mlevin
Member
Well if you had it your way what do you think SOUNDS better, analog or digital.
-
To anyone looking to acquire commercial radio programming software:
Please do not make requests for copies of radio programming software which is sold (or was sold) by the manufacturer for any monetary value. All requests will be deleted and a forum infraction issued. Making a request such as this is attempting to engage in software piracy and this forum cannot be involved or associated with this activity. The same goes for any private transaction via Private Message. Even if you attempt to engage in this activity in PM's we will still enforce the forum rules. Your PM's are not private and the administration has the right to read them if there's a hint to criminal activity.
If you are having trouble legally obtaining software please state so. We do not want any hurt feelings when your vague post is mistaken for a free request. It is YOUR responsibility to properly word your request.
To obtain Motorola software see the Sticky in the Motorola forum.
The various other vendors often permit their dealers to sell the software online (i.e., Kenwood). Please use Google or some other search engine to find a dealer that sells the software. Typically each series or individual radio requires its own software package. Often the Kenwood software is less than $100 so don't be a cheapskate; just purchase it.
For M/A Com/Harris/GE, etc: there are two software packages that program all current and past radios. One package is for conventional programming and the other for trunked programming. The trunked package is in upwards of $2,500. The conventional package is more reasonable though is still several hundred dollars. The benefit is you do not need multiple versions for each radio (unlike Motorola).
This is a large and very visible forum. We cannot jeopardize the ability to provide the RadioReference services by allowing this activity to occur. Please respect this.
Analog or Digital
- Thread starter mlevin
- Start date
- Status
By default anything that converts audio to a digital format and back to audio has to lose something, so there's no way it can sound as good as it started.
MLEVIN
To answer your question has you asked it. Definatly Digital is more clear, but however to very honest the "digital sucks" must just be a tower issue or something, but in general the digital is more clear with no static. Sometimes though it is a relief to get back to the analog system and be able to hear them!
Digital voice-clear no static
Analog voice-clear but will have static depending on where you are in ref to the tower.
just my 2 cent worth!
Eric-KB8UYC
http://www.groups.yahoo.com/group/michigantrunktracking2003
To answer your question has you asked it. Definatly Digital is more clear, but however to very honest the "digital sucks" must just be a tower issue or something, but in general the digital is more clear with no static. Sometimes though it is a relief to get back to the analog system and be able to hear them!
Digital voice-clear no static
Analog voice-clear but will have static depending on where you are in ref to the tower.
just my 2 cent worth!
Eric-KB8UYC
http://www.groups.yahoo.com/group/michigantrunktracking2003
mlevin
Member
I personally like a well constructed analog system better. I just like the good old classic radio sound. If the system has good coverage, and enough RF energy to take care of most of the cell phone interference, then you don't have a big problem with static.
On the other hand it's nice to have no crackling but it doesn't mean that there's good coverage, you just don't get any breaking up until the voice cuts out completely. It's also nice to have alot more audio power on digital systems. But the background noise sounds really funky on the digital stuff.
My point is that I like both, but I prefer analog.
On the other hand it's nice to have no crackling but it doesn't mean that there's good coverage, you just don't get any breaking up until the voice cuts out completely. It's also nice to have alot more audio power on digital systems. But the background noise sounds really funky on the digital stuff.
My point is that I like both, but I prefer analog.
LarrySC
Member
The Palmetto 800 system in SC has some departments with both analog and digital channels. I've heard both. The digital is THE BEST. On analog comms you have to listen harder to hear the traffic.
Given the right amount of bandwidth digital would sound a lot better (Compare CDMA to IMBE for example) but IMO analog is best with what LMR technology and FCC constraints we currently have. With analog you don't have issues with background noise (ie., wind), you can still get something from scratchy comms, you can use DTMF tones over the air, and it's ultimately the best for interagency communication since analog radios are cheaper and more available.
Regardless of APCO-25 being an open standard you still have the cost issues, availability, and maintenance personel that aren't adept with configuration.
-Wayne
Regardless of APCO-25 being an open standard you still have the cost issues, availability, and maintenance personel that aren't adept with configuration.
-Wayne
- Status
Similar threads
BCD325P2/BCD996P2:
BCD325P2 scanning digital and analog