Unity Gain antenna that is about 6in-8in in length for the BR200. The stock antenna is only 2in in length. Could I expect a significant improvement with the upgraded antenna due to improved transmission/reception? Is there an antenna that you would recommend which would work even better that isn't over 8in?

2) Midland makes the MB400 radio which is their more powerful business class radio at 4 watts. Could I expect an even greater improvement in reception with these 4 watt radios vs a Unity Gain antenna? Would my FCC license cover the use of 4 watt units as I listed the BR200 units on our license which is a 2 watt radio?

3) I've been told that the Kenwood headsets will work with the Midland business class radios. Can you say whether those would be of greater quality than the Midland headsets? I have both the over-the-ear and surveillance style Midland headsets.

Thanks,
Ralph

 

[prcguy]

Your radios are UHF so going from a 2" to a 6" long antenna will make a very slight improvement. In some cases you won't notice a difference and in other cases you might see a slight improvement. Going to a 4 watt radio will make another very slight improvement but will run your batteries down faster.

Sounds like the main issue is with external headsets and they may not be getting enough mic audio into the radio. In ear and over the ear types are notorious for this and I would shop for a different type of headset and test them with your radio. Do a simple radio to radio test with no headset, note the received audio level and quality, then try different headsets and go for one that is at least equal to the stock radio mic level. You'll probably end up with a headset with a little tube sticking out in front of the mouth or one with a boom mic to sound good.

 

[K4EET]

Hi @RalphIII and welcome to Radio Reference!

Another important thing too keep in mind is how high that antenna is above the ground. Since you all are using headsets, I'm going to guess that the portable radios are being worn on a belt or worse yet, inside a pants pocket. Let's say the portable radio is worn on a belt and the antenna is 3 feet Above Ground Level (AGL). Let's also say the person on the other end has the same setup and their antenna is also 3 feet AGL. For simplicity, in this scenario, I am going to normalize everything so that the system gain of the system from the transmitter on one end to the receiver on the other end just happens to work out to a nice round number of 0 dB. Now if both people were to raise their portable radios from the belt to their head which now puts the antenna at 6 feet AGL, that doubling of height can potentially give each person a 3 dB increase in their effective gain or an overall system gain improvement of 6 dB. Now that is rather significant and most certainly would be noticeable if the initial reception problem was due to received signal strength. I do say "potentially" because it must be a doubling of height above the Earth. So if the church is one-story construction built on terra-firma, you would see the expected gain. However if the two people are already on the second floor above the ground, raising the antenna an additional 3 feet (on-belt to head-level), that 3 foot delta is small when compared to height AGL which may be 15 feet AGL or more at the belt level on the second floor. Note that this has been an overly simplistic explanation of a rather complex concept but hopefully yo get the idea. Bottom line? If you are at ground level using portable radios on your belt, try raising them to head level and see if there is any noticeable improvement.

Just thought that I would throw that little tid-bit out there in case it helped in the short-run until you settle on a long-term solution. @prcguy covered UHF antennas, power levels and headset quality. Let us know if you have any questions.

 

[RalphIII]

Thanks PRCGUY and Bill. I welcome any other advice as well. FYI, the headsets I purchased are specifically made for the BR200 radios.

I have not been able to thoroughly test the issue in order to pinpoint it. But if you watch this VIDEO where a guy performs a hack on his radio to increase transmission range, the audio quality is similar. Start at 1:10 as compared to 1:40 (after hack).

We don't experience the type of static he is demonstrating in the video but the audio quality is similar. When communicating at our longest distance (one building to another building) the audio quality is muffled and hard to discern with the headsets. Whereas the audio quality at shorter distances (within one building or the other) is fine with the headsets.

I honestly don't even notice static (per say) but maybe there is enough white noise introduced at our longest distance that it affects the headsets? Whereas it doesn't really affect the radios because of the larger and better speaker?

Anyhow, I will go ahead and purchase some different headsets and the unity gain antennas. We'll see if that makes a difference or not. I really only need about a 10 or 15 percent increase in clarity. I just need to insure someone will understand if they are being called on the radio. They could always step outside to carry on a conversation, if needed.

God Bless,
Ralph

 

[RalphIII]

Hi @RalphIII and welcome to Radio Reference!

Another important thing too keep in mind is how high that antenna is above the ground. Since you all are using headsets, I'm going to guess that the portable radios are being worn on a belt or worse yet, inside a pants pocket. Let's say the portable radio is worn on a belt and the antenna is 3 feet Above Ground Level (AGL). Let's also say the person on the other end has the same setup and their antenna is also 3 feet AGL. For simplicity, in this scenario, I am going to normalize everything so that the system gain of the system from the transmitter on one end to the receiver on the other end just happens to work out to a nice round number of 0 dB. Now if both people were to raise their portable radios from the belt to their head which now puts the antenna at 6 feet AGL, that doubling of height can potentially give each person a 3 dB increase in their effective gain or an overall system gain improvement of 6 dB. Now that is rather significant and most certainly would be noticeable if the initial reception problem was due to received signal strength. I do say "potentially" because it must be a doubling of height above the Earth. So if the church is one-story construction built on terra-firma, you would see the expected gain. However if the two people are already on the second floor above the ground, raising the antenna an additional 3 feet (on-belt to head-level), that 3 foot delta is small when compared to height AGL which may be 15 feet AGL or more at the belt level on the second floor. Note that this has been an overly simplistic explanation of a rather complex concept but hopefully yo get the idea. Bottom line? If you are at ground level using portable radios on your belt, try raising them to head level and see if there is any noticeable improvement.

Just thought that I would throw that little tid-bit out there in case it helped in the short-run until you settle on a long-term solution. @prcguy covered UHF antennas, power levels and headset quality. Let us know if you have any questions.

This is a good point and something that I have thought about. The radios are clipped on the belt, so they are 3 ft off the ground. I may have had my shirt over the radio as well. In addition, both buildings are single story but the Fellowship Hall is about 3 ft higher than the Sanctuary. So is this enough to potentially cause an issue?

Thanks,
Ralph

 

[CopperWhopper67]

Can you confirm if you have tried doing a radio check in the areas in question without any accessories attached to the radios? It is best practice to keep the antenna as perpendicular to the ground as possible when speaking or when clipped on your person. Holding the unit sideways can result in signal attenuation. From your original post it seems like its only an issue with the headsets. Often times those connectors (especially on new units) are very tight, so it is possible that they may not have been inserted completely.

 

[K4EET]

This is a good point and something that I have thought about. The radios are clipped on the belt, so they are 3 ft off the ground. I may have had my shirt over the radio as well. In addition, both buildings are single story but the Fellowship Hall is about 3 ft higher than the Sanctuary. So is this enough to potentially cause an issue?

Thanks,
Ralph

Based on the two buildings being basically at ground level (the Fellowship Hall could be at ground level but on a small hill that is 3 feet higher than the ground at the Sanctuary), it would not hurt to get those portable radios up to head height when transmitting and receiving. Definitely would not hurt to test it out to see if there is a noticeable difference. Also, @CopperWhopper67 brings up a good point too about the antenna needing to be vertical as much as is practical. If the antenna is parallel to the ground (horizontal orientation) or even 45 degrees off from being vertical, you will be inducing a fair amount of signal loss from an end-to-end system gain perspective. Since what you are doing now is marginal, anything to improve the signal is worth following. And remember, you may need the cumulative effect of all of the above (antenna at head height, antenna in vertical orientation, etc.) to give you the results that you are looking for. All of the suggestions in this thread are far less expensive than renting radios from a shop with a community repeater that gives you solid coverage inside and out on the church's property. Keep us posted.

 

[RalphIII]

Hello Everyone and thanks for all of the input! I will give some pertinent details and answer your questions.

I initially purchased some FRS two way radios to test. Those units performed quite well all over the Church property which included the parking lot. However, audio quality was somewhat poor between the two buildings (Sanctuary/Fellowship Hall) similar to what I am experiencing now with the headsets (muffled). I concluded that some walls/electrical was creating interference.

Consequently, I then purchased some Motorolla DLR 1020 digital radios to test. The DLR 1020 digital radios were quite superior to the FRS units. They performed great all over the property as well as communications between the two buildings. There was no issues with audio quality anywhere on Church property or within my home/neighborhood with testing.

I tested those units for about a week but I found some of their features to be annoying. So I had Midland send me a pair of the BR200 business class radios to test. I thoroughly tested the Midland radios and the Motorola digital radios simultaneously on Church property and within my house/neighborhood.

At Church, I tested communications between the two buildings (Sanctuary, Fellowship Hall) which was/is the trouble area and both performed great! I then tested the units to the extreme, from the Sanctuary to the very rear of our property which included going behind some metal storage sheds. Both units performed flawlessly with excellent audio quality. I honestly couldn't tell a difference in audio quality between the two on property. Everyone preferred the Midland units though because of their ease of use and as they proved equal to the digital Motorola units. So I went with the Midland units.

As noted, the Midland radios sound great. It's just the Midland headsets that I have issues with. I will test them again with some of the suggestions given. Otherwise, I can only hope that the unity gain antenna will make a difference and/or another style of headsets?

God Bless,
Ralph

 

[CopperWhopper67]

Hello Everyone and thanks for all of the input! I will give some pertinent details and answer your questions.

I initially purchased some FRS two way radios to test. Those units performed quite well all over the Church property which included the parking lot. However, audio quality was somewhat poor between the two buildings (Sanctuary/Fellowship Hall) similar to what I am experiencing now with the headsets (muffled). I concluded that some walls/electrical was creating interference.

Consequently, I then purchased some Motorolla DLR 1020 digital radios to test. The DLR 1020 digital radios were quite superior to the FRS units. They performed great all over the property as well as communications between the two buildings. There was no issues with audio quality anywhere on Church property or within my home/neighborhood with testing.

I tested those units for about a week but I found some of their features to be annoying. So I had Midland send me a pair of the BR200 business class radios to test. I thoroughly tested the Midland radios and the Motorola digital radios simultaneously on Church property and within my house/neighborhood.

At Church, I tested communications between the two buildings (Sanctuary, Fellowship Hall) which was/is the trouble area and both performed great! I then tested the units to the extreme, from the Sanctuary to the very rear of our property which included going behind some metal storage sheds. Both units performed flawlessly with excellent audio quality. I honestly couldn't tell a difference in audio quality between the two on property. Everyone preferred the Midland units though because of their ease of use and as they proved equal to the digital Motorola units. So I went with the Midland units.

As noted, the Midland radios sound great. It's just the Midland headsets that I have issues with. I will test them again with some of the suggestions given. Otherwise, I can only hope that the unity gain antenna will make a difference and/or another style of headsets?

God Bless,
Ralph

I commend you for doing thorough testing. Please give us an update when you get the new accessories.

 

[RalphIII]

Hello All,
So we were able to do a little more testing tonight at Church between the two buildings and I can add the following.

1. I think one of the main issues with the Midland headsets is with the PTT microphone. You must speak with authority and concisely into the PTT to be understood. If you speak with a softer voice or turn your head the slightest, which you would expect you could, then it comes across very muffled. As long as you speak authoritatively into the PTT then audio quality is mostly acceptable. It's not perfect but it is at least workable.

2. The Midland Over-The-Ear headset is more crisp -vs- the Surveillance style headsets. The Surveillance headset speakers/tube is more muffled in comparison. So it has challenges with both the PTT microphone as well as with the headset speaker sound.

3. We had the radios clipped on our belts and there was virtually no static to be noticed transmitting from one building to the other. The only time I noticed any static was when I turned to face a specific direction. So if a circle is 360 degrees (it is) I experience no static for 350 degrees. It was just one specific direction or otherwise when I had my back turned. Sorry, I didn't try to pinpoint it.

Anyhow, I've ordered some different headsets including some Kenwood's that I've been told will work with the Midland units. I will give subsequent updates as that stuff comes in and I'm able to test it.

Take care,
Ralph

 

[RalphIII]

Hello All,
I wanted to give an update.

I ordered some Unity Gain antennas and we were able to test them at Church today. They made a huge difference in both tone and clarity between our two Church buildings. We realized at least a 50%-60% improvement in tone and audio quality which now makes the Midland headsets usable. I’m still going to attempt to get better headsets though.

This brings me to a question. Does the Unity Gain antenna improve both transmission and reception range? In other words, it allows the radio to transmit further while also allowing the radio to pick up other transmissions from further away? The reason I ask is this. My buddy installed his Unity Gain antenna first and then called me. The difference in tone and clarity was quite drastic. It was as if he was standing right next to me. Consequently, when I installed my Unity Gain antenna I expected another 50% improvement in tone/clarity but the improvement was then only minimal? Is this because the first Unity Gain antenna had already realized the greatest improvement to be had, given the radios were already within range of each other? If that is the case, then I really only need Unity Gain antennas for half of my radios.

God Bless,
Ralph

 

[a417]

If that is the case, then I really only need Unity Gain antennas for half of my radios.

Think about this...what if two non-unity gain antennas are on radios talking to each other?

 

[RalphIII]

Think about this...what if two non-unity gain antennas are on radios talking to each other?

I'm not following you a417?

1. When using radios "A" and "B" between two buildings with the shorter antennas (non-unity gain) the signal strength is weaker. This is especially noticeable/pronounced when using the headsets, as the audio quality is quite poor.

2. However, if I add a unity gain antenna on one of the radios the result is much better clarity between the two radios. The overall signal stength is better which results in much greater clarity with the headsets.

__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________


So my question is in regards to why clarity is so much better by adding just one Unity Gain antenna.

**Is it better because radio "A" Transmission is stronger which allows radio "B" to hear it better.

**Is it also better because radio "A" now has stronger Reception which allows it to hear radio "B" better.

I assumed a Unity Gain antenna just helped with Transmission range. But does it also help with Reception range?

Thanks,
Ralph

 

[a417]

your rationale for buying these antennas for half of your fleet (based on the premise that your test showed a single antenna on two radios improved things) is a terrible idea.

If you happen to only buy antennas for half of your radios, and you get two radios without those antennas trying to communicate, you will have improved nothing.

 

[CopperWhopper67]

Hello Ralph,

An improved antenna will help improve both the transmit and receive on a given radio, and it is a good idea to have them on all radios for an equally improved experience across the fleet.

 

[RalphIII]

Hello a417 and CopperWhopper!

I agree fully with your sentiments and I appreciate your input!

Let me explain though. I had planned on reserving the Unity Gain antennas for the radios kept within the Fellowship Hall building. We would only need to use those on Wednesdays, which is the only day both buildings are utilized. Whereas, we only use the Sanctuary building on Sundays and there is no need for Unity Gain antennas on that day.

Irrespective, someone might get them mixed up at some point and they're really not very expensive. So I'll be getting the Unity Gain antennas per your advice for all of the radios. I'm just ecstatic that they made such a difference. I'm very happy with our setup now and if I'm able to get even better headsets, it will be even better.

Take care,
Ralph