SDS200 vs SDS100 Performance

[sefrischling]

Is there a noticeable performance difference between the 100 and 200?

I received both today and have them running side by side, on the identical antennas. The SDS200 is picking up far more than then SDS100 is.

Also, with the scanning seeming slower than the 996P2, I turned off the Global Filter ... anyone have a better suggestion than that? I am all ears.

Thanks.

 

[hiegtx]

Is there a noticeable performance difference between the 100 and 200?

I received both today and have them running side by side, on the identical antennas. The SDS200 is picking up far more than then SDS100 is.

Also, with the scanning seeming slower than the 996P2, I turned off the Global Filter ... anyone have a better suggestion than that? I am all ears.

Thanks.

My SDS200 does seem to be a bit more sensitive than my SDS100, but that might be, in part, due to two different antennas. Of course, the metal case on the SDS200, as well as most other base/mobile models, can help reduce interference from other electronic devices, such as your PC, printer, or broadband modem, among other things. The portable scanners, which generally have a plastic case, can be affected by that outside interference.

For the SDS series scanner, for each site (in a trunked system), it can take about one second for the scanner to acquire the control channel & decode it for active talkgroups. I would suggest using only the sites that are definitely in range, and that carry the radio traffic you are interested in. So, in a regional, or statewide system, don't add a bunch of sites that are well out of range. That way, you won't lose scanning speed as it attempts to hear sites that are out of range.

I have not noticed much difference depending on which filter is used, with one exception: If you set a given Department (for conventional channels), or a site (in a trunked system) to use the Auto filter, each time that Department, or site, comes up to be scanned, the scanner will try every filter setting to see which works best. That definitely slows down the scanning speed. And, to boot, it does not remember which filter it used the last time that site or department is scanned, so it cycles through all of the filter options again, every time it comes across anything set with the filter choice as auto. Various members, including myself, have made the request that once the best filter is found when an item is scanned, that the scanner saves that for use the next time that department or site is scanned, even if that is only a temporary save. (Channels set as Avoid when scanning, are usually only temporary avoids. The next time the scanner is booted up again, after being off, those temp avoids are gone.You can, of course, make it a point to set the Avoid as permanent, if you use the correct keystrokes.) Or, at least, when set as Auto, that the filter chosen can be seen on the display, so that you could update your Favorites list to match. As it is now, if you set the filter to 'Auto', that is what remains on the display, even after the scanner has determined which filter is best.

 

[n1chu]

Assuming the scanner does in fact check every filter setting when set to AUTO mode, I suspect the reason the SDS series checks every filter setting is because the filters are “location dependent”. Meaning any particular choice of filter will probably change if you are mobile. In my case, I have turned off GLOBAL and additionally all filter settings, checking each agency individually. I wanted to start checking the filter settings to see which ones might allow for the best results. So I needed a place to start, which was with all filters set to off. I found I wasn’t suffering from simulcast issues, probably because the only simulcast agency I listen to is the statewide CLMRN (Connecticut Land Mobile Radio Network) and I “Avoid” all sites except the ones closest to me, with only those TG’s that aren’t statewide. So, I have turned off all filtering. My understanding of how the CLMRN works may be flawed, where you could take issue with my reasoning concerning simulcast but I have no problem with differing views if you care to reply and correct my take on the subject, as my knowledge of how simulcast affects our ability to receive is limited. To date, I’ve just found the filters to be non-essential for my needs.

It was my understanding these filters were originally used by the Uniden tech bench, for testing purposes, and later pushed out to all for those to experiment with regarding simulcast problems. But I have received reply’s that the filters have nothing to do with helping with simulcast problems per se, that filters were added merely to satisfy Uniden’s promise of being able to push out additional enhancements after the fact, because the SDS series are SDR (Software Defined Radios), capable of allowing changes to the basic structure of the receiver, where previous models might be restricted due to hardware limitations. Again, I can not confirm any of this and leave you to correct my understandings I have written here. I’d like to get it right so please reply with any discrepancies or confirmations you may have.

 

[Ubbe]

The specification in their user manuals shows the exact same sensitivity at different frequency bands.

They use the same bandfilters and receiver chip but it's always better to spread out the components so they don't interact with it other, or the SDS200 could have used a SDS100 in a box with a 12v-5v converter and no battery as it's base and used a large remote head connected to it using the controller signals from that cold solder joint connector and the display data coming out of its USB port and an interface to a 8pin network cable. It would had been a more cost effective solution than producing a whole new SDS200 that required a bigger box than BCT15/996 and different circuit boards. It would also have made it easier to install in a vehicle.

The SDS100 have a lot of internal interferencies that hesitate and slows down scanning as it thinks it's receiving a carrier. It gets worse the lower in frequency the scanner are using.

There's one auto setting for choosing between Normal-Invert and another auto wide for the Wide Normal and Wide Invert. I don't know if it even tries the off setting in either of those auto settings. One would need to use Steve Holloway's spectrum display program to check how the filter changes when initially landing on a channel with its filter set to auto.

/Ubbe

 

[sefrischling]

Assuming the scanner does in fact check every filter setting when set to AUTO mode, I suspect the reason the SDS series checks every filter setting is because the filters are “location dependent”. Meaning any particular choice of filter will probably change if you are mobile. In my case, I have turned off GLOBAL and additionally all filter settings, checking each agency individually. I wanted to start checking the filter settings to see which ones might allow for the best results. So I needed a place to start, which was with all filters set to off. I found I wasn’t suffering from simulcast issues, probably because the only simulcast agency I listen to is the statewide CLMRN (Connecticut Land Mobile Radio Network) and I “Avoid” all sites except the ones closest to me, with only those TG’s that aren’t statewide. So, I have turned off all filtering. My understanding of how the CLMRN works may be flawed, where you could take issue with my reasoning concerning simulcast but I have no problem with differing views if you care to reply and correct my take on the subject, as my knowledge of how simulcast affects our ability to receive is limited. To date, I’ve just found the filters to be non-essential for my needs.

Three of the SDS 200 units will be used solely on CLMRN. One SDS200 and the SDS100 will also be used on Waterford's TRS (which will transition to CLMRN likely in the next year) and at times RISCON.

 

[n1chu]

Three of the SDS 200 units will be used solely on CLMRN. One SDS200 and the SDS100 will also be used on Waterford's TRS (which will transition to CLMRN likely in the next year) and at times RISCON.

So the radios will be dedicated solely to CLMRN. You might have led with that. It also sounds like you have already tried a 996P2 where the SDS units will end up residing. Did you have problems with simulcast with the 996P2? Is that why you ordered up the SDS units? What do you intend on doing if you find the 996P2 does a better job-I believe you stated it was hearing better and/or better scanning rates than the SDS units…

 

[GadgetGeek]

Mine are very similar in performance. Global filter is off too.

 

[nessnet]

To the OP:
The discussion has mainly been about the potential differences/similarities between the radios.

But... unless you have both radios (via a Stridsberg/some multi-coupler), connected to the same antenna/feedline, any test between them is not using a common baseline.

I have both radios sitting here in front of me connected to one of the aforementioned multi-couplers and they seem to be damn close to the same when running the same set of favorites.

I have found that all the filters attenuate somewhat, so if you have a good signal at a specific location, global is set to off (not set to normal - set to off).

 

[GadgetGeek]

I have both radios sitting here in front of me connected to one of the aforementioned multi-couplers and they seem to be damn close to the same when running the same set of favorites.

Same experience here.

 

[sefrischling]

So the radios will be dedicated solely to CLMRN. You might have led with that. It also sounds like you have already tried a 996P2 where the SDS units will end up residing. Did you have problems with simulcast with the 996P2? Is that why you ordered up the SDS units? What do you intend on doing if you find the 996P2 does a better job-I believe you stated it was hearing better and/or better scanning rates than the SDS units…

I have two 996P2 units that work just fine on CLMRN, both are about 3 years old. Ultimately the Fire Service ended up with five new 996P2 units that would in no way work with CLMRN. They were tested in a variety of ways, they were totally deaf to CLMRN, so we now have four SDS200 and one SDS100 scanners.

The 996 will be used or analog conventional monitoring, the SDS units will be primarily used for CLMRN. One SDS200 is dedicated solely to two TGs on the system, that's it.

 

[sefrischling]

To the OP:
The discussion has mainly been about the potential differences/similarities between the radios.

But... unless you have both radios (via a Stridsberg/some multi-coupler), connected to the same antenna/feedline, any test between them is not using a common baseline.

I have both radios sitting here in front of me connected to one of the aforementioned multi-couplers and they seem to be damn close to the same when running the same set of favorites.

I have found that all the filters attenuate somewhat, so if you have a good signal at a specific location, global is set to off (not set to normal - set to off).

They were operating off the same antenna, via a multi-coupler. I tried swapping the connectors between the two units, the 200 out performs the 100 consistently.