BCD436HP/BCD536HP: Rookie Questions & Observations......

[Mobilman44]

Good Day!
I've had (and used) the 436 for two weeks now. I picked up a second antenna (Diamond srh77ca) and believe I notice an improvement in reception - although its hard to say for sure.

So far my scanning revolves around my zip code (77388 - north Harris County Texas) and I can pick up a good mix of law enforcement, EMS, and fire.

The quality of the transmissions ranges from extremely good, to clipped and muddled. Most transmissions seem to be somewhere in between.

I plugged in some Bose headphones and found the sound clarity significantly improved. Would I get similar improvement with a plug in speaker?

Also, I would like to know if the "clipped" messages are caused by the participants, my reception, or ?

Clarity is another issue, but that could well be "normal".

Having done two "ride along" shifts with my Nephew when he was a training officer, I learned then that the transmissions received in the squad were rarely clear to my ear. I guess it takes time to get used to.

Anyway, other than a really good outdoor antenna, is there any way to improve on reception and clarity?

Thank you!

 

[jonwienke]

An outdoor antenna will make the biggest difference. The only time a better antenna won't solve a reception problem is when the issue is simulcast interference, rather than signal strength.

 

[iMONITOR]

There are numerous factors that affect the sound quality you hear from your scanner. Some of which have nothing to do with the scanner, antenna or speaker. Transmitter modulation levels, microphone quality/design, audio compression, person speaking too far or too close to the microphone, background noise, RF interference, etc. The best thing is to experiment on your end, that's what makes our hobby fun! Do what works best for you.

With regards to headphones/speakers, typically communications gear will not have good sound fidelity, in fact it often sounds rather tinny, like you have no bass and the treble is turned up too high, that's intentional. It's optimized for voice clarity. Back when C.B. radio was all the rage, some people would sound like they were talking from a tin can, and others would have a heavy mellow sound like they were talking from inside their bed mattress. Some of you might remember Alan Almond from the radio show Pillow Talk. But the guy who's radio sounded tiny, usually was heard about the rest and got through the noise.

This explains it better than I can:

Human Voice Frequency Range
Human Voice Frequency Range

 

[troymail]

Agree - lots of factors....

Everyone's ear is different - systems are different - your location, etc.

"Adjusting" your ear to listen to digitally encoded voice takes time....

"Clipping" could simply be a factor of "scanning" ... but it also could (at least partially) be implementation in the scanner firmware. Even after delays based on scanning where the radio is constantly "tuning itself" to different types of systems and frequencies, there is also typically a built-in "delay" in unmuting the audio. This time is used to determine if the signal is of sufficient quality before allowing the audio to be heard. In some cases, you can adjust that delay (and risk hearing digital noise vs. voice) but as was stated above, that's part of the hobby....

If you have solid reception and "park" or hold on a system and one talkgroup, you should expect reception to be about as good a real subscriber radio. However, real users are not typically scanning - and even if they do, they are even less likely to be scanning multiple talkgroups on multiple systems.

 

[Mobilman44]

Just got an idea........why it took so long is beyond me. I can put an "umbrella" like antenna in the attic (have a 2 story house) and run a cable down to my office. I would think this would make a nice difference, and the cost (antenna/cable) should be minimal.

Anyone else try this?