The only thing I noticed is that one of the WX channels that is weak is a little better on the 996
Which is the better scanner
- Thread starter Bonkk083
- Start date
Since you have both, and I presume you use both, what is YOUR opinion?
Seriously, when I wondered about such things 60 years ago, I bought a book... "The ARRL Handbook " and pretty much read it cover to cover. That book used to be the "Bible" for HAM radio operators and wanna-bes and can help you understand.
As an example, just because a tech spec shows one radio is more sensitive RF wise tells you nothing about how selective it is (the ability to tune 1 frequency without interference from other frequencies) or how clearly and cleanly it can recover the intelligence (audio or data) in the signal.
I'm 70% leaning towards the 996, on the 996 it gets one channel that gets WX and another frequency talking at the same time
For those of you not familar with Dynamic Range, below is a good read on the subject:
What is Radio Receiver Dynamic Range
What is Radio Receiver Dynamic Range » Electronics Notes
Radio receiver dynamic range is one of the most important parameters of any radio specification - it looks at sensitivity and strong signal handling.
wtp
Member
does that mean you can hear two transmissions/voices on one frequency?
wtp
Member
try turning on attenuation (ATT).
that cuts down the signal strength.
this is what everyone has been talking about.
is there any radio towers around you.
and one thing to try is to take the antenna OFF and see what you hear.
that is one indicator that the transmitter is REALLY close.
it is also a way to find transmitters.
that cuts down the signal strength.
this is what everyone has been talking about.
is there any radio towers around you.
and one thing to try is to take the antenna OFF and see what you hear.
that is one indicator that the transmitter is REALLY close.
it is also a way to find transmitters.
I have the SDS100, SDS200, BCD15X and a BC125AT. The 15 and 125AT are much better than the SDS radios on VHF and UHF analog. I listen to aircraft as well as the police and fire departments that are still using analog. They work much better than the SDS radios for analog.
I would personally stop worrying about all this. You already own both scanners, do your own experiments and see which one performs better for you in whatever band you like.
Enjoy the hobby and don't get hung up on the specs, the real world experience is what matters and everyone's world will be different.
Enjoy the hobby and don't get hung up on the specs, the real world experience is what matters and everyone's world will be different.
Would you think the 996 be better at analog than the 536hp
mmckenna
I ♥ Ø
"Better" as compared to what?
You are asking a lot of very open ended questions, yet seem to be looking for very specific answers. It's difficult/impossible to give you the accurate answers you seem to want when your questions are exceedingly vague.
But I get it. You are new to this and looking for some reassurance and confirmation about what you are seeing.
A more sensitive scanner would be "better" than a less sensitive scanner if you were trying to listen to a very weak signal.
The 0.2mv sensitivity specification for one radio and the 0.3mv sensitivity spec is showing that in a lab environment that is the lowest strength signal the radio can decode. 0.2mv is less signal strength than 0.3mv.
A more sensitive scanner can be worse if you are in an area with a lot of strong signals. The higher sensitivity can make it more susceptible to stronger signal, even one you don't want to listen to, overpowering the signal you do want to listen to. This may be why you are hearing other audio superimposed over the NOAA weather radio station you are trying to hear.
A less sensitive scanner might do better in higher RF noise environment since it won't be as easily overloaded by strong signals.
More isn't always better if it's something you don't need.
Feel free to keep asking questions, that is what this site is for. If someone else doesn't want to answer you question, they don't have to be engaged.
Asking questions is a great way for people to learn things they are interested in. It just helps if you give us a few more details.
Ubbe
Member
As already mentioned a more sensitive receiver usually means it will be more prone to intermod that makes sensitivity worse. Having two receivers at the extremes, one very sensitive and one very good at handling intermod, will at one location, where there are few other transmitters near by, have the more sensitive receiver to receive better, but at another location where there are more local interfering transmitters will have the less sensitive one but less intermod prone to receive better. It also depends how much signal are received from the antenna, if a more effective antenna are in use that will more easily create intermod, and if any signal booster are used.
So what scanner works best depends of the local environment and what antenna systems are used. That's the reasons why some people say one scanner are the best and others say it's useless and praise another scanner. Many professional radios can be both sensitive and be effective to fight intermod but then they cost much more and their scanning capabilities are more restricted compared to a genuine scanner.
/Ubbe
So what scanner works best depends of the local environment and what antenna systems are used. That's the reasons why some people say one scanner are the best and others say it's useless and praise another scanner. Many professional radios can be both sensitive and be effective to fight intermod but then they cost much more and their scanning capabilities are more restricted compared to a genuine scanner.
/Ubbe
Possibly, but maybe not, but then again it might be, depending on numerous things.
wtp
Member
icom 9500-02
that one is really sensitive and only runs just under $20K
like has been said, just sit back and enjoy what you have as you have to spend A LOT to really see a difference.
if you hear a little static on a station, at least you can hear the station.
Last edited:
I know that when i listen to WX channel 6 has more static on the 536 and sounds better on the 996, would that indicate which one is stronger
that one is really sensitive and only runs just under $20K
like has been said, just sit back and enjoy what you have as you have to spend A LOT to really see a difference.
if you hear a little static on a station, at least you can hear the station.
wtp
Member
just like everyone is saying, it has many variables.
and it might be a little less on that area of the band and do better on others.
and it might be a little less on that area of the band and do better on others.
So you have both scanners, based on your observations one outperforms the other, and you decide to start a thread out of boredom to confirm what you're observing personally? Did I misinterpret any part of your original thread?
Sit back, enjoy your scanners, be happy what you have, and for the love of God man, push the laptop away every time you think of a new question to ask.
Sit back, enjoy your scanners, be happy what you have, and for the love of God man, push the laptop away every time you think of a new question to ask.So you have both scanners, based on your observations one outperforms the other, and you decide to start a thread out of boredom to confirm what you're observing personally? Did I misinterpret any part of your original thread?
Sit back, enjoy your scanners, be happy what you have, and for the love of God man, push the laptop away every time you think of a new question to ask.
