Motorola Radios Sound Way Better Than Kenwood!

[Ghost117]

And sorry guys, I know I'm probably coming across as a Motorola Fanboy or whatever, but this again just my personal opinion and I'm not invalidating any of yours. I can totally see where you guys are coming from as well.

 

[mmckenna]

And sorry guys, I know I'm probably coming across as a Motorola Fanboy or whatever, but this again just my personal opinion and I'm not invalidating any of yours. I can totally see where you guys are coming from as well.

Yeah, no problem. You noticed something that didn't sound right. We're just pointing out what the likely cause is. It isn't a brand thing, if that was the case there wouldn't be large agencies using Kenwood radios. It's all in the programming. Sounds like someone didn't do their homework when programming the radios.

 

[Avery93]

As has been said, it all depends on programming. The default settings can make the NX-5000 series sound muffled in some cases, but this can be alleviated by playing around with the numerous audio settings. I've also found that those radios often come under-deviated from the factory, which if not corrected will make them sound quieter than other radios.

With that said, I have always noticed that Kenwood radios have a more bassy, high fidelity sound quality than Motorola in analog mode. This sounds great in good signal conditions, or when the user is speaking properly into the microphone; however under week signal conditions or when a user is not speaking optimally, it seems to ever so slightly hamper voice intelligibility. In my personal experience, the very crisp, compressed DSP audio of a properly programmed Motorola XTS or APX is more intelligible under a wider range of signal and noise conditions in analog mode.

The NX-5000 series analog audio can be tweaked to sound very good, but I have not personally been able to match that Motorola DSP sound. Don't get me wrong, I am not at all saying that the audio sounds bad, it's just not the same as Motorola. The only non-Motorola product I have heard that has roughly the same analog audio characteristics is the Harris XG series.

 

[RFI-EMI-GUY]

Lets be honest. Narrow band, whether analog or digital sounds awful.

 

[12dbsinad]

Lets be honest. Narrow band, whether analog or digital sounds awful.

I'll still take NB analog over any form of NB digital any day. I'll take WB analog over anything else.

 

[RFI-EMI-GUY]

I'll still take NB analog over any form of NB digital any day. I'll take WB analog over anything else.

I resurrected some WB Securenet DES and to be honest, it does not sound too bad compared to IMBE.

 

[Ghost117]

As has been said, it all depends on programming. The default settings can make the NX-5000 series sound muffled in some cases, but this can be alleviated by playing around with the numerous audio settings. I've also found that those radios often come under-deviated from the factory, which if not corrected will make them sound quieter than other radios.

With that said, I have always noticed that Kenwood radios have a more bassy, high fidelity sound quality than Motorola in analog mode. This sounds great in good signal conditions, or when the user is speaking properly into the microphone; however under week signal conditions or when a user is not speaking optimally, it seems to ever so slightly hamper voice intelligibility. In my personal experience, the very crisp, compressed DSP audio of a properly programmed Motorola XTS or APX is more intelligible under a wider range of signal and noise conditions in analog mode.

The NX-5000 series analog audio can be tweaked to sound very good, but I have not personally been able to match that Motorola DSP sound. Don't get me wrong, I am not at all saying that the audio sounds bad, it's just not the same as Motorola. The only non-Motorola product I have heard that has roughly the same analog audio characteristics is the Harris XG series.

Absolutely! There's just something about that Motorola that sounds really good to my ears. And I agree with you 100%. The Harris XG-100M and XG-100P sound almost indistinguishable from a Motorola. Harris did a great job with those radios.

 

[Ghost117]

I'll still take NB analog over any form of NB digital any day. I'll take WB analog over anything else.

We're on the same page friend.

 

[12dbsinad]

Motorola has very compressed AGC audio by design. Much different than Kenwood. You can tell it's compressed by more "nasally" it sounds compared to the Kenwood with more low, deep audio. I wouldn't say the Kenwood sounds terrible, and I wouldn't say the Motorola sound HiFi. Some hate that compressed audio. It all depends on the ear listening.

 

[Ghost117]

Motorola has very compressed AGC audio by design. Much different than Kenwood. You can tell it's compressed by more "nasally" it sounds compared to the Kenwood with more low, deep audio. I wouldn't say the Kenwood sounds terrible, and I wouldn't say the Motorola sound HiFi. Some hate that compressed audio. It all depends on the ear listening.

Ahhhh, I see. That makes a lot of sense. In that Motorola clip I initially provided, you can definitely hear that Automatic Gain Control and heavy compression in effect, hence why the person speaking, does sound quite nasally. And exactly the opposite with the Kenwood's more deep low's and such, with almost no AGC and quite muffled at the tail end with that active noise cancellation kicking in, trying to compensate for the sound of the engine or whatever in the background, the hum basically.

 

[12dbsinad]

Ahhhh, I see. That makes a lot of sense. In that Motorola clip I initially provided, you can definitely hear that Automatic Gain Control and heavy compression in effect, hence why the person speaking, does sound quite nasally. And exactly the opposite with the Kenwood's more deep low's and such, with almost no AGC and quite muffled at the tail end with that active noise cancellation kicking in, trying to compensate for the sound of the engine or whatever in the background, the hum basically.

But please take note, Most Motorola's have AGC setting that can be turned on/off. I'm not sure exactly what model they use, but that the general consensus. A lot of other brands like Kenwood will have many noise cancelling features, and other audio settings but rarely imitates AGC compressed audio Motorola has seemed to adopt. They have had this since back in the HT-1000 days and probably earlier.

 

[mmckenna]

I'll still take NB analog over any form of NB digital any day. I'll take WB analog over anything else.

Yeah.

But I have a Kenwood NX-700 VHF listening to our PD dispatch in analog.
I also have an NX-900 800MHz listening to the same dispatchers on 12.5KHz NXDN.

Same dispatchers. Same microphones, same dispatch consoles.
On my end, same radios (different bands), same speakers.
VHF analog is 4 wire circuit to a Quantar.
800 digital is to a bunch of NX-900's in a rack next to a Zetron 4048 console with tone remotes as the connection.
The 12.5KHz NXDN sounds better to my ears than the 12.5KHz analog. The NXDN has a wider audio range, more highs/lows than the analog. But then again, I spent a ton of time playing with the audio settings on the radios in dispatch that link them to the trunked system, and with the rest of the subscriber radios.

 

[Ghost117]

Yeah.

But I have a Kenwood NX-700 VHF listening to our PD dispatch in analog.
I also have an NX-900 800MHz listening to the same dispatchers on 12.5KHz NXDN.

Same dispatchers. Same microphones, same dispatch consoles.
On my end, same radios (different bands), same speakers.
VHF analog is 4 wire circuit to a Quantar.
800 digital is to a bunch of NX-900's in a rack next to a Zetron 4048 console with tone remotes as the connection.
The 12.5KHz NXDN sounds better to my ears than the 12.5KHz analog. The NXDN has a wider audio range, more highs/lows than the analog. But then again, I spent a ton of time playing with the audio settings on the radios in dispatch that link them to the trunked system, and with the rest of the subscriber radios.

Wait, you're the guy from Santa Cruz County right?

 

[12dbsinad]

Yeah.

But I have a Kenwood NX-700 VHF listening to our PD dispatch in analog.
I also have an NX-900 800MHz listening to the same dispatchers on 12.5KHz NXDN.

Same dispatchers. Same microphones, same dispatch consoles.
On my end, same radios (different bands), same speakers.
VHF analog is 4 wire circuit to a Quantar.
800 digital is to a bunch of NX-900's in a rack next to a Zetron 4048 console with tone remotes as the connection.
The 12.5KHz NXDN sounds better to my ears than the 12.5KHz analog. The NXDN has a wider audio range, more highs/lows than the analog. But then again, I spent a ton of time playing with the audio settings on the radios in dispatch that link them to the trunked system, and with the rest of the subscriber radios.

Maybe it's just my old ears. I've always found analog to have that edge, especially when you're trying to listen with high background noise. It just sounds more natural DFQ, as we humans do indeed, speak analog.

Jeez a 4048? I can tell you anything you want to know about those!

 

[Ghost117]

Maybe it's just my old ears. I've always found analog to have that edge, especially when you're trying to listen with high background noise. It just sounds more natural DFQ, as we humans do indeed, speak analog.

Jeez a 4048? I can tell you anything you want to know about those!

It's definitely not your "old ears", cause I believe we have the same taste. I prefer that sound as well and I am only 23 years old.

 

[paulears]

We’re having the same discussions as we had when CDs were invented, and we still have analogue guys unhappy with any form of digital, but we have digital folk unhappy with any form of data compression. The feeling is still that individuals respond differently to the result of throwing data away. Moving to comms it could be the same phenomena. Hence why some prefer Nexedge and some Motorola and then others happy with different settings to default. My opinion is we respond differently to digital data reduction. There is no ultimate best. There is best for each circumstance. In the pro audio world where I work, radio microphones all use companding on analogue systems, and each manufacturer is different and it even changes between models. The often spoken rule by the non-radio technical folk is never mix and match brands, but I discovered through sheer chance that Sennheiser transmitters on Trantec receivers sounded really nice and technically matched fine. Receiver bandwidth is slightly different and so is the compander curve. People think I’m mad, but I continue to do it because I like the result.
I suspect we all are a bit prone to our likes and dislikes. I’m happy with some kenwood out of the box, others less so. I think to my ears, the old 320s were the ‘warmest’ sounding which I like.

 

[mmckenna]

Maybe it's just my old ears. I've always found analog to have that edge, especially when you're trying to listen with high background noise. It just sounds more natural DFQ, as we humans do indeed, speak analog.

Yeah, I agree, 25kHz analog sounds really good. I think that the NXDN set up correctly sounds pretty good, too. Maybe I've just gotten accustomed to it. Been running a NexEdge system since 2011, and it's been a good investment. I set up the depreciation for 10 years, thinking I'd be ready to replace it, but it's still plugging along nicely.

Jeez a 4048? I can tell you anything you want to know about those!

What can I say, she's been a solid performer. Just keeps going, just as long as no one tries to mess with the PC's used at the dispatcher positions. That's the only issue we have had.

 

[mmckenna]

The feeling is still that individuals respond differently to the result of throwing data away.

My wife's new truck as XM radio. Something about their compression leaves me looking for something more. My ears are not good enough to tell you what is missing, but it doesn't sit well with me.

 

[IAmSixNine]

Irving?

I dont recall hearing them test an irving profile. But this was also 5+ years ago. So i could have forgotten.

 

[KevinC]

I dont recall hearing them test an irving profile. But this was also 5+ years ago. So i could have forgotten.

I meant was the system Irving.