TRX-1 Simulcast systems

Status
Not open for further replies.

afdscan

Member
Joined
Oct 20, 2007
Messages
237
Location
Central Indiana
Is there an ideal way of making adjustments to the programming of simulcast systems? I've read a lot of posts that would suggest it varies according to the local system and one's location. I guess I need more specifics. I have made numerous changes that haven't produces any great results. Any suggestions?
 

radio3353

Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2003
Messages
1,209
You already have the specifics...location, location, location. Keep reading. Some people have had some success with antennas (less is more or directional antenna), location of scanner, etc. You are fighting a difficult battle with a consumer scanner. Good luck!
 

TexScan780D

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Feb 20, 2003
Messages
804
You already have the specifics...location, location, location. Keep reading. Some people have had some success with antennas (less is more or directional antenna), location of scanner, etc. You are fighting a difficult battle with a consumer scanner. Good luck!

Even the commercial radios sound bad.
 

milf

Careful, I CAN hear you!
Database Admin
Joined
Dec 18, 2002
Messages
13,482
Location
Indianapolis, IN
How does an Professional Commercial Radio that is programmed and authorized for any said system sound bad? Never heard an APX, or STX, or even P7100, or Jaguar sound bad on an system it is set up to be on sound bad. At least not on any of the P25 LSMs I have had the pleasure to listen to being used, or used myself. Except for if the user was at the extreme fringes of the coverage areas, or had a LOT of wind in his/her mic. In the actual coverage area of the system, the radios sound beautiful.

Scanners yes, can and do have challenges on some systems, and always will unless the specs change to those of an professional radio, and the same antenna etc... FOR specific bands, and system types. If you have an scanner that is designed for the VHF High/UHF/700-800 P25 LSMs... Then it will be useless on VHF low, and aviation, or suck canal water. If you put the emphasis on one thing, you will lose out somewhere else. Sorry folks but there will never be an *perfect* scanner for everything out there. Is there still room for improvements? Yes! But expectations of scanners being able to literally do it all... thats just not happening. Want awesome Low band ops, and pretty good analog VHF High conventional and civ aviation? Get one of the cheaper scanners that is not an P25 trunking Monster. Need more of the VHF High through 900 MHz ranges for TRSs, and UHF Mil Aviation? Pop a bit more cash and add an more high tech scanner to your line up. And then of course comes antenna, or more properly, antenna farming!.... Wait, dont we already do this today anyway? Back to the usual non stop complaint department.....
 

OHIOSCAN

Member
Joined
Jul 9, 2001
Messages
657
Location
Lorain Cnty, OH
I have had luck using a " Comet Miracle Baby" antenna, kills VHF performance but helps null out the LSM a bit. My side by side vs 436 shows 436 handles LSM better but TRX-1 is much better on VHF. Adjusting DSL on TRX-1 shows no improvement
 

radio3353

Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2003
Messages
1,209
Even the commercial radios sound bad.
Can you provide examples to back this statement?

I have not read of any problems with Motorola, Harris or even Unication pagers having a problem with simulcast systems. Enlighten us, please.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top