Old4rd said:
Just curious where you ran it... I spent about half of my time in Swartz Creek along 69, then got off 69 near the Red Cross building and it was a very noticeable improvement.
Dsp 1.3: Reports Only
- Thread starter rdale
- Start date
- Status
Just curious where you ran it... I spent about half of my time in Swartz Creek along 69, then got off 69 near the Red Cross building and it was a very noticeable improvement.
mlevin
Member
I'm noticing decoding on distant C4FM trunked systems in the 800 MHz band. A few systems which I could barely pick up before are now coming in almost the same as my two local digital systems.
Can't wait to take it mobile tommorow.
Can't wait to take it mobile tommorow.
1.3 upgrade
Updated to 1.3 upgrade on both the 96 and 2096 and reception was improved on both,
but now on both radios digital transmissions drop out randamly and at differant times for each radio when they are on side by side, even if they are on the same frequency,one radio will drop out and the other one continues to decode digital transmissions.
This happens while monitering LAPD which is a very active agency,the frequent drop outs are very annoying.Also noticed this on the Orange County CA countywide TRS when on
digital signals,however those signals are improved when not dropping out.
Updated to 1.3 upgrade on both the 96 and 2096 and reception was improved on both,
but now on both radios digital transmissions drop out randamly and at differant times for each radio when they are on side by side, even if they are on the same frequency,one radio will drop out and the other one continues to decode digital transmissions.
This happens while monitering LAPD which is a very active agency,the frequent drop outs are very annoying.Also noticed this on the Orange County CA countywide TRS when on
digital signals,however those signals are improved when not dropping out.
M
mpg0515
Guest
code6 said:
This is the same thing that is happening to me on the CO DTRS. Really annoying I will be going back to 1.2.
mpg0515 said:
I've been trying to figure out how to go back to 1.2 with no success.
I found a way to go to 1.1 but would like to go back 1.2 instead.
There is 1.2 on the RS web site but I can't get it to work.
fmon
Silent Key Jan. 14, 2012
Going back to 1.2 worked ok for me. You'll need to go through each step, to activate the upgrade button.code6 said:
BTW, I then reloaded version 1.3.
From the DSP 1.2 Update instructions (not provided in the 1.3 version):
"Reverting to the factory DSP firmware version
If for any reason you decide that you would like to revert to the original factory DSP version (F1.1), you
may do so by pressing 0, then PGM, then CLEAR, then ENTER during the “Welcome” screen. Note
that this will permanently remove the upgrade from the DSP flash memory. You can reload the upgrade
as many times as you like using the PRO96U12.EXE upgrade utility."
I added this to the PRO-96/2096; Wiki/DSP Upgrade section.
"Reverting to the factory DSP firmware version
If for any reason you decide that you would like to revert to the original factory DSP version (F1.1), you
may do so by pressing 0, then PGM, then CLEAR, then ENTER during the “Welcome” screen. Note
that this will permanently remove the upgrade from the DSP flash memory. You can reload the upgrade
as many times as you like using the PRO96U12.EXE upgrade utility."
I added this to the PRO-96/2096; Wiki/DSP Upgrade section.
Last edited:
been trying to revert to factory setting useing 0,pgm,clear,enter.does not work.
code6 said:
Did you try fmon's method?
fmon: "Going back to 1.2 worked ok for me. You'll need to go through each step, to activate the upgrade button."
DaveIN said:
Yes can not get 1.2 to work either
Are you doing the key sequence when the welcome screen is up?
scnnr
Member
code6 said:
Guy's
Here is the 1.2 DSP version. Just unzip it then double click on it and follow the same proceedures that you did for 1.3 version
Randy
EDIT:
I also have switched back and forth between version 1.2 & 1.3 a few times with no problems.
Last edited:
scnnr
Member
Rob, do you mean pressing the 3 key when the welcome screen comes up to see what version is in for the DSP? If so good point because that is the way that I checked mine after doing the upgrade.rdale said:
Last edited:
fmon
Silent Key Jan. 14, 2012
Dave,DaveIN said:
The pdf provided is the original instructions for upgrading from DSP-APP F1.1 to U1.2, and may still be required if one has never changed to U1.2 in the early Pro-96 scanners. Otherwise, I don't know why Radio Shack provided the pdf again.
EDIT: I don't think the Pro-96 can be reverted to F1.1 once U 1.3 has been installed. Of course, the 2096 never had a F1.1.
Last edited:
fmon
Silent Key Jan. 14, 2012
0.pgm,enter is the correct procedure, however, you need to use the 1.2 exe program to revert back, unless you are reverting back from the first U1.2 upgrade from F1.1 which was in the early Pro-96.code6 said:
fmon said:
Good point. I changed that in the 96/2096 Wiki.
902
Member
I've used it for a couple of days and have been monitoring several systems, including two Wide-Pulse Astro (C4FM, but not P25 spec because they occupy a 25 kHz channel and not a 12.5 kHz channelspace) and one CQPSK system.
Audio on the CQPSK system sounds close to what I hear on my XTS5000. I haven't used the scanner to listen to it before (it's further away from me and I can only hear it in my office, which has an 800 MHz BDA), so I have no frame of comparison.
Now, I could never use the AGC on the C4FM systems. It produced raspy, distorted audio that sounded horrible (to me, at least). Listening to the C4FM systems now, seems like there is less distortion when using the AGC, like the gain was reduced. There seems to be less bass and fuller high-range audio, as well. Using the AGC seems to yield acceptible results. (My Pro-96 wish list: though I'd like to have an adjustment for gain and compression levels and audio equalization accessible in software. This kind of adjustment could be dangerous for the casual user.)
On dropouts - I only notice dropouts in known simulcast overlap areas or in places where the signal level is fairly low. If the GRE product engineers are reading these, can you incorporate a greater degree of hysteresis on the DSP decode? Something that will allow a lower DAQ without dropping out, at least providing the listener with an indication that they are in a marginal area? I suspect these drop-outs, if they were on analog systems, would either be multipath phase distortion fades from simulcast, excessive simulcast overlaps that cannot be corrected because of the number of overlaps or weak signals either due to an increase in noisefloor or just marginal coverage.
I haven't noticed any quantifyable changes in analog reception. I still can't decode DPL 506 through one particular system (although the equipment intended to use it decodes it fine, so it's a non-issue for me). No observable analog magic bullets. No observable changes in sensitivity.
Audio on the CQPSK system sounds close to what I hear on my XTS5000. I haven't used the scanner to listen to it before (it's further away from me and I can only hear it in my office, which has an 800 MHz BDA), so I have no frame of comparison.
Now, I could never use the AGC on the C4FM systems. It produced raspy, distorted audio that sounded horrible (to me, at least). Listening to the C4FM systems now, seems like there is less distortion when using the AGC, like the gain was reduced. There seems to be less bass and fuller high-range audio, as well. Using the AGC seems to yield acceptible results. (My Pro-96 wish list: though I'd like to have an adjustment for gain and compression levels and audio equalization accessible in software. This kind of adjustment could be dangerous for the casual user.)
On dropouts - I only notice dropouts in known simulcast overlap areas or in places where the signal level is fairly low. If the GRE product engineers are reading these, can you incorporate a greater degree of hysteresis on the DSP decode? Something that will allow a lower DAQ without dropping out, at least providing the listener with an indication that they are in a marginal area? I suspect these drop-outs, if they were on analog systems, would either be multipath phase distortion fades from simulcast, excessive simulcast overlaps that cannot be corrected because of the number of overlaps or weak signals either due to an increase in noisefloor or just marginal coverage.
I haven't noticed any quantifyable changes in analog reception. I still can't decode DPL 506 through one particular system (although the equipment intended to use it decodes it fine, so it's a non-issue for me). No observable analog magic bullets. No observable changes in sensitivity.
xusmarine1979
Active Member
I upgraded a few days ago and have noticed better audio for digital. The main system I have trouble with due to distance is Akron/Summit's TRS. Now it seems that it doesn't "drop" or break up as much as before.
Has anybody found out what areas the 1.3 upgrade covers?
Has anybody found out what areas the 1.3 upgrade covers?
- Status
Similar threads
