PSR-800

[mlairson]

I purchased a PSR-800 and I don't recommend it. It has too many "chimes and bells" that the majority of us don't need. I'm one of those guys that didn't mind paying the extra money for something that works better or even if it's smaller in size. For example, I read in the instructions that most areas would works without the attentuator on at all. But there are 4 different ways to turn that on and off. Also it works better with the AGC (automatic gain control) completely off. But there are several different ways to turn it off. I got my PSR-800 to recieve just as good (but not better) as my Radio Shack Pro-106, but after alot of studying the different functions. The "problem" is that the PSR-800 was "invented,made" by a group of "rocket scientists" and it IS the "perfect scanner". That is to say it cover ALL circumstances, even if you are that ONE person in 1000 in THAT area (again 1 in 1000 would need that particular function with the correct combinations). Again I do have to (in a way) give it more credit than negatives. I've been scanning for a hobby since 1972, since the days that all scanners had to have crystals in them. Also the Radio Shack Pro-106 IS a good scanner and the Pro-197. Some of us people had come to relate Radio Shack with cheap and poor quality. But when you pay what Radio Shack charges for the scanners, they HAVE to WORK right and these models do work right. The reason the Radio Shack discontiued them was that too many people were returning them because they could not figure out how to program them.But they are very, very good scanners.Also, if you buy a PSR-800, or PSR-500 (good scanner)or Pro-106, some antennas are better than the stock antenna that comes with it. Motorola makes a 700-800 stubby and standand model that require a BNC adaptor that work better than the stock antenna. So many of the above mentioned items depend on your exact location, but 95 percent (or more) or us just don't need all the chimes and bells that the PSR-800 has. And even after (and if) you figure out all of those thing (by the way, the instruction manual is 80 pages long), your PSR-800 scanner is not going to recieve any better that the Radio Shack Pro-106 or the PSR-500. I was willing to spend the extra money on a better RECEIVER, but I just didn't get it with the PSR-800


k

 

[AC2OY]

I agree it is a advanced radio and it isn't easy at first to program,what I have found is reading up on it as much as you can and operation or programming gets easier. That is to say I'm nowhere near mastering this device but by experimentation I have discovered some things. The only reason I acquired one was so I could monitor P25 Phase II systems.

 

[AC2OY]

I purchased a PSR-800 and I don't recommend it. It has too many "chimes and bells" that the majority of us don't need. I'm one of those guys that didn't mind paying the extra money for something that works better or even if it's smaller in size. For example, I read in the instructions that most areas would works without the attentuator on at all. But there are 4 different ways to turn that on and off. Also it works better with the AGC (automatic gain control) completely off. But there are several different ways to turn it off. I got my PSR-800 to recieve just as good (but not better) as my Radio Shack Pro-106, but after alot of studying the different functions. The "problem" is that the PSR-800 was "invented,made" by a group of "rocket scientists" and it IS the "perfect scanner". That is to say it cover ALL circumstances, even if you are that ONE person in 1000 in THAT area (again 1 in 1000 would need that particular function with the correct combinations). Again I do have to (in a way) give it more credit than negatives. I've been scanning for a hobby since 1972, since the days that all scanners had to have crystals in them. Also the Radio Shack Pro-106 IS a good scanner and the Pro-197. Some of us people had come to relate Radio Shack with cheap and poor quality. But when you pay what Radio Shack charges for the scanners, they HAVE to WORK right and these models do work right. The reason the Radio Shack discontiued them was that too many people were returning them because they could not figure out how to program them.But they are very, very good scanners.Also, if you buy a PSR-800, or PSR-500 (good scanner)or Pro-106, some antennas are better than the stock antenna that comes with it. Motorola makes a 700-800 stubby and standand model that require a BNC adaptor that work better than the stock antenna. So many of the above mentioned items depend on your exact location, but 95 percent (or more) or us just don't need all the chimes and bells that the PSR-800 has. And even after (and if) you figure out all of those thing (by the way, the instruction manual is 80 pages long), your PSR-800 scanner is not going to recieve any better that the Radio Shack Pro-106 or the PSR-500. I was willing to spend the extra money on a better RECEIVER, but I just didn't get it with the PSR-800


k

Sorry I also wanted so say if I could attempt to help you please feel free to ask!! A lot of wonderful people here have surely helped me get rolling!

 

[mlairson]

Yes, I did too. Houston,Texas Police was the last of the big cities to switch to P25 Apco system. And I have 4 scanners. I have the PSR-800,Psr-500,PRO-406 radio shack and the PRo-197 mobile Radio Shack models. So I'm qualified to speak for all. Is the PSR-800 a bad scanner? The answer is no. You just have to "fine tune" it in many ways, shapes, and forms to get it to receive JUST AS GOOD as the PRO-106, or PSR-500 models. The PSR-800 is the most advanced scanner in this day and time, most likely invented and made by the most "BRAINY" guys in the world, in regards to radio and scanner knowledge, It definately took 'rocket scientists" type to invent this piece of scanner. But for 99 percent of us, we just don't need it and it takes alot of studying and working with it, just to get it to receive as good as the other about mentioned "simpler" operated and cheaper models. Am I sorry I bought a PSR-800? Well, no. But I just don't recommend it. I recommend the PRO-106 Radio Shack model. Some of us "old times" have come to relate Radio Shack scanners with less quality, but times have changed and that is not true in this case. The Pro-106 scanners can recieve just as good as the PSR-800. Take my word for it.

 

[tvnews]

The Pro-106 scanners can recieve just as good as the PSR-800. Take my word for it.[/QUOTE]


Maybe I'm misinformed, does the Pro-106 do everything the PSR-800 does? I thought the 800 was the only scanner to do APCO 25 Phase II?

Thanks
Dean

 

[AC2OY]

The Pro-106 scanners can recieve just as good as the PSR-800. Take my word for it.

Maybe I'm misinformed, does the Pro-106 do everything the PSR-800 does? I thought the 800 was the only scanner to do APCO 25 Phase II?

Thanks
Dean[/QUOTE]

Your correct Dean!!!

 

[garys]

Merely because you don't like or use some of the features of the PSR800 doesn't mean that "99%" of users don't need or too many "chimes and bells". Unless you have done some sort of study, you're speaking for yourself, not for the rest of us.

The PSR800 is a very good scanner. It can be used by people who have never owned a scanner before and it can be used by people who have been using scanners as long as you have.

I have a friend who lives in Arizona. He's a very bright man, but he's in his 70s and computer technology can intimidate him. He had a very nice conventional scanner he used to listen to the local public safety agencies. Then the county went to a P25 trunk system and his scanner was useless. He asked a couple of people he knew what to do. We all suggested the PSR800 because he could get it up and running quickly and then fine tune it as he got more familiar with it. I didn't even own one and wasn't a big fan of GRE at the time, but I still suggested he get one.

There is certainly a learning curve with the PSR880, but there was with the earlier OOS GRE scanners, the Uniden 780XLT and the Uniden DMA scanners. All of them represented new approaches to operating scanners and all of them took some learning. There are features on all of my scanners that I don't use, but other people do. A lot of people use GPS based scanning, but I don't. Doesn't meant that 99% of the people don't need it, just means that I don't need it.

I'd say that in 40 years of owning scanners, the majority of mine have needed aftermarket antennas to work the way I wanted them to. That's just the nature of the beast.

Frankly none of your complaints hold water.

Oh, the reason that Radio Shack discontinued the Pro 197 and Pro 106 is that GRE went out of the scanner business.

 

[mlairson]

The Pro-106 and the Grecom model 500 both do the Phase II and Apco 25.

 

[KevinC]

The Pro-106 and the Grecom model 500 both do the Phase II and Apco 25.

Umm...no...the 106 and 500 will positively NOT decode P25 Phase 2 TDMA.

 

[awal]

The Pro-106 and the Grecom model 500 both do the Phase II and Apco 25.

In my area (Washington, DC/Maryland) this is simply not true. The Pro-106 CANNOT pick up Prince George's County as well as the PSR-800, for example - if at all.

anyone in the DMV can confirm this.

 

[JoeyC]

I have the PSR800 and although it has a number of settings (as do all digital scanners) I have never ventured to experiment by changing any of them. The audio is clean with the defaults and although the scanner is a bit cumbersome when it comes to programming/navigating the only "chimes and bells" I've found are the channel/TG LEDS and alerts which I find are a little much but certainly avoidable if one chooses not to use them.

AND its the ONLY scanner at present to do Phase 2 TDMA

 

[garys]

Thanks to KevinC, awal, and JoeyC for maintaining my sanity and grip on reality!

 

[troymail]

I agree it is a advanced radio and it isn't easy at first to program

Funny -- this is the total opposite of what they were going for and one of the main reasons there is no keypad.

The intent was to provide a radio that - as long as you have the firmware and library data current - allows the user to simply select what he/she wants to listen to via the menu, import it, and listen.

And it does that.

You really don't need to look at any of the bells and whistles unless you want special programming (scanlists, etc.) or features enabled. But to simply listen, it just select, import and SCAN.

 

[garys]

I think that this is the genius of the design. I know a couple of ham radio manufacturers did something similar. For new users, there was an easy to get on the air programming function. For more advanced users, there were more complex menus.

Same with the PSR800. I hated the EZScan software at first because it really seemed geared to new users. The more I used it and came to understand it, the more I liked it. Not to say I really liked it because it was still fairly cumbersome to use. Still, you could do some pretty good custom programming once you became familiar with it.

Funny -- this is the total opposite of what they were going for and one of the main reasons there is no keypad.

The intent was to provide a radio that - as long as you have the firmware and library data current - allows the user to simply select what he/she wants to listen to via the menu, import it, and listen.

And it does that.

You really don't need to look at any of the bells and whistles unless you want special programming (scanlists, etc.) or features enabled. But to simply listen, it just select, import and SCAN.

 

[SCPD]

Very interesting points being made in the Forum here. For a PSR 800 user myslef and it being the first scanner I'ved ever owned its a pretty good scanner ok there are some gliches and bugs butonce you get aound those your good. I'm really glad I own one because of the P25 Phase II cabability which came in great when some of the talkgroups on my local transit system went Phase II. All in all a great scanner to bad about the company

 

[brownlab]

Best scanner I have ever owned. Sorry that I did not buy two.

 

[scosgt]

First of all, the PSR-800, along with the Uniden HP-1, is the ONLY way to use a scanner when traveling. Simply input your location and the scanner programs itself. Uniden has GPS in some models, but you have to set up all the programming in advance.

Second, the 800 is EXTREMELY sensitive. However, it misses a lot of transmissions. Here is why:

This scanner allows you to program a trunked talk group in the same scan list as conventional frequencies. You can program in, for example, seven TGs from one trunked system, 3 TGs from another trunk, and 30 conventional channels. BUT, each time it hits a trunked channel, it needs to acquire the control channel of that system and listen for the TG you have entered.
This is very very inefficient. It makes EFFECTIVE scanning speeds very slow, and causes it to appear "deaf" when a radio next to it is receiving strong local channels and it is receiving nothing!

So the "trick" is to first of all never put a trunk ID into the same scanlist as your local conventional freqs. Keep them in separate scan lists and only enable those you want to listen to. This is the key in a busy area, like NYC area.

If you are in a less busy area, you can probably enable more at the same time.

This is a very very good radio, but there is a learning curve to using it. It does not behave the same as other scanners.

I have mostly conventional channels here, and I had the OEM emergency channels from the NYC DOITT system enabled. I was missing local transmissions to the extent I thought there was something wrong with the radio. Not. Got rid of those TGID's, radio receives exactly the same as the 996T. It just works differently. Other radios can have a trunked system enabled on one of the QK's and you can see it sitting on that system. In the 800, you can not tell what it is doing, so it appears to be doing nothing. In reality, it is sitting on a CC looking for the TGID's you have programmed in.

 

[garys]

This is very very inefficient. It makes EFFECTIVE scanning speeds very slow, and causes it to appear "deaf" when a radio next to it is receiving strong local channels and it is receiving nothing!

It's a trade off. I like being able to mix TGs and conventional frequencies in one list. It's one of the things I like about GRE scanners that I wish Uniden would steal. If a conventional frequency is more important, I think that the solution would be to make it a priority channel.

Of course with the GRE you have the option of programming the scanner either way. You can mix and match or you can have separate lists for conventional and trunked. That does take some getting used to if you mostly use the Uniden DMA scanners, but it gives you a lot of flexibility too.

I agree with you about sensitivity. The PSR800 outperforms both my 396XT and my Pro 197. All three are on the same antenna with a splitter/amplifier and the PSR800 hears stuff that neither of the other two do. Again, I wish that GRE had been able to stay in business because I'd likely sell my 396XT and 996XT to buy a PSR800 and PSR900.

 

[mlairson]

Most agencies that went to the Phase II system have a Phase I patch, so that wrecker drivers,etc can monitor it. You don't necessarily need the psr-800 to monitor an agency that's on Phase II. But here in Houston,Texas the police dept have a Phase I patch to accomplish the above mentioned detail.I really didn't mean to "bad mouth" the psr-800, but it does have a small speaker and 99 percent of us, in reality, just don't need it. If you will read more comments on this scanner, the really "smart" guys that have figured out all the chimes and bells in detail, probably will talk a little more better about the psr-800 than the rest of us. But again, the psr-500 and Radio Shack Pro-106 work just fine here in Houston,Tx and receive just as good (and in fact better) unless you figure out all the chimes and bells on the psr-800. If you don't figure out all the chimes and bells that I mentioned in my first comment on the psr-800, your PSR-800 might not recieve all the transmissions. I've have learned a little more about the psr-800 by reading some of the comments that other members left. But again I own all 3 of the above mentioned scanners, some you might consider me qualified to give my opinion, as I have, of all 3 scanners.
a

 

[AC2OY]

Funny -- this is the total opposite of what they were going for and one of the main reasons there is no keypad.

The intent was to provide a radio that - as long as you have the firmware and library data current - allows the user to simply select what he/she wants to listen to via the menu, import it, and listen.

And it does that.

You really don't need to look at any of the bells and whistles unless you want special programming (scanlists, etc.) or features enabled. But to simply listen, it just select, import and SCAN.

I read you loud and clear Troy! I have to experement with it further. Is it better or easier to enable what you want to listen to by using EZ Scan or just it right on the radio itself?