Post-V2 Update Performance for BCD396T and BCD996T

Status
Not open for further replies.

utlchris

Member
Joined
Jan 30, 2006
Messages
355
Location
Thornton, Colorado
Hi,

Upgrade went pretty smooth as long as I stuck and read the notes closely. I primarily monitor a P25 700 MHz Simulcast system. (Site 322) After the upgrade the system was pretty quiet and I don't feel it's picking up all the transmissions on both the BCD996T and BCD396T, and still cutting out. I am also noticing that it will stop on a group with no audio and will sit there 4-5 seconds before moving on. Also it may start a conversation and keep going until they un-key, the channel will remain open but the end of the conversation can not be heard. I did read the release notes but not sure where to start and if setting the P25 level lower or higher than the 600 would help. The EDACS systems I monitor are much better and have no issues with them. You can also monitor my feed at the below link.

Thanks in advance!
Chris
 

EJB

20 + year membership
Joined
Oct 29, 2002
Messages
3,732
Location
Downtown Hamilton
Hi. I loaded in the update for my 396t.
After figuring out how to do it (absolutely 'puter illiterate) I tweked the settings.
I normally monitor a mixed analog/digital P25 system
http://www.radioreference.com/apps/db/?sid=861

And find that the P25 comms are easier to listen to than before.
There was always a difference between the quiet Analog coms on the MOH talkgroups to the P25 OPP comms.

Sounds a bit better
thank you uniden.
 

Viper43

Member
Joined
Jul 23, 2005
Messages
3,272
utlchris said:
Hi,

Upgrade went pretty smooth as long as I stuck and read the notes closely. I primarily monitor a P25 700 MHz Simulcast system. (Site 322) After the upgrade the system was pretty quiet and I don't feel it's picking up all the transmissions on both the BCD996T and BCD396T, and still cutting out. Chris

Turn the scanner off

While holding down HOLD turn scanner on

Go to the Program mode, then scroll to SETTINGS

Scroll to P25 Hold Time select 400

Then see how it does. If it is already at 400 try other settings and see how it does. If that doesn't do it contact UPman and explain whats going on.
 

gregmoss

Member
Joined
Feb 19, 2006
Messages
151
Location
Alaska
Thanks! I didn't know about this, until you mentioned it. Didn't read the print properly :) When i access the hidden menu setting, i see this also AGC--- VOL--- What is this?



Thanks,
Greg.
 
Last edited:

Viper43

Member
Joined
Jul 23, 2005
Messages
3,272
AGC = Automatic Gain Control, you can adjust the gain on the volume with that setting
 

garys

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jun 13, 2002
Messages
6,165
Location
Texas
Viper43 said:
With newer scanners the digital will not work with a CTCSS/DPL tone properly. It's not the firmware but the way the scanners are designed. Most likely the digital is slightly stronger and knocking the analog out.

What you say makes perfect sense for the 996, but I'm not sure it does for the 396. However, I don't want to hijack the thread, so I'm going to repost my original message over there in a new thread.
 

Viper43

Member
Joined
Jul 23, 2005
Messages
3,272
Yes, it IS the same for the 396, I have one and it will not pick digital out with a PL tone on. Or in search with the Search tone selected.
 

Bote

know-it-all
Feed Provider
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
1,072
Location
Ft. Lauderdale, FL, U.S.A.
HOLDing mutes shorter

yaesumofo said:
...One of my pet peeves with the 396 is that for example if you are
scanning and the radio has stopped on a digital signal and it is
decoding....if you press the HOLD key the audio stops being decoded
for a moment(mutes) and then starts up again. Some times the
transmission seemed to drop when you hit the hold button and it
hadn't.
Anyway this issue seems better to me now. The signal doesn't seem to
drop when the hold key is pressed. So I am happy.

Yaesumofo

I just tried this on my 996 and I am pleasantly surprised! That bugged me that when I would hear something "good" I'd hit HOLD and miss a key syllable or word. Now that problem has been greatly reduced by this firmware upgrade.

It's little usability tweaks to which I look forward.
 

Bote

know-it-all
Feed Provider
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
1,072
Location
Ft. Lauderdale, FL, U.S.A.
Upgrade = so far, so good

I updated both my 996 scanners last night. After reading a number of "oops!" and "gotchas" I read ALL the instructions carefully before beginning. When I decided that I understood the steps, I performed them and all went well.

In fact, it went better than it should have because I left the updater program at its default 57600bps while my scanner was set for 115200bps. How that updated the first firmware correctly I don't know, but I'm glad it didn't corrupt anything.

So far the digital audio is at least as good as before, but both digital systems near me are borderline quality. When I go to work this week I will be able to make better judgements. At least they're not worse than before.

I like the tiny usability tweaks that make it more of a pleasure to use this box. That is important to power users like me.
 

mikeydcg2003

Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2007
Messages
325
Location
Dallas Center, IA
Updated my 396 Last night. I still can hear the beeps on the Racom Edacs System in Des Moines, but it's has been greatly diminished. Have yet to get some digital talk. Will find out tomorrow when the Highway Helpers and the DOT start gabbin about the morning rush.
 

mike_s104

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Aug 25, 2004
Messages
4,808
Location
Berkeley Co. WV/ Loudoun Co. VA
with the 996T after the upgrade, I am able to receive a non-trunked digital VHF station with much better audio. Before it was broken and could never really hear a complete transmission, but now I'm hearing everything clearly.
 

rsnap

Member
Joined
Feb 24, 2008
Messages
2
I played around with the squelch last nite and it cleared up the cc holding problem. 996.
 

dick122

Member
Joined
Apr 27, 2003
Messages
0
Location
Brewer, Maine
Low Hum on conventional channels?

Upgrade went with no issues. Now I notice that i seem to have a low humming noise on all conventional channels. Anyone else notice this? Do I need to tweak the AGC? Thanks.
 

garys

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jun 13, 2002
Messages
6,165
Location
Texas
After the upgrade, two systems are missing from the scanner. System names are there, but I can't access the systems themselves. Not a big deal as I can just reload them. If you don't have the current profile saved somewhere, be sure to do so before you do the firmware update.

Gary
 

ERICMYERS

Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2007
Messages
248
Location
Plainfield, IL
Southwest Chicagoland report

I run a BDD996T to monitor Starcom.

I loaded the updates the night they came out. I monitor southwest chicagoland, Plainfield PD on Starcom, Joliet MOT Public Safety, Naperville, WillCO EDACS, and WESCOM. I still get a lot of garbling on the Will County 113 site, and the DuPage site still works better than Will for what I want to hear but not without its share of garbling as well.

After the install I still get the tollway and ISP very well as I did before. However, I bought this radio primarily to monitor Plainfield PD, which is better now, but still less than 25% of the transmissions are getting through decode. Before, it was maybe 10%.

Since the firmware update, when Starcom DOES GET decoded, it sounds a good bit better..maybe even sounds what I would consider good for digital. It still fails to decode a lot of the time even on groups that come in very well. I have lots of signal strength (though the meter fluctuates constantly), and have tried all 4 of my antennas with no noticeable difference. Attenuating just kills all the traffic, so it's probably not an overloading situation. I did find that setting the P25 decode to 400ms is the best setting for me after much trial and error. Setting Digital End Code to YES seemed to help the scanning. Also I've adjusted the hold times down to 1 second, which now matches my PRO2055 for scan speed catching the traffic on MOT adn EDACS and keeps the conversations going to my liking.

Conventional, MOT, EDACS all still work just fine. My squelch knob registers no change on screen until it's turned to about half way, then it starts with zero and goes to 20 if I recall correctly....that's odd, and probably a remnant of the install??

I built all new clean profiles ahead of the upgrade, so nothing to report about that. No issues at all getting the files downloaded or installed.

I'm going to crosspost this in Starcom Yahoo forum as well. For purposes of Starcom, any advice you all might have on getting Plainfield PD to come in better will be appreciated. UPMan and forum participants, thanks for the support.
Eric
 

FlashP

Member
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
196
results

I updated both 396 & 996. Other than having to redo some of my programming, no ill effects noted.

Audio clarity on nearby 38x & 40x P25 systems is much better. Reception at a distance seems improved, at least for the random weather and locations I sampled.

Flash
 

Mikek

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 10, 2003
Messages
305
Just a quick update from the West Coast. I applied the updates to my 396 and 996 without any trouble (other than a VERY slow transfer rate when downloading) a few hours after they became available.

I primarily listen to the Orange County (CA.) 800Mhz CCCS (http://www.radioreference.com/apps/db/?sid=201) which is mixed analog and P25 digital simulcast. I occasionally monitor the Riverside County's EDACS system although I'm not in a great location to hear it.

My 996 is a base radio, using the supplied antenna. Performance on the CCCS was excellent prior to the upgrade and continues to be flawless now - no differences or enhancements were noted. On the EDACS system, I'll hear beeps following about 30% of the transmission on the Riverside West system - unchanged from before.

The 396 is with me in the car most of the time and also uses the supplied antenna. Prior to the upgrade, digital traffic on the CCCS was difficult to hear at times due to audio clarity, slow decoding, and/or the decoder just dropping until it could re-sync. I haven't noticed an improvement in these areas since the upgrade, but haven't spent as much time as I should with the radio.

One thing I have noticed - the P25 Err rate is now in the 50's and 60's from the low teens prior to upgrading. If I understand correctly, a big part of the upgrade had to do with eliminating the need to set the P25 threshold, so I'm hoping that the values aren't relevant anymore as it could signal poorer performance in fringe areas.

I'm out of range of the Riverside County EDACS system when I have the 396 around, but I'll post again if there's a big change (good or bad) when I can monitor it for a while.

End result, I'll take that ever-unpopular "neutral' position on the upgrades for now. The radios both worked well before and after the upgrade on the trucked systems I monitor.

Cheers!
Mike
 

rhutch

Member
Joined
Feb 5, 2005
Messages
569
Location
Ontario
On my 396 since the update the err rate is constanly at zero while monitoring the Bell Fleetnet System zone 1 in Ontario. I have the P25 Wait Time set to 400ms. I use to get a little breaking of the squlech just prior to a trans mission, don't get that at all anymore.
 

Statevillian

Member
Joined
Aug 21, 2006
Messages
255
Location
Chicago, IL.
Another SOuthwest Chicago Area Update

ERICMYERS said:
I run a BDD996T to monitor Starcom.

I loaded the updates the night they came out. I monitor southwest chicagoland, Plainfield PD on Starcom, Joliet MOT Public Safety, Naperville, WillCO EDACS, and WESCOM. I still get a lot of garbling on the Will County 113 site, and the DuPage site still works better than Will for what I want to hear but not without its share of garbling as well.

After the install I still get the tollway and ISP very well as I did before. However, I bought this radio primarily to monitor Plainfield PD, which is better now, but still less than 25% of the transmissions are getting through decode. Before, it was maybe 10%.

Since the firmware update, when Starcom DOES GET decoded, it sounds a good bit better..maybe even sounds what I would consider good for digital. It still fails to decode a lot of the time even on groups that come in very well. I have lots of signal strength (though the meter fluctuates constantly), and have tried all 4 of my antennas with no noticeable difference. Attenuating just kills all the traffic, so it's probably not an overloading situation. I did find that setting the P25 decode to 400ms is the best setting for me after much trial and error. Setting Digital End Code to YES seemed to help the scanning. Also I've adjusted the hold times down to 1 second, which now matches my PRO2055 for scan speed catching the traffic on MOT adn EDACS and keeps the conversations going to my liking.

Conventional, MOT, EDACS all still work just fine. My squelch knob registers no change on screen until it's turned to about half way, then it starts with zero and goes to 20 if I recall correctly....that's odd, and probably a remnant of the install??

I built all new clean profiles ahead of the upgrade, so nothing to report about that. No issues at all getting the files downloaded or installed.

I'm going to crosspost this in Starcom Yahoo forum as well. For purposes of Starcom, any advice you all might have on getting Plainfield PD to come in better will be appreciated. UPMan and forum participants, thanks for the support.
Eric
I still think it is very, very early for anyone to be making claims without real good testing in a variety of areas with a myriad of settings. I did the download Friday afternoon and spent the past 3 days where I had free time experimenting.

Starcom IN MY OPINION is just a mess. Not the Uniden scanner at fault so far as I can tell. No change noticable so far on sites 101, 102, 113, and 115. Not even audio in my opinion. Tonight site 113 actually sounds great in Homer Glen/Lockport. Weather is clear tonight too though. When weather was bad...windy, rainy, Starcom 113 totally sucks with drop outs. Tonight has been as good as that site has always sounded for me. Plainfield PD is clear on a scanner and no one on their end is complaining tonight. Weather impacts this digital stuff. No question.

I have noticed no change to Motorola 800 trunked systems. I have found TG 80 to motorboat on the O Hare 400Mhz UHF digi system and this weekend was no exception. But, I also noticed that when TG 48 or 80 motorboated, the GRE 500 would pick up a bad signal but at least catch it and struggle to hang onto it. Sadly, I was mobile so I couldn't document which frequency was at work when this happened.

Chicago Police Zone observations: While in a particular zone/district...all 460Mhz conventional analog, the squelch tail after the dispatcher would talk was almost unbearable. Adjacent zones, no problem. I had to set squelch to 6 or better to lose the squelch tail. It ONLY happened when I was in that Zone. And, no, the answer isn't to attenuate. I never had to and shouldn't have to attenuate. This is one of the only residuals I see from the update to this firmware. My Uniden 330 on same zones were perfect at a squelch setting of 2. As was the 396, pre update. However, Lemont PD uses UHF conventional...In downtown Lemont....no squelch tail.

LTR in UHF and VHF range....not really tested yet. LTR still works so that is a plus. I will concentrate on the LTR stuff soon.

Midway UHF and Metro Correctional Center. I have noticed no change in just 2 hours of listening. Both are still adequate.

EDACS. I had original firmware in the 396. Pre update...no beeps at end of transmissions. Same with my 330. Post update..one beep or half beep before the system moves on. Various antennas, same result.Test area...Will County EDACS system less than 5 miles from tower. Yet to sample from farther away. 2nd thing I didn't like about the update.

Comparison with GRE 500: Starcom. Both drop transmissions in middle of conversations....especially in bad weather and windy conditions. I never realized how many full transmissions I was missing on the 396 until I puchased the GRE 500. Nothing seems to have changed in that respect after the updated firmware. The 396 still misses many conversations...even after I played with RF gain and AGC resume values. Digital audio?...Unfair to compare. The 396 speaker is awful. No way I will touch that question. It can't reasonably be answered in my opinion. The 396 speaker ruins the real potential of this scanner.

Scan speed?...I don't care so I haven't tried.

Just preliminary friends. Much more work to do with various settings and playing before one can truly render a fair and honest report of findings.
 

ERICMYERS

Member
Joined
Jul 8, 2007
Messages
248
Location
Plainfield, IL
Starcom last night

So last night, Starcom, specifically Plainfield PD, for the first time since I got this radio weeks ago, came is clear and very consistent. I think you are right, Statevillian, that Starcom is maybe sensitive to weather or is in need of more refinement or??? Users were not complaining at all last night about 'unreadable' transmissions, which they normally do quite a bit. I agree that it probably isn't the radio at fault, because I get a lot of Starcom traffic to decode and it often sounds really good (and did before the updated firmware) it's just not what I want to listen to for content.

Will County EDACS was bringing in absolutely nothing last night, and that is usually a very high traffic system. I did get some voice if I hit hold, but it wasn't tracking at all, as if it couldn't find the control channel, and I don't even know if I was hearing Will Co EDACS or other traffic on the same frequency. Not sure what's going on with that, and I spent no time trying to resolve, just reporting the oddity today.

Off topic but related, last night I was running 2 scanners simultaneously. 996 on Starcom Dupage site with only Plainfield PD, and my Pro2055 on WESCOM. It was sort of funny to listen to the dispatchers having to bounce between systems and repeating messages between Shorewood on conventional and Plainfield on Starcom to collaborate on catching an evader going north on 59. This dual system situation has to drive them a little crazy when they have to collaborate.
Cheers,
Eric
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top