improving 500s digital

[beischel]

I'm sure this is the case on non-simulcast systems.

Main issue - heck, maybe the only issue - is the performance and quality under simulcast systems.

The Hamilton County (Ohio) Cincinnati is a simulcast system. With the Uniden 996T I had to lock out the Cincinnati Simulcast broadcast and just use the other. With the PSR-500 and 600, I have them both loaded, and have the setting on "roam" and that seems to work. The attenuator helps quite a bit and unlike the Uniden, the GRE attenuator is not as aggressive so a lot of the signal still gets through while attenuating the adjacent channel interference (which I assume is coming from Ohio MARCS since that tower is very close).

 

[kikito]

I'm sure this is the case on non-simulcast systems.

Main issue - heck, maybe the only issue - is the performance and quality under simulcast systems.

And as we know it's an issue with all the currently available scanner brands out there....

 

[RoninJoliet]

Here in Joliet ILL monitoring the ILL Starcom 700/800 system i am about 25 miles from the northern simulcast towers in the Chicago area and both the GRE500 and 396 give me fits with or without my outside antennas or rubber duck . BUT, on the stand alone or "non-simulcast" tower located in Grundy Co=T125 i get perfect coverage with no CC flicker or breakup on the 396,GRE500, PRO96,and 2096...It is a 800mgz tower...Its also about 25 miles from my location....There is a difference on these digital scanners in MY opinion.....

 

[JT-112]

And as we know it's an issue with all the currently available scanner brands out there....

Oh, that totally excuses it then.

Sorry for saying anything.

My bad.

 

[troymail]

Several of us have been saying that all along. Many people have differing opinions but, I too own Unidens...396 as far as digi. The 500 has been mind bobbling. I thought my 396 was *it* until I had that 500 up and running. Now, no comparison. Only thing I wish the 500 had was status bit function. Digital has been a very pleasant surprise.

I agree and have also been saying this for a while. I actually about "gave up" trying to listen to digital on my 396....then the PSR500 came out... no more worries...

 

[troymail]

ok. i know this question is a little late, but... in my case, with the simulcast system, would using an 800mhz antenna (the RS 800mhz) actually be worse then using the stock antenna??

it's all about having plenty of tools in the toolbox... history (and postings on RR) have proven that there is no "one size fits all" when it comes to these issues. What works for one may not work for others... don't rule anything out but, at the same time, don't be frustrated when trying something new doesn't help as much as you thought it would (based on someone else's success).

 

[ScanTheFreqs]

ive come to find out exactly that.

in my case, with my location and the towers' locations, ive found my diamond rh77ca (of all things) to work best. that really surprised me since this antenna does worse then the stock one on 800mhz conventional channels, but maybe i need that weaker signal so i dont pick up the second tower

 

[kikito]

Oh, that totally excuses it then.

No, it doesn't excuse it. But I thought I clarify in case anybody thinks is a brand-specific issue. It's a little more complicated issue that probably can't be solved with a little tweak of the firmware like some might think. Otherwise don't you think scanner manufacturers might've gotten a better handle on it by now after 2 years or more of trying. Even the real radios have occasional problems with Simulcast.

What you said is akin to someone saying that the Unidens can't do Phase 2 P-25 systems or LTR MultiNet, I would respond that no scanners currently in the market can do it. Which is exactly what I did earlier with no mentioning of brand or trying to justify or defend anything.

Sorry for saying anything.

My bad.

You can say whatever you want, that doesn't mean it will go unchallenged or everyone will agree.

Ironically, you don't like ME disagreeing with YOU while you're doing the same and worst by doing it in a cynical and less productive way.

 

[wa8pyr]

Simulcast digital cannot be well received by portable scanners. Your best bet is a directional antenna pointed at the closest tower to you.

Funny, works fine for me.

I've monitored MARCS in Columbus (simulcast... admittedly C4FM) ) and Hamilton County / Cincinnati using both STAT and ROAM modes and all the factory settings, and had no problem with either one. Only issue was an occasional garble on HamCo, but not nearly enough to condemn the radio's capability to receive the system effectively.

A great deal of this is individual, based on where an individual is located at any given moment, their particular hardware setup, and other varying factors. Works for some, not for others. I think it would be wise to avoid blanket indictments.

 

[rdale]

I've monitored MARCS in Columbus

MARCS in Columbus is not CQPSK. Sorry for not clarifying. My blanket statement holds.

 

[JASII]

Improving The GRE PSR-500 CQPSK Reception

I have had a Gre PSR-500 for several months now and I have typically been using it during work in the car with the OEM rubber duck antenna. I have noticed on the Minnesota ARMER system, which is a simulcast CQPSK system, that there are times when talkgroups sound almost as good as my Motorola XTS5000 and other times when it is having trouble decoding the system. Now I know that others have opined the "fix" is a Yagi antenna pointed in a position for optimum performance, but obviously that is not an option in the mobile environment. I just got an 800 mHz Tuf Duck
http://www.wpsantennas.com/index.asp?PageAction=VIEWPROD&ProdID=2201 and I was evaluating its performance tonight. I think it is better, but I have to do some more testing. Anyway, has anyone here used the Tuf Duck on an 800 mHz CQPSK system and, if so, was it overall better than the stock antenna?

 

[rdale]

Any 800Mhz specific antenna will be an improvement.

 

[PHOENIX_SCANNER]

Yagi can solve simulcast issues

I am the person in Arizona who has spent years figuring out how to monitor the PRWN with its many simulcast sites.

Yes, it is true, a scanner cannot match a $5k police radio for sorting things out. And keep in mind even the dispatcher with millions of dollars worth of equipment, when listening to that $5k radio, still has to tell the officer from time to time, "can you repeat that, you went digital". So even they don't have 100% reception!

But for a hundred bucks give or take a few, you may be able to set your base scanner up to hear things pretty darn well.

As I stated in my thread on this, the goal is to attenuate the offending towers, with the maximum ratio of signal when comparing the target tower to the offending tower(s). Print out the radiation pattern for the desired yagi, and plot out all your towers and your home location. If you can isolate one nearby tower with a gain in db, and attenuate the others GREATLY, it will work for you. By using this method, and your scanners attenuator, you can hopefully get the offending tower(s) down by 40-60 db, while getting some gain on the target tower.

After a good deal of testing, I would revise reception estimates from 95% down to about 90% overall, but compared to what I had before (hearing probably 25% of transmissions - tons of "break-ups"), I am in scanner heaven. Sometimes I pick up my 500 and am driven mad in a matter of minutes when I can't even hear ONE TRANSMISSION without it breaking up severely. So I turn it off, and head to my scanner desk, where I can actually hear the action. It is truly a Godsend, and that is no overstatement.

In the (probably rare) case that you can't point any direction without having two sites or more hitting you hard, my sympathies. I know this will be the case for some.

But for most of you "simulcast sufferers" out there, there is hope. Check out the thread for detailed parts list and description of what I went through.

Oh, and by the way, as far as digital decoding quality, the new PSR scanners are the best I have used yet, and if you take a look at my signature, I have played with most of the digital scanners out there.