Digital scanners from 2018 and on

[Joe1123]

Will be getting a digital scanner in the near future, probably Uniden SDS 100 or the new Whistler TRX 100 or 200 when it comes out.
All I can say is, I sure hope they've improved the reception on these things (P25 1 and 2 in particular).
I listen online now and it often sounds like garbage. Like listening to a cell phone call ... all watery and processed if you know what I mean. Seems like I'm straining half the time to make out what was said. ... Never had that problem with analog, it was a joy to listen to.
Sure hope things are better now that this technology has been out there for quite a while. I'd hate to think I'm dropping $700 or so on a scanner I can only understand half the time.
Please share your opinions.

 

[iMONITOR]

Don't be the first kid on the block to run out and buy one. Wait until you read some reviews and see more real life demonstrations. There will likely be numerous firmware updates when it's fist released. Again, wait until the dust settles and all the bugs are worked out.

 

[troymail]

I suspect both Uniden and Whistler have made significant improvements in simulcast reception... Unication already handles simulcast without nearly no problems.

Having said that - for those of us long time analog listeners - including the actual system users - it does take time for your ear (and mind) to adjust to listening to digital transmissions. It is kinda like listening to police transmissions for the first time - lots of lingo and 10 codes - but eventually, you understand what is going on even without trying....

Now to show my age - way back when, I remember an episode of Adam-12 where the guys had a ride-along in their patrol car.... the ride-along at some point said "how can you hear what they are saying on that radio with the volume so low".... they explained that it is something you just get used to over time... so, it's kinda like that --

...and...

Don't be the first kid on the block to run out and buy one. Wait until you read some reviews and see more real life demonstrations. There will likely be numerous firmware updates when it's fist released. Again, wait until the dust settles and all the bugs are worked out.

+1

 

[buddrousa]

Dear Joe Commercial radios tend to sound like the scanners some what. Cell Phones sound a little different but there is another whole thread on that. You can read that here https://forums.radioreference.com/i...-i-dont-understand-entirety-lmr-2way-p25.html

 

[smason]

I listen online now and it often sounds like garbage. Like listening to a cell phone call ... all watery and processed if you know what I mean.

I think you'll find that listening to a scanner directly is much better than listening to a feed. Even my old GRE-PSR600 sounds just fine on P25, but not near as good when I listen remotely, as the extra A/D conversion and compression do take a toll on the audio quality,

 

[jonwienke]

I listen online now and it often sounds like garbage. Like listening to a cell phone call ... all watery and processed if you know what I mean. Seems like I'm straining half the time to make out what was said. ... Never had that problem with analog, it was a joy to listen to.

Listen to the audio clips here:
https://1drv.ms/f/s!ApJIS-l4xqPtgvA4E_M7dXge1rQjIw

Most are digital P25 or DMR, but one is analog FM. The digital recordings are direct digital, no analog conversion between the transmitter and the file. They are as good of audio quality as the digital radio format allows.

The Dauphin County bus clips are DMR. The clip of the guy talking about Sharpsburg and his butt is analog. The rest are P25.

 

[UPMan]

Digital will inherently have some odd audio artifacts any time there is background noise on the transmitter side (wind noise, traffic noise, etc) as the encoding algorithms prioritize quality digital reproduction to the voice element of the transmission. With some kinds of noise, it is difficult to differentiate the noise from the voice and so the original audio will be imperfectly encoded and thus imperfectly rendered on the receiver. "Watery" is a good way to describe the result. In the best recordings, if you listen for the background noise, you can almost always discern this effect even when the voice is perfectly rendered. Some people are more highly attuned to the totality of the audio and are bothered by the background wah-wah. But, it is something you get used to.

 

[Joe1123]

.. But, it is something you get used to.

See, that's where my problem is. It's 2018, and I had scanners in 1975 that sounded better. I realize that we're not going back to analog. But you would think technology would make things better, not worse ,,, especially when the prices have gone out of sight.

 

[jonwienke]

It's not the scanner, it's just the way digital works.

You don't have the noise and static of analog, but you do have artifacting under some conditions. And digital uses a fraction of the bandwidth of analog, which is why digital is never going to go away.

Did you listen to any of my audio clips?

 

[Joe1123]

Yeah, I know ... I just miss the analog I guess. I did listen to the clips .. I just hope listening to scanner directly is better than online and that the new ones are somewhat improved (audio quality wise).

 

[buddrousa]

Joe did you go to the link I posted that goes into detail of digital LMR.

 

[jonwienke]

Yeah, I know ... I just miss the analog I guess. I did listen to the clips .. I just hope listening to scanner directly is better than online and that the new ones are somewhat improved (audio quality wise).

The clips represent what you will hear listening directly.

 

[radio3353]

Listening to a scanner through a powered communications speaker is the way to go. The 3" or less speaker and minuscule audio amp in a scanner is not going to produce good quality (think transistor radio from the 60's if you are old enough.) Yes, it is subjective. Some will say the audio quality of their scanner is great. They just don't have anything to compare it to, like a commercial radio or a good communications speaker.The audio clips posted earlier would drive me nuts over time. I like quality.

 

[scannersnstuff]

I think that digital <phase II> actually sound's better than analog. I do have to do a lower volume offset, on some channel's.