With the right filter I have been receiving it today, sitting in my office a mile from Shaw Butte, but only with the SDS100 sitting in a "sweet spot" (luckily I have a sweet spot to put it in). The interference problems at least when using the SDS100 seem to occur everywhere, home, work, on the road, aside from those "sweet spots". If things don't change on their end (and I know they may not), the SDS's will probably never work very well on this system, at least in the places I need them to work. This system may now be added to the list of problem systems for the SDS scanners I own. That list already includes RWC South Mountain, North Mountain, White Tanks, and Thompson Peak. The Unication G4 has no issues on any of those systems, and I know that some are probably going to tell me that "my SDS works fine on those systems" and I don't doubt it. But I've tried every combination of filters and attenuation and they are never going to be properly monitored with at least my SDS's. Unfortunately this new Maricopa County system is one that is going to be important to me. Looks like I'll be waiting for at least a several years for a scanner that can monitor this system, if there is ever such a thing.
Maricopa County new P25 system
- Thread starter hulka
- Start date
With the right filter I have been receiving it today, sitting in my office a mile from Shaw Butte, but only with the SDS100 sitting in a "sweet spot" (luckily I have a sweet spot to put it in). The interference problems at least when using the SDS100 seem to occur everywhere, home, work, on the road, aside from those "sweet spots". If things don't change on their end (and I know they may not), the SDS's will probably never work very well on this system, at least in the places I need them to work. This system may now be added to the list of problem systems for the SDS scanners I own. That list already includes RWC South Mountain, North Mountain, White Tanks, and Thompson Peak. The Unication G4 has no issues on any of those systems, and I know that some are probably going to tell me that "my SDS works fine on those systems" and I don't doubt it. But I've tried every combination of filters and attenuation and they are never going to be properly monitored with at least my SDS's. Unfortunately this new Maricopa County system is one that is going to be important to me. Looks like I'll be waiting for at least a several years for a scanner that can monitor this system, if there is ever such a thing.
hulka
Member
The radio techs are on there running test before they go live with that talk group.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
I am just the opposite...as I can receiver the Downtown Simulcast GREAT with my SDS200. I am
at 27th Ave and Camelback. My discone, or my rubber duckie has the same result.
at 27th Ave and Camelback. My discone, or my rubber duckie has the same result.
hulka
Member
How can I tell if the Durango site is up and running?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
cellphone
Silent key.
Park close to it, and see if you can receive it full signal. Then take off the antenna and see if you can still receive it. If you are right next to the transmitter and receiving it with no antenna, then it’s active. When the question about Shaw Butte came in, I just happed to be right next to the mountain.
LOL, I knew I would see one or more posts like yours. Glad you have a spot that your SDS200 likes, looks like I won't be that lucky.
cellphone
Silent key.
I am finding that my SDS100 is very susceptible to interference on 700mhz and thus performing poorly. This is causing me issues with RWC sites in Phoenix. This seems to be the case for you was well. In areas where my SDS100 struggles, my BCD436HP works great.
I haven’t done enough research to confirm, but others have speculated that Verizon’s heavy use of 700mhz in Phoenix is causing the problems that we are seeing with the SDS100 and 200.
I haven’t monitored the new Maricopa County system on my SDS100 enough yet, but I am concerned that the SDS100 and 200 will have localized problems on this system.
I think that you nailed it right there, it's the big V I believe and their dominance of 700 MHz. Worst of all they are putting up the micro cell sites in more and more places. They put one up a block from my home and when they turned it on my Verizon LTE service went full scale and scanner reception got worse. That was several weeks back. The SDS's definitely struggle with interference sometimes, but it's unpredictable. Some systems are fine. Some are an absolute no go.
hulka
Member
I have both 100 & 200. I can pick up both Phoenix and MCSO with out any issues 67th ave and Baseline rd area. I have a remtronix on both. Driving around I get the both systems hit and miss. Have heard Phoenix pd as far away as Bell Rd and 303. On my car I have the Tram 1199 glass mount antenna.
On a side note I saw one of the radio installers today at a cafe and asked about the new system.
McDot
Flood control
Parks
Animal control
He said these are all on the new system. MCSO not on there yet.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
On a side note I saw one of the radio installers today at a cafe and asked about the new system.
McDot
Flood control
Parks
Animal control
He said these are all on the new system. MCSO not on there yet.
Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk Pro
Glad we have a good local community of scanner guys here to get feedback from, thanks guys. The last two posts, Hulka's and cellphone's really puts it in perspective for SDS / simulcast systems in the valley. It's hit or miss, and more and more I truly believe the glut of Verizon 700 MHz LTE signal, now including all of these micro-sites they are putting up on lamp posts, is creating a lot of RF that the SDS's SDR design struggles with.
If someone asks "how will the SDS work on XXX system in the valley?", my answer will remain, "depends on which system and where you are, and it's seemingly random. You won't know how it works for you in your situation without trying one in your location".
If someone asks "how will the SDS work on XXX system in the valley?", my answer will remain, "depends on which system and where you are, and it's seemingly random. You won't know how it works for you in your situation without trying one in your location".
I am getting a new (to me anyway) site on 851.575, reporting as a neighbor from the Wickenburg site. It is pretty strong out here in the NW Valley...
Alternates are 851.2625, 851.8125, 853.875. Neighbors are listed as White Tanks, Towers and Wickenburg.
I will keep an eye on it.
Alternates are 851.2625, 851.8125, 853.875. Neighbors are listed as White Tanks, Towers and Wickenburg.
I will keep an eye on it.
Last edited:
KB7MIB
Member
I heard a tech testing on the old system Callbox TG this morning. It was the last test, as he apologized to the dispatcher, and said there wouldn't be any more.
I wasn't listening to the new system at the time, though.
John
Peoria
I wasn't listening to the new system at the time, though.
John
Peoria
Couldn’t agree more, sitting near 17 and 101 with an SDS100 that’s all but useless and not worth using for analog due to its pathetic front end and turtle scan speed, was waiting to buy a 200 to see if it’s any better but have enough hum in my life and I’m short of tin foil (still can’t believe they recommended putting chunks of a metallic easily broken off item inside as a fix).
Oh well....
Hopefully they’re not made by Uniden is all I can say.
Where there any testers of the 100/200 that were located in the Phx area to feed out the issues we’re having before they went into production?
I wanna love it I just can’t... that’s the same thing my momma said about me and just “wanna’ing” don’t make it happen sadly.
Hopefully they’re not made by Uniden is all I can say.
Where there any testers of the 100/200 that were located in the Phx area to feed out the issues we’re having before they went into production?
I wanna love it I just can’t... that’s the same thing my momma said about me and just “wanna’ing” don’t make it happen sadly.
At least one and maybe two people. But with such a large and challenging metro area it would have been nice if there had been more, even though it probably wouldn't have seemed practical for Uniden. I actually had a meet-up with one beta tester. He had been having good luck in his location (Peoria I believe), but once he came to my office at I17 & Peoria, he observed the exact same issues that I had been seeing. I also then met with a few other SDS100 owners (not beta testers) who had observed similar issues to mine.
That original SDS100 did not meet my expectations so I returned it, and I'm glad I did. The new production SDS100 that I have now is a much better scanner. So be aware that there definitely were / are "bad apples" out there. Look up the threads that address cold solder joints and other known issues. You may possibly have a "bad apple". If you are able to compare your SDS100's function to that of another person it might give you a clearer picture in that regard.
If Uniden makes another attempt at this, they would be wise to have 3-4 people in Phoenix beta testing, maybe eliminating a few people from less troubled areas. Honestly I think that if a scanner can conquer Phoenix, it will probably work fine everywhere. Phoenix is notoriously challenging and makes for the perfect testing environment.
hulka
Member
I get white tanks, wickenburg and downtown only from Laveen with White tanks being the strongest. I will see if I can get anything from the Durango tower tomorrow. Not sure how to do it but I gather discovery then trunking system. Does it show you what it finds or do you have to hook it up to sentinel?
I tested the SDS100 and later the SDS200 extensively on RWC and (to a lesser extent) TOPAZ at several locations during the beta testing periods. While where I live is not prone to simulcast distortion I went to many spots around the area that had issues with my other scanners. I compared it against the TRX-1 and 2, PRO106, PSR600, BCD436HP, BCD536HP, a G5, a 996P2 and a BCD325P2. My tests were done with the standard antennas for handheld scanners or sharing the same mobile antenna via a multicoupler for the mobiles. For the G5 the included stubby antenna was used. I am currently using my SDS200 to monitor the MCSO P25 system (It was not in use during the beta periods other than occasional site testing) and it is working well. I can hear a half dozen sites from my home and so far I have not heard any of them having difficulties here.
My results were pretty similar to what I have seen in other areas I have tried, including Chicago, Boston, Tucson, central Ohio, the Denver area and others. Compared to the other scanners the SDSx00's performed better in every instance. The G5 of course worked as good or better than the SDS and of course the other scanners. In the Chicago area I had a chance to compare reception with the SDS100 against that of an APX7000 on StarCom21 and at that particular location and time the performance was comparable.
The most telling test was up at White Tanks, at one of the spots about halfway up the hill I was able to hear a half dozen different RWC sites as well as being within spitting distance of the local site. The SDSx00's outperformed the other scanners at each location. While not perfect, it was pretty much similar as other scanners with non-simulcast systems. I had similar results out in the Deer Valley area as well as from Sky Harbor, west Glendale and the north Scottsdale (Keirland) area.
The SDS was not perfect, but it certainly was much better than any of the other scanners. For the sites I have set up in the G5 (Mostly West Valley RWC sites and a few SC21 sites in the west and NW suburbs of Chicago) the G5 was somewhat better or similar to that of the SDS100 and 200. Most of these comparisons were done with early or beta versions of the SDS firmware, I have noticed that the current firmware provides better performance on RWC but I have not replicated the one-on-one comparisons. I was out at Arrowhead a couple times last week and the 536 in the car was having some issues with RWC but a coule days later I had no problems with the SDS100 in the same neighborhood.
The original videos available on the Scanner Master site were not performance comparisons, they were more to show the operation of the radio and that it had good P25 simulcast performance. Yes, Scanner Master is a Massachusetts based company but not all of us live there. I probably should go out and do some more scientific vids but finding the time to do so is hard. Doing videos from home is not telling as where I live I likely will only be able to hear a single tower of a simulcast set, not multiple towers to see how it works on a simulcast set..
Simulcast performance is a challenging issue with any scanner, even the SDSx00's. Some areas can be hard with any radio. You reception could be great today and with the exact same radio and antenna sound like garbage tomorrow. As the MCSO system gets built out and transitioned to scannists are going to find areas that have difficulties and other areas that work great. I do not think there is any difference with the hardware between early and late build SDS's, but the latest firmware versions make a huge difference. I do want to get out and try the 436/536 in some of these areas now that the latest firmware for those radios seem to be working very well.
Phoenix is no more or less challenging for P25 Simulcast performance than the Chicago, Denver or Columbus areas, there are some really bad reception areas and some not so bad in each. I imagine that any large metro area with simulcast sites are going to have similar issues. The MCSO system seems to sound pretty good so far, hopefully it will remain so.
My results were pretty similar to what I have seen in other areas I have tried, including Chicago, Boston, Tucson, central Ohio, the Denver area and others. Compared to the other scanners the SDSx00's performed better in every instance. The G5 of course worked as good or better than the SDS and of course the other scanners. In the Chicago area I had a chance to compare reception with the SDS100 against that of an APX7000 on StarCom21 and at that particular location and time the performance was comparable.
The most telling test was up at White Tanks, at one of the spots about halfway up the hill I was able to hear a half dozen different RWC sites as well as being within spitting distance of the local site. The SDSx00's outperformed the other scanners at each location. While not perfect, it was pretty much similar as other scanners with non-simulcast systems. I had similar results out in the Deer Valley area as well as from Sky Harbor, west Glendale and the north Scottsdale (Keirland) area.
The SDS was not perfect, but it certainly was much better than any of the other scanners. For the sites I have set up in the G5 (Mostly West Valley RWC sites and a few SC21 sites in the west and NW suburbs of Chicago) the G5 was somewhat better or similar to that of the SDS100 and 200. Most of these comparisons were done with early or beta versions of the SDS firmware, I have noticed that the current firmware provides better performance on RWC but I have not replicated the one-on-one comparisons. I was out at Arrowhead a couple times last week and the 536 in the car was having some issues with RWC but a coule days later I had no problems with the SDS100 in the same neighborhood.
The original videos available on the Scanner Master site were not performance comparisons, they were more to show the operation of the radio and that it had good P25 simulcast performance. Yes, Scanner Master is a Massachusetts based company but not all of us live there. I probably should go out and do some more scientific vids but finding the time to do so is hard. Doing videos from home is not telling as where I live I likely will only be able to hear a single tower of a simulcast set, not multiple towers to see how it works on a simulcast set..
Simulcast performance is a challenging issue with any scanner, even the SDSx00's. Some areas can be hard with any radio. You reception could be great today and with the exact same radio and antenna sound like garbage tomorrow. As the MCSO system gets built out and transitioned to scannists are going to find areas that have difficulties and other areas that work great. I do not think there is any difference with the hardware between early and late build SDS's, but the latest firmware versions make a huge difference. I do want to get out and try the 436/536 in some of these areas now that the latest firmware for those radios seem to be working very well.
Phoenix is no more or less challenging for P25 Simulcast performance than the Chicago, Denver or Columbus areas, there are some really bad reception areas and some not so bad in each. I imagine that any large metro area with simulcast sites are going to have similar issues. The MCSO system seems to sound pretty good so far, hopefully it will remain so.
I tested the SDS's in Gilbert, Chandler, Mesa, Scottsdale, the I-17 corridor, I-10 to county limits, 101 corridor between Chandler and North Phoenix, and a little in Glendale and Peoria. Performance was very good, if not excellent, in all of these, and exceeded that of the 4/536.
At my home, I had never been able to receive TOPAZ on any model or brand of scanner. The SDS's receive it well. The SDS's also receive DMR systems that my 4/536's cannot receive because I am too far away from the transmitters and they operate with relatively low power and purposely restricted coverage areas.
I met with KR7CQ to investigate his issue at his place of work. I concluded that the main problem was an unusually high amount of RF Noise being generated by his computer, which was directly below his SDS100. When the SDS100 was moved 2-3 feet away from his computer, performance was comparable to that of his 436. The SDS200, because of its size and allowed weight, is much better shielded than the SDS100, so my guess is that it would have been immune to the RF-noisy computer.
Having said all of this, I have no reason to doubt that some people are having issues in certain areas. There are a lot of RF emitters out there, including equipment whose purpose is not to emit RF. It remains to be seen whether any scanner can be perfected to the point of working flawlessly everywhere. I personally doubt it, unless people are willing to pay much, much more -- essentially what first responders pay for their radios. I know there are devices that can work well in troubled areas, but they are not scanners so comparison to them is not fair.
I don't work for Uniden and believe that competition is always good for the consumer. Even though they do not currently have a competitor, it is self-evident that they have been doing an outstanding job in improving SDS performance through firmware changes and have also continued to improve their older models. Perhaps it will be possible to make more improvements to the SDS line, until the limits of the current technology are reached.
At my home, I had never been able to receive TOPAZ on any model or brand of scanner. The SDS's receive it well. The SDS's also receive DMR systems that my 4/536's cannot receive because I am too far away from the transmitters and they operate with relatively low power and purposely restricted coverage areas.
I met with KR7CQ to investigate his issue at his place of work. I concluded that the main problem was an unusually high amount of RF Noise being generated by his computer, which was directly below his SDS100. When the SDS100 was moved 2-3 feet away from his computer, performance was comparable to that of his 436. The SDS200, because of its size and allowed weight, is much better shielded than the SDS100, so my guess is that it would have been immune to the RF-noisy computer.
Having said all of this, I have no reason to doubt that some people are having issues in certain areas. There are a lot of RF emitters out there, including equipment whose purpose is not to emit RF. It remains to be seen whether any scanner can be perfected to the point of working flawlessly everywhere. I personally doubt it, unless people are willing to pay much, much more -- essentially what first responders pay for their radios. I know there are devices that can work well in troubled areas, but they are not scanners so comparison to them is not fair.
I don't work for Uniden and believe that competition is always good for the consumer. Even though they do not currently have a competitor, it is self-evident that they have been doing an outstanding job in improving SDS performance through firmware changes and have also continued to improve their older models. Perhaps it will be possible to make more improvements to the SDS line, until the limits of the current technology are reached.
Good to hear some positive reviews on the SDS scanners. I agree it's not fair to compare any scanner to the Unication or commercial receivers. Do you have an early release model or a newer one? Have you experimented with the VHF reception, I have heard several users saying their reception on the VHF was poor?
Similar threads
