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
  #1 (permalink)  
Old 02-20-2014, 9:37 AM
UPMan's Avatar
Uniden Representative
  Premium Subscriber
Premium Subscriber
Amateur Radio Operator
Amateur Radio
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Arlington, TX
Posts: 12,422
Exclamation Test for P25 Decode Improvement

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.
__________________
Uniden Product Ninja
Who is UpMan and why doesn't he answer my email/phone call?
Personal Blog
For better help, tell us specifically what you are trying to scan.

Last edited by KE4ZNR; 02-20-2014 at 10:50 AM.. Reason: added format for reporting
Sponsored links
  #2 (permalink)  
Old 02-20-2014, 9:53 AM
KE4ZNR's Avatar
KE4ZNR@radioreference.com
  Shack Photos
Shack photos
RadioReference Database Admininstrator
Database Admin
Amateur Radio Operator
Amateur Radio
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Raleigh, NC
Posts: 6,867
Default

Thread stickfied for the time being.
Marshall KE4ZNR
__________________
NC/SC Forum Moderator/Database Administrator
Frequently Asked Questions
Forum Rules & Guidelines

@KE4ZNR on Twitter
  #3 (permalink)  
Old 02-20-2014, 9:55 AM
NYPDAUX's Avatar
Member
   
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Wichita, KS
Posts: 139
Default

Ok results for Wichita Kansas P25 Stage one originally was set to NFM make changes as per your request to FM did not notice any difference in my P 25 decoding single sounded the same as when it was on NFM the original settings of an FM work clear in Wichita. Kansas. P 25 when switched to FM there was no difference in results still crisp and clear thank you if there's any more of these tests please post will be happy to assist

Sent from my SCH-S738C using Tapatalk

Last edited by NYPDAUX; 02-20-2014 at 10:04 AM..
  #4 (permalink)  
Old 02-20-2014, 10:05 AM
Member
   
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Roanoke, Va
Posts: 116
Default

that did it. STARS control channel is 152.5475 in my area and is working as we speak. I had already set the band defaults to 7.5 mhz in an atempt to get it working. changed to FM and it is searching id's all over the place. thanks if it keeps on working. I just went to profile and band plan in sentinel and changed the 150.000/161.995 plan to FM and 7.50 which makes mine work perfect. hope it keeps working!

THANKS UPMAN YOU MADE MY DAY


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.
__________________
J.R. N4PIZ PSR-800 now history
BCD 536 HP works great PRO-106
PRO-97, PRO-2067
BC560XLT, BC125AT

Last edited by jrrob8; 02-20-2014 at 10:26 AM..
  #5 (permalink)  
Old 02-20-2014, 10:06 AM
MikeOxlong's Avatar
Forums Manager/Global DB Admin/Commie
  RadioReference Database Admininstrator
Database Admin
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Central Ontario
Posts: 10,114
Default

Paul, what about band defaults on other bands?

I don't have any 800MHz systems near me but I do have lots of UHF and VHF.
__________________
Mike.

Sorry but I don't accept PM's. Please use email instead.
Sponsored links
  #6 (permalink)  
Old 02-20-2014, 10:09 AM
UPMan's Avatar
Uniden Representative
  Premium Subscriber
Premium Subscriber
Amateur Radio Operator
Amateur Radio
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Arlington, TX
Posts: 12,422
Default

My example was just an example. If your system is in another band, the you'd set it for the band your system uses.

NYPDAUX: You fail to mention whether P25 decode was good or bad. Also, from your other posts it seems you are not using the released firmware. Please update your scanner so that we can get comparable results.
__________________
Uniden Product Ninja
Who is UpMan and why doesn't he answer my email/phone call?
Personal Blog
For better help, tell us specifically what you are trying to scan.
  #7 (permalink)  
Old 02-20-2014, 10:14 AM
MikeOxlong's Avatar
Forums Manager/Global DB Admin/Commie
  RadioReference Database Admininstrator
Database Admin
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Central Ontario
Posts: 10,114
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by UPMan View Post
My example was just an example. If your system is in another band, the you'd set it for the band your system uses.
Sorry, I missed the "for example".

Default Modulation has been changed and I'll let you know if it makes any difference although my P25 decoding was good to begin with.
__________________
Mike.

Sorry but I don't accept PM's. Please use email instead.
  #8 (permalink)  
Old 02-20-2014, 10:16 AM
NYPDAUX's Avatar
Member
   
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Wichita, KS
Posts: 139
Default re: Test for P25 Decode Improvement

Quote:
Originally Posted by UPMan View Post
My example was just an example. If your system is in another band, the you'd set it for the band your system uses.

NYPDAUX: You fail to mention whether P25 decode was good or bad. Also, from your other posts it seems you are not using the released firmware. Please update your scanner so that we can get comparable results.
Yes you are right I'm still using original firmware because there was no problem with receiving I will be willing to upgrade tell me which firmware upgrade version you would like me to put on my radio I hope it will be working fine after doing so.

Sent from my SCH-S738C using Tapatalk
  #9 (permalink)  
Old 02-20-2014, 10:21 AM
UPMan's Avatar
Uniden Representative
  Premium Subscriber
Premium Subscriber
Amateur Radio Operator
Amateur Radio
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Arlington, TX
Posts: 12,422
Default

There is only one version of release firmware.
__________________
Uniden Product Ninja
Who is UpMan and why doesn't he answer my email/phone call?
Personal Blog
For better help, tell us specifically what you are trying to scan.
  #10 (permalink)  
Old 02-20-2014, 10:22 AM
NYPDAUX's Avatar
Member
   
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Wichita, KS
Posts: 139
Default

Okay we'll go an upgrade firmware now I will keep my fingers crossed

Sent from my SCH-S738C using Tapatalk
  #11 (permalink)  
Old 02-20-2014, 10:33 AM
UPMan's Avatar
Uniden Representative
  Premium Subscriber
Premium Subscriber
Amateur Radio Operator
Amateur Radio
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Arlington, TX
Posts: 12,422
Default

Setting to 7.5 is not necessary. This just changes the default frequency step size. NFM vs FM changes bandwidth filtering.


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.
__________________
Uniden Product Ninja
Who is UpMan and why doesn't he answer my email/phone call?
Personal Blog
For better help, tell us specifically what you are trying to scan.
  #12 (permalink)  
Old 02-20-2014, 10:37 AM
Member
   
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: Roanoke, Va
Posts: 116
Default

thanks for that info, makes it simpler J. R.
by the way, it is decoding just perfect. keeping up with my 106 everything being equal.

Quote:
Originally Posted by UPMan View Post
Setting to 7.5 is not necessary. This just changes the default frequency step size. NFM vs FM changes bandwidth filtering.


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.
__________________
J.R. N4PIZ PSR-800 now history
BCD 536 HP works great PRO-106
PRO-97, PRO-2067
BC560XLT, BC125AT

Last edited by jrrob8; 02-20-2014 at 10:41 AM..
  #13 (permalink)  
Old 02-20-2014, 10:48 AM
NYPDAUX's Avatar
Member
   
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Wichita, KS
Posts: 139
Default re: Test for P25 Decode Improvement

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.
Okay export your request I have updated firmware to 1.0 2.0 7 the latest firmware on Sentinel I have gone back and put the frequency back FM mod as you requested I noticed no difference between FM NFM both are clear and loud in Wichita Kansas P25 stage one I hope this is helpful

Sent from my SCH-S738C using Tapatalk

Last edited by NYPDAUX; 02-20-2014 at 10:52 AM..
  #14 (permalink)  
Old 02-20-2014, 10:52 AM
UPMan's Avatar
Uniden Representative
  Premium Subscriber
Premium Subscriber
Amateur Radio Operator
Amateur Radio
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Arlington, TX
Posts: 12,422
Default

To make sure I understand what you checked:

Using the current released firmware (1.0.7), the P25 performance was excellent regardless of the NFM/FM setting, correct? And the results in the format I requested would have been:

Sedgwick County (Project 25) Emergency Services Radio System Trunking System, Wichita, Kansas - Scanner Frequencies
Site 1
Before: Excellent
After: Excellent
__________________
Uniden Product Ninja
Who is UpMan and why doesn't he answer my email/phone call?
Personal Blog
For better help, tell us specifically what you are trying to scan.
  #15 (permalink)  
Old 02-20-2014, 10:55 AM
NYPDAUX's Avatar
Member
   
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Wichita, KS
Posts: 139
Default re: Test for P25 Decode Improvement

Quote:
Originally Posted by UPMan View Post
To make sure I understand what you checked:

Using the current released firmware (1.0.7), the P25 performance was excellent regardless of the NFM/FM setting, correct? And the results in the format I requested would have been:

Sedgwick County (Project 25) Emergency Services Radio System Trunking System, Wichita, Kansas - Scanner Frequencies
Site 1
Before: Excellent
After: Excellent
Yes you are correct it is excellent before with original firmware and also excellent with updated firmware from Sentinel I've checked both NFM an FM all loud and clear in Wichita Kansas thank you

Sent from my SCH-S738C using Tapatalk
  #16 (permalink)  
Old 02-20-2014, 10:56 AM
KE4ZNR's Avatar
KE4ZNR@radioreference.com
  Shack Photos
Shack photos
RadioReference Database Admininstrator
Database Admin
Amateur Radio Operator
Amateur Radio
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Raleigh, NC
Posts: 6,867
Default

Folks: If you are going to report back with results please submit
them in the format that UPMan has requested them.


Thanks!
Marshall KE4ZNR
__________________
NC/SC Forum Moderator/Database Administrator
Frequently Asked Questions
Forum Rules & Guidelines

@KE4ZNR on Twitter

Last edited by KE4ZNR; 02-20-2014 at 10:56 AM.. Reason: clarity
  #17 (permalink)  
Old 02-20-2014, 11:38 AM
signal500's Avatar
Member
  Shack Photos
Shack photos
Premium Subscriber
Premium Subscriber
Amateur Radio Operator
Amateur Radio
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Florida Panhandle
Posts: 510
Default BCD536HP/BCD436HP Test for P25 Decode Improvement

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.
Link to the system: https://www.radioreference.com/apps/db/?ctid=332
Specific site monitored: 460.15000/465.15000 KIN947 RM 718 NAC A7 Info Net(Records Check) P25 Law Talk
Condition before: Excellent
Condition after: Excellent

Tested on both the BCD536HP and the BCD436HP
__________________
Douglas - K4DPS / WPUT291
My YouTube channel: http://www.youtube.com/user/k4dps
  #18 (permalink)  
Old 02-20-2014, 11:51 AM
Dafe1er's Avatar
Member
   
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: Off in a far away place, far from u.......
Posts: 760
Default

Monitoring VA STARS P25 Phase 1 system using the BCD436HP unit: Virginia Statewide Agencies Radio System (STARS) Trunking System, Statewide, Virginia - Scanner Frequencies

Change the 148.0:NFM/ 12.5khz to
148.0:FM/ 12.5khz

Monitoring only the following sites:

Arlington
Dumfries (this is the "primary" site everything comes in from since I believe it is the closet tower to me)
Fairfax
Independent Hill
Mobile Site- Richmond
Richmond
Thornburg

Condition before: Excellent
Condition after: Excellent

Seems to sound the same. Does pick up the conversation at the beginning of a transmission a little better than the HP-1 now. But, about the same as with NFM on. I am using a stock antenna on the 436 and a 23" mini mag mount antenna on the HP-1.

*****************EDIT********************
It is hard to tell from waiting on a transmission and then jumping back and forth changing the settings but it does seem to be a much clearer sound during the transmissions with the change for FM you requested above UPman. Not as "garbled" as with the NFM on. Wish I had a second 436 next to mine to compare.
__________________
I am just a Novice, compared to some here. I am willing to learn and once know what has been taught to me, will help others know this awesome hobby of ours.

Last edited by Dafe1er; 02-20-2014 at 12:18 PM.. Reason: Update the post for UPman and others.
  #19 (permalink)  
Old 02-20-2014, 11:56 AM
N2MWE's Avatar
Member
  Premium Subscriber
Premium Subscriber
Amateur Radio Operator
Amateur Radio
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: People's Republic of New York
Posts: 2,392
Default BCD536HP/BCD436HP Test for P25 Decode Improvement

I assume this his for straight P25 systems like the Rockland CountyNY system.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
__________________
I've done my bid for king and country
  #20 (permalink)  
Old 02-20-2014, 11:59 AM
whsbuss's Avatar
Member
   
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: SE Pa
Posts: 532
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by N2MWE View Post
I assume this his for straight P25 systems like the Rockland CountyNY system.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Why would it not be for ALL systems with digital transmissions?
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 6:51 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