Ws1098 vs bcd536hp

Status
Not open for further replies.

firemantom26

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Aug 5, 2005
Messages
1,218
Location
Wintersville Ohio
I like to get some opinions on the two scanners. I love my 536, but I am not happy with the decoding of the P25. I have messed with threshold and all kind of adjustments. I run Unitrunker and get it to decode the same CC that the 536 can't.

I was wondering if you have any thoughts on the decoding on a WS1098 P25 CC vs the 536 on P25 phase 1

Happy New Year
 

mtindor

OH/WV DB Admin
Database Admin
Joined
Dec 5, 2006
Messages
10,368
Location
Carroll Co OH / EN90LN
Tom,

I'm sure any of the Whistler / GRE / RS digitals will pick up phase I P25 sites beautifully [as all mine do] as long as they aren't simulcast. Obviously you already know that for simulcast, there isn't a better scanner on the market to handle simulcast. (to be clear to readers, no scanners have the capability of handling simulcast digital site decoding properly -- but the 436/536HP do it best in my book)

I'm sure that this is just some settings on the 536HP, Tom -- and not an issue with the scanner/receiver itself. You gotta trust me on that. If I were there i'd show ya.

If you are getting interference, that interference likely is not going to disappear [and would probably be worse] on the GRE/Whistler guts.

Did you try switching the intermediate frequency?

m
 

SCPD

QRT
Joined
Feb 24, 2001
Messages
0
Location
Virginia
From everything I have ever seen .. there is no clear winner out of ANY of the scanners that will do P25 of any shape.
 

buddrousa

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 5, 2003
Messages
11,224
Location
Retired 40 Year Firefighter NW Tenn
It all depends on what you want its like the Ford and Chevy thing. I like the sound of my x36's better than my Whistler built Pro-668. My Whistler built 668 needs more attention setting up on the TACN P25 system in Tennessee it also has a tinnie sound and still misses some P25 traffic sitting beside my 436. Others here have stated theirs works great for them. If you are up to a road trip go to Evansville, In. to the Ham Station to it get a hands on and hear both and decide for yourself. Or a scanner dealer in your area.
 
Last edited:

firemantom26

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Aug 5, 2005
Messages
1,218
Location
Wintersville Ohio
It all depends on what you want its like the Ford and Chevy thing. I like the sound of my x36's better than my Whistler built Pro-668. My Whistler built 668 needs more attention setting up on the TACN P25 system in Tennessee it also has a tinnie sound and still misses some P25 traffic sitting beside my 436. Others here have stated theirs works great for them. If you are up to a road trip go to Evansville, In. to the Ham Station to it get a hands on and hear both and decide for yourself. Or a scanner dealer in your area.


The 436/536 are very easy to setup. One day I will borrow someones scanner to make a side by side comparison.

A RTL dongle running Unitrunker on my computer with the same antenna connection decodes CC on a p-25 phase 1 system some much better than my 436/536. I would say it is probably 20-30 percent better...
 

radio3353

Active Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2003
Messages
1,497
...

A RTL dongle running Unitrunker on my computer with the same antenna connection decodes CC on a p-25 phase 1 system some much better than my 436/536. I would say it is probably 20-30 percent better...

Seriously. Isn't it amazing that a $20 dongle and free software works better than a $400-$500 scanner? Shame, shame Uniden and Whistler. Time for you guys to step up and make a scanner that works with today's systems.
 

firemantom26

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Aug 5, 2005
Messages
1,218
Location
Wintersville Ohio
Seriously. Isn't it amazing that a $20 dongle and free software works better than a $400-$500 scanner? Shame, shame Uniden and Whistler. Time for you guys to step up and make a scanner that works with today's systems.


That's exactly how if feel.


Sent from my iPhone 6 using Tapatalk
 

Blackswan73

Active Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2015
Messages
1,385
Location
Central Indiana
I have had a 536 for about a month and half, and I do not think I have ever disliked a scanner more than my 536. It is less sensitive than either my 668, or my HP2. The sound is extremely bassy and muffled most of the time. The display is so small, my 65 year old eyes can hardly see it. I am seriously considering selling or trading it and getting a Whistler 1095, or 1098. It has features I like, but overall I am starting to wish I never bought it.
 

firemantom26

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Aug 5, 2005
Messages
1,218
Location
Wintersville Ohio
I have had a 536 for about a month and half, and I do not think I have ever disliked a scanner more than my 536. It is less sensitive than either my 668, or my HP2. The sound is extremely bassy and muffled most of the time. The display is so small, my 65 year old eyes can hardly see it. I am seriously considering selling or trading it and getting a Whistler 1095, or 1098. It has features I like, but overall I am starting to wish I never bought it.


I was hoping that someone here has compared the 1098 to 536.


I am not concerned about sound quality as I am on decoding a control channel on the P 25 phase 1 system

I have compared before the 436/536/HP2. In all have been equal in decoding



Sent from my iPhone 6 using Tapatalk
 

SCPD

QRT
Joined
Feb 24, 2001
Messages
0
Location
Virginia
I was hoping that someone here has compared the 1098 to 536.


I am not concerned about sound quality as I am on decoding a control channel on the P 25 phase 1 system

I have compared before the 436/536/HP2. In all have been equal in decoding



Sent from my iPhone 6 using Tapatalk

I see you already have that $20 dongle. I definitely would not dedicate a $500 scanner for the job. You will find that the scanner will do no better when it comes to the job of only decoding.

The 1098 is identical to the 1095 internally .. so really, no difference but the keypad. The 1095/1098 can hold their own when it comes to P25 .. no better or worse than anything else out there. I think that you have pretty much already found that out.
 
Last edited:

firemantom26

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Aug 5, 2005
Messages
1,218
Location
Wintersville Ohio
Thank you for your advice I didn't want to go out and spend another $500 and pretty much have the same results


Sent from my iPhone 6 using Tapatalk
 

SCPD

QRT
Joined
Feb 24, 2001
Messages
0
Location
Virginia
Thank you for your advice I didn't want to go out and spend another $500 and pretty much have the same results
Sent from my iPhone 6 using Tapatalk

Best $500 you didn't spend ..

Until there is some sort of revolution in P25 decoding (ie fixing LSM issues) you can pretty much assume that they are all very much the same.

It comes down to the bells and whistles .. and brand preference.

The thing, what works great for one will not necessarily work great for another .. the simple truth. You just need to read these forums to see that there is no clear winner when it comes to the digital modes. Analog was so much simpler, and well .. better.
 

firemantom26

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Aug 5, 2005
Messages
1,218
Location
Wintersville Ohio
Best $500 you didn't spend ..

Until there is some sort of revolution in P25 decoding (ie fixing LSM issues) you can pretty much assume that they are all very much the same.

It comes down to the bells and whistles .. and brand preference.

The thing, what works great for one will not necessarily work great for another .. the simple truth. You just need to read these forums to see that there is no clear winner when it comes to the digital modes. Analog was so much simpler, and well .. better.


I agree with you totally. Buying another scanner and spending $500 to find out it works the same is definitely not worth it.


Sent from my iPhone 6 using Tapatalk
 

buddrousa

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 5, 2003
Messages
11,224
Location
Retired 40 Year Firefighter NW Tenn
And a $20 dongle does not count the cost of your computer, monitor, speakers and (the most important part) your time. Several people can not operate a scanner and you think they can operate a SDR. They can not operate a windows computer and you want them to use dos commands. A SDR is not for everyone.
 

mule1075

Member
Feed Provider
Joined
Jan 20, 2003
Messages
3,956
Location
Washington Pennsylvania
And a $20 dongle does not count the cost of your computer, monitor, speakers and (the most important part) your time. Several people can not operate a scanner and you think they can operate a SDR. They can not operate a windows computer and you want them to use dos commands. A SDR is not for everyone.
Yup all of us are stupid.You are the best.Get off your high horse.

Sent from my Z750C using Tapatalk
 
Last edited:

buddrousa

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 5, 2003
Messages
11,224
Location
Retired 40 Year Firefighter NW Tenn
I never said everyone YOU DID I said SEVERAL. Facts are if you can not operate a scanner you can not operate a SDR. The scanner industry is way past crystal scanners that you plug a crystal in a slot and turn it on and off. Giving up after the scanner fails due to user error then blame it on Whistler or Uniden is not fair. Blaming the limitations of FAT32 on Whistler or Uniden when you have been told the problem is not fair either. If you read my first post you will see a fair answer to the OP question. The question was ask about 2 scanners nothing else.
 

dmaria

Member
Joined
May 24, 2010
Messages
295
And a $20 dongle does not count the cost of your computer, monitor, speakers and (the most important part) your time. Several people can not operate a scanner and you think they can operate a SDR. They can not operate a windows computer and you want them to use dos commands. A SDR is not for everyone.

If you can't count the cost of the computer, then just how do YOU update the scanner?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top