ProVoice/DMR/NXDN Upgrades Work Better on BCD536HP or SDS200?

iMONITOR

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Sep 20, 2006
Messages
8,814
Has anyone determined if the ProVoice, DMR, and NXDN upgrades work better on the BCD536HP or the SDS200? I'm considering purchasing all three upgrades but trying to decide which scanner to install them into.
 

trentbob

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Feb 22, 2007
Messages
2,769
Location
Bristol, Pa.
A very good question and I have nxdn on both the SDS series end the x36.

Specifically it's an NX48 system in the 460 megahertz range with two sites in the next city over. Both sound good. No muddiness on either the SDS or 36. I use a rooftop so both come in well. On the Portables, using the remtronix 800/uhf the 436 definitely gets a better signal on both sites. By applying wide normal to both sites on the 100 it picks up well enough to decode the signal but there's a little more choppiness. The 436 doesn't miss a beat. Modulation wise the 100 sounds better.

As far as the 536 and the 200. Signal is the same and I do use wide normal on both sites on the 200. Modulation is better on the 200.

Hope that comparison helps. Overall my opinion would be both the SDS and the x36 work very well on that n x 48 system I monitor. My Whistler scanners do not work as they do not trunk track and there are many missed transmissions compared to the Unidens.
 

iMONITOR

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Sep 20, 2006
Messages
8,814
A very good question and I have nxdn on both the SDS series end the x36.

Specifically it's an NX48 system in the 460 megahertz range with two sites in the next city over. Both sound good. No muddiness on either the SDS or 36. I use a rooftop so both come in well. On the Portables, using the remtronix 800/uhf the 436 definitely gets a better signal on both sites. By applying wide normal to both sites on the 100 it picks up well enough to decode the signal but there's a little more choppiness. The 436 doesn't miss a beat. Modulation wise the 100 sounds better.

As far as the 536 and the 200. Signal is the same and I do use wide normal on both sites on the 200. Modulation is better on the 200.

Hope that comparison helps. Overall my opinion would be both the SDS and the x36 work very well on that n x 48 system I monitor. My Whistler scanners do not work as they do not trunk track and there are many missed transmissions compared to the Unidens.
Thanks for your input. The main reason I ask is the scanner I put the upgrades in will be somewhat dedicated to DMR/NXDN (no ProVoice in my area). I'd rather tie up the 436 than the 200 with that duty.
 

buddrousa

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 5, 2003
Messages
8,760
Location
NW Tenn
When I got the filters set after some playing with them my SDS200 has a little better range than my 536 but the 536 worked better with out changing the SDS200 filters. Hope this helps.
 

iMONITOR

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Sep 20, 2006
Messages
8,814
When I got the filters set after some playing with them my SDS200 has a little better range than my 536 but the 536 worked better with out changing the SDS200 filters. Hope this helps.
Yea, it put me back on the fence as what to do. :unsure: :ROFLMAO:
 

trentbob

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Feb 22, 2007
Messages
2,769
Location
Bristol, Pa.
Thanks for your input. The main reason I ask is the scanner I put the upgrades in will be somewhat dedicated to DMR/NXDN (no ProVoice in my area). I'd rather tie up the 436 than the 200 with that duty.
When I got the filters set after some playing with them my SDS200 has a little better range than my 536 but the 536 worked better with out changing the SDS200 filters. Hope this helps.
Yes that is exactly what I would do. Use the x36 for the upgrades. Because of the SDR chip used, the SDS radios are slow scanners and take a little more time to cycle through the two sites I listen to. My understanding was the scanning speed was slowed down with a firmware update after release so as to improve overall performance.

The method that I use is Global filter first which is on normal which of course affects every object in the radio unless you go in to a specific site or into group options for conventional and change it. What I do is temporarily use Global filter and try wide normal, invert, wide invert... I never use Auto as it slows down scanning and you never know what filter did the trick anyway.

Using real-time results watching RSSI and noise level I find the filter that works the best. I then put Global filter back on normal which is the default and then go into the specific sites on that system I'm tweaking and change it to the filter that I found was best on the global search. I also put the filter indicator on my display which I'm sure you guys know about anyway.
 

buddrousa

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Jan 5, 2003
Messages
8,760
Location
NW Tenn
Do you have distant DMR NXDN and care to play with filters if not upgrade the 536.
 

iMONITOR

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Sep 20, 2006
Messages
8,814
Do you have distant DMR NXDN and care to play with filters if not upgrade the 536.
My needs are exploratory right now. There's still not a lot of DMR/NXDN in my area so I'm just playing around with it for now. I think I'm going to use the 536. I like to keep the 200 free for everyday public safety stuff where I can get a screen full of related info. Thanks guys! :)
 

trentbob

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Feb 22, 2007
Messages
2,769
Location
Bristol, Pa.
My needs are exploratory right now. There's still not a lot of DMR/NXDN in my area so I'm just playing around with it for now. I think I'm going to use the 536. I like to keep the 200 free for everyday public safety stuff where I can get a screen full of related info. Thanks guys! :)
like button.png
 

blantonl

Founder and CEO
Staff member
Joined
Dec 9, 2000
Messages
9,746
Location
San Antonio, TX
The method that I use is Global filter first which is on normal which of course affects every object in the radio unless you go in to a specific site or into group options for conventional and change it. What I do is temporarily use Global filter and try wide normal, invert, wide invert... I never use Auto as it slows down scanning and you never know what filter did the trick anyway.
If you hold on a frequency or system, how can you change the filter on demand? Is there a button combination to do so?
 

trentbob

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Feb 22, 2007
Messages
2,769
Location
Bristol, Pa.
If you hold on a frequency or system, how can you change the filter on demand? Is there a button combination to do so?
Yep easy process... Just to clarify that what I was explaining in that situation was nxdn system with two sites. If the system is all on one favorites list then you just monitor that favorites list. If there are other things on that favorites list then use system hold to isolate that system.

Use the menu, go to settings, choose Global filters, by default it's on normal which is a good Universal filter. You already know how it behaves on that filter so click down to the next which is invert. Back out of the menu and now you're back monitoring your system alone. You can either hold on a talk group or just scan that one particular system. If you were doing a conventional frequency you would literally have to sit on that frequency and wait for a transmission, a tedious process but because we're listening to a system the RSSI and the S meter and noise level are visible. You're just looking for the best results, you can do it by memory or even write them down.

Then you go back to menu, go to settings, go to Global filters and repeat the process with the next filter. As I say I would only sample wide normal, invert, wide invert and of course no filter at all. I wouldn't use the auto filter choices because that samples every filter slowing scanning way down and there's no way to know what filter did the trick anyway. After you have sampled all the above filters.,One is going to work better than the next. It doesn't matter how many sites the system has because global filter affects every object on the radio unless you have already gone in and customized a site with a specific filter. When you pick your favorite filter in global then return Global to normal as it will affect the many objects that you have not applied a Filter to because they come in great on normal filter.

Now that you've chosen the best filter from your Global filter search you would just go into menu to manage favorites, pick your favorites list that the system is in, review edit system, go to that system, edit sites and on each individual site... Set filter. Back up one step and pick the next site and set the filter. Back out of menu.
 
Last edited:

IAmSixNine

Member
Feed Provider
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
2,040
Location
Dallas, TX
I got a SDS100 a few weeks ago.
I monitor a decent size Connect Plus system (UHF).
I have tested my BCD436 with the SDS100 and so far i have more confidence in my 436 on DMR. BUT, im still playing around with the filters.
I do have 1 of my 2 BCD436 dedicated to a medical helo dispatch channel on a private zello channel so can still monitor when i am out of range of the system, aka in my office. I then used my second 436 to scan the system and side by side comparison with the 436 and 100 i was still missing some comms. This is a UHF system that is not simulcast so i feel the 436 would would work just fine. Sunday evening I was able to get better decoding using the Invert filter on my 100 but then i moved it 2 inches over and it was back to not getting comms. Im fairly close to the site (few miles away) and im pretty sure im getting some interference from adjacent UHF channels as i am not far from the downtown area of a major matropolitan area. But again lots of testing to do.
Come to think about it, can DMR systems use simulcast set ups like public safety P25 systems? IF not then the 436 is a great option.
 
Top