GRE PSR-500 Post Release Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.

SCPD

QRT
Joined
Feb 24, 2001
Messages
0
Location
Virginia
kevins669 said:
This does not sound too good. My radio comes tomorrow, so I will be able to test it on our 700/800 Mhz simulcast P25 system here in New Orleans... I will be very disappointed if GRE did not get this right. Ok, so this scanner can now trunktrack 700 Mhz... No problem. Why not get this thing working, when there was a big outcry with the Pro-96, resulting in a "fix" (if you could even call it that) with a DSP update? I am really hoping it is not as bad as it is sounding in this thread :(


Again, why should we settle for hearing digital modulation, or nothing at all? I will report my findings tomorrow, but please GRE, get working on a CQPSK solution. Be the leader that you are!

-- Kevin

I think the above "this" sounds great! Please post your reports after some days of listening. What radios will you be comparing against?
 

SCPD

QRT
Joined
Feb 24, 2001
Messages
0
Location
Virginia
troymail said:
Programming software - BC-396 (comes with usable software; PSR500 s/w in development/separate)

I'm hoping some of this may change in the coming days as I do more testing/evaluation (specifically the interference issues)...

Looks like within less than one week after the PSR-500 started to ship, that two very usable PC programs are available that use the included USB cable (and they even convert from the Pro-96 memory to load to the PSR-500).

Makes me wonder what will we see in a month or, maybe by Christmas-time regarding PC support from multiple independent sources.
 

doug408

Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2004
Messages
59
Aircraft band performance

I'd be interested how well others can hear aircraft band (120 MHz or so) frequencies on their PSR-500 compared with other scanner models. I live a few miles from a fairly major airport and have no trouble picking these up clearly on a BC796D with a stock antenna. My PSR-500 has a surprisingly difficult time with the same transmissions on its own stock antenna or when borrowing the BC796D's. It does much better above 150 MHz. (Obviously no antenna or electronics will be optimal for all frequencies.) Playing with attenuation settings does not help. Personally, this is not a major issue, but it may be a lot more important to others, so I'll mention it.
 

mikey60

Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2003
Messages
3,543
Location
Oakland County Michigan
radionut44 said:
Re: PSREdit
It appears that even after a DOWNLOAD from the scanner you cannot view Hit Counts for objects (the count always shows 0) even when there is a count shown in the radio itself. I assume this will be corrected in an update of the software... right Mike? The software seems to do good for all else...but then again I have only had the radio and software working for about 3 hours. Still a lot to learn.

You're not seeing hitcounts? I'm seeing them here. The next version will have them shown on the talkgroup and conventional list screens as well. They're showing up here.

Mike
 

SCPD

QRT
Joined
Feb 24, 2001
Messages
0
Location
Virginia
mharris said:
The signal strength meter indicates full strength on weak signals and sometimes on no signals at all. Very strange.

Sounds like you have strong on frequency interference there in your car.

mharris said:
My 396 does not suffer from this receiver issue. I can use it in the cruiser with the MDC running all day long. In todays world there are many mobile computers in use. I cannot endorse a scanner that cannot be used near an MDC when there are other scanners on the market that can be used(296, 396, 996). This is a HUGE, HUGE issue for me. If you do not plan on using the radio in a mobile computing environment then you should enjoy it. It does have many nice features.

Maybe the PSR-500 and 396 have a different signal strength meter calibration? I have heard hams debate about such things for years. I have found that the signal strength meter usually indicates S+N (signal plus noise) which means if you are near a noise source, you have to take that into account.

mharris said:
I like the scanner outside of the cruiser. The digital audio quality is nice, it seems to be very "crisp". I like the NAC decoding very much, and the screen displays a lot of good information.

Seems to support my above (our) thoughts that the PSR-500 is okay.

mharris said:
I know there is nothing wrong with my unit, but I am still considering taking it back because I should be able to use it in the car. If the Uniden's didn't work in the car either, then I wouldn't complain as much. Come on GRE, tightening up the front end on a radio these days should be TOP PRIORITY with all of the wireless devices in use around us. I'm not saying you have to build an XTS front end, but please just something that works around other electronics. Remember also that regardless of price, this is a TOP end scanner, it should be held to a standard well below an XTS, but good enough to receive in all environments.

I built a 2M repeater many years ago. The receiver has very nice metal can helical filters on the front end. I think the purpose built XTS receivers are the same? That gives wonderful performance on a narrow group of frequencies, but makes for a very poor wide range scanner. Maybe the 396 is less sensitive? Have you tried the attenuator on/off on the PSR-500?
 

SCPD

QRT
Joined
Feb 24, 2001
Messages
0
Location
Virginia
doug408 said:
I'd be interested how well others can hear aircraft band (120 MHz or so) frequencies on their PSR-500 compared with other scanner models. I live a few miles from a fairly major airport and have no trouble picking these up clearly on a BC796D with a stock antenna. My PSR-500 has a surprisingly difficult time with the same transmissions on its own stock antenna or when borrowing the BC796D's. It does much better above 150 MHz. (Obviously no antenna or electronics will be optimal for all frequencies.) Playing with attenuation settings does not help. Personally, this is not a major issue, but it may be a lot more important to others, so I'll mention it.

I live within three miles of KIAD and hear its transmissions very well. When using a discone I hear lots of "fun" stuff on VHF "guard" with pilots violating the post Sept 11 airspace.
 

mharris

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
376
Location
Bay Area, California
MIL STD 810 Scanner?

Hi CPUNUT,

Thanks for you comments.

I have tried the attenuator but nothing seems to change. The signal strength meter is just strange. At times it will indicate full strength on a frequency with no traffic.

Has anyone looked into engineering a MIL STD 810 scanner? I do not know enough about the business side of things to understand if it is reasonable or not. I would REALLY love to have a scanner that is durable, has a commercial grade speaker and audio, and a very tight receiver.

When I think of all the amateur stuff out now that is 810 and the price point of that equipment, it does not seem so far out in left field to make an 810 scanner. My 91AD has a nice commercial feel to it and does not seem to suffer from intermod or other misc interference issues. I paid $450 for it. The Yaesu VX-170 is only $129 at Universal. It has 600mw audio output and is as tough as any big M model!

Ok, I am ready for all the comments now! :)

Matt
WY8E
 

LEH

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 23, 2003
Messages
1,488
Location
Yorktown, Virginia
Matt,

What part MIL-STD-810? "DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE TEST METHOD STANDARD FOR
ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING CONSIDERATIONS AND LABORATORY TESTS"

Here is a list of the labratory tests defined in the standard.

500.4 Low Pressure (Altitude)
501.4 High Temperature
502.4 Low Temperature
503.4 Temperature Shock
504 Contamination by Fluids
505.4 Solar Radiation (Sunshine)
506.4 Rain
507.4 Humidity
508.5 Fungus
509.4 Salt Fog
510.4 Sand and Dust
511.4 Explosive Atmosphere
512.4 Immersion
513.5 Acceleration
514.5 Vibration
515.5 Acoustic Noise
516.5 Shock
517 Pyroshock
518 Acidic Atmosphere
519.5 Gunfire Vibration
520.2 Temperature, Humidity, Vibration, and Altitude
521.2 Icing/Freezing Rain
522 Ballistic Shock
523.2 Vibro-Acoustic/Temperature

Adding some of these like 504, 506.4, 510.4, 512.4 and 516.5 or 520.2 might be beneficial, but would certainly increase the cost. Others, like 519.5 or 522 seem a bit ludicrous.

If anyone is curious or needs a cure for insomnia, you can find the base version of the standard here:

http://assist.daps.dla.mil/docimages/A/0000/0003/5978/000000431013_000000041310_WLPQFRUQJK.PDF
 

don333

Member
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
163
Help

Downloaded the PSREDIT software and am totally confused. I guess it's due to Uniden overload. How do you go about entering the information in the different fields? Also, when I select the Coventional tab there is no information there. Could someone please enlighten me!!
 

W4KRR

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Apr 1, 2001
Messages
3,514
Location
Coconut Creek
don333 said:
Downloaded the PSREDIT software and am totally confused. I guess it's due to Uniden overload. How do you go about entering the information in the different fields? Also, when I select the Coventional tab there is no information there. Could someone please enlighten me!!

Right click on the empty field and select, "New Object".
 

W4KRR

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Apr 1, 2001
Messages
3,514
Location
Coconut Creek
I have been playing around with the new PSR-500 for about a day now, and here are my impressions/opinions:

General: The signal strength meter seems to be liberal, or else the radio is really a lot more sensitive on weak signals. Systems that get one or two bars on my BCD396T are showing four or five bars on the PSR-500.

Display: Characters similar to those on the PRO-97. Displays more/different information than is displayed on other GRE made scanners. Backlighting nearly as good as that of the PRO-97, much better than the PRO-96.

Conventional frequencies: No problems or issues noted, receives at least as well as
my other scanners.

Trunked systems: It seems to track analog trunked systems at least as well as, and
maybe a tad better, than my other scanners (PRO-96, PRO-97, BCD396T, BCD996T).

3600 baud trunked systems with digital talkgroups: A local system which is predominately analog, but with some digital talkgroups (Broward Co., FL, system ID 1f25); when I hold on a digital talkgroup on the PSR-500, and the same talkgroup on my BCD396T, the BCD396T decodes the signal with no issues or problems. The PSR-500 will appear and act as if it's decoding the signal, even showing the granted voice frequency, but either no audio is heard, or a garbled noise is heard, or, on occasion, some clear voice is heard. This is with a full five bars on the signal strength meter. Another 3600 baud system to the north of me, (Boca Raton, FL), seems to decode the digital talkgroups with little or no difficulties.

9600 baud P-25 systems: None in range of me to test.

"Object Scanning" And here is a big issue for me. This scanner makes use of "Objects" to program and scan. Like, a frequency is a scannable object, a talkgroup is a scannable object, etc. This means you can program a frequency or talkgroup as an object, and assign it to one or more of 20 scan lists. Which means you only need program a talkgroup or frequency one time, no need to program in the same frequency or talkgroup more than once. Great! Except for one thing: Unless I'm missing something, all the talkgroups you assign to a scan list are placed into one big basket, if you will.

On my BCD396T, I can program a trunked system, assign it a System Quick Key, and have up to ten Group Quick Keys under that system. Which allows me to have a fire/rescue group, a police group, a sheriff group, a parks department group, a streets department group, all under the same system, and I can turn the seperate groups on or off at will.

But with the PSR-500, all the talkgroups you assign to a Scan List go into one big pot under that sacanlist. There's no way to seperate the police talkgroups out from the fire/rescue talkgroups. (Again, this is unless I've missed something being this scanner is brand new to me.) This is a throwback to the old PRO-92, which was laid out in the same manner. Even the PRO-96 and PRO-97 have seperate talkgroup lists in eack bank. I suppose a workaround would be to treat each scanlist as a seperate system for whatever service you want, and with "Object Scanning" it would be easy enough, but then you're limited to 20 scan lists. Why not 50, or 60, or 99?

The jury is still out, I need more experience with this new radio, but right now, my BCD396T has nothing to worry about. :roll:
 

DaveIN

Founders Curmudgen
Database Admin
Joined
Jan 5, 2003
Messages
6,515
Location
West Michigan
W4KRR said:
3600 baud trunked systems with digital talkgroups: A local system which is predominately analog, but with some digital talkgroups (Broward Co., FL, system ID 1f25); when I hold on a digital talkgroup on the PSR-500, and the same talkgroup on my BCD396T, the BCD396T decodes the signal with no issues or problems. The PSR-500 will appear and act as if it's decoding the signal, even showing the granted voice frequency, but either no audio is heard, or a garbled noise is heard, or, on occasion, some clear voice is heard. This is with a full five bars on the signal strength meter. Another 3600 baud system to the north of me, (Boca Raton, FL), seems to decode the digital talkgroups with little or no difficulties.

Nice review! Sounds like the radio may be overloaded on your local system if the system north of you. Did you try the attenuator by chance?
 

W4KRR

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Apr 1, 2001
Messages
3,514
Location
Coconut Creek
DaveIN said:
Nice review! Sounds like the radio may be overloaded on your local system if the system north of you. Did you try the attenuator by chance?

Thanks, Dave!

No, I have not tried the attenuator, but I may do that. It seems that everyone here is having different experiences with digital decoding.

Sitting side by side on a table, my BCD396 decodes Hollywood digital talkgroups with no issue, yet the PSR-500 just sits there and passes no audio at all, yet Boca Raton (a more distant and weaker system) decodes seemingly with no problems.

Fortunately, in my area, digital isn't what I predominately monitor, but for $500, I expect it to work.
 

fmon

Silent Key Jan. 14, 2012
Joined
May 11, 2002
Messages
7,741
Location
Eclipse, Virginia
TedTed said:
Can't agree more on scanlists, this is 'only' a 20 bank scanner.
'Only'?

Who's gonna scan 20 list at the same time? Or who's gonna scan multi quick keys at the same time?
 

mancow

Member
Database Admin
Joined
Feb 19, 2003
Messages
6,908
Location
N.E. Kansas
I just called GRE and told them that this thing doesn't work correctly with P25 systems. It will be interesting to see if they can get it worked out.
 

Statevillian

Member
Joined
Aug 21, 2006
Messages
255
Location
Chicago, IL.
Number of scan lists necessary is user defined

fmon said:
'Only'?

Who's gonna scan 20 list at the same time? Or who's gonna scan multi quick keys at the same time?

I respect your point of view as far as anyone full bore scanning all lists at once. What I think the previous poster meant was having lists available for listening choice & preference. I have one V folder for the Chicago area with the following 'scan lists' that has Chicago PD analog UHF conventional, another for the City of Chicago 800Mhz analog trunked system split into 3 lists for specific distinction between users.....but in my 396 I use 9 separate groups=scanlists, 3 Starcom21 tower sites for P25 trunking, Cook County Jail, Cook County Sheriff, City of Chicago CTA (transit), Streets & Sanitation, Midway Airport UHF digital trunked, Metro Correctional Center UHF P25 trunked, and that is not counting O'Hare Airport/Midway air traffic, O'Hare's various trunked systems, etc. and I am almost at 20. Not counting various LTR systems either. With my 396 I can switch out any one of 100 at any time without switching folders. If one could have more scanlists or access ACROSS V folders at any given time without closing, saving and loading it would be very convenient. In urban areas rich with dozens of systems, just having one or 2 you want to access very quickly is something I have gotten spoiled with my Uniden 330 or 396. Don't get me wrong, the 500 still fits the bill for my needs. It's just a slower and more complicated process of storage and access. At 37,000 objects I can't see me ever reaching 100%.
 

TedTed

Member
Joined
Feb 19, 2006
Messages
72
Location
Florida
fmon said:
'Only'?

Who's gonna scan 20 list at the same time? Or who's gonna scan multi quick keys at the same time?

It's not about scanning 20 lists at the same time, it's about having quick access to groups of data like Unidens Quickkey system.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top