If you have a lot of conventional (non-trunked) P25 agencies that you may want to monitor, then the PSR500 has an edge. The 500 can decode the NAC used on those frequencies, so that you can separate out various agencies and stations on the same channel, as well as cut down interference. TX
DPS uses the same set of frequencies in multiple locations statewide. With the BCD396T, I have to leave the squelch code at "none" for it to catch the ones using digital (not all have converted). Besides the potential for stations to overlap, using CSQ squelch leaves it open to interference from the various electrical devious in my home, vehicle, or office. Besides being able to tag individual sites, using the NAC codes, the interference is also reduced on the 500. As a few of the other agencies in the region are also beginning to migrate to conventional P25, the NAC capability was my primary reason to add a 500 to the collection.
For the systems that I monitor currently, I don't detect any significant difference in digital decode. The only digital TRS that is in close range, Grand Prairie, is behind a ridge line from me. I can monitor it with either scanner, and it sounds about the same: perfectly readable, just a bit of the 'underwater' sound. Uniden is due out with a firmware update in the coming weeks, so digital decode may improve on the 396. I should note that there are no systems in this metro area (at this time) of the type that I've seen generate the most complaints about any of the scanners. There are some new P25 systems coming online soon, but no large scale multi-site or simulcast types that seem to be problematic. The Parker County
system is beginning to show usage, apparently, but out of my range. They have two more sites planned, don't know if that will provide any reception here (doubtful).
The object oriented memory of the 500 is an improvement over the old banks/channels system. However, I prefer Uniden's DMA system for this reason:
On the PSR500, for trunked systems & talkgroup IDs, you have two text tags, that will alternate (the blink on/blink ). So you get the system name (16 characters) alternating with the TGID name (also 16 characters).
On the 396, the memory system is like the 246 & the other DMA scanners. The top line alternates the system name and the group name, while the second line is the TGID text tag. So you have three pieces of information to define what you're hearing.
For conventional frequencies, the difference is more pronounced.
On the 500, the only text tag you've got is the 16 characters for the conventional object itself. The display does, also, show the frequency & PL tone (or DCS or NAC code), but that's all. On the 500, I have to get more creative on the text tags, to squeeze something in.
On the 396, you've still got system name alternating with group name, plus the conv. channel's text tag.
The 500 is more sensitive than the 396, but overloads badly in the metro area if you put too much antenna on it. I've gone back to the stock antenna, & get generally better reception around town than I did with the R/S 800 Mhz whip. Once I get out of town, I do switch to either a whip with more more gain, or a mag mount on my truck. The 396, while less sensitive, rarely overloads unless I'm right next to a cluster of transmitters, & using the R/S 800, hears everything I reasonably expect to receive.
Bottom line, for me, is that there are certain things one scanner does better than the other. Each also has some features the other does not. That's why I ended up with both.
You won't really go wrong with either. Ideally, find someone local that would loan you one for a day or so (maybe buy their lunch or a six-pack).
But the PSR does better P25 decoding and that's what I need right now.
