Official BC-RH96 Remote Head Pre-Release Thread

[UPMan]

Didn't want to lock you into using a speaker in the RH. This way you have flexibility in using:

1) The scanner's own speaker (if positioned where it makes sense),
2) An external accessory speaker
3) Car audio system (through AUX input)
4) Other???

Any speaker we could have fit into the form factor would have been disappointing.

 

[rescue161]

I do agree with not putting a speaker inside the remote head as most of the commercial remote heads don't have one either.

I was under the impression that there would be a jack on the back of the remote head to plug the speaker in.

 

[UPMan]

Wanted to avoid having too many wires strewn across the dash.

 

[rescue161]

Wanted to avoid having too many wires strewn across the dash.

Makes sense now that I look at it that way.

 

[yaesumofo]

It seems to me that at least putting in an audio amp and an audio out port on the head would have been a wise thing to do.
For example the 396 doesn't have a powerful audio signal to begin with. using the remote head to boost the audio I believe would have been the smart thing to do.
As a Ham radio operator I have set up a number of remote heads for mobile radios. every remote kit I have ever installed included at least a long audio cable for the purpose of extending the the speaker placement. Why should Unidens product be so much different?

I am trying to figure out why I am remoting a radio like a hand held which is not much smaller than this remote head. If the head provided an amplified audio port then it would have Ben one less long cable from the radio.


I agree that any internal speaker would have most likely been disappointing. But the inclusion of an audio amp and an audio OUT. would have gone a long way to helping those of us who might have used this product with a HT, which do not have strong audio to begin with. You say fewer wires. This way it is the same number of wires instead of the wire coming from the remote head I have to string the wire all the way from where the scanner is set up, to where ever I have to mount the remote speaker. seems to me like 2X as much work. somebody mentioned using an FM TX at the scanner to send the audio to the car radio. Why not build this into the remote head?
I really feel like the lack of audio options for the remote head hurts the product. It is almost as if the engineers turned a blind eye to the issue and gave it zero thought. It is like "we will ignore audio they wont notice". I think it is too bad because some of us have noticed.
Is a cable included for a remote speaker? Some how I doubt it.
This is a real short coming.
A remote head is supposed to enhance the original product. As it is all this head does ,is give you control of a radio which as an ht works fine just like it is when sitting in the cup holder with zero weird hanging anywhere, the one issue with this setup is the weak audio from the scanner. the remote head doesn't solve or even attempt to resolve this issue in an way.
I am sitting here and scratching my head. I really wanted this product to work for me. With zero audio (not even an audio cable) this $200.00 device just doesn't do it for me. Too bad. I am also amazed that I seem to be alone with this issue. I had no Idea I was so terminally unique.
I will wait for version 2
Yaesumofo

Didn't want to lock you into using a speaker in the RH. This way you have flexibility in using:

1) The scanner's own speaker (if positioned where it makes sense),
2) An external accessory speaker
3) Car audio system (through AUX input)
4) Other???

Any speaker we could have fit into the form factor would have been disappointing.

 

[bctrl1]

I am sitting here and scratching my head. I really wanted this product to work for me. With zero audio (not even an audio cable) this $200.00 device just doesn't do it for me. Too bad. I am also amazed that I seem to be alone with this issue. I had no Idea I was so terminally unique.
I will wait for version 2
Yaesumofo

You are not alone at all. There are a number of things about this product that leave me scratching my head as well.

Personally, “avoid having too many wires strewn across the dash” seems like a rather questionable excuse. If I were to speculate, I would blame this missing ‘feature’ on implementation issues and cost.

One problem with providing an audio connection is running the audio signal path alongside the serial data in the cable. If the two are run inside the same cable the data will often couple onto the audio signal, and is heard at the speaker. This problem becomes much worse if amplified speakers are used. One solution is to use cable with separately shielded data and audio paths (+$$) or even twisted pairs, but often this does not eliminate the problem entirely. Running the audio signal differentially is an even better option, as the interference is common mode to both audio paths. But again, there is cost and development time associated with each of these solutions. It would also mean that the convenient and inexpensive 3 pin headphone jack for the cable connection could no longer be used. A more elaborate ($$) connector would be needed, and a robust method of splitting the cable on either end would need to be developed.

Doesn’t it seem easier to conveniently leave this fundamental function out of the product, and let the customer deal with it? After all, we already need to run power and a control line to turn the receiver on and off…so what is another cable?

 

[MarkEagleUSA]

This way it is the same number of wires instead of the wire coming from the remote head I have to string the wire all the way from where the scanner is set up, to where ever I have to mount the remote speaker. seems to me like 2X as much work.

Since there's no audio carried in the data cable, you'd still have to string 2 wires from the scanner mounting location even if the remote head had audio capabilities. It doesn't create any additional work.

Why not build this into the remote head?

One word: cost.

I really feel like the lack of audio options for the remote head hurts the product. It is almost as if the engineers turned a blind eye to the issue and gave it zero thought. It is like "we will ignore audio they wont notice".

You seem to be forgetting that the RH is not designed solely for HT's. If it were, I might begin to understand your argument. However, everyone that wants one has different needs. I think Unidens design to the least common denominator makes sense.

Is a cable included for a remote speaker? Some how I doubt it.
This is a real short coming.

How? What about those that may not want or need external audio? Should the RH price be higher to include all the options anyone may want?

A remote head is supposed to enhance the original product. As it is all this head does ,is give you control of a radio which as an ht works fine just like it is when sitting in the cup holder with zero weird hanging anywhere, the one issue with this setup is the weak audio from the scanner. the remote head doesn't solve or even attempt to resolve this issue in an way.

Again, your argument makes no sense. If Uniden never made the RH, you'd still be stuck with an HT and weak audio. You'd either learn to live with it or, like many have done, gotten an external (possibly amplified) speaker or some other alternative.

I believe the "enhancement" the RH brings to handhelds is the larger display and easier to use controls.

I am sitting here and scratching my head. I really wanted this product to work for me. With zero audio (not even an audio cable) this $200.00 device just doesn't do it for me.

Obviously the RH isn't suited to your needs. To others, I'm sure it's viewed as the best thing since sliced bread. If it doesn't do what you need or want, don't buy it.

 

[garys]

As a Ham radio operator I have set up a number of remote heads for mobile radios. every remote kit I have ever installed included at least a long audio cable for the purpose of extending the the speaker placement. Why should Unidens product be so much different?

That's funny because NONE of the ham radios I've remoted have run their audio back to the head nor have they included any audio cable. That includes several Alinco, Yaesu, and Kenwood radios. All have run their audio off of the chassis. I have a Yaesu on the way with the separation kit and from what I can see there is no audio cable included. I was talking with a friend of mine who just bought a Kenwood D700 with the separation kit. I'm pretty sure he told me that came without audio or microphone extension cables. Which is interesting since Kenwood put the mic on the chassis, not the head in that radio.

I am trying to figure out why I am remoting a radio like a hand held which is not much smaller than this remote head. If the head provided an amplified audio port then it would have Ben one less long cable from the radio.

I don't know about you, but I found the 396 very hard to operate in a vehicle. The 996 controls are much better and the RH-96 duplicates a lot of the functions that I found hard to operate on the 396.


Gary

 

[Uplink]

I see the owners manual is now on the Uniden site!!!

That is a good sign I would say.

I can't believe how cool this thing is going to be, THANKS UNIDEN, FOR MAKING SCANNERS FINALLY COME OF AGE.

 

[Air490]

RH96 and the "U" models

Does anyone have any idea yet if the RH96 will be compatable with the UBCD396 and 996?

 

[Julian1]

RH 96 on Uniden Website

Maybe others have already seen this, but I just came across this on the Uniden website.

I guess the formal release is due very soon.

Best Regards,
Julian

http://www.uniden.com/products/productdetail.cfm?product=BC-RH96&filter=Public Safety

 

[trido]

Maybe others have already seen this, but I just came across this on the Uniden website.

I guess the formal release is due very soon.

Best Regards,
Julian

http://www.uniden.com/products/productdetail.cfm?product=BC-RH96&filter=Public Safety

Update I received today was still end of FEB .

 

[swwesq]

When does it go on sale?

I can't believe how cool this thing is going to be, THANKS UNIDEN, FOR MAKING SCANNERS FINALLY COME OF AGE.

Anyone know when we will by able to buy the BC-RH96 and who will have it first?

Thanks,
Steve

 

[kingpin]

I was very dissapointed to see on the Uniden website that the backlight is orange in the picture and the manual does not mention being able to change it. I know Paul has been good about listening to our opinions here on this thread but why let the many many posts for green backlighting fall through the cracks? I for one can't read the orange display during the day. It's just too dark.... I was planning on purchasing one of these but now I've changed my mind....

oh well

 

[trido]

Anyone know when we will by able to buy the BC-RH96 and who will have it first?

Thanks,
Steve

I was told tuesday they should be out by END of FEB.
We have many on order and plenty not sold yet.

 

[safetyobc]

I was very dissapointed to see on the Uniden website that the backlight is orange in the picture and the manual does not mention being able to change it. I know Paul has been good about listening to our opinions here on this thread but why let the many many posts for green backlighting fall through the cracks? I for one can't read the orange display during the day. It's just too dark.... I was planning on purchasing one of these but now I've changed my mind....

oh well

I think the backlight color has affected my decision to buy more than I would like to think. Initially anyway. I have the BCT15 and even though it is a GREAT scanner, the backlight color isn't good. It is hard for me to see.

 

[SCPD]

We have some BC-RH96 on order. We will beat anyones prices on these, e-mail us.

 

[XTS3000]

Why only one color for the RH96? Most likely to make it compadible with the 396. The 396 has no provisions for dual color lights. A price we pay so we can use it on many scanners now and in the future.

Why orange? If Uniden had to choose one color, orange is the best for day time driving & night time driving. Blue light is the most distorting color for the human eye (why do you think they make Blu-Blocker sunglasses). The human eye is most sensitive to the green region of the color spectrum - good for day time, but is too bright for night time driving and preserving your nightvision. Orange is a good middle area that works well for both day and night.

If you don't like the color of the control head, change it. There are less than 10 smt LEDS to change out. Cost for the LEDS would be $6 to $20 depending on color - blue being the most expensive.

 

[garys]

Why only one color for the RH96? Most likely to make it compadible with the 396. The 396 has no provisions for dual color lights. A price we pay so we can use it on many scanners now and in the future.

I'd think it was more a cost factor since it would seem that the color of the control head is independent of the color of the scanner it's controlling.

If you don't like the color of the control head, change it. There are less than 10 smt LEDS to change out. Cost for the LEDS would be $6 to $20 depending on color - blue being the most expensive.

I found it pretty interesting when I read an article on why blue and white are more expensive. You'd think that the cost would be pretty close on all of them, but it took a lot of R&D to get Blue and White to work properly.

Gary

 

[biglaz]

Scanner Master has it listed now. $199.95. "Coming in February."
http://www.scannermaster.com/BC_RH96_Remote_Head_p/10-691108.htm