BCD536HP discriminator tap/DSD+

[AA6IO]

Thanks to Rich, N9JIG, who posted several months back about discriminator taps for the 536HP only a few days after receiving his scanner. Well I decided to tap one of my 536HPs today (Uniden will know which one if I have to send it in for anything, and I'm sure, tell me it is no longer under warranty. C'est la vie. I have one other 536HP right now that will be under warranty. Some of you may think I'm nuts.).
Anyway, the discriminator tap seems to be working well. About the same as my tap on one of my 996XTs and the IF output from my 1080. Better than I can get with RTL dongles and SDRSharp raw audio. Working well with DSD+ right now decoding P25 and NXDN here in Los Angeles.
Now to my point, the 536HP "native" P25 decoding of the LAPD and LA ICIS P25 audio is much better than that with DSD+. On the stronger stations or TGs, the P25 decoding via the tap/DSD+ is quite good, but the 536HP native decoding sounds better. However, for weaker channels, DSD+ is floundering with errors, lousy decode, while the 536HP native decode is still very good.
This mirrors my experience with the 436HP/536HP vs. all my other scanners listed below. When the going gets rough, the x36HPs do the best job of digital decoding for me here in the Los Angeles area. Yes, the GRE/RS/WS1080 sound a bit better (more treble), but on the weaker ones, the x36HPs pull/decode stuff that the others cannot. I have been using the HP2 for a couple of weeks. The P25 is pretty good, but again, in the weak signal cases, my x36HPs do better.
Thought I would post this, because here is an example, at least in my experience, where the P25 decode from the 536HP is better than with DSD+ using the discriminator audio of the 536HP.

Steve AA6IO

 

[n3617400]

try adcr25,it could change your concept of good decoding

 

[AA6IO]

n3617400
I did not even know of that program. Will give it a try.
Steve AA6IO

 

[AA6IO]

Spoke to soon, I see it is a standalone unit. Looks interesting.
Steve

 

[n3617400]

hm, it's not program, it's trunk radio/scanner with support apco25, mototrbo.

The P25 is pretty good, but again, in the weak signal cases, my x36HPs do better.

ADCR25 vs WinRADIO G305e. APCO25 sensetivity test. - YouTube
very sensitive when receiving weak signals.

 

[tsalmrsystemtech]

Thanks to Rich, N9JIG, who posted several months back about discriminator taps for the 536HP only a few days after receiving his scanner. Well I decided to tap one of my 536HPs today (Uniden will know which one if I have to send it in for anything, and I'm sure, tell me it is no longer under warranty. C'est la vie. I have one other 536HP right now that will be under warranty. Some of you may think I'm nuts.).
Anyway, the discriminator tap seems to be working well. About the same as my tap on one of my 996XTs and the IF output from my 1080. Better than I can get with RTL dongles and SDRSharp raw audio. Working well with DSD+ right now decoding P25 and NXDN here in Los Angeles.
Now to my point, the 536HP "native" P25 decoding of the LAPD and LA ICIS P25 audio is much better than that with DSD+. On the stronger stations or TGs, the P25 decoding via the tap/DSD+ is quite good, but the 536HP native decoding sounds better. However, for weaker channels, DSD+ is floundering with errors, lousy decode, while the 536HP native decode is still very good.
This mirrors my experience with the 436HP/536HP vs. all my other scanners listed below. When the going gets rough, the x36HPs do the best job of digital decoding for me here in the Los Angeles area. Yes, the GRE/RS/WS1080 sound a bit better (more treble), but on the weaker ones, the x36HPs pull/decode stuff that the others cannot. I have been using the HP2 for a couple of weeks. The P25 is pretty good, but again, in the weak signal cases, my x36HPs do better.
Thought I would post this, because here is an example, at least in my experience, where the P25 decode from the 536HP is better than with DSD+ using the discriminator audio of the 536HP.

Steve AA6IO

I have been trying for months off and on with my 20 dollar SDR dongle I bought to test and work with. I found it really difficult to fine tune the software and to get it to work right. I guess if I want to listen to FM stereo on my laptop then it works great. I was trying to decode paging with PDW paging decode software and I could get it working 10 percent of the time and it would drop for whatever reasons.

I said screw it. I went to radio shack and spent about 6 bucks and opened up my BCT15X since this scanner was a 150.00 bucks and spent about 30 minutes and made a tap on the discriminator and bingo the PDW software worked instant. No configuration. Ran the audio cable right to my sound card and ran the software all night long with a 100 percent success. No drops or anything. This is the only true way to get the raw baseband audio. If you are hearing a hissing sound from a pair of earbuds then you are right on the money with your solder job.

 

[Voyager]

Your problem was likely with the virtual audio cable.

 

[tsalmrsystemtech]

Your problem was likely with the virtual audio cable.

Actually it was not the virtual audio cable. I was able to decode some other paging frequencies at about 70 percent accuracy but the one I wanted I tried to weeks to tweak the software and the SDR and no luck. Once I tapped the discriminator on my radio it was a clean fix. I get a 100 percent with the clean baseband audio right from the radio. It was a fun learning experience too. I think every high end scanner should have it already tapped.

I figured I would tap the 150.00 dollar radio instead of the 600 dollar radio. I am really happy I finally digested and researched on how to open the radio and tap the radio. A lot of reading and studying up before attempting. I recommend this to all people that are using 3rd party software paging software or DSD+