RadioReference on Facebook   RadioReference on Twitter   RadioReference Blog
 

Go Back   The RadioReference.com Forums > Scanners, Receivers and Related Equipment Forums > Uniden Forums > Uniden Tech Support


Uniden Tech Support - For discussion of all technical aspects of current or future Uniden scanners.

Closed Thread
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #161 (permalink)  
Old 12-21-2014, 6:18 AM
Member
  Amateur Radio Operator
Amateur Radio
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Michigan
Posts: 564
Default BCDx36HP Test for P25 Decode Improvement

Quote:
Originally Posted by N2ZGE View Post
My BCD436 has been doing a terrible job decoding tg's on my local County's site here in NJ. However, after playing around with it a little, it has made some fair improvement. The default Threshold is set to 8 on the scanner, and after conducting the test, it does show the error rate close to zero at the default threshold of 8, however it sounds BETTER when it is set to "manual" rather than auto. So, even though 8 is the default setting anyway, setting it to 8 under manual makes a big difference for me.

I also added a 3 second Site hold time delay under system options, giving the scanner a better chance of catching/decoding the P25 phase TDMA signal in scan mode. Yes, I still hear a few garbled transmissions that should be heard more clearly, but I believe part of that problem is due to the transmissions currently being patched through VHF still for some departments. If your system is still simulcasting on VHF, this will definitely make some of your transmissions sound more garbled at times and there's nothing you can do about that until the VHF patch is abandoned on their end.

Next, I will try setting my squelch setting lower, maybe to about a 2, to see if that helps even more. I think it's a great scanner, but you really need to play around with the settings a lot to get it to decode clearly on digital trunked systems.
Wondering if you tried switching between NFM & FM to see if either makes any improvement as stated on page one of this thread as upman stated?

Mike
__________________
kb8rvp
Sponsored links
  #162 (permalink)  
Old 12-21-2014, 6:41 AM
Member
  Premium Subscriber
Premium Subscriber
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 12,007
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by brischo View Post
I also have the advantage of comparing it to the audio of the Harris XG25 Portable and Mobile units
those radios are much clearer but still get digital distortion.
If a $3K radio gets distortion, you can't really expect a $500 scanner to perform any better. Sounds like the system isn't set up properly.
  #163 (permalink)  
Old 12-21-2014, 7:32 AM
Member
  Amateur Radio Operator
Amateur Radio
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Roselle Park, NJ
Posts: 1,736
Default

I did try switching between NFM and FM, but that didn't make any difference. The biggest difference occurred when switching P25 threshold to manual, even when still set to the default level of 8 and increasing the delay time.
__________________
"Analog will always be the most reliable form of public safety communication"
  #164 (permalink)  
Old 12-21-2014, 8:36 AM
brischo's Avatar
Member
   
Join Date: Jul 2011
Location: WNY
Posts: 13
Default

After the 3 new towers were put on line the audio has improved, but there is still distortion once in a wile. I believe there are plans to add another tower. The distortion level changes day to day. I think its a combination of system and radio user that causes the problems.

I have also switched back and forth between FM & NFM with no noticeable change in audio quality
  #165 (permalink)  
Old 01-31-2015, 7:55 AM
w9xxx's Avatar
Member
  Amateur Radio Operator
Amateur Radio
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: Kanab, UT
Posts: 90
Default

I've played with this heavily for several days in many different locations. I've noticed that on repeated systems it either helps or hurts.50/50 chance. On simplex frequencies some radios are already good and some bad. Changing to fm Improved some and hurt others that were talking to each other. It seems very radio dependent.
Sponsored links
  #166 (permalink)  
Old 02-04-2015, 9:30 PM
Member
  Premium Subscriber
Premium Subscriber
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Appomattox County, Virginia
Posts: 12
Default Virginia State Police Stars System Towers

Can someone tell me where I can go online to get a complete list of what star antenna Tower sites belong to which VA state Police Division. I need this for my mobile as I do a lot of traveling throughout Virginia. When I am programming my mobile scanner (PRO 197) radio reference lists all the star antenna sites but how do I know which ones pertain to which Division for example mine, APPOMATTOX Division 5? I hope I have made some sense here PLEASE HELP I'm pulling my hair out trying to figure this out. For another example how do I know which Division Bear Den Mountain Tower belongs to? I need to find out these Tower Sites.
I am a disabled Vet and thanking you in advance for any help you can give me.
  #167 (permalink)  
Old 02-04-2015, 9:58 PM
muchomorek's Avatar
Member
   
Join Date: Sep 2014
Posts: 106
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by randythomas View Post
Can someone tell me where I can go online to get a complete list of what star antenna Tower sites belong to which VA state Police Division. I need this for my mobile as I do a lot of traveling throughout Virginia. When I am programming my mobile scanner (PRO 197) radio reference lists all the star antenna sites but how do I know which ones pertain to which Division for example mine, APPOMATTOX Division 5? I hope I have made some sense here PLEASE HELP I'm pulling my hair out trying to figure this out. For another example how do I know which Division Bear Den Mountain Tower belongs to? I need to find out these Tower Sites.
I am a disabled Vet and thanking you in advance for any help you can give me.
check this out
https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer...&oe=UTF8&msa=0
__________________
BCD436HP, BCD396XT, R820T(x2), UniTrunker, DSD+, Antennacraft ST2, Yagi 800 MHz.
  #168 (permalink)  
Old 02-05-2015, 1:15 PM
Member
  Premium Subscriber
Premium Subscriber
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Appomattox County, Virginia
Posts: 12
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by muchomorek View Post
This is exactly what I Need. Thanks so much. Since I am disabled I have to travel a lot to VA Hospital in Richmond and to VA in Bedford. Thank you so very much. Since I can't work anymore scanning is my only hobby. Thanks again.
  #169 (permalink)  
Old 03-12-2015, 10:41 AM
Member
   
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central IL
Posts: 57
Default coverage issues on new BCD436

Hello, I am on this system Peoria County Illinois ETSB (P25) Trunking System, Peoria, Illinois - Scanner Frequencies
Can anyone tell me what freq range I would have to change to FM ?
My coverage is spotty for this area. I have great signal strength though but the p25 coverage I think could be much better for Peoria County ETSB project 25. I seem to be missing a lot of traffic.

Thanks, Jim
  #170 (permalink)  
Old 03-19-2015, 11:06 PM
Member
   
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Palm Springs Area / OrCo
Posts: 1,331
Talking

Quote:
Originally Posted by jimijodie View Post
Hello, I am on this system Peoria County Illinois ETSB (P25) Trunking System, Peoria, Illinois - Scanner Frequencies
Can anyone tell me what freq range I would have to change to FM ?
My coverage is spotty for this area. I have great signal strength though but the p25 coverage I think could be much better for Peoria County ETSB project 25. I seem to be missing a lot of traffic.

Thanks, Jim
Set the modulation to fm in the 800 MHz and lower vhf say below the am flight band. Mostly the ham and vhf hi freq are nfm now.
__________________
You be steppin....I be stomping.
  #171 (permalink)  
Old 03-20-2015, 12:25 AM
Member
  Premium Subscriber
Premium Subscriber
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 12,007
Default

Business and Public Safety frequencies in the 150-174 and 420-470 MHz bands are NFM. All other users in those bands and all other users will be FM except broadcast. Also, 900 MHz is NFM.
  #172 (permalink)  
Old 03-30-2015, 5:02 PM
Member
   
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central IL
Posts: 57
Default

Thanks for the help but changing these setting really didn't help. My p25 phase 2 system still is garbled and I am in the same town as the towers. My signal strength is good, I have 5 bars.
Is there any adjustments I can make to dial this in better ?

Thanks
  #173 (permalink)  
Old 03-30-2015, 6:30 PM
Member
  Amateur Radio Operator
Amateur Radio
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Roselle Park, NJ
Posts: 1,736
Default

I have owned this radio for over a year and tried every setting imaginable. For many systems, this scanner simply does a horrible job decoding phase 2.
__________________
"Analog will always be the most reliable form of public safety communication"
  #174 (permalink)  
Old 03-30-2015, 6:57 PM
Member
   
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Central IL
Posts: 57
Default

From what Ive been reading that does look like thats the case, I just got it, so now what, what for firmware upgrade or sell and buy a different model
  #175 (permalink)  
Old 04-01-2015, 1:41 PM
K8CPA's Avatar
Member
  Shack Photos
Shack photos
Amateur Radio Operator
Amateur Radio
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Lincoln Park, Michigan
Posts: 255
Default

I changed it and am listening to MPSCS and Downriver Mutual, which are in my favorite lists and are P25 Phase 1, from what I have read.

I really don't see much of a difference, yet. I still hear the clipping and digital sound here.
__________________
Scanner: Bearcat BC536HP - Rigs: HF: Kenwood TS-950SDX - VHF/UHF: Yaesu VX6R. Antennas - HF: Cobra Ultra-Lite Senior @ 40FT VHF and UHF Comet CX-333 - 40 Ft Steel TV Tower
  #176 (permalink)  
Old 04-01-2015, 6:20 PM
K8CPA's Avatar
Member
  Shack Photos
Shack photos
Amateur Radio Operator
Amateur Radio
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Lincoln Park, Michigan
Posts: 255
Default

.
Specific sites monitored:
Michigan's Public Safety Communications System (MPSCS) Trunking System, Statewide, Multi-State - Scanner Frequencies

and

Downriver Mutual Aid (Project 25) Radio System Trunking System, SE Wayne County, Michigan - Scanner Frequencies


Condition before: Excellent
Condition after: Excellent

Saw no difference. still cuts in and out on certain stations on both systems.
__________________
Scanner: Bearcat BC536HP - Rigs: HF: Kenwood TS-950SDX - VHF/UHF: Yaesu VX6R. Antennas - HF: Cobra Ultra-Lite Senior @ 40FT VHF and UHF Comet CX-333 - 40 Ft Steel TV Tower
  #177 (permalink)  
Old 05-05-2015, 9:05 PM
Rumpaltin's Avatar
Member
   
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Green Bay, Wisconsin
Posts: 8
Default 12.5Khz not 12.5Mhz and should not need to be changed.

P25 by Nature is NFM 12.5Khz (which is actually 11K0F3E - 11.0Khz). The radio should have no problem picking this up and decoding it unless there are more cheap low quality components starting to fail internally. You don't see the P25 system users having to Wide band their mobile or portable radios in order to hear and/or decode a transmission to them now do you?

Quote:
Originally Posted by UPMan View Post
Rather than try to post these details in several threads, I'm making one post and hoping you'll see it (and maybe post in the thread you were previously active in pointing here). We've been investigating the various reports of degraded P25 performance in some areas and noted with interest when reports surfaced that changing from NFM to FM mode improved P25 decode performance. We have tentatively verified this, but would like some more confirmation if you don't mind. Here is a relatively easy way to check:

First do MENU --> SETTINGS --> BAND DEFAULTS
Then, scroll to the setting(s) that have the frequency just below the range your local system is using. For example, if you are monitoring an 800 MHz system, scroll to the line that looks like:
849.0:NFM/ 12.5 MHz
Press E and scroll to change NFM to FM.
Press E two more times.
Then, check to see if there was any performance improvement.

For conventional P25, you'll still need to set MOD for the individual channels.

Based on the feedback we get from this, we'll be able to make adjustments that should reflect optimum settings w/o you having to tweak around with these settings.

Oh, and if your P25 decode is just fine, please do the above and see if it degrades your decode performance. We don't want to issue an update that fixes half of you but breaks the other half.

To submit a report:
FORMAT FOR REPORTING (to make my life a little easier):
Link to the system in RRDB.
Specific site monitored (if known).
Condition before: Excellent / Poor
Condition after: Excellent / Poor

Then, put any additional discussion you want to add.
__________________

Department Of Civilians
United States of America
  #178 (permalink)  
Old 05-06-2015, 2:11 AM
PiccoIntegra's Avatar
Member
   
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: North Texas
Posts: 522
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rumpaltin View Post
12.5Khz not 12.5Mhz and should not need to be changed.
I'm sure it was a fat-finger or brain fart... not at all intentional on his part.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rumpaltin View Post
P25 by Nature is NFM 12.5Khz (which is actually 11K0F3E - 11.0Khz).
NFM 12.5Khz is just an allotted frequency slot, nothing special about it. There are many different modes and schemes allowed within those slots. That's what the emission designators indicate. The designator 11K0F3E is just an analog frequency modulated voice channel with connect tone and DTMF etc capabilities.

The two most common P25 designators are 8K10F1E(C4FM) and 8K70D1W(QPSK variants). Both of which requires different filtering widths and modes. C4FM can typically be decoded easily at the discriminator, because it has a constant amplitude envelope. It just requires some proper low pass filtering, and slicing. Easy-peasy.. for the most part.

The QPSK variants are were the decoding problems are for these cheap scanners. Each manufacturer has their own QPSK variant. Motorola has LSM, Tait has TSM, Harris has who-knows-what. These are all proprietary modulation schemes. Each have their own characteristics and require different filtering and decoding methods. This is why this thread exists in the first place. People were experimenting around with different modes and "seen" better decoding.

Don't you find it kind of funny that half the people that update their scanners with a new firmware release report better decoding, and the other half report worse? Then it switches again with subsequent releases? Whatever Uniden and Whistler are doing with their firmware updates need to put these options in the hands of the user to make their own situation better. There isn't any one solution to all of the scenarios out there, but they treat them all the same. Baffling...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Rumpaltin View Post
The radio should have no problem picking this up and decoding it unless there are more cheap low quality components starting to fail internally. You don't see the P25 system users having to Wide band their mobile or portable radios in order to hear and/or decode a transmission to them now do you?
I have no idea what the hell you are talking about here...
  #179 (permalink)  
Old 05-20-2015, 11:28 AM
Member
  Premium Subscriber
Premium Subscriber
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Statesville, NC
Posts: 19
Default P25 decode test with bcd536hp

I made the changes as per your request

results:

Nc viper (iredell co and surrounding)
condition before: Fair
condition after: Good to excellent

statesville nc (pd fire etc)
condition before : Good
condtion after: Good to excellent

Rowan Salisbury NC Phase 2
condition before : Fair
condition after: Fair

i noticed more clarity on all channels. There were fewer missed transmissions and virtually no drop outs after locking on to a transmission. The iredell county traffic was better over all but there signal going into the system is very bad at times. They are doing a simulcast or piggy back onto the nc viper system, so what goes in comes out. They also send fire, etc tones that were and are still a distorted mess. The Phase 2 out of Rowan Salisbury was choppy before and still is.. But overall i see a significant improvement . Thanks your help.

Last edited by slwilson28625; 05-20-2015 at 11:37 AM..
  #180 (permalink)  
Old 06-02-2015, 4:20 PM
Member
   
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Preble County Ohio
Posts: 105
Default

Is this still applicable, potentially?
Closed Thread

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 6:26 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
All information here is Copyright 2012 by RadioReference.com LLC and Lindsay C. Blanton III.Ad Management by RedTyger
Copyright 2015 by RadioReference.com LLC Privacy Policy  |  Terms and Conditions