i've been watching this closely myself -- personally, i'm inclined to give the benefit of the doubt with regard to it being the holiday season so although UPMan has responded to other forum threads in the meantime without responding here, i'm still not ready to say we're being ignored. now, if it goes much longer without reply then i'd get very concerned. i'm hoping we hear something in the next day or so now that the holidays are over.
396XT with decode errors
- Thread starter W6KRU
- Start date
- Status
slicerwizard
Member
When no fix is forthcoming for some dumb hardware/firmware flaw, Paul's response is to ignore the poster/thread. So it looks like you have your answer.
*Maybe* Uniden is working on a fix (for the small percentage who have problems) but doesnt want to announce it right now untill its released/proved working/sucessfull etc. Why announce thier intentions on RR thread then find it doesnt work, or doesnt get released for a while etc...
Uniden (UpMan) clearly states they/he does NOT comment on what is in the works.
I have NO problems with the XT scanners at all, I think they are fantasic scanners. I hope uniden keeps everything EXACTLY the same in terms of digital decode, size (form factor) and everything just adds more features (TDMA) to the next series of scanners 396XTDMA and 996XTDMA =).
The 996XT decodes AMAZING for me in auto mode right out of the box... Im scared they will change it, I want it kept exactly as is.
So you dont speak for "ALL OF THE XT OWNERS" ...only a very small percentage.
Uniden (UpMan) clearly states they/he does NOT comment on what is in the works.
I have NO problems with the XT scanners at all, I think they are fantasic scanners. I hope uniden keeps everything EXACTLY the same in terms of digital decode, size (form factor) and everything just adds more features (TDMA) to the next series of scanners 396XTDMA and 996XTDMA =).
The 996XT decodes AMAZING for me in auto mode right out of the box... Im scared they will change it, I want it kept exactly as is.
So you dont speak for "ALL OF THE XT OWNERS" ...only a very small percentage.
I'm thinking the predicament is with systems that have multiple/simulcasting sites. The scanners are "hearing" two or more transmitters at the same time, and is having trouble with the bit error rate correction. There is some correcting of this through adjustments, but not enough. It's kind of like there is a "receive echo" that the scanner cannot handle.
Here in Louisville we have such a system. Owing to where I am, the scanner performs really well, or very poorly. It can be just a matter of a couple of yards. I can hear just fine in one place, but move down road 100 yards and the sound is very garbled.
I'm sure Uniden is well aware of this situation - there have been several posts about this over many months. I suspect this is something that the less expensive scanner hardware just can't seem to overcome with respect to an actual system radio which is much more costly than a scanner.
One thing I found is that when I use an older scanner, a 396T versus my newer 396XT, is the problem isn't as severe. I'm sorta thinking as time has gone along, the receive has deteriorated some and, oddly enough, that's an improvement in reception. So perhaps trying to go the route of decreasing the reception, such as through a poor antenna, may be somewhat of a solution.
Here in Louisville we have such a system. Owing to where I am, the scanner performs really well, or very poorly. It can be just a matter of a couple of yards. I can hear just fine in one place, but move down road 100 yards and the sound is very garbled.
I'm sure Uniden is well aware of this situation - there have been several posts about this over many months. I suspect this is something that the less expensive scanner hardware just can't seem to overcome with respect to an actual system radio which is much more costly than a scanner.
One thing I found is that when I use an older scanner, a 396T versus my newer 396XT, is the problem isn't as severe. I'm sorta thinking as time has gone along, the receive has deteriorated some and, oddly enough, that's an improvement in reception. So perhaps trying to go the route of decreasing the reception, such as through a poor antenna, may be somewhat of a solution.
Last edited:
this is exactly it -- the scanner works flawlessly on "normal" systems, but if you're trying to tune in a simulcast site with multiple locations then all you get is a garbled choppy mess.
this reply details extensive testing comparing the -T vs -XT scanners side by side and finds that the missing "magic" is with the ability to manually adjust the p25 settings. if you setup the -T on auto it sounds as bad as an -XT on these simulcast systems, but if you put the -T on manual you can get it to sound just fine, an option lacking for the -XT's.
regarding reply #43 above :
nobody is advocating CHANGING anything with respect to the auto settings out of the box, we're simply lamenting the omission of the ability to make manual adjustments which would help on these simulcast systems.
Fair enough Kris. I implied that all XT owners are having problems and I realize that is not the case. I am not asking for a change that would effect the people who are not experiencing problems. There are some of us that are monitoring simulcast systems who do have bad problems and do need a change. I have P25 error rates over 50 and I assure that an error rate over 50 causes audio that is complete garbage.
The change I am asking for would give those of us who do have simulcast problems a chance at good audio like the rest of you who do not have a simulcast problem.
As I have stated before, my 396T has garbage audio under the same conditions if I set the the P25 threshold to automatic adjustment. If I set the 396T to manual adjustment and a setting of 11, the audio gets a lot better. That is what I want for my 396XT. A simple replacement of the manual P25 threshold adjustment on the XTs as it exists on the T models. People who like the current performance of their XT can continue to use them as they currently are.
I think about a month ago waaaay back in this thread "Paul" announced there were "NO" plans for a upgrade to the "XT" model scanners....Im positive i read that.....Also he did say there "hardware" did "NOT" support any type TDMA.....They are upgrading the HP-1 to be able to process X2-TDMA on 1/6/2012 so personally i would look in the future as more TDMA systems come on line for a new model H/H-Base to be released with a key pad and upgrade to decoding multi-site systems....One of the towers here on IL-Starcom digital system just went from 3 sites to six and now is totally confusing my 996XT decoding....Im seeing "err-40-60 and its choosing decoding 11-13 when it should be 7-8.....
scanningisfun
Member
- Joined
- Jun 29, 2010
- Messages
- 689
- Reaction score
- 9
He did not say anything about adding any form of TDMA decoding.
New Firmware On the Way
19. Add P25 X2 TDMA systems in HPDB to receive some FDMA Talkgroups. Add "System Info" of P25 X2 TDMA. (Note: This will not enable the HP-1 to receive channels using 2-slot TDMA signalling...only the "Phase 1" type channels that sometimes occur on this kind of system.)
scannersnstuff
Active Member
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2006
- Messages
- 1,982
- Reaction score
- 239
the future ain't looking bright. even marshall hasn't jumped to unidens defense yet. i got the same response when i inquired about the correct step size in the upcoming bc125at. NO RESPONSE ! .
That is correct. What Paul did say in one post was that the HP-1(e) did not have the needed hardware to implement any form of TDMA decoding so it will never be possible to add that feature through firmware period.
Maybe they will look into a SDR format in the future so new features could be added provided the controlling computer has the needed horsepower under the hood.
Right now it is kind of like when DVD players for computers were introduced. In the early days, you needed either a very modern computer that could handle the DVD conversion for smooth video playback or you needed a dedicated card that handled the conversion via a special processor on the card. Kind of like the old days when you could add the math coprocessor! Todays machines do not need that card as they can do the conversion in software and existing hardware.
I'd love to see a SDR scanner that handled what the XT or HP series radios can handle. I guess it would be called a SDS though.
I do watch the SDR market with interest but most of it is still geared towards the HF bands.
Regarding torontokris's post, nobody would ever wish that Uniden changed anything that would have a negative effect in the way the XT radios currently work. We only wish they would add the "manual" setting back so that we too can enjoy our XT radios as you do.
What ofd8001 said is dead on. The algorithm in the XT series cannot determine the correct setting so we hear nothing or garbled audio. My XT's work great with standard single site systems also, but throw a multi tower simulcast site at it and it chokes big time. It becomes confused and can no longer “decide for itself”, what setting should be used. Us users with the problem only wish Uniden would bring the manual setting back so we can enable it for the trouble systems and again enjoy or expensive scanners.
I think this is a very fair request. Your XT would still work as it does today as you could leave it on auto as it is now.
Just bring back the manual setting for those that need it is all we are asking. Heck torontokris, you do not need to take the upgrade if you were worried about it messing things up. If I'm not mistaken, I'm pretty sure the T series did not have a manual setting when they were first released.
I think Uniden released a firmware at a later date that offered the manual setting as they knew the auto setting was not working out.
The manual setting was a blessing for those with the older T models.
Then the new and improved XT comes out but without the manual setting again just like the T was released. Did it work? Yes, for some it did but NO for others that monitor simulcast systems.
There are some users that monitor a simulcast system with an XT series just fine. I'd put money on the fact that those users either live very near one tower that drowns out the other towers or the other towers signals are blocked by a tall building between them and their XT scanner.
I do not have that luxury. I live in the county an equal distance from two of the towers so my XT will receive the signal from both. That confuses it as the two signals are not exactly the same so the algorithm used cannot determine what to lock onto and I hear – mostly nothing. You can see this when you switch the display so you can see the decode error rate. The P25 level just bounces all over the place and usually settles on a setting that is just the opposite of what it needs for good reception. Had it had the manual setting, the setting would stay on the one YOU the user selected as you know it is the one that works.
For some things, there is nothing better than letting the human brain make the choice and the P25 setting is no exception.
It should be able to be set manually, if needed, by the end user just as it was with the T series models.
I myself am fortunate to have a Yagi beam that I can aim towards just one of the towers and only then is the signal strong enough to drown out the other tower and allow the auto setting to semi work as it should. Many users do not have that luxury however and either live with crappy reception or go out and purchase the competition.
I would not give up my XT's or HP-1 for anything though. When they work, they work fantastic and I love them.
Now, if restoring the Manual setting in the XT's is even possible is anyone’s guess so we all hope for word from Paul that it can or can't be done.
Who knows, maybe the firmware in the XT is occupying all the eeprom space and there is no room left to add the manual routine back in the space. It would still be nice to get an official word on this as it is a very real problem for many.
How many XT owners are out there that have no idea this website exists.
Pretty much all the features that were included in the T models carried over to the XT models as well as some very nice newly added features. I think the only feature that did not carry over was the manual P25 adjust setting per system. I would have thought Uniden would have learned from the same mistake with the T models when the XT's were introduced but I guess they were very confident in that the Auto setting would now work just peachy. I hate to say it but it does not work worth a darn on simulcast P25 sites unless you happen to live under the umbrella of just one of a simulcast sites transmitters.
Highpockets
Member
They also took out the 3-4 second delay from the XT models that was in the T model and others.
There ya go, that is one I forgot about. I loved the longer delay now that you brought it up. I don't notice it gone though as I've been dedicating a radio for the channel that the longer delay was a benefit.
I wonder why something harmless like that was removed?
I'm curious why any feature like that would be removed?
Is it a memory issue? Does a simple setting like that actually take up enough memory to require it's removal (in order for Uniden to include what it considers more important settings)?
Is it a memory issue? Does a simple setting like that actually take up enough memory to require it's removal (in order for Uniden to include what it considers more important settings)?
scannersnstuff
Active Member
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2006
- Messages
- 1,982
- Reaction score
- 239
here is the situation as i see it. since the 396xt is probably close to the end of it's life cycle anyway, i doubt if uniden is going to put any more time or effort into improving it. they just want to get rid of what they have left. then they say "here is the new improved uniden xxxxxxt". hopefully they will put some time and effort into correcting what was wrong with the last one. this way, shmucks like me keep buying the thing's.
then we'll all have something new to complain about. i do have to say that i've been pretty happy with my bcd396xt. i don't monitor any simulcast systems though. as my friend say's, "alway's looking for the next ex.". i'm alway's looking for the next ex. scanner.
then we'll all have something new to complain about. i do have to say that i've been pretty happy with my bcd396xt. i don't monitor any simulcast systems though. as my friend say's, "alway's looking for the next ex.". i'm alway's looking for the next ex. scanner.
Last edited by a moderator:
Post #50 by "Kruser" says it all, i hope someone from Uniden can make good use of the info....
The funny thing is, when they released the XT, They added new features but never transferred over the fixes from the T line. That is the scary thing about it. I don't think the HP-1 even has a manual adjustment as well. Paul has not chimed in at all, which is troubling. It's like calling customer service, telling them your problem "In great detail I might add" and they just hang up the phone. I just don't get it? I have always loved Uniden scanners. I have never bought the competition, But I must admit, this is BAD BUSINESS. Uniden, Paul, please do not ignore your loyal customers, Think Netflix
Well said Kruser... maybe there is a chance for a manual P25 setting on the XT's for those who are having problems on simulcast sites as it was added to the T version.
I guess Uniden is working on something but it not going to announce it till its proven to work 100%
I guess we wont know till its announced... if it is announced.
UpMan < UnidenMan4 < TWiki
replace the words new scanner.. with manual settings fix/firmware update etc
I guess Uniden is working on something but it not going to announce it till its proven to work 100%
I guess we wont know till its announced... if it is announced.
UpMan < UnidenMan4 < TWiki
replace the words new scanner.. with manual settings fix/firmware update etc
scannersnstuff
Active Member
- Joined
- Mar 31, 2006
- Messages
- 1,982
- Reaction score
- 239
I guess Uniden is working on something but it not going to announce it till its proven to work 100%
although i respect your opinion. ha,ha,ha,ha.........ha. roflamo.......
although i respect your opinion. ha,ha,ha,ha.........ha. roflamo.......
scanningisfun
Member
- Joined
- Jun 29, 2010
- Messages
- 689
- Reaction score
- 9
People say they want a new scanner because of P25 Phase 2/TDMA. People say firmware update because something needs to be done about the distortion that the scanner puts out when attempting to decode CQPSK/LSM. In Illinois, there is a statewide system named Starcom 21 which is maintained by Motorola. In St. Clair County, there are multiple towers which 'simulcast' using CQPSK. When I got my scanner a while back and turned it on I thought something was wrong with it or I wasn't doing something right because the TGID's I had programmed were coming up and the scanner was completely silent. I figured I needed to use the P25 threshold adjustment but it still didn't work. The numbers were going bizzerk. It did sound reasonable when the setting was at level 7 but there was no way for me to get it to stay there. I tried turning on the site attenuator with no luck also. I decided I would use that setting were it keeps the setting at level 8 and deal with some of the decode errors. Here in CT, CSP does not use CQPSK and I have noticed that the audio here is excellent. The auto adjustment here works perfect. I wish I could have demonstrated my scanner to my friends in IL without the the audio going bizzerk. It was especially annoying when there was something going on worth listening to and not being able to understand. The 396XT is a great scanner Uniden, but there has to be something to do about the inability to reliably decode CQPSK. I'm not trying to flame Uniden because of this issue at all. Just saying that it would be great to use the Scanner seamlessly in metropolitan areas were the majority of the simulcast systems are. I hope everyone rests on this issue after reading this post. It seems like this forum is just about problems with scanners and nothing positive. I don't think people should blame Mr. Opitz though because he is not the one that caused the issues to happen in the first place.
Jacob (J-Duncs)
XBL: Pilot135R
Uniden BCD396XT
Radio Shack Pro-79
Last edited:
That's exactly how I feel. Where is Uniden support for this problem? Doesn't Uniden have customer support for their products?
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
