Anyone else have issues with VHF analog on the SDS200? My 996p2 picks up vhf analog way better then my sds200. Reception is clear transmissions arent missed or cut off even misses the beginning of the transmission. SDS200 is amazing on the digital side but conventional is poor. Im running the same antenna on both units so i dont know just seeing if anyone else had the same issues.
- Status
I am having the same problem with my SDS200
The SDS200 doesn't work as well as my older scanners on VHF, but it's not too far behind. I believe it struggles with high RF levels / interference / intermod more than previous flagship scanners. If I use the auto filter which works best in helping with VHF problems, scan rate slows to a crawl so I can't use it.
For me UHF is the true problem child though. Intermod is sometimes bad and attenuation and filtering help but never fully solve the issue. Oddly, filters don't slow my UHF scanning. At night when there is less RF in the air intermod is less of an issue. I'm hopeful that future firmware might help, but this is a digital scanner first and foremost, no doubt about it. I won't be selling my older scanners that still do VHF / UHF analog best, but I'm still happy with the SDS200 overall though.
For me UHF is the true problem child though. Intermod is sometimes bad and attenuation and filtering help but never fully solve the issue. Oddly, filters don't slow my UHF scanning. At night when there is less RF in the air intermod is less of an issue. I'm hopeful that future firmware might help, but this is a digital scanner first and foremost, no doubt about it. I won't be selling my older scanners that still do VHF / UHF analog best, but I'm still happy with the SDS200 overall though.
I agree , vhf analogue is poor , a old baofeng is much better , my sds100 is the same .
Uniden need to resolve this .
Uniden need to resolve this .
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2007
- Messages
- 6,180
So I can only go by my sds100 because I'm not going to buy a 200 at this time even though I badly want one. SDS works good on simulcast LSM susceptible systems but there are only so many of them around me and you can't scan too many at once or you will miss stuff just by the nature of rolling through a few chosen different sites.
I listen to a lot of VHF because I'm near by local airports and I live on the water and listen to Marine broadcast including the Coast Guard and I live near the Northeast Corridor rail line, all of these Simplex VHF channels are not PL tone protected. I also listened to several UHF repeater channels so it's imperative that I have that availability.
I find the filters are critical in doing this. Before this update not only did I have problems with simulcast but also with VHF and UHF. For those who use Auto filter that is going to slow you way down on an already very very slow scan. Auto just samples normal and invert filters so take it off of Auto and do some testing and pick one or the other, normal or invert on each individual object you want to hear or in the case of Aviation in my area... No filter at all.
So with the sds100 and my rooftop antennas I find the reception of VHF and UHF comprable to the 536s with a little better reception but more interference and innermod on the SDS...
So now I'm wondering if there is a difference between the sds200 performance on VHF and UHF compared to my sds100... I can say that on my sds100 VHF and UHF works okay and I'm wondering if there are some sds200 units that it does too and it's just a roll of the dice... Again.
I listen to a lot of VHF because I'm near by local airports and I live on the water and listen to Marine broadcast including the Coast Guard and I live near the Northeast Corridor rail line, all of these Simplex VHF channels are not PL tone protected. I also listened to several UHF repeater channels so it's imperative that I have that availability.
I find the filters are critical in doing this. Before this update not only did I have problems with simulcast but also with VHF and UHF. For those who use Auto filter that is going to slow you way down on an already very very slow scan. Auto just samples normal and invert filters so take it off of Auto and do some testing and pick one or the other, normal or invert on each individual object you want to hear or in the case of Aviation in my area... No filter at all.
So with the sds100 and my rooftop antennas I find the reception of VHF and UHF comprable to the 536s with a little better reception but more interference and innermod on the SDS...
So now I'm wondering if there is a difference between the sds200 performance on VHF and UHF compared to my sds100... I can say that on my sds100 VHF and UHF works okay and I'm wondering if there are some sds200 units that it does too and it's just a roll of the dice... Again.
I wouldn't say that it's so much a sensitivity problem really, it's more of a problem with how these scanners handle things when being bombarded in high RF situations, marginal selectivity, intermod especially when near a bunch of towers, or when using an outdoor antenna.
I believe that Upman said something along the lines that if you want the best simulcast scanner buy an SDS, but that if analog is the main focus, you might be better off with a 436/536. That's about how I see things as well.
I believe that Upman said something along the lines that if you want the best simulcast scanner buy an SDS, but that if analog is the main focus, you might be better off with a 436/536. That's about how I see things as well.
I've been getting staticy reception on my SDS100 lately. Checking to make sure it is not the mobile antenna
Just in case you didn't see mention of it in the forums, some of the early SDS100s are starting to die, and people are beginning to send them in for repairs and replacement. You might want to check those threads to see if your symptoms compare. Just a thought.
- Joined
- Feb 22, 2007
- Messages
- 6,180
Anybody considering buying the SDS 100 or 200 should be scouring these forums before making an educated purchase. That old saying buyer beware really applies here as there is such detailed, repetitive and overwhelming feedback as to what we're dealing with here.
As far as the SDS series being optimal on simulcast and that's what it should be bought for... For that kind of money how about being optimal for all of the frequencies it covers or we could just use that money for a used Motorola radio that will work great on simulcast and is built like a rock? Duh, or should I say... Doh..........LMAO.
As far as the SDS series being optimal on simulcast and that's what it should be bought for... For that kind of money how about being optimal for all of the frequencies it covers or we could just use that money for a used Motorola radio that will work great on simulcast and is built like a rock? Duh, or should I say... Doh..........LMAO.
Ubbe
Member
The specification for the receiver module are not great. IP3 are -14dBm inside +/-6MHz and -7dBm +/-12MHz from the frequency and Uniden have a preamplifier in front of it with something like a 6-10dB gain and the figures will be equally dB lower I.E. -20dBm to -24dBm for IP3.
In comparison a preamplifier connected to an antenna needs something like +20dBm to not create problems with intermod and interferencies.
What is physical significance of IP3, why it is more important in Receiver Chain ? - Techplayon
/Ubbe
In comparison a preamplifier connected to an antenna needs something like +20dBm to not create problems with intermod and interferencies.
What is physical significance of IP3, why it is more important in Receiver Chain ? - Techplayon
/Ubbe
Anyone's reception change with the new firmware on VHF? Ive tried the new filters and still no changes. the 996p2 is out preforming the sds200
I couldn't brag more about having a BCT15X and a BCD996P2 scanner. These are my work horses. I wish I could say I am in love with my SDS-200 but I am not.
What is the main deal-breaker in your case?
Bob1955
Member
Australia4001, I don't own a SDS-200 but I've heard this almost ever day since it was released. I will TAKE a Bearcat BCD-996P2any dayover a SDS-200. Also, A Baofeng transceiver will receive BETTER then any Bearcat handheld scanner and the audio blows them always along with the battery life. And it is a Chinese IMPORT. OMG
Bob1955
Member
The (2) PERFECT BASE/MOBILE SCANNERS! WAY TO GO UNIDEN AMERICA CORPORATION!!!
I have a few Baofengs. I paid ten bucks for the last one I bought and it's worth every bit of that too. The problem is though that I just can't figure out the setting in the menu to make it decode P25 systems. Have you found that setting yet? Oh and AM aircraft frequencies, It just will not accept those. WelI, I do also need to figure out how to set up trunking on it too, but other than that and the ultra low scan speed, and the intermod, and the unusual Chinese menu structure, it's an amazing scanner.
The perfect digital / analog mixed couple:
View attachment 70092
I agree 100% with the combo of the BCT15X and SDS200. Analog performance on VHF and UHF much better on BCT15X.
View attachment 70092
I agree 100% with the combo of the BCT15X and SDS200. Analog performance on VHF and UHF much better on BCT15X.
- Status
Similar threads
