• To anyone looking to acquire commercial radio programming software:

    Please do not make requests for copies of radio programming software which is sold (or was sold) by the manufacturer for any monetary value. All requests will be deleted and a forum infraction issued. Making a request such as this is attempting to engage in software piracy and this forum cannot be involved or associated with this activity. The same goes for any private transaction via Private Message. Even if you attempt to engage in this activity in PM's we will still enforce the forum rules. Your PM's are not private and the administration has the right to read them if there's a hint to criminal activity.

    If you are having trouble legally obtaining software please state so. We do not want any hurt feelings when your vague post is mistaken for a free request. It is YOUR responsibility to properly word your request.

    To obtain Motorola software see the Sticky in the Motorola forum.

    The various other vendors often permit their dealers to sell the software online (i.e., Kenwood). Please use Google or some other search engine to find a dealer that sells the software. Typically each series or individual radio requires its own software package. Often the Kenwood software is less than $100 so don't be a cheapskate; just purchase it.

    For M/A Com/Harris/GE, etc: there are two software packages that program all current and past radios. One package is for conventional programming and the other for trunked programming. The trunked package is in upwards of $2,500. The conventional package is more reasonable though is still several hundred dollars. The benefit is you do not need multiple versions for each radio (unlike Motorola).

    This is a large and very visible forum. We cannot jeopardize the ability to provide the RadioReference services by allowing this activity to occur. Please respect this.
  • Effective immediately we will be deleting, without notice, any negative threads or posts that deal with the use of encryption and streaming of scanner audio.

    We've noticed a huge increase in rants and negative posts that revolve around agencies going to encryption due to the broadcasting of scanner audio on the internet. It's now worn out and continues to be the same recycled rants. These rants hijack the threads and derail the conversation. They no longer have a place anywhere on this forum other than in the designated threads in the Rants forum in the Tavern.

    If you violate these guidelines your post will be deleted without notice and an infraction will be issued. We are not against discussion of this issue. You just need to do it in the right place. For example:
    https://forums.radioreference.com/rants/224104-official-thread-live-audio-feeds-scanners-wait-encryption.html

XPR Noise Cancelling RSM vs. SINC.

Joined
Mar 26, 2002
Messages
46
Location
Roscommon, MI
#1
We use xpr 3300 series radios in an industrial/manufacturing environment (read: loud). Currently in Analog but plan to go to DMR when I have enough radios replaced. I have been buying new radios with PMMN4071A - the noise cancelling RSM. One issue we run into when testing out DMR is that you end up with holes in the audio.... I think its actually the noise cancelling on the RSM doing it. If you speak extremely loudly (over the noise, which can be >100db) it is not as bad, but I cannot expect people to yell all day long. If you enable basic or advanced noise cancelling (SINC) Intelligent Audio, it seems to make things even worse.

I just ordered/tried a PMMN4073A RSM which is windporting but non noise cancelling. With no noise cancellation on the radio (intelligent audio) it was not great. With Basic noise cancelling, you could tell someone was talking but could not tell anything they said. With Advanced Auto, it actually worked pretty well. My co-worker actually thought that the audio coming across was actually louder. I have not done quite enough testing to see if the audio clipping is improved.

The RSM's are about the same price, and the cost of SINC+ on the older radios is negligible...

Does anyone have any experience with this? Or thoughts and comments?
Thanks!
 
Joined
Oct 23, 2017
Messages
584
#2
With the PMMN4071 it should be noticeably better. I think that mic would be your best bet since it is listed as a noise cancelling mic. Make sure that the user is talking right into the front of the mic and not off to the side of it. I don't think there is an INC RSM for the 3300 like there is the 7550. I have never had any luck with the noise cancelling in the programming it just seems to make the audio worse no matter the situation. When the audio cuts out on DMR it is just how the the mic picks up the audio not much you can do about that unfortunately.
 
Joined
Mar 26, 2002
Messages
46
Location
Roscommon, MI
#3
Thanks!
Using the RSM correctly will be a challenge... I wish the RSM speaker was louder. I know in digital you can use the intelligent audio to boost it. Nothing available in analog. The INC RSM is not available for the 3x00 series.
 
Joined
Oct 23, 2017
Messages
584
#4
The only thing I can think of is turning mic gain up or hoping AGC will do the best. The XPR3000 series are good radios they just aren't meant for the environment you are using them in
 
Joined
Feb 1, 2010
Messages
563
Location
Tampa, FL
#5
Enhanced noise cancelling and noise cancelling mics do not work well together. They fight each other. I would do basic noise cancelling and a noise cancelling mic. Keep in mind each mic has an "Intended Use Position" and is not forgiving if used outside of those positions (i.e. talk across vs talk into mic). I cannot remember if you can set the 3300 for Loud Environment and Preference to Mid. I fight this stuff on a daily basis. There is no one size fits all. TT
 
Joined
Mar 26, 2002
Messages
46
Location
Roscommon, MI
#6
In my testing, using AGC and RX Audio Leveling provided the best results. I found the same results with Advanced noise cancelling and NC RSM that you mentioned... Where do I find the Intended Use Position?
Thanks!
 
Joined
Dec 22, 2013
Messages
2,868
#8
I was doing coverage testing on a P25 System which used the IMBE vocoder and we tested inside a noisy bar with lots of people talking and the vocoder did some very nonlinear things. AMBE might be better, but it will be a challenge.

Sent from my SM-T350 using Tapatalk
 
Top