• Effective immediately we will be deleting, without notice, any negative threads or posts that deal with the use of encryption and streaming of scanner audio.

    We've noticed a huge increase in rants and negative posts that revolve around agencies going to encryption due to the broadcasting of scanner audio on the internet. It's now worn out and continues to be the same recycled rants. These rants hijack the threads and derail the conversation. They no longer have a place anywhere on this forum other than in the designated threads in the Rants forum in the Tavern.

    If you violate these guidelines your post will be deleted without notice and an infraction will be issued. We are not against discussion of this issue. You just need to do it in the right place. For example:
    https://forums.radioreference.com/rants/224104-official-thread-live-audio-feeds-scanners-wait-encryption.html

Uniden X36 Simulcast Performance Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.

mancow

Member
Database Admin
Joined
Feb 19, 2003
Messages
5,807
Location
N.E. Kansas
#1
Would it be possible to consolidate the topic of simulcast performance of the new units to this thread so it doesn't get muddled up in the mix of all the other topics?

I think a few of us are teetering on the edge of a purchase but are really wanting to know how they perform where other units struggled or outright didn't work.
 

KE4ZNR

KE4ZNR@radioreference.com
Joined
Jan 21, 2002
Messages
7,069
Location
Raleigh, NC
#6
I think I will stick this thread for a little while so that feedback can be given
for both the BCD436HP and BCD536HP.
Do understand that any off topic posts will be deleted.
Marshall KE4ZNR
 
Joined
Aug 22, 2008
Messages
766
Location
Fremont NE
#8
excellent idea for a thread! since this will be the sole deciding factor on whether i buy this scanner or not, (396xt does everything i need besides this) its nice to have 1 "go to" place for everything regarding this!
 
Joined
Apr 22, 2004
Messages
696
Location
Indianapolis, IN USA
#9
Thanks for this thread. I'm also in the "sole factor for buying these radios" camp when it comes to simulcast performance. If new Uniden hardware will improve my feed's audio, I'll buy. If not, no reason to. I really look forward to everyone's evaluation, particularly anyone here in central Indiana monitoring IDPS System 1.
 

redburgundy

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jul 1, 2009
Messages
337
#10
I understood that there were two somewhat different simulcast interference cases:
LSM CQPSK and non-LSM C4FM.
If so, then it would help to have performance reports say which case is being tested.

But how do I know if any particular simulcast system is LSM or non-LSM?
 

OregonScanner

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Oct 30, 2009
Messages
676
Location
Sherwood, Oregon, USA
#11
If a system is non-LSM then its not simulcast. C4FM modulation is non-simulcast P25 Phase I. CQPSK modulation is simulcast P25 Phase I. CQPSK (simulcast) is where scanners have digital simulcast distortion problems.
 
Last edited:
Joined
Jan 27, 2011
Messages
1,601
#12
Wirelessly posted (Mozilla/5.0 (Linux; Android 4.0.4; LG-MS870 Build/IMM76L) AppleWebKit/535.19 (KHTML, like Gecko) Chrome/18.0.1025.166 Mobile Safari/535.19)

Ok, but the question is, how do we tell which type a particular system is using? The RR database does not specify this info.
 

Citywide6

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Dec 31, 2003
Messages
41
Location
Madison, Wisconsin
#13
CQPSK modulation is simulcast P25 Phase I. CQPSK (simulcast) is where scanners have digital simulcast distortion problems.
And that is the key question for my area. The Sheriff Dept. in Dane County Wisconsin, and the municpalities on the county system, will convert to a Harris P25 simulcast system in a month or so. The base stations will transmit simulcast CQPSK (the mobiles are C4FM). Will the new Uniden's be able to properly and easily decode this system? My 996XT even with the most recent upgrade to 1.07.03 only coughs up an occassional snippet of garbled audio. UPman can you give us any info?
 

redburgundy

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jul 1, 2009
Messages
337
#14

wise871

Member
Database Admin
Joined
Jun 23, 2006
Messages
3,718
Location
Florida
#15
Seems the topic is getting off track. I thought it was suppose to be used for reporting simulcast performance on the new Uniden scanners?
 

KE4ZNR

KE4ZNR@radioreference.com
Joined
Jan 21, 2002
Messages
7,069
Location
Raleigh, NC
#16
Seems the topic is getting off track. I thought it was suppose to be used for reporting simulcast performance on the new Uniden scanners?
Yep. From my previous post:

Do understand that any off topic posts will be deleted.
Marshall KE4ZNR
You have been warned. Please help keep this thread on topic.
Thanks and happy monitoring! :)
Marshall KE4ZNR
 

redburgundy

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jul 1, 2009
Messages
337
#17
Seems the topic is getting off track. I thought it was suppose to be used for reporting simulcast performance on the new Uniden scanners?
There should be some common understanding of what is to be reported
In particular, I'm suggesting that the type of simulcast system being received should be reported along with the scanner performance.
 

UPMan

Uniden Representative
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Apr 19, 2004
Messages
13,268
Location
Arlington, TX
#18
Report the system, site, receive conditions, and receive quality. Posting the recording would be good, too.

If you haven't noticed, I am absolutely not going to make a claim of how well the scanner will work. I only have the experiences of myself and beta testers. While these reports do cover multiple receive sites on multiple systems, they are not all encompassing. I am pleased with the reports I've gotten, but YMMV.
 
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
3,352
Location
Somewhere in this room. Right now, you're very col
#19
Not to clutter up this thread needlessly, but I think a side by side comparison with an older model is helpful also. For example, here in Phoenix I may find that I still have some issues receiving the RWC, but compared to my BC796D the new scanner might work much better. I intend to include such a side-by-side comparison in my report/review. Based on what we've seen (and heard) so far in the videos that have been posted, I'm reasonably certain that I'll see a dramatic improvement on this system. Can't wait! Hurry up and ship these things out, Paul! :)

-AZ
 

KevinC

Moderator
Super Moderator
Joined
Jan 7, 2001
Messages
4,325
Location
Somewhere other than home :(
#20
Report the system, site, receive conditions, and receive quality. Posting the recording would be good, too.
To add to what Paul posted...


I would like this thread to be reports/videos/audio ONLY...but I'm not in charge. :D

If it gets filled up with banter back and forth (like this post) all the reports will get lost.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top