• Effective immediately we will be deleting, without notice, any negative threads or posts that deal with the use of encryption and streaming of scanner audio.

    We've noticed a huge increase in rants and negative posts that revolve around agencies going to encryption due to the broadcasting of scanner audio on the internet. It's now worn out and continues to be the same recycled rants. These rants hijack the threads and derail the conversation. They no longer have a place anywhere on this forum other than in the designated threads in the Rants forum in the Tavern.

    If you violate these guidelines your post will be deleted without notice and an infraction will be issued. We are not against discussion of this issue. You just need to do it in the right place. For example:
    https://forums.radioreference.com/rants/224104-official-thread-live-audio-feeds-scanners-wait-encryption.html

Why cant they make a scanner that...

Status
Not open for further replies.

GutWrench

Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2005
Messages
42
Location
Lake Charles, LA
comes in as clear as my portable from work?

I have two scanners, pro95 and a 296d and both of them suck as far as reception goes compared to my issued mts2000.
 

Dubbin

Member
Premium Subscriber
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
4,465
Location
Findlay Ohio
GutWrench said:
comes in as clear as my portable from work?

I have two scanners, pro95 and a 296d and both of them suck as far as reception goes compared to my issued mts2000.
Well lets compare the cost of the scanners against the cost of your mts2000...
 

GutWrench

Member
Joined
Jan 5, 2005
Messages
42
Location
Lake Charles, LA
Thats BS. We are paying $500 for trunking scanners already but if the scanner manufaturers could make one that would come in as good as the mts200 I would be more then willing to pay for it.
 

mancow

Member
Database Admin
Joined
Feb 19, 2003
Messages
5,882
Location
N.E. Kansas
Your MTS2000 wont' scan 25-1300 Mhz either.

Scanners are wideband devices. You have to give a little to get something and you have to give up some of the extra filtering to allow for the range. Otherwise, it would consist of basically numerous different radios all tuned to specific ranges and the cost would be insane.
 

kd7rto

Member
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
458
Location
Bountiful, Ut
mono-band scanners

mancow said:
Your MTS2000 wont' scan 25-1300 Mhz either.

Scanners are wideband devices. You have to give a little to get something and you have to give up some of the extra filtering to allow for the range. Otherwise, it would consist of basically numerous different radios all tuned to specific ranges and the cost would be insane.
In ham radio, there is a market for both multi-band as well as mono-band VHF/UHF equipment. So why not mono-band scanners? Anyone who is serious about this hobby is going to own multiple receivers, anyway.

I certainly would buy an 806-869 MHz only trunktracker, if it had rx performance comparable to commercial units.
 

JoeyC

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 19, 2002
Messages
3,395
Location
San Diego, CA
In the grand scheme of things, the scanner hobby is very very small. Most scanner enthusiasts want multi-band radios so they can listen to a variety of things. For those hardcore enough to want to pay the huge bucks, there are MTS2000s and other pro radios.
 

jeffy

Member
Joined
May 31, 2006
Messages
69
Clear

Gutwrench, are you talking about reception or the sound coming from the speaker? If it's the sound (clarity) I think manufactureres could do better with speakers. Some of the sound coming from scanner speakers IS pure B.S. Even $100 scanners ought to have speakers that don't sound muffled or distorted. My pro 89 sounds better than my pro 94. The people designing scanners can do better.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top