996XT --> 996P2 IF changes?

Status
Not open for further replies.

FeedForward

Member
Joined
Jul 7, 2014
Messages
75
Reaction score
10
Location
Dallas
Haven't been around for some time. About 4 years ago there was a rush to replace the BCDx996XT IF ceramic filter to improve NBFM and AM operation. I wondered if the newer version 996P2 has incorporated the narrower Mu-Rata IF filter, or perhaps changed the design of the IF?

I'm also reading about a discriminator tap modification and would appreciate it if you would point me to that discussion.

Thank you!
Feedforward
 

FeedForward

Member
Joined
Jul 7, 2014
Messages
75
Reaction score
10
Location
Dallas
Interesting how much things change in just a few years. The interest in changing ceramic IF filters in the 996XT was started by Boatanchor, who discovered that a slightly narrower bandpass filter would improve NBFM and AM reception signal/noise.

Mu-Rata has discontinued making 450 KHz bandpass filters and their ceramic filter line is almost entirely limited to 10.7 MHz. This situation suggests that the newer scanners are using DSP filters for the IF. If that is so, the bandpass could easily be changed on the fly to correspond to the signal being received. I guess this approach is now used in all better quality ham receivers also. Anyone familiar with the general design of the 996P2?

I hear a lot of complaining about poor audio during digital decoding. This is typical of the electronics industry to sell a technology based on some irrelevant, imaginary benefit. Remember that fantastic audio quality was the reason for cell phones to transition to digital? Not! The real reason for the change was to fit more signals into a small bandwidth - which is a valid design goal. The goal in both cases is not fantastic audio quality. This is communications radio, not surround sound. Whether it is basically CDMA or TDMA, or some other algorithm, the basic idea is to accommodate more traffic, to implement proprietary channel use, or to provide space for some nearly useless data transmissions, and not to produce recording studio audio. For communications use (i.e. weak signal communications ability), FM is still more reliable and effective. That's the way it is.

FeedForward
 
Last edited:

jonwienke

More Info Coming Soon!
Joined
Jul 18, 2014
Messages
13,409
Reaction score
3,728
Location
VA
I hear a lot of complaining about poor audio during digital decoding. This is typical of the electronics industry to sell a technology based on some irrelevant, imaginary benefit.

Some people don't like the "sound" of digital, but if you actually measure the Total Harmonic Distortion, digital is lower than analog unless the analog signal is very strong. In most cases, digital has less distortion than analog. It's just a different kind of distortion.

For communications use (i.e. weak signal communications ability), FM is still more reliable and effective. That's the way it is.

Not true. Newer receivers can recover bits from weak signals that render as static with analog FM. And inside the fringe, digital can decode 0% error rate in cases where analog FM has annoyingly high levels of static that make it difficult to copy the transmission.
 

vocoder

Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2017
Messages
731
Reaction score
123
Location
Indiana
I followed boatanchors advice on my older scanners awhile ago. Boy did they tighten things up!
Way better audio and cleared up some adjacent frequency noise!
 

milcom_chaser

Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2010
Messages
999
Reaction score
70
We were reading boatanchor's thread as well, and wondering about the filtering scheme used in the 325P2. Is it the same has 536HP? Any ideas, or pics of the RF board for this (325P2) radio?
 

jonwienke

More Info Coming Soon!
Joined
Jul 18, 2014
Messages
13,409
Reaction score
3,728
Location
VA
The 536 receiver design is different than the 325P2.
 

jonwienke

More Info Coming Soon!
Joined
Jul 18, 2014
Messages
13,409
Reaction score
3,728
Location
VA
The x36 units come with true narrowband filters already installed, you don't have to retrofit anything to get them.
 

milcom_chaser

Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2010
Messages
999
Reaction score
70
The x36 units come with true narrowband filters already installed, you don't have to retrofit anything to get them.

Yeah, I get that from reading other threads about filtering of the 536HP...

Perhaps someone will chime in about current filtering in the 325/996P2
 

vocoder

Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2017
Messages
731
Reaction score
123
Location
Indiana
I swapped out my 996p2 and my 325p2 filters to narrow also, same as boatanchor thread. Of coarse, to be expected, the squelch changes a little too. But nothing extreme.

I swapped out a couple of friends with success, too

I dont have pics but it is SMT and you have to be slow and careful with the surgery. The filters are the same that i swapped in the 396xt & 996xt

It is a big reward for the small cost of the filters!

John
 
Last edited:

milcom_chaser

Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2010
Messages
999
Reaction score
70
I swapped out my 996p2 and my 325p2 filters to narrow also, same as boatanchor thread. Of coarse, to be expected, the squelch changes a little too. But nothing extreme.

I swapped out a couple of friends with success, too

I dont have pics but it is SMT and you have to be slow and careful with the surgery. The filters are the same that i swapped in the 396xt & 996xt

It is a big reward for the small cost of the filters!

John

I had wondered if the filter is the same they used in the 396/996XT series. Where did you source your filters, as Murata isn't producing them? And, how is Phase II decoding with the narrower filter?
 

vocoder

Member
Joined
Mar 2, 2017
Messages
731
Reaction score
123
Location
Indiana
I ordered them from chip 1 stop. I try to get all my components here, and they ship fast! Carry alot that are discontinued, cuz of warehousing big qty.
This was a year ago, so hopefully they still have some. But they showed a huge amount then.

Yes, phase 2 sounds better than before i swapped them. It makes the digital systems sound clearer. Some sound like the tower is around the corner.
 
Last edited:

FeedForward

Member
Joined
Jul 7, 2014
Messages
75
Reaction score
10
Location
Dallas
Good work finding the filter. The main Mu-Rata site lists ALL ceramic filters below 2 MHz as obsolete with no replacement. Same with Mouser if you type in the part number. No replacement is a curious situation. Designers have been using 455 KHz IF strips forever...

It is worth a little work to find out which if any of these designs might be using a DSP IF.
FF
 

jonwienke

More Info Coming Soon!
Joined
Jul 18, 2014
Messages
13,409
Reaction score
3,728
Location
VA
The SDS-100 most likely, but not previous models.
 

milcom_chaser

Member
Joined
Jul 4, 2010
Messages
999
Reaction score
70
Good work finding the filter. The main Mu-Rata site lists ALL ceramic filters below 2 MHz as obsolete with no replacement. Same with Mouser if you type in the part number. No replacement is a curious situation. Designers have been using 455 KHz IF strips forever...

Since this part is listed as EOL, and the 325/996P2 is still being produced, one has to wonder where Uniden Japan is sourcing the IF filter for those radios.

It is worth a little work to find out which if any of these designs might be using a DSP IF.
FF

Probably the SDS-100 is centered around SDR.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top