News photographer ditches brand new 436HP, film at 11

Status
Not open for further replies.

Anderegg

Enter text in this field
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Mar 7, 2010
Messages
2,221
Location
San Diego
Just picked up my shiny new 436HP, tested it with both v1.03 and 1.02 firmware with no antenna against my old beaten up 396XT on analog trunking. 396XT receives much better than the 436HP, meaning the 396XT will be receiving totally legible audio where the 436XT is receiving nothing at all.

Also, when the 436HP was receiving, the talkgroup would unmute almost a second after unmuting on my 396XT. Squelch on both set to 1, as 0 causes constant static.

So, from the perspective of a breaking news photographer/reporter, who's job and success depends on not missing radio transmissions, I can not recommend the 436HP, when there are used 396XT's out there that will receive voice traffic that the 436HOP will not.

One note. I have access to County programmed SmartZone Astro radios, and the difference between the 396XT and the 436HP is similar to comparing a 396XT to a Motorola.

Anyone know when the 436HP goes up to $550? I want to wait till the price increase to sell this on eBay, HRO wants $75 restocking fee because I walked outside the door for 10 minutes to test the scanner, rendering it used with the plastic still on the screen. :-\

Paul
 

KevinC

Moderator
Super Moderator
Joined
Jan 7, 2001
Messages
5,891
Location
Somewhere other than home :(
Just picked up my shiny new 436HP, tested it with both v1.03 and 1.02 firmware with no antenna against my old beaten up 396XT on analog trunking. 396XT receives much better than the 436HP, meaning the 396XT will be receiving totally legible audio where the 436XT is receiving nothing at all.
Say what???
 

fxdscon

¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 15, 2007
Messages
4,970
Just picked up my shiny new 436HP, tested it with both v1.03 and 1.02 firmware with no antenna against my old beaten up 396XT on analog trunking. 396XT receives much better than the 436HP, meaning the 396XT will be receiving totally legible audio where the 436XT is receiving nothing at all.

Your observations are absolutely correct. I took the antenna off of my 436HP and sure enough, all of my other scanners beat it by a mile!

.
 

Anderegg

Enter text in this field
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Mar 7, 2010
Messages
2,221
Location
San Diego
I tested with NO antenna because the first P25 transmission received out of the box with antenna was full signal and garbled. Both scanners were identically handicapped as far as limiting the RF they were receiving.

Anyway, both with stock antennas exhibit the same performance variation. Taking the antennas off was the easiest way to verify "fringe" reception performance. I have a hard enough time moving the 396XT around trying to eek out voice traffic with zero bars in the field. Zero bars performance in a job where you have no control over your location in relation to the transmitting site is a very real concern.

Again, this point of view is from someone who makes a living off of these devices, not someone who listens as a hobby and whose location and physical actions are not governed by the audio coming out of the speaker. :p

Paul
 

Anderegg

Enter text in this field
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Mar 7, 2010
Messages
2,221
Location
San Diego
BTW, my favorite test is to take the antenna off of my XTS3000 and have it outperform my 396XT with an antenna. Heh......

Paul
 

mule1075

Member
Feed Provider
Joined
Jan 20, 2003
Messages
3,866
Location
Washington Pennsylvania
BTW, my favorite test is to take the antenna off of my XTS3000 and have it outperform my 396XT with an antenna. Heh......

Paul
Apples to Oranges comparison as always is the case.Nothing to see here again someone compairing a professional radio to scanner.Please give it up already.
 

Anderegg

Enter text in this field
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Mar 7, 2010
Messages
2,221
Location
San Diego
Apples to Oranges comparison as always is the case.Nothing to see here again someone compairing a professional radio to scanner.Please give it up already.
Hey, you get it! 396XT is a PROFESSIONAL radio, the 436HP is a scanner. Glad you actually get what I am saying. :)

I am currently getting up in the 80's for P25 decode ERR on the HP with an antenna, while the XT with no antenna is humming along with 1 bar and 0 ERR's. An Apple may not be an Orange, but a worm is a worm, and an error is an error.

And just to point out something you guys seem to be ignoring. This post specifies what the scanner is being used for, the purpose, and the job it is employed towards. Here is an example of what I do, I shot this story the other night, and it includes scanner audio courtesy of a paid Broadcastify (RR) subscription. If that feed was breaking up, or my car radio was breaking up, our audience wouldn't have seen the story and been informed.

Rocks hit cars on SR-163 in Linda Vista: 2 cars damaged but no one hurt - 10News.com KGTV ABC10 San Diego

The 436HP is a fun scanner to play with, and to operate, and to hold and look at, but if you depend on reliable reception, and have an alternative, then this is not the scanner for you at this time. I enjoy dating the 436HP, but I wouldn't want to marry it. :p

Paul
 

mule1075

Member
Feed Provider
Joined
Jan 20, 2003
Messages
3,866
Location
Washington Pennsylvania
Hey, you get it! 396XT is a PROFESSIONAL radio, the 436HP is a scanner. Glad you actually get what I am saying. :)

I am currently getting up in the 80's for P25 decode ERR on the HP with an antenna, while the XT with no antenna is humming along with 1 bar and 0 ERR's. An Apple may not be an Orange, but a worm is a worm, and an error is an error.

And just to point out something you guys seem to be ignoring. This post specifies what the scanner is being used for, the purpose, and the job it is employed towards. Here is an example of what I do, I shot this story the other night, and it includes scanner audio courtesy of a paid Broadcastify (RR) subscription. If that feed was breaking up, or my car radio was breaking up, our audience wouldn't have seen the story and been informed.

Rocks hit cars on SR-163 in Linda Vista: 2 cars damaged but no one hurt - 10News.com KGTV ABC10 San Diego

The 436HP is a fun scanner to play with, and to operate, and to hold and look at, but if you depend on reliable reception, and have an alternative, then this is not the scanner for you at this time. I enjoy dating the 436HP, but I wouldn't want to marry it. :p

Paul
Have both and neither are a professional radio they are both scanners.Now with that being said both of mine sitting side by side exhibit the same performance on all bands using either the DPD Omni-X or the dual band commercial Diamond antennas.
 

Anderegg

Enter text in this field
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Mar 7, 2010
Messages
2,221
Location
San Diego
Mule, do you get similar P25 ERR rates between the two scanners? I am starting to firmly believe I got a lemon. I researched the board for months before deciding it was safe enough to get the 436, even had the 1.02 firmware that was supposed to revitalize the somewhat lower sensitivity brought on by the 1.03 update.

Thanks.

Paul
 

mule1075

Member
Feed Provider
Joined
Jan 20, 2003
Messages
3,866
Location
Washington Pennsylvania
Mule, do you get similar P25 ERR rates between the two scanners? I am starting to firmly believe I got a lemon. I researched the board for months before deciding it was safe enough to get the 436, even had the 1.02 firmware that was supposed to revitalize the somewhat lower sensitivity brought on by the 1.03 update.

Thanks.

Paul
I can look for you when I get home tonight.Get back to you as quick as I can
 

Anderegg

Enter text in this field
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Mar 7, 2010
Messages
2,221
Location
San Diego
Cool, thanks. The sensitivity issue I could chalk up to biting the bullet on a not so perfect scanner design, but the ERR rates I am getting are too big to ignore.

I really would like this scanner to operate normally......I am growing attached to it, it's entertaining me and I want to use all the cool new features.

Paul
 

giant22000

Member
Joined
Jun 5, 2011
Messages
69
Mule, do you get similar P25 ERR rates between the two scanners? I am starting to firmly believe I got a lemon. I researched the board for months before deciding it was safe enough to get the 436, even had the 1.02 firmware that was supposed to revitalize the somewhat lower sensitivity brought on by the 1.03 update.

Thanks.

Paul
No you did not receive a lemon. Mine has absolutely terrible performance on P25 simulcast systems. If I could return mine I probably would. If you do any amount of reading on here you will find a lot of complaints for the BCD436HP with P25 simulcast systems.

I'm keeping my fingers crossed that a firmware update fixes some of these issues but a lot of people are very optimistic that firmware alone can't fix this as some are saying it's hardware related.

BTW I get on average 60-90% err rate on P25 decode on my local simulcast with full signal where the majority of what I like to listen is at.

Glad I still have my good ole' trusty Pro-106!
 

Anderegg

Enter text in this field
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Mar 7, 2010
Messages
2,221
Location
San Diego
The P25 system I am monitoring is a standard SmartZone one, not simulcast. I have read all about the dreaded simulcast issues for months. And I just got a hit at ERR: 59, my lowest yet! The 60-80 ERR rates seem to be pretty consistent with my local site as well as a distant site with minimal bars, signal strength doesn't seem to be a factor. 1 bar on the HP gets up in the 100's though!

The display on the 436HP reminds me of a OSX error log. Full of all the details of what you wanted, but listed with the errors that prevented you from getting what you wanted. :)

Paul
 

tilt404

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Apr 11, 2011
Messages
609
Location
Canada
I'm always surprised how my 396XT still gets 4 out of 5 bars on the S meter with no antenna on with my local P25 Phase 1 system. I don't have a 436HP to compare it to though.
 

ButchGone

Member
Joined
Jan 9, 2004
Messages
832
I've had the 396, 396xt, 436 and gre psr 500. Big improvement in sensitivity and digital decode going from 396 to the xt. The GRE was OK, but the reciever was poorly designed and often overcome by strong out of band signals and cell towers. The 436 is a big improvement over the xt because of sharper filtering and improved digital decode. The xt had features I wish the 436 retained. But for my bottom line, which is hearing things well on simulcast phase 1/2 sites, the 436 is a step up and so far the best for P25 simulcast sites. The 436 is also much improved to work around cell sites. It's not perfect but the best option.
I have tested the 436 on VHF hi band and it hears as well as the 396xt.
I guess mileage varies based on the type of system, location, etc. I'm happy with the 436, and hope Uniden continues with firmware updates for new features like analyze.
BG..
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top