436 vs 536 Receive performance..

Status
Not open for further replies.

Rescue1

Member
Joined
Oct 4, 2003
Messages
46
Location
South Jersey
Hello all,

I recently had the opportunity to program and learn how to use the BCD436 for a friend. It was a steep learning curve but I mostly figured it all out. I currently have a GRE PSR-500 and have been running it since 2009. I can say the receive performance on the 436 was unmeasurably better and couldn't believe how much traffic I was missing, not to mention all the Phase 2 systems popping up in my area so it's time to upgrade..

I also purchased the ARC536 PRO to assist in programming. As a side note I am not impressed with this software nor it's ridiculous price. I do like the Proscan for virtual control way better, but I digress..

To the point, I am torn between the 436 and 536. I know the basic answer is weather or not one wants portable or mobile, so I will figure that all out. However I was curious if they both perform the same or if the 536 has better performance. Any help would be appreciated..
 

marksmith

Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2007
Messages
4,128
Location
Anne Arundel County, MD
They both perform about the same. Also, forget using ARC software in either radio. The Sentinel software is made specific for the radios, costs nothing, and can do anything any other software can do once you learn it.

Mark
WS1095/536/436/996P2/HP1e/HP2e/996XT/325P2/396XT/PRO668/PSR800/PRO652
 

buddrousa

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 5, 2003
Messages
6,114
Location
NW Tenn
I will also say that putting my 436 and 536 on my combiner they both hear the same as they are programmed the same.
 

tglendye

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jun 15, 2002
Messages
1,689
Location
Virginia
I only have 436, but I have programmed three 536's for people. I agree that as long as you have the two programmed the same, they are essentially the same- at least on digital systems.

If you are planning on monitoring a lot of analog (especially UHF), I believe the 536 audio is better. The 436 has sub-par sound on analog transmissions, in my opinion. I haven't listened to a lot of UHF transmissions on the 536, but the traffic I have heard seems as decent as any other scanner. The digital audio on both, however is impressive.

Also... I agree about the impressions of the software. ARC is difficult and expensive. Sentinel is difficult as well, but you'll need it for firmware and database updates. So you may as well stick with Sentinel. Once you learn it, it is not so bad.
 

Rescue1

Member
Joined
Oct 4, 2003
Messages
46
Location
South Jersey
Thanks everyone.. While I think the 536 would look better in my stack, the exta $100 bucks, same receiver performance(per what you are saying) and the few times I may actually take it with me I think I will stick with the 436. Your advice was helpful..

And yes, I got the sentinel software and figured I would be able to do more with the ARC, as I'd rather manually program a system in being old school and anal about how things are named. But it really is overpriced Netherlands crapware, super disappointed..

All I can tell ya is after having my friends scanner for a few weeks, it's hard being without it. So definitely gonna hit up the local HRO this week... :)
 

captainmax1

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Dec 28, 2010
Messages
484
Location
Florida Keys
I also have both the 436 and 536. They work the same if programmed the same. Just have to figure out if you want a handheld or mobile. I don't have any of the reception problems with my 436 that other people have reported. I am very happy with my 436 and 3 536 scanners. You will not go wrong with either version.
 

MStep

Member
Joined
May 2, 2005
Messages
1,164
Location
New York City
I like the WiFi connectivity of the 536. But the 536 audio tends to be a bit bassy, especially on some of the digital modes, giving the audio a somewhat muffled sound.

While the 436 omits the WiFi capability, and some might complain that it has a "flat" sound of some channels. the smaller speaker seems to make it clearer and easier to listen to in some of the digital modes.

Nevertheless, both great radios.
 

buddrousa

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 5, 2003
Messages
6,114
Location
NW Tenn
Not true I have the inputs going into a PC running Proscan and my 536 is more bassy than my 996p2's all mixed on the PC out speakers.
 

marksmith

Member
Joined
Jun 20, 2007
Messages
4,128
Location
Anne Arundel County, MD
Thanks everyone.. While I think the 536 would look better in my stack, the exta $100 bucks, same receiver performance(per what you are saying) and the few times I may actually take it with me I think I will stick with the 436. Your advice was helpful..

And yes, I got the sentinel software and figured I would be able to do more with the ARC, as I'd rather manually program a system in being old school and anal about how things are named. But it really is overpriced Netherlands crapware, super disappointed..

All I can tell ya is after having my friends scanner for a few weeks, it's hard being without it. So definitely gonna hit up the local HRO this week... :)
Sentinel will do anything manual that you want to program in the x36 radios. Once you build a favorites list, you can manually make any kind of changes you want and have it scan exactly what you want to hear. Only when using the Full Database (zip code nonsense, etc) are you limited with changes.

As someone who has used both radios and the HP1 and HP2 radios based on the same concept, you will quickly learn that the full database is just something to draw on to build your own favorites lists to scan, or for using with a gps while traveling. You will mainly use your own lists, customized however you want.

Sent from my LG-V410 using Tapatalk
 

Rescue1

Member
Joined
Oct 4, 2003
Messages
46
Location
South Jersey
I ended up ordering the 436 and made a spot for it on the bench. The audio will go through my PC where the GRE scanner is currently hooked up, so the the tiny speaker won't be an issue. I figured even though there will be few times it leaves the bench, I'll be happy when I can.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top