WS1095: Why so much Squelch Hysteresis on WS-1095 ?

[SCPD]

So .. well it has been said on these forums regarding other scanner models, but the WS-1095 also has terrible squelch hysteresis.

You can read a bit about it here .. Improve the Squelch in Your Monitor Receiver Thank you Bob P for the explanation.

You can read about other models here (most recently the WS-1080) .. http://forums.radioreference.com/gr...sr800-ws1080-weak-signal-squelch-problem.html

The issue .. the 1095 will not receive weak signals .. as you are forced to set the squelch very high like at 7 or 8.

So .. how about it Whistler ? Can you please investigate this issue.

You can be pretty sure that the NEW 1088 and 1098 models will likely be the same.

I did some sensitivity tests last night .. and the Whistler WS-1095 was the almost the least sensitive scanner out of all the units tested. If the squelch was fixed .. I think it would do well.

It beat out only the 780XLT which I can confirm in listening comparison tests does not do well on 800 MHz.

Measured .... Icom IC-R7000, Uniden HomePatrol 1, Whistler WS-1095, SDRPlay, and Uniden BC780XLT.

For example .. on 868 MHz the radios were as follows. I did measure different frequencies, but showing a sample of the results below. (testing for minimum squelch activation)

Icom IC-R7000 - 0.11 uV
Uniden HomePatrol 1 - 0.15 uV
Whistler WS-1095 - 0.31 uV
SDRPlay - 0.05 uV
Uniden BC780XLT - 0.7 uV

Maybe Boatanchor has fixed his unit ? They can sometimes be fixed by adding a resistor .. but I am not so sure on the 1095 and not to willing to monkey around with my scanner too much.

But I would be interested in hearing about the experiences of other users re this scanner.

 

[troymail]

My guess is that the Whistlers try to do a better job with receiving systems more consistently.

My Unidens seem to receive more distant systems/sites/frequencies but very inconsistently -- one minute the system is there, the next it's gone. In between, I see the Uniden LNK indicator when it seems to be struggling to try and find and sync on a distant system/site control channel. When this happens (trying to lock on these distant systems), the scan rate of the radio seems to slow down and sometimes even appear to "hang" on that system for long periods of time.

Of course, this is just my experience. Everyone's is different... even my experience varies from time to time, system to system, and "location" to "location".

 

[SCPD]

I think it should be up to the user to adjust their scanner as needed depending on their location and situation.

But having to set the squelch at 8 just 'to shut it up' .. and miss weak signals is in my mind, wrong.

If you stifle your scanner by eliminating the possibility of receiving weak signals .. you may **** off some users, and not effect others (cause they typically do not know they are missing something anyways).

The only way to know if there is a problem .. have different radios on the same frequency and see what happens.

I know that certain bands on my certain radios / scanners work better .. but the WS-1095 is pretty much at the back of the pack when it comes to usable sensitivity due to this issue. I think that if I could set the squelch at 2 rather than 8, I would likely receive more signals.

I do know that these scanners tend to overload easily .. and that may be one of the reasons that Whistler has done what they have.

 

[a417]

It beat out only the 780XLT which I can confirm in listening comparison tests does not do well on 800 MHz.

Measured .... Icom IC-R7000, Uniden HomePatrol 1, Whistler WS-1095, SDRPlay, and Uniden BC780XLT.

That's funny, the 780XLT I keep kicking around is single handedly the hottest scanner deck I have. I really should test it to see how low it goes.

 

[SCPD]

That's funny, the 780XLT I keep kicking around is single handedly the hottest scanner deck I have. I really should test it to see how low it goes.

It was only somewhat deaf on 800 MHz .. it was the best one on 420 MHz, and probably why people use it for UHF aircraft monitoring.

 

[TAbirdman]

For example .. on 868 MHz the radios were as follows. I did measure different frequencies, but showing a sample of the results below. (testing for minimum squelch activation)

Icom IC-R7000 - 0.11 uV
Uniden HomePatrol 1 - 0.15 uV
Whistler WS-1095 - 0.31 uV
SDRPlay - 0.05 uV
Uniden BC780XLT - 0.7 uV

.

To have Squelch out of the test - wouldn't using a Sinad meter give a truer result? Just throwing that out there.

 

[SCPD]

To have Squelch out of the test - wouldn't using a Sinad meter give a truer result? Just throwing that out there.

I do not care about the numbers as much about the true performance of each radio. The numbers just confirm what I probably already know.

It is not really for me anyways but just to give people some idea how these radios perform. But as I have stated before in another thread .. it is not 100% about sensitivity. Selectivity is a major part of the performance equation.

The 1095 was very much throttled due to the hysteresis of the squelch.

If I could set it to 2 (similar to the HomePatrol) .. it would perform better.

I do not know if it could be fixed in a firmware update .. as it has been stated that it is 'an encoder'. Or .. if a hardware change is needed.

I will probably get one of my friends to look at it .. but it is not a pressing issue as the 1095 is not my main scanner and I seldom use it due to its issues.

 

[Boatanchor]

To have Squelch out of the test - wouldn't using a Sinad meter give a truer result? Just throwing that out there.

Turning the squelch off completely, would be a moot point since you are not going to receive any signal until the squelch opens anyway. You could in theory, have a receiver with a 0.12uV for 12dB Sinad with the squelch forced open, but a squelch that doesn't open (at minimum closed setting) until the carrier is .7uV. So, is your receiver sensitivity 0.12uV or 0.7uV?

Also in my experience with a couple of the later generation (zip code) GRE legacy scanners, there is something else strange going on that affects sensitivity.

I.e Whilst scanning, the minimum carrier level required to stop the scan and open the squelch is higher than when manually tuned to a frequency.

You can prove this yourself if you have a signal generator by:

* Setting the scanner's squelch to the minimum closed setting.
* Manually tune or hold on a generated signal and note the minimum signal generator level that opens the squelch.
* Now, put the test frequency into a scan group and/or press scan.
* Increase the signal generator output until the scan stops/squelch opens.

You should find that it takes a considerably stronger signal to stop the scan and open the squelch than the manually tuned level.

At this point, the receivers 'sensitivity' is the level at which the scan stops and the squelch opens..

I have not noted this on any of the recent Uniden models, or even the older PSR500/600 vintage GRE models.

 

[Boatanchor]

SDRPlkay is amazing

Icom IC-R7000 - 0.11 uV
Uniden HomePatrol 1 - 0.15 uV
Whistler WS-1095 - 0.31 uV
SDRPlay - 0.05 uV
Uniden BC780XLT - 0.7 uV

Maybe Boatanchor has fixed his unit ? They can sometimes be fixed by adding a resistor .. but I am not so sure on the 1095 and not to willing to monkey around with my scanner too much.

But I would be interested in hearing about the experiences of other users re this scanner.

No, I didn't fix my unit. In fact, I no longer own any GRE/RS/Whistler zipcode scanners.
I saw no value in trying to re-engineer that wheel
I do still own a well used PSR600 though..

Your figures on the SDRPlay above match my own Sinad testing. It is just a stunningly sensitive piece of kit. You can do a Sinad test on the 'Play' by taking an audio feed from the PC/Laptop's headphone output and feeding that into your Service Monitor, as I did. The results will blow you away.
SDRPlay well and truly outperforms my Airspy too, which is interesting considering the difference in price and complexity.

When the gain figures are manually set, the SDRplay is by far the most sensitive V/UHF receiver in my arsenal.

Edit: Shame you can't fix spelling mistakes in the heading with the edit function..

 

[SCPD]

Turning the squelch off completely, would be a moot point since you are not going to receive any signal until the squelch opens anyway. You could in theory, have a receiver with a 0.12uV for 12dB Sinad with the squelch forced open, but a squelch that doesn't open (at minimum closed setting) until the carrier is .7uV. So, is your receiver sensitivity 0.12uV or 0.7uV?

Also in my experience with a couple of the later generation (zip code) GRE legacy scanners, there is something else strange going on that affects sensitivity.

I.e Whilst scanning, the minimum carrier level required to stop the scan and open the squelch is higher than when manually tuned to a frequency.

You can prove this yourself if you have a signal generator by:

* Setting the scanner's squelch to the minimum closed setting.
* Manually tune or hold on a generated signal and note the minimum signal generator level that opens the squelch.
* Now, put the test frequency into a scan group and/or press scan.
* Increase the signal generator output until the scan stops/squelch opens.

You should find that it takes a considerably stronger signal to stop the scan and open the squelch than the manually tuned level.

At this point, the receivers 'sensitivity' is the level at which the scan stops and the squelch opens..

I have not noted this on any of the recent Uniden models, or even the older PSR500/600 vintage GRE models.

That is very interesting .. and something that we sure will have to try. I will try to remember to do this little test and post my results back here.

 

[W9JBM]

Whistler WS 1095 Squelch setting and sensitivity issues

I bought the Grecom PSR 800 several yrs ago just days after it was released for sale and then WS 1095 again just days after it was released for sale! The PSR 800 is a great receiver and I've never had any problems with it except for having to get a reaplacement face plate for it (it seems to get a lot of dust inside the diplay area) the build quality could have been better on the PSR 800. Now Whistler made huge improvements in the build quality on the WS 1095 and the remote face plate is an excellent feature. Both of these receivers are pretty much identical inside except for a couple new featursite that were added to the 1095.

Here's where the big disappointed comes in... I have identical Comet tri-band antennas on both radios and the radio data files are also identical. The older PSR 800 stops on every channel where there is traffic (analog & P25) but the newer WS 1095 acts as if there's no antenna on the radio!! It seems really deaf plus the squelch always has to be set to max settings!

Are there any other owners that are seeing the same problems with the WS 1095??

I spoke to Whistler about this problem late last year and I was told that they have received no complaints and I asked about sending it back while under warranty to see if there could adjust the squelch and the receiver's sensitivity?? I got no where

 

[SCPD]

It is all about location, location, location when it comes to these scanners.

I have done fairly extensive testing on several scanners .. and with usage testing have determined that there are potentially issues once you put an external antenna on these scanners. Again .. not everyone will experience issues, but some will.

The Uniden scanners have a better front end design. As a result, they overload a lot less and do not experience any where near as much the problem you are experiencing.

The Whistler scanners have a much better user interface (except for the HomePatrol models).

So it is a trade off .. performance or usability.

I have both the PSR800 and 1095 and they are great as long as I do not put on anything more than a rubber ducky. Otherwise .. particularly the 1095 will overload and become pretty much a boat anchor.

I can virtually guarantee that you are overloading the 1095. Plain and simple. The test .. put a portable antenna on the scanner and see if it comes back to life.

If you live in a rural area .. you should be fine, but if you live in / near a big city .. you could have problems.

EDIT .. I see you live in Tuscon. That is close enough to a big city to me. Likely your problem, the radio is being overloaded by strong nearby signals.

One RR user (who lives in Los Angeles) returned I believe 2 1095's .. cause they just would not work. He uses Uniden 536HP and other scanners now.

 

[W9JBM]

Whistler WS 1095 Squelch setting and sensitivity issues

Hi, thanks for your reply! I'm using identical rubber duck antennas on both (I bought 2 Comet tri-band portable rubber duck antennas to improve the 800 mhz) they are designed for 2m, 70cm & 800mhz!
They do a much better job than the stock antenn, the 800mhz duck antenna from Radio Shack doesn't help with coverage on VHF & UHF!

I'm also 17 miles north of Tucson in Oro Valley. I live in very low lying area where it's very difficult to hit a 440 repeater from inside the house thats's only a mile and a quarter away!! The AT&T cell site is at the same location and my wireless coverage is very poor! The house is covered with stucko that has chicken wire inside so overloading the front end of this scanner isn't the problem!!

I've done extensive testing with both the PSR800 & WS1095 with the stock antenna and the Radio Shack 800 mhz antenna and both of these Comet tri-band duck antennas (both in the house & in the vehicleI) Ive even tried an SMA clip on the window antenna mount for a vehicle and tried 4 or 5 rubber duck antennas including a Yaesu HT antenna that's used on a VX-8DR & VX-7. I've never used an external scanner antenna on the house with either scanner!! I've owned a lot of programmable scanners & crystal scanners in the last 40yrs... I certainly don't miss having a coffee mug full of $5 crystals!!

Again, I have the identical "Code Plug" or program in both scanners and identical rubber ducks on both scanners and they can sit side by side or separated in the same room and the WS1095 will ONLY stop on maybe 10-20% of what the PSR800 will stop on!! I have a Ham friend that bought a WS1095 in Indiana and he has compared his with a newer Uniden Digital scanner and he has the same problem with having to have the squelch @ max setting and the his WS1095 seems to be very deaf also!

 

[marcotor]

My Whistler 1095 is in my vehicle due to the convenience of the remote head.

The squelch tail is terrible on CHP (VHF Low) - which is the main system I listen to during my long workdays on the freeway. I have to set the squelch to 8 to eliminate the tail, in spite of CHP using CTCSS.

None of my handhelds (Whistler/GRE/Uniden/RS) or Uniden base/mobile scanners exhibit this issue when connected to the same antenna. I would certainly like to see someone connected with Whistler (Don?) address this.

 

[SCPD]

It is interesting that you are using a ducky .. not an external antenna. But .. you cannot rule out overloading unless you have scanned the spectrum for any strong signals that could be causing issues. For me .. it was 3 taxi frequencies from a site 3 blocks from here. But the 1095 still has issues and will only work with a ducky antenna. Even on my discone (outside antenna) .. it is done.

But .. these radios are far from deaf when it comes to sensitivity.

Whistler WS-1095 sensitivity and not that different from my other scanners.
(minimum squelch activation)
Squelch was I believe at 8 if I recall.

127.5000 AM 0.27 uV
147.0000 FM 0.14 uV
155.0000 FM 0.21 uV
420.0000 FM 0.17 uV
447.0000 FM 0.30 uV
772.0000 FM 0.24 uV
868.0000 FM 0.31 uV

 

[SigIntel8600]

I use a Comtelco all band low profile mobile antenna (mag mount) stuck to a metal file cabinet in the shack with my WS 1098. Outstanding on 700/800 MHZ. Decent results on UHF/VHF conventional with squelch set to 9.