JMedley_1 said:
No.
You can create separate trunked systems and conventional systems and "link" them with the same quick key.
Official BCD396T Discussion Thread (Post-release)
- Thread starter blantonl
- Start date
- Status
No.
You can create separate trunked systems and conventional systems and "link" them with the same quick key.
John_M
Member
Thanks. Scannerman of the North. How many systems can be linked with the same quick key?
JMedley_1 said:
As many as the radio can handle. (400 I think)
troymail said:
If I may quote UPMAN:
"I will release no software before its time"
(I'm pretty sure that was the exact wording - it was in reference to the BC246T UASD)
Remember that this scanner was not originally due out until August. It's about 2 months early. The software is likely still being worked on (likely at a feverish pace), but I believe UPMAN also said it would be out soon - maybe even this week.
Joe M.
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2002
- Messages
- 560
WELL!! I was all but certain I was gonna get this scanner, but with all the mixed reviews I'm not so sure. :shock: How feasable would it be for any of you to post some sound files so we can all hear for ourselves what the audio really sounds like?
I'd hate to risk buying the scanner now, when for all we know Uniden might come out with an improved future version ( a la the BC245XLT 5-second vs. 1-second multi-track delay).
Until I get to hear this scanner for myself, I've decided to hold off on buying it for now.
I'd hate to risk buying the scanner now, when for all we know Uniden might come out with an improved future version ( a la the BC245XLT 5-second vs. 1-second multi-track delay).
Until I get to hear this scanner for myself, I've decided to hold off on buying it for now.
jdanon
Member
- Joined
- Jun 24, 2005
- Messages
- 49
Screen impressions
Got my 396 yesterday (would have been nice to have for the long weekend but oh well). Box was so small and light I could have sworn they shipped an empty box. I still can't believe the size of this thing. These are my impressions of the now infamous blue backlight:
1. The display to begin with is on the small side. Much smaller than I anticipated, but then again it's proportional to the overall size of the unit.
2. The font used went from the nice big wide letters of the 296/796 to a tall and narrow font. It's not bad because I think the resolution of the screen is higher than say the 296. The font is legible, it's just packed in kind of tight.
3. OK, I'll admit the screen is hard to read without the backlight on. Black letters on a grayish background compared to big black letters on an orange background of the 296/796.
4. Cranking up the contrast without the backlight on seems to reduce the viewing angle as it makes the letters darker and things seem to run together making it hard to read when you look at it off center.
5. The blue backlight isn't as bad as some people are making it out to be. I'd say it has slightly less contrast from the black on orange displays we are used to, but not by much. It's more of a light blue backlight so it's black letters on a bluish-white backlight. Not bad at all.
6. I like how they can use different font sizes to show different things on the screen. The main alpha tags are big letters, but group/system key numbers are in smaller letters, as are status/mode messages. Much cleaner.
7. Haven't had a chance to benefit from the matte finish of the screen, but I do know the 296 had a bit of a shine when used in direct sunlight, so this will be great.
As you can see from above, there are pros and cons. Overall I like the screen probably the same as the 296 though I think over time I'll end up liking it more. By the way, I was listening to UHF (463 MHz) last night, and the reception was a little better than the 296 on the same antenna. It was a station I normally listen to that's about 25 miles away and it was much clearer than the 296.
Got my 396 yesterday (would have been nice to have for the long weekend but oh well). Box was so small and light I could have sworn they shipped an empty box. I still can't believe the size of this thing. These are my impressions of the now infamous blue backlight:
1. The display to begin with is on the small side. Much smaller than I anticipated, but then again it's proportional to the overall size of the unit.
2. The font used went from the nice big wide letters of the 296/796 to a tall and narrow font. It's not bad because I think the resolution of the screen is higher than say the 296. The font is legible, it's just packed in kind of tight.
3. OK, I'll admit the screen is hard to read without the backlight on. Black letters on a grayish background compared to big black letters on an orange background of the 296/796.
4. Cranking up the contrast without the backlight on seems to reduce the viewing angle as it makes the letters darker and things seem to run together making it hard to read when you look at it off center.
5. The blue backlight isn't as bad as some people are making it out to be. I'd say it has slightly less contrast from the black on orange displays we are used to, but not by much. It's more of a light blue backlight so it's black letters on a bluish-white backlight. Not bad at all.
6. I like how they can use different font sizes to show different things on the screen. The main alpha tags are big letters, but group/system key numbers are in smaller letters, as are status/mode messages. Much cleaner.
7. Haven't had a chance to benefit from the matte finish of the screen, but I do know the 296 had a bit of a shine when used in direct sunlight, so this will be great.
As you can see from above, there are pros and cons. Overall I like the screen probably the same as the 296 though I think over time I'll end up liking it more. By the way, I was listening to UHF (463 MHz) last night, and the reception was a little better than the 296 on the same antenna. It was a station I normally listen to that's about 25 miles away and it was much clearer than the 296.
TGID Priority
I know how to setup a conventional channel for priority. But is there a way to set a priority on a specific TGID within a system? I notice when in ID Search on a busy system I miss the fire dispatch talkgroup alot.
If its not available maybe we can see this in a future update?
I know how to setup a conventional channel for priority. But is there a way to set a priority on a specific TGID within a system? I notice when in ID Search on a busy system I miss the fire dispatch talkgroup alot.
If its not available maybe we can see this in a future update?
As you can see from above, there are pros and cons. Overall I like the screen probably the same as the 296 though I think over time I'll end up liking it more. By the way, I was listening to UHF (463 MHz) last night, and the reception was a little better than the 296 on the same antenna. It was a station I normally listen to that's about 25 miles away and it was much clearer than the 296
jdanon:
Do you mean the UHF was clearer on the 296 or the 396? I ask because the Dallas PD/FD is all in this range. I don't want to lose clarity on the 396 over my Pro-96.
Thanks for clarifyng.
-Al
jdanon:
Do you mean the UHF was clearer on the 296 or the 396? I ask because the Dallas PD/FD is all in this range. I don't want to lose clarity on the 396 over my Pro-96.
Thanks for clarifyng.
-Al
jdanon
Member
- Joined
- Jun 24, 2005
- Messages
- 49
I haven't done a whole lot of testing just yet, as I only had about 30 minutes to play last night so bear that in mind! I was listening strictly to 460-468 range and it seemed to me that it was a little better than my 296. Normally the stations I listen to are pretty weak and scratchy on the 296, but the 396 sounded noticeably better. This is my initial impression so take it for what it's worth. Others here have reported some reception issues, but so far none in my area (eastern CT) where UHF isn't all that widespread compared to VHF.
JGP
Member
jdanon,
Thank you for the good news! I should receive my 396 this Thursday, and I listen to fourteen LTR SMR's in the UHF Mhz band.
The UHF reception wasn't talked much about on the BCD396T Yahoo Group. So I'm happy to hear this.
Joel
Thank you for the good news! I should receive my 396 this Thursday, and I listen to fourteen LTR SMR's in the UHF Mhz band.
The UHF reception wasn't talked much about on the BCD396T Yahoo Group. So I'm happy to hear this.
Joel
Re: audio quality p-25
Did you set audio AGC for digital to on? I notice that the AGC, when activated, is slow. The beginning of transmissions are often loud and then it seems that the AGC kicks in and levels them out. This happens often but not 100% of the time.
I think they have made a significant improvement over the 250/785/296/796 models (and I've owned three of the four, all sold because I hated the way they sounded on P25) but they still don't stack up to the GRE models.
Of more concern to me is the analog audio quality...or lack thereof. I'm finding it somewhat raspy and distorted, especially the lower the volume is. As I've said before I've tried switching from NFM to FM on 800 MHz transmissions, switched analog AGC on and off, but the problem still exists. I've seen another reference to this issue posted here, and exchanged a few e-mails with others that feel the same way. At $500 plus I would expect better.
Unfortunate, as the feature set of this radio blows away anything else out there right now. Sadly the GRE's continue to blow Uniden away where audio is concerned. Just my .02...actually this is the third time I've said it here, I think, so just my .06... :roll:
ronhl said:
Did you set audio AGC for digital to on? I notice that the AGC, when activated, is slow. The beginning of transmissions are often loud and then it seems that the AGC kicks in and levels them out. This happens often but not 100% of the time.
I think they have made a significant improvement over the 250/785/296/796 models (and I've owned three of the four, all sold because I hated the way they sounded on P25) but they still don't stack up to the GRE models.
Of more concern to me is the analog audio quality...or lack thereof. I'm finding it somewhat raspy and distorted, especially the lower the volume is. As I've said before I've tried switching from NFM to FM on 800 MHz transmissions, switched analog AGC on and off, but the problem still exists. I've seen another reference to this issue posted here, and exchanged a few e-mails with others that feel the same way. At $500 plus I would expect better.
Unfortunate, as the feature set of this radio blows away anything else out there right now. Sadly the GRE's continue to blow Uniden away where audio is concerned. Just my .02...actually this is the third time I've said it here, I think, so just my .06... :roll:
Re: audio quality p-25
Well, hopefully all this audio "issues" can be taken care of by "tweaking" the firmware. I think it should be very possible.... :wink:
scancapecod said:
Well, hopefully all this audio "issues" can be taken care of by "tweaking" the firmware. I think it should be very possible.... :wink:
Well I have had this radio for almost a week now (tomorrow will be a week) and have posted what I have found as far as sensitivity compared to the Pro-96 previously. There has been quite a lot of comment about the audio and I didn't want to rush my thoughts on that.
In reference to P25 audio, I too found it very rough in comparison to the Pro-96, and since programming has taken so much of the actual usage time on this radio (as opposed to playing with it) it has taken me until last night to get around to try and adjusting the P25 audio levels in accordance with the instructions on page 99 of the inclosed manual.
Last night I started playing with that and amazingly I was able to smooth out quite a lot of the harshness of the audio. Yes it still has some up and down volumn level problems, but the speaker no longer sounds as if it rattles (a comment made by several people). I am not sure I have gotten the P25 exactly optimized yet, but I must say I don't mind listening to it as much as I did at first.
In reference to P25 audio, I too found it very rough in comparison to the Pro-96, and since programming has taken so much of the actual usage time on this radio (as opposed to playing with it) it has taken me until last night to get around to try and adjusting the P25 audio levels in accordance with the instructions on page 99 of the inclosed manual.
Last night I started playing with that and amazingly I was able to smooth out quite a lot of the harshness of the audio. Yes it still has some up and down volumn level problems, but the speaker no longer sounds as if it rattles (a comment made by several people). I am not sure I have gotten the P25 exactly optimized yet, but I must say I don't mind listening to it as much as I did at first.
Hello,
I got my 396 today. It is small and alot is on that LCD screen.
I think someone asked in the pre-release thread if the 396 went to 11. Paul mentioned that Uniden only made 10 louder. The comments may be for another scanner since the 396 goes to 15!!!!
I dealt with SMA connectors on other gear. One potential problem when adapting BNC to SMA with an adapter is the weight of the duck or antenna cable can loosen the SMA connector. I noticed on the Uniden BNC to SMA adapter that there is a flat area that rests against the case when it is screwed on. This should help distribute the weight and strain of a BNC antenna or Cable. I would not use an adapter like this:
An alternative if you are connecting to a cable is a short jumper cable with a SMA on one end and a BNC on the other end.
The supplied antenna also has a flat area that rests against the case.
The 396 only had the Nationwide system enabled and since work beckoned I just enabled the local preprogrammed systems. I did enter the boring TSA frequency to test out the digital. I was able to hear the audio with a level of about 7 while driving through the driving rain and avoiding the flooded out roads.
73 Eric
I got my 396 today. It is small and alot is on that LCD screen.
I think someone asked in the pre-release thread if the 396 went to 11. Paul mentioned that Uniden only made 10 louder. The comments may be for another scanner since the 396 goes to 15!!!!
I dealt with SMA connectors on other gear. One potential problem when adapting BNC to SMA with an adapter is the weight of the duck or antenna cable can loosen the SMA connector. I noticed on the Uniden BNC to SMA adapter that there is a flat area that rests against the case when it is screwed on. This should help distribute the weight and strain of a BNC antenna or Cable. I would not use an adapter like this:
An alternative if you are connecting to a cable is a short jumper cable with a SMA on one end and a BNC on the other end.
The supplied antenna also has a flat area that rests against the case.
The 396 only had the Nationwide system enabled and since work beckoned I just enabled the local preprogrammed systems. I did enter the boring TSA frequency to test out the digital. I was able to hear the audio with a level of about 7 while driving through the driving rain and avoiding the flooded out roads.
73 Eric
MacombMonitor
Member
- Joined
- May 18, 2005
- Messages
- 3,551
I agree! I put an SMA>BNC adapter, like the one pictured, on an Icom IC-R2 once...for about five minutes! It made me nervous for the reasons you stated. I took it off, and resigned myself to using SMA antennas. It sounds like Uniden did it right!
Need Some 396 Help in CT
I just received my 396. I am a veteran of the 785/796 and have good luck with the two of those i have. I programmed the 396 for the CT State Police APCO 25 Trunking system, and I am having trouble with it. I programmed the trunking frequencies, then the talk groups, however i am only hearing small bits of messages while it's scanning. If i stop the scan, and scroll through the frequencies, i can hear transmissions loud and clear. I have do be doing something wrong, but can't figure it out, anyone have some suggestions??
bernie
I just received my 396. I am a veteran of the 785/796 and have good luck with the two of those i have. I programmed the 396 for the CT State Police APCO 25 Trunking system, and I am having trouble with it. I programmed the trunking frequencies, then the talk groups, however i am only hearing small bits of messages while it's scanning. If i stop the scan, and scroll through the frequencies, i can hear transmissions loud and clear. I have do be doing something wrong, but can't figure it out, anyone have some suggestions??
bernie
Re: Need Some 396 Help in CT
CT does not have an APCO25 system. If you set the scanner for a P25 TRS, you set it wrong. CT has a Motorola Type II sytem, that uses P25 CAI modulation. That is the same problem several people experienced when first getting the scanner. :wink:bmeehan282 said:
jdanon
Member
- Joined
- Jun 24, 2005
- Messages
- 49
Re: need 396 help in CT
Bernie,
I believe the CT State Police is not a pure digital P25 system. It is a P25 CAI system with digital voice channels which makes a big difference with setting up this scanner. Your problem has been commonplace with this scanner and the solution is to set the system type from a P25 system to a 800MHz system.
Bernie,
I believe the CT State Police is not a pure digital P25 system. It is a P25 CAI system with digital voice channels which makes a big difference with setting up this scanner. Your problem has been commonplace with this scanner and the solution is to set the system type from a P25 system to a 800MHz system.
EricCottrell said:
What do you mean by "went to 11"?
- Status
