Which scanner is better? PRO96/2096 or BC296/796D

[STiMULi]

I have asked this in a different way and there weren't many replies.

I want the best scanner I can afford that will take me into the requirments of todays and tomorrows scannists.

I have always leaned towards GRE and AOR radios.

But GRE's new radio (Pro96 or soon to arrive Pro2096) does not have computer control. AOR doesn't do the trick anymore w/o trunking

I can think of a bunch of reasons for computer control and the biggest is remote control.

The BC296/796 both do the computer control thing, but is it the best scanner I can buy?

To me the minimum qualities of the best scanner is APCO25 reception and OS upgradability.

What makes one scanner better than another in your opinion?

Which one do you own?

Why do you refuse to own the _________ scanner?

Do you use Computer Control?

 

[cellblock776]

I'm holding out for the digital version of the Uniden 246T.

 

[Mike-KC8OWL]

That's a hard question, but I'll give you my thoughts on it because I own both the 296D and the P96 -

Let me prefacethis with the statement that I live in Ohio and we have a statewide trunked system (MARCS) that uses a number of towers placed throughout the state.

I live in Cuyahoga county, which has 4 unique towers (systems) in the county (north, west, south west, and east). From my house I can monitor all 4 Cuyahoga systems and most of the systems in the counties that souround my home county. Because of the way the BC296 handles control channels, I would have to put each system into a seperate bank in order to monitor all of the systems. As an example, if I wanted to monitor all 4 systems in my home county I would have to dedicate 4 banks to the job. That's a huge waste of memory space (channels) that cannot be used for anything else very effectively.

On the other hand, the P96 will scan multiple control channels in a single bank as long as there is a conventional freq. between each possible control channel. For me, this is a huge benefit, but that is only my opinion.

If you don't need to scan multiple CC's in a single bank, I would say either on is a great choice.

 

[Mike-KC8OWL]

That's a hard question, but I'll give you my thoughts on it because I own both the 296D and the P96 -

Let me prefacethis with the statement that I live in Ohio and we have a statewide trunked system (MARCS) that uses a number of towers placed throughout the state.

I live in Cuyahoga county, which has 4 unique towers (systems) in the county (north, west, south west, and east). From my house I can monitor all 4 Cuyahoga systems and most of the systems in the counties that souround my home county. Because of the way the BC296 handles control channels, I would have to put each system into a seperate bank in order to monitor all of the systems. As an example, if I wanted to monitor all 4 systems in my home county I would have to dedicate 4 banks to the job. That's a huge waste of memory space (channels) that cannot be used for anything else very effectively.

On the other hand, the P96 will scan multiple control channels in a single bank as long as there is a conventional freq. between each possible control channel. For me, this is a huge benefit, but that is only my opinion.

If you don't need to scan multiple CC's in a single bank, I would say either on is a great choice.

 

[Swipesy]

Mike, you did not comment on the Pro96's automatic adjustment of digital sound? Do you not consider that a plus for the Pro96 or is not a big deal?

Thanks,

John

 

[Voyager]

I have asked this in a different way and there weren't many replies.

I want the best scanner I can afford that will take me into the requirments of todays and tomorrows scannists.

I have always leaned towards GRE and AOR radios.

But GRE's new radio (Pro96 or soon to arrive Pro2096) does not have computer control. AOR doesn't do the trick anymore w/o trunking

I can think of a bunch of reasons for computer control and the biggest is remote control.

The BC296/796 both do the computer control thing, but is it the best scanner I can buy?

To me the minimum qualities of the best scanner is APCO25 reception and OS upgradability.

What makes one scanner better than another in your opinion?

Which one do you own?

Why do you refuse to own the _________ scanner?

Do you use Computer Control?

It all comes down to the features YOU want, and the importance YOU place on them. Read the comparison thread (the second thread from the top at present) and choose which one you like more. We can't tell you which you prefer.

I will tell you that I chose the PRO-96 because it was the only one that would do 9600 control channels at the time I bought it, but I still would
make the same choice due to mainly the V-Folders. I travel a lot and don't care to lug my laptop out just to reprogram the scanner - especially while I am driving, or when I'm only going a relatively short distance when I wouldn't otherwise need the laptop, or while I'm in a mall, Etc.

Yes, computer control is nice, and I really wish the PRO-96 had it, but I (emphasis on I) needed the V-Folders more.

I will also add that while I only have one digital system near me in the same band at present, I will also likely appreciate the automatic tuning when the second system somes online in my area in the same band. The Uniden settings for different systems are often not the same, and sometimes what works on one system will not work on another. That is not a problem with the PRO-96.

Joe M.

 

[loumaag]

... the P96 will scan multiple control channels in a single bank as long as there is a conventional freq. between each possible control channel.

(I know I should just keep my mouth shut but...) The interleaving of conventional frequencies is not necessary in most instances. The Pro-96 will scan an entire bank and check each CC on the bank as it encounters it. The Pro-96 does not lock on a control channel.

 

[Voyager]

I guess there is yet another benefit of the PRO-96 that has come up recently. I like using Trunker-like programs to monitor trunk systems. Currently, PRO96COM is the only trunker-like program to monitor 9600 systems, and it only works with the PRO-96.

Joe M.

 

[kikito]

(I know I should just keep my mouth shut but...) The interleaving of conventional frequencies is not necessary in most instances. The Pro-96 will scan an entire bank and check each CC on the bank as it encounters it. The Pro-96 does not lock on a control channel.

I guess it depends on the system. For some reason, I monitor a Digital VHF 9600 system that won't switch to any other control channel in the bank unless it has at least one conventional frequency in between each CC. On the other hand, I also monitor some analog 800MHz systems that do seem to switch through all available CC's without conventional stuff in between.

I have confirmed the above in my area with 2 or more scanners simultaneously, YMMV....

 

[CORN]

To me it doesn't seem like a good idea to put two different systems into the same bank. Especially if they both were large you would miss a lot of stuff. That's why i run two different radios. Just a thought.

 

[STiMULi]

It all comes down to the features YOU want, and the importance YOU place on them. Read the comparison thread (the second thread from the top at present) and choose which one you like more. We can't tell you which you prefer.

Sorry... In this case It doesn't come down to ME. It comes down to what YOU want. You see I don't know what I want. I have no point of reference. So instead I ask for YOUR opinion and maybe I can ge an idea of what might be important to ME

You see since I have never been to SIX FLAGS I have no idea what are the best rides...

I travel a lot and don't care to lug my laptop out just to reprogram the scanner - especially while I am driving...

Same here! So I gave the V folders alot of weight

Yes, computer control is nice, and I really wish the PRO-96 had it, but I (emphasis on I) needed the V-Folders more.

Yes YOU not ME :lol:

I have been doing some strong thinking about the computer control thing. One reason is I liked computer control is because of a poor OS in the scanner and lack of enough memory in the scanners that I used them in.


Another reason is I need to cut the cord. Will I enjoy the usability of the scanner as much when it is not connected to the computer...

The Uniden settings for different systems are often not the same, and sometimes what works on one system will not work on another. That is not a problem with the PRO-96.

Thank you guys for your help!!!

I actually made up my mind a few hours ago and bought the Pro96.

Here is why...

I did not understand before today that the BC296/796D could only have effectively 1 trunked system per bank. What a waste!

No one has ever complained about the audio quality of the 96...

V folders will be used often

They have not manufactured the ultimate scanner yet. (it is about 3-5 years out)

I would really like to have a Pro2096 but I would end up leaving it in my car. This way I can move around.

I have always been biased toward the GRE radios for listener quality.

Thanks again for your opinions. I'll give you mine in a few days :wink:

My 1st opinion...

DAMN THIS THING IS LIGHT!

 

[loumaag]

I guess it depends on the system. For some reason, I monitor a Digital VHF 9600 system that won't switch to any other control channel in the bank unless it has at least one conventional frequency in between each CC. On the other hand, I also monitor some analog 800MHz systems that do seem to switch through all available CC's without conventional stuff in between.

That is why I put in the qualification.

I monitor a VHF 3600 system that does not require the interleaving. Nor did any other 3600 system I have ever come across. And when I was in Colorado, the state system didn't require interleaving either (800MHz 9600) but I understand there are those systems out there that do. I have just not come across one yet. My advice to anyone would be try it without the interleaving first, and then if you have to, put some in.

To me it doesn't seem like a good idea to put two different systems into the same bank. Especially if they both were large you would miss a lot of stuff. That's why i run two different radios. Just a thought.

I was actually discussing differnt sites/towers on the same system so that you don't miss something that is appearing on one site but not the other. However, putting differnt systems in can be an advantage when traveling and passing through new areas.

 

[Voyager]

They have not manufactured the ultimate scanner yet. (it is about 3-5 years out)

I would really like to have a Pro2096 but I would end up leaving it in my car. This way I can move around.

And in 3-5 years, there will probably be new features that make that model not the ultimate scanner. :wink:

Besides, the PRO-2096 isn't out yet. I want to get one, but can't yet.

As for which rides are best at 6 flags, what I consider the best may not be what you consider the best. You see, I don't like any that go more than 20-30 feet in the air. That's why it's usually better to list specs, and let each decide for himself or herself.

I will say this for the PRO-96, and I've heard this same complaint from many people monitoring 9600 systems. Leave the DSP off. It makes everything sound like it's underwater. With it off, the audio sounds very close to a Motorola XTS series portable. That's the only complaint I have about the PRO-96, and as it's easily 'cured', it's not much of a complaint.

Joe M.

 

[Mike-KC8OWL]

I wanted to add some additional info based on my experience with both the BC296 and the P96.

The following is based on my own experiences with the two - your mileage may vary ... Sorry for the double post earlier in the thread

1) The BC296 will only go about 5 hours on a full charge; the P96 will do 10+ with quality batteries (I use 2Ahr AA's)

2) I have never felt the need to adjust the digital audio quality on any of the systems here in northeast Ohio.

3) The free software that comes with the BC296 is junk; the P96 does not come with software - you must buy it. I like Win96.

4) The battery pack on the BC296D is proprietary; the P96 accepts AA's cells (regular or rechargeable), but does not come with a charger - thats extra. The BC296 comes with a charger.

5) The virtual folders on the P96 are a great feature; the BC296 has nothing to match this.

6) The BC296D does LTR trunking; the P96 does not. No big deal unless you want to listen to a lot of LTR systems and don't want to hear the data burst every 10 - 15 seconds.

7) The LCD display is nicer on the BC296D; the P96's LCD display is very crowded compared to the 296's.

There are a number of other little things I could add, but those are the most obvious ones. It really comes down to what you want the scanner for. I have both because I bought the 296 last year before Chrstmas as an early present to myself. I bought the P96 a month ago or so, mostly because of frustrations associated with monitoring Ohio's state-wide MARCS system; a job much better suited for the P96.

Happy Holidays.

Mike KC8OWL

 

[kikito]

I will say this for the PRO-96, and I've heard this same complaint from many people monitoring 9600 systems. Leave the DSP off. It makes everything sound like it's underwater. With it off, the audio sounds very close to a Motorola XTS series portable. That's the only complaint I have about the PRO-96, and as it's easily 'cured', it's not much of a complaint.

Joe M.

I couldn't survive without the AGC feature (I assumed that's what you mean). The digital system I monitor has so many audio "variables" that I very rarely use my BC296D because of it.

By variables I mean:

Different brands - for some reason, the Motorola radios sound much better than the EF Johnson they use. I've heard they might get other brands too eventually. You get what you pay for I guess....

Mobiles and Handhelds - Again, you can tell the difference in audio, maybe for obvious reasons.

Different environments: You'll go from hearing someone at the Base Flightline with machinery running in the background and the guy screaming at the radio to someone talking from a nice and quiet office to a Snow plow operator scraping the road and with the mobile mike down his throat.

Basically, without AGC, the system I monitor will go from barely discernible audio to so loud it gets clipped and distorted and in the end what matters is if I understand what's being said.

Going back to the original question of the thread, just like many things already discussed, your mileage may vary and only personal experimentation and research will let you know what's the best radio for what you want it for.

While we're at it, can anyone let me know which car brand is best? :wink:

 

[Voyager]

I will say this for the PRO-96, and I've heard this same complaint from many people monitoring 9600 systems. Leave the DSP off. It makes everything sound like it's underwater. With it off, the audio sounds very close to a Motorola XTS series portable. That's the only complaint I have about the PRO-96, and as it's easily 'cured', it's not much of a complaint.

Joe M.

I couldn't survive without the AGC feature (I assumed that's what you mean).

OOPS! Yes - AGC.

The other is easy. Hummer. (The H1, not the H2)

Joe M.

 

[qoatzecotl]

For me, AGC is constantly being turned on and off... MARCS is great without it, so is Summit County, Lake County, and Akron City. Brook Park Fire seems to talk too far from the mic, it's hard to hear them. The Cleveland Hopkins TSA people like to swallow the mic, then talk, making it sound distorted. So, While in Lake or Summit County, I leave AGC off. If I don't hear the TSA for a while, I'll turn off the AGC. When the TSA starts talking, or I can barely hear Brook Park, AGC gets turned on...

I wish it had AGC for the analog, as well, though. Strongsville Police CMHA Police are like night and day. Anyone who's ever heard them both can attest that Strongsville is extremely soft, while CMHA's system is rather loud...

 

[STiMULi]

And in 3-5 years, there will probably be new features that make that model not the ultimate scanner. :wink:

The 1st FCC approved Software Defined Radio (SDR) is hitting the market soon. It will be every mode. When they create the scanner version of this radio it will probable be inn the $1K + price range. We won't be buying many new scanners then. instead we will be buying software packages instead. They will cost bucks too!

When it becomes available as a 2 way in a price range that I can afford and built by a manufacture with a reputation I will buy one.

On another subject...

Does anyone else think that the Pro96 ergonomically feels like a brick?

At least it is light. Is the BC796D easier to hold?

You guys are right! This thing sounds nice in digital mode.

I am such a NOOB on this radio it frustrates me!

Thanks again for everyones help

======================================
BTW at this time 17% of the pollsters have voted not to vote :lol:

 

[kikito]

Does anyone else think that the Pro96 ergonomically feels like a brick?

Yes!

At least it is light. Is the BC796D easier to hold?

The BC796D is even worse since it's a mobile!!!!
But seriously, the BC296D is also a brick, just a bit thicker one.

 

[loumaag]

The BC796D is even worse since it's a mobile!!!!

You bet! But it is nothing compared to carrying around that 12volt GelCel. :lol: