Where is the Bandscope?

[SOFA_KING]

Not so---- to the uninitiated, they may appear to be similar, but they do not achieve their ends in the same fashion. I'm sure that someone with great technical expertise will come here with a better explanation, but a true spectrum analyzer uses different technology and sits on a center frequency and allows you to view adjacent frequency traffic without moving off the center frequency, all in real time.

The bandscope that Uniden is employing on the HP-1 and HP-2 is simply a visual representation of frequencies which are being scanned. I have several true spectrum analyzers which plug into the 10.7 IF output of my Icom R7100 receivers, and it's a completely different animal than Uniden's bandscope.

While Uniden's bandscope (which I call a scanscope) puts on a pretty display and may have some use, a true spectrum analyzer is a MUCH more powerful tool. I've used both and know the difference in terms of operation, but someone needs to jump in with a better technical explanation.

I expect that Uniden will implement their bandscope in the same fashion as they did on their HP-1 and HP-2 radios, but the adjectives that Paul uses to describe the upcoming firmware update could mean that there are surprises in store. We'll just have to see what gets delivered in the update and how the features get implemented.

Sorry, M, but you are not correct. I use everything from HP, Agilent, Rohde and Schwarz, Tektronix, Anritsu, Motorola and IFR...and use them professionally. They all sweep. Sweep time is dependent on bandwidth and processor speed. You may not see it sweeping, but that is what they all do. This is not "amateur" gear.

Phil

 

[XTS3000]

BandScope feature in Uniden scanners is extremely horrible spectrum analyzer. Even spectrum analyzers from the 70's will run circles around anything Uniden can produce for this feature.

That being said, Uniden scanners are scanners, not spectrum analyzers. Uniden is doing what they can with their "bandscope" to mimic a spectrum analyzer (on the HP-1) the best the hardware will support. Due to how Uniden implemented it's bandscope in the HP-1, I'm satisfied 100%.

 

[vlxjim]

Actually the original iPhone and the iPhone 3G didn't supported copy and paste till iOS 3.0 came out after 2 years.

I know this, but not the point. Apple never listed it as part of the phones iOS platform. Had you bought the iPhone and it was suppose to be include and was not is my point. We asked Apple to include copy / paste in updates. Which they did.

 

[vlxjim]

Welcome Jim. Great to see a fresh point of view for a change
And from what I can see, you met Voyager :lol::lol::lol:
Too bad new folks too the forum have to be jumped on right away. I don't expect a new person to catch up on almost 2 years of x36 discussion over night.

Thanks,

Seem all forums have they're bull dogs. Some times the forum members give them to much chain.

 

[vlxjim]

I've been here on the forums quite a while vixjim, starting with my purchase of the HP-1, admittedly late in the game--- probably a year after it was actually introduced. It took me a while to appreciate all the "genius" that went into the HP-1, and I was here when the x36 series was introduced--- once again, I did not jump into the pool until about a year after it's release, although I must say I made some very general comments about the x36 series and Uniden before actually owning one.

I'm glad that you at least have the 436 vixjim--- there are a number of folks pouring gasoline on the fire who don't even own an x36 radio. Three or four months ago, I figured my comments would no longer be valid unless I also had some skin in the game, so I went ahead and purchased the 536. I wanted Phase 2 capabilities, and while I could have opted for an HP-2, I wanted all the bells and whistles. I actually ended up liking the 536 so much, that about 2 months ago, and lacking any way to permanently mount a 536 in the car, I opted for the 436, which has worked out very well for mobile use.

If you review a lot of my posts, I am certainly not what you would consider a Uniden fanboy--- I've written some pretty tough posts here in an attempt to rally Uniden into completing a feature set that was either implicitly or explicitly promised at the beginning of the x36 adventure.

The hardware problems aside, I'm hoping that the upcoming firmware will resolve a lot of these missing-feature issues. Incidentally, I hope you read and appreciated a response I made to one of your posts that indicated that at least in the HP-1 and HP-2 series, the "bandscope" is more of a "scanscope"--- and unless there is different implementation in the x36 series, I don't feel that it's an especially powerful function, but we'll have to see what the new firmware holds in store.

I'm wondering if, based on what you now know, and with your operation of the 436 over the past xx weeks that you've had it, whether you are planning on keeping the unit or returning it to HRO?

I've read some of your post. It seems like you are one of the more level headed members. Good to see someone else putting a fire under these problem.

As I've stated before I'm going to keep the 436 and get a HP2 as well. Whats your take on the HP2 vs the 536? What do you gain giving up the color touch screen that would be missed on the HP2. I do like using the same software for both radios if I went with the 536.

 

[SOFA_KING]

BandScope feature in Uniden scanners is extremely horrible spectrum analyzer. Even spectrum analyzers from the 70's will run circles around anything Uniden can produce for this feature.

That being said, Uniden scanners are scanners, not spectrum analyzers. Uniden is doing what they can with their "bandscope" to mimic a spectrum analyzer (on the HP-1) the best the hardware will support. Due to how Uniden implemented it's bandscope in the HP-1, I'm satisfied 100%.

Well that is all they could do with a very limited display, but in principle they are doing the exact same thing...just on a much smaller (cruder) scale. And that's not a mimic, as the mechanics are the same. Both scan sequential frequencies in steps inside a given span, and both display detected signal of each step "sample" as amplitude on the screen. The smaller the steps (RBW), which also narrows the bandwidth filter, the more time it takes to make a full pass, and the clearer the spectrum image becomes. Of course, wider spans also take longer to complete a pass. Simply put, more steps take more time. That is exactly how analyzers work, but instead of 250 kHz steps of RBW (one slice at 8 MHz span and12.5 kHz steps), a high end analyzer offers as little as 10 Hz RBW. Some even offer 1 Hz steps. The smaller the "steps", the more detailed the spectrum picture becomes...if you have a display that can display that many pixies. The trade off of high detail is sweep time. I just tried the smallest span of 200 kHz at the smallest step of 5 kHz centered on a P25 modulated frequency. Look at that! It's starting to look like a "real" spectrum analyzer.

And that's the real deal.

Phil

 

[kellykeeton]

This thread smells like Bs from the first post - who spends $400 on a radio and never reads one public review of the people bashing it - snore ..... Your just trolling - looks like you caught a few as well - so beers to you


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[MStep]

I've read some of your post. It seems like you are one of the more level headed members. Good to see someone else putting a fire under these problem.

As I've stated before I'm going to keep the 436 and get a HP2 as well. Whats your take on the HP2 vs the 536? What do you gain giving up the color touch screen that would be missed on the HP2. I do like using the same software for both radios if I went with the 536.

I try to remain calm on these forums--- it's sometimes a challenge. You've got a taste of the 536, at least in terms of operation, with your 436. Somehow I like the "bells and whistles"--- my original choice before I had the 436 and only had the HP1 was between the HP2 and the 536. So that's why I opted for the 536. You can't beat the features. And although some claim that the SIREN function is thus far half-baked, it works fine on my own network in conjunction with Proscan, which I use for 24/7 logging.

After I had the 536 for about a month, I realized that I was not going to be able to mount it in the car, so I grabbed a 436 for both mobile and portable use.

So none of that answered your question, but I think for you between the 536 and the HP2, its a matter of form vs. function. The HP2 certainly has the form--- the 536 has the features. Remember, no priority or close call on the HP2. Are you looking for something for base use or mobile?

Incidentally, it is nice to use the same Sentinel program to load up the 436 and 536 with the same setup.

 

[darunimal]

+31months

 

[k3fs]

Very well put vlxjim.

Fact is it is Uniden's product, and they bear responsibility to the paying consumers for their lack of delivering what they promised. Their lack of transparency and honesty towards the paying consumer is wrong. I for one expect to get all of the features I paid for.

 

[greggk]

I just found this today. So, while I should be out cutting grass again, here I am.

LOL...I just heard on the 536 an ambulance call for a women who accidentally injected herself with an EpiPen. :roll:

Anyhow, back to my 2 cents worth. VIXJIM has the right to come here and give his opinion. One could say he might have read reviews and did a little research into the radio, but Monday morning quarter-backing is something we could ALL learn from sometime in our lives.

I do not believe we should attack him for his opinion. What he said is true about the band scope.

I am now personally a solid Uniden fan. In fact, I just recently experienced that Monday Morning call myself.

My point is that the grass is not always greener on the other side. Take a close look at what alternative scanners are out there, then decide. Personally I believe in Uniden! Greg

 

[greggk]

What did I miss here?