SDS100/SDS200: SDS100 Firmware 1.03.03M/1.01.05S Open Beta
- Status
Analog, DMR and NXDN still need improvement but P25 is sounding great and more importantly the patches are working properly I'm hearing patched talk groups on both of the talk groups that are patched together this is a big improvement for me!
Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk
Hit_Factor
Member
Using ProScan I see both the Unit ID and the Unit ID Name in the UID Logging screen. Before the update only the Unit ID Name column was populated.
I assume this has to do with the GSI remote command issue.
I assume this has to do with the GSI remote command issue.
Funny you should mention that, I was about to bring up that analog reception *seems* better with this latest beta firmware but it’s a little early for me to say for sure. With my usual caveat that my results are in MY area and environment, YMMV. And of course, even more improvements are welcomed
Badboy536
Member
- Joined
- Apr 14, 2015
- Messages
- 156
Funny you should mention that, I was about to bring up that analog reception *seems* better with this latest beta firmware but it’s a little early for me to say for sure. With my usual caveat that my results are in MY area and environment, YMMV. And of course, even more improvements are welcomed
Your right this beta is better in analog reception over the last public release. But i feel the last beta 1.02.05b had better analog reception then the public release for sure and is still a little better then this beta.
Nah, this beta is the best by far yet for my area as said above YMMV but the patch bug being fixed is a major plus for me. This scanner is almost keeping up with my APX radios with this firmware release. It could stand to be a little more sensitive to the analog side of things though also DMR and NXDN aren't doing the best either but I will have to test them with a roof top antenna to see any comparable results. Can't wait for a base version
Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk
Sent from my SM-N910V using Tapatalk
Last edited:
Analog does seem to be better.
Does anyone have the files for older FW? This latest is not working for me on MARCS. It's flashing talk groups, and the voice is extremely garbled.
Which Marcs sites? I’m in Columbus and it’s working great
Sent from my iPhone 8 using Tapatalk Pro
Jason WX4JCW
Unication G4, BCD536HP
I know this doesn’t help you much but I’m seeing good reception and tracking on an 800MHz Con+ system. I will report any anomalies as I get more time to compare with a BCD436 and a TRX-1. (I know the TRX doesn’t really “trunktrack” but because of that sometimes you can catch stuff going that the Unidens are quiet about
)- Joined
- Dec 20, 2010
- Messages
- 21
Not sure where to post this, this is from the most current public release and not the beta. This is from the New York Onondaga County CNY Simulcast System. Seems like it isnt decoding the system quick enough. Seems like the p25 nac identifier isnt being detected and when I switch to search it comes up a little quicker. Then I turn around and it seems to be working well. Not sure if any of these files help UPMan.
Not seeing any improvement on P25 I & II can’t say anything about analog as I don’t monitor any on the SDS100.
Honestly,I think it actually made me lose one Simulcast System (Parma/Medina County) that was 68 miles away.
Just my findings,sure others will have different outcomes.
Do miss the backlight squelch delay that the 436hp has.
Hope we can reinstall the 1.03.01.
Hopefully I did this right...first reply.
Kudos to UpMan,one hell of a scanner.
Honestly,I think it actually made me lose one Simulcast System (Parma/Medina County) that was 68 miles away.
Just my findings,sure others will have different outcomes.
Do miss the backlight squelch delay that the 436hp has.
Hope we can reinstall the 1.03.01.
Hopefully I did this right...first reply.
Kudos to UpMan,one hell of a scanner.
You may subscribe to this yahoo group for access to archived SDS100 firmware files.
https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/SDS100/files/Firmware/
EDACS has gone from some occasional gibberish to almost listenable!!
Still not as good as the 436.. But much improved!
https://www.radioreference.com/apps/db/?sid=2672
Thanks Upman & Team!
Thanks for the past firmware links,to bad ya got to be a member.
Last edited:
Columbus MARCS and Columbus city sites. I'm way up in Dublin at my GF's house where Union/Delaware/Franklin county all meet. It may be have to do with the location. My normal location is south Worthington. It's very strange though, 10 FIRE robot voice is perfect but the human voice on the Patrol 1-5 talk groups (and other Columbus MARCS site LE talk goups) is very garbled. It doesn't make much sense to me because the RSSI is still pretty good. Any ideas?
Make a log file POST IT so Uniden FW Team can look at it and make it better.
Location I have to move the radio some
Sent from my iPhone 8 using Tapatalk Pro
Jason WX4JCW
Unication G4, BCD536HP
JamesO
Member
Initial operation subjectively appears to be improved on standard P25 which is most of what I am monitoring. I am not at home much these days, so I have a slight problem comparing to my normal listening location.
A few comments/questions:
1. At what signal level in dBm displayed would we be expected to have choppy receive due to lack of strong signal?? What is considered the lower level threshold for signal drop out?
2. At what stronger signal level in dBm would we expected to have choppy signal receive?
I have choppy receive on some stronger signals in the -45 to -50 dBm range which I do not think are due to simulcast. Seems that maybe there needs to be some form of AGC that limits stronger signals from over driving the receive section of the radio. Never was able to get Uniden to comment on the AGC function of the 436/536 radios and I never felt the AGC on those radios actually worked or did anything. Subject was pretty much dropped.
I need to monitor these same systems from a slightly different locations with lower signal levels to see how they respond and/or turn the Attenuator on and monitor for a while.
3. Did not have a good baseline at my current location, however, NOAA Weather channels appear to come in strong, even the more distant stations. May have been an improvement in Analog reception, but I have little analog that I regularly monitor.
4. FM Broadcast band still has issues. While it appears that maybe the IF bandwidth for FM Broadcast may have been improved in some of the newer firmware releases, I still have some of the stations drop out then come back in. These tend to be stronger station sin the upper frequency range. I have not tracked FM Broadcast closely with all the firmware releases, but there is still work to do on the FM Broadcast band which I realize is a lower priority, but often sorting out some of the lower hanging fruit can benefit the entire firmware at times.
A few comments/questions:
1. At what signal level in dBm displayed would we be expected to have choppy receive due to lack of strong signal?? What is considered the lower level threshold for signal drop out?
2. At what stronger signal level in dBm would we expected to have choppy signal receive?
I have choppy receive on some stronger signals in the -45 to -50 dBm range which I do not think are due to simulcast. Seems that maybe there needs to be some form of AGC that limits stronger signals from over driving the receive section of the radio. Never was able to get Uniden to comment on the AGC function of the 436/536 radios and I never felt the AGC on those radios actually worked or did anything. Subject was pretty much dropped.
I need to monitor these same systems from a slightly different locations with lower signal levels to see how they respond and/or turn the Attenuator on and monitor for a while.
3. Did not have a good baseline at my current location, however, NOAA Weather channels appear to come in strong, even the more distant stations. May have been an improvement in Analog reception, but I have little analog that I regularly monitor.
4. FM Broadcast band still has issues. While it appears that maybe the IF bandwidth for FM Broadcast may have been improved in some of the newer firmware releases, I still have some of the stations drop out then come back in. These tend to be stronger station sin the upper frequency range. I have not tracked FM Broadcast closely with all the firmware releases, but there is still work to do on the FM Broadcast band which I realize is a lower priority, but often sorting out some of the lower hanging fruit can benefit the entire firmware at times.
- Status
