Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [BCD396XT] Re: Not Impressed with the BCD396XT

Expand Messages
  • Uniden UPMan
    You might also check in on the Georgia forums at RadioReference. I seem to recall seeing that the Atlanta and Dekalb systems are pretty tough to receive
    Message 1 of 19 , Jun 24 7:43 AM
    • 0 Attachment
      You might also check in on the Georgia forums at RadioReference. I seem to recall seeing that the Atlanta and Dekalb systems are pretty tough to receive unless you are right there. As with many newer systems, they tweak the signal coverage so that receive cutoff is pretty sharp with little extension beyond the intended area. Digital is much less forgiving than analog...with analog signals if the reception is poor you can still sometimes pull content from the noise. Not so with Digital...there it is either good or garbled.

      In general, garbling is caused by one of about three conditions:

      a) Too little signal; improve your location or antenna to solve this.

      b) Too much signal (usually adjascent channel); many times turning on attenuation will help with this (by reducing the level of the interfering signal enough to remove the problem).

      c) Multipath interference; can be helped by using a directional antenna aimed at a specific transmit tower or by relocating (sometimes by only inches).

      For the Atlanta and Dekalb systems, setting up manually is pretty easy: For each one:
      1) Create a P25 system.
      2) Create a site.
      3) In that site, use "Set Frequencies" to enter the three frequencies that comprise the control channel and alternates.

      (If you want the systems to have nice names and other options, there is a bunch more you should do, but for a quick and simple system test, the above will suffice.)

      When you scan them as programmed above, the systems will be scanned in ID Search mode, stopping on all system traffic (because you haven't programmed any channels). But, the above will work great for reception checks, and removing the chance for any other setting to be affected helps with troubleshooting (if there is an overall reception problem when programmed as above, then it is going to be either a), b) or c), above, barring any actual problem with the hardware).
       UPMan




      ________________________________
      From: "kc4cgy@..." <kc4cgy@...>
      To: BCD396XT@yahoogroups.com
      Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2009 6:22:46 PM
      Subject: [BCD396XT] Re: Not Impressed with the BCD396XT





      Well I don't know what else to do. It's true i'm new to DMA, and I am a member of www.radioreference, but not a premier member, I'm not sure why that's important, to be a premier member. With my old scanners I could use ScanControl and the datagrabber feature and highlight, copy and load any thing I wanted into scancontrol and then load it into the scanner. For some reason I can't do the same with Freescan. I am also waiting for Scancontrol to update there software to support the 396XT.

      So then in your opinion I have something set up wrong, if that's the case the file I used came from this users group, which I had to update some of the frequencies because they were wrong.

      All things concidered above, i'm not sure what to do next, can you enlighten me?

      Thanks,
      Hamradionut


      --- In BCD396XT@yahoogroup s.com, "JAN FINE" <janfine@... > wrote:
      >
      > It's definately you. It takes time to learn the scanner. Especially for someone that has no experience using a DMA scanner, listening to Digital, or using the software. If you are a member of www.radioreference. com you can download anything you want into FreeScan software and load it right into the scanner. It's the most sensitive scanner to every hit the market. I live in SW Broward County all the way west in Miramar. I'm now listening to Palm Beach County TRS on a rubber duckie. This is not normal. Conditions are good. But things I could never hear I can hear with the xt scanners.
      >
      > ----- Original Message -----
      > From: kc4cgy@...
      > To: BCD396XT@yahoogroup s.com
      > Sent: Tuesday, June 23, 2009 6:51 PM
      > Subject: [BCD396XT] Not Impressed with the BCD396XT
      >
      >
      >
      > Hi All,
      >
      > Maybe it's just me, I have the new BCD396XT scanner, my first digitial, DMA etc...I also have the BC245XLT and the BC780XLT, and have enjoyed them both. I decided to get into the digitial world with the BCD396XT. I found this user group and a file on here for my area (Atlanta). I finaly figured out how to use FreeScan to load the file into the scanner, some of the frequencies were incorrect, so I looked on RadioReference web site and even some of there frequencies were incorrect so I copyied them from my trusty BC245XLT and set up the 369XT. So far I have had the scanner about a week, I live in north Newton County, which you can't monitor anymore because they went to SkyLink or something like that, I can barely hear Rockdale and I have to be IN Dekalb County before I can hear anything there. Also when i'm in Dekalb County listening to them the audio sounds garbled, and most of the time unledigable. The audio also Echos sometimes. I know Dekalb is on
      the digitial AP25 system, and Rockdale is not. Rockdale sound ok.
      >
      > So am I doing something wrong or did I purchase the wrong scanner?? I have liked and used Uniden scanners for as long as I can remember, and they have always worked great. However this 396XT that I have is far from great, it's like the receiver is just not sensitive enough to hear the signals.
      >
      > I am a Ham Operator, (since 1987) so I know a little about receiver sensitivity, and the likes.
      >
      > Thanks in advance for any help.
      >
      > Hamradionut
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      >
      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      >







      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    • hamradionut@bellsouth.net
      Hello, Thanks for the reply, Yes I think it has something with the automatic tuning in the P25 mode. I have noticed in P25 Monitor mode that the ERR gets up
      Message 2 of 19 , Jun 24 3:46 PM
      • 0 Attachment
        Hello, Thanks for the reply, Yes I think it has something with the automatic tuning in the P25 mode. I have noticed in P25 Monitor mode that the ERR gets up around 35-50 and the audio is trashed. Seems like the lower this ERR is like between 2-5 the audio is ok. Also there is out to the right of this on the screen the work AUTO and just to the left of that is a number, most of the time this number is 8 or higher. I have noticed in the FreeScan program there is a place where this can be changed or set called APCO Mode and Threshold, in the software the AUTO is default to AUTO, and the Threshold is default to "8" I wonder if this can be changed to improve on the digitial decoding of that system?? In the APCO Mode the options are AUTO, MAN, DFLT. and the Threshold is numbered from 0-63. So anyone can shed a little light on this, that would be great. Evidently the setting is changable, because in the FreeScan software the options are there.

        Hamradionut


        --- In BCD396XT@yahoogroups.com, SRehm24416@... wrote:
        >
        > Dear Hamradionut
        >
        > There are a few people here that get the same garbled transmission as you do and there are some that really don't like the XT. One of the complaints that I have read about is the tuning ????difference between the 396T and the XT. The one main topic has been the inability to manualy fine tune the P25 signal. I do not know for sure, because I too am a first time owner of a digital scanner. So I can not compare the two scanners. Apparently the XT automatically tunes the systems and the T had the ability to manualy fine tune the signal. Again I am not sure if this is completely true or not. A lot of the T users don't like the XT because of that. It was talked about on this site a long time back. You may have problems fining it. Either way, good luck. It is a very good scanner.?
        >
        >
        >
        > -----Original Message-----
        > From: kc4cgy@... <kc4cgy@...>
        > To: BCD396XT@yahoogroups.com
        > Sent: Tue, Jun 23, 2009 5:51 pm
        > Subject: [BCD396XT] Not Impressed with the BCD396XT
        >
        >
        >
        > Hi All,
        >
        > Maybe it's just me, I have the new BCD396XT scanner, my first digitial, DMA
        > etc...I also have the BC245XLT and the BC780XLT, and have enjoyed them both. I
        > decided to get into the digitial world with the BCD396XT. I found this user
        > group and a file on here for my area (Atlanta). I finaly figured out how to use
        > FreeScan to load the file into the scanner, some of the frequencies were
        > incorrect, so I looked on RadioReference web site and even some of there
        > frequencies were incorrect so I copyied them from my trusty BC245XLT and set up
        > the 369XT. So far I have had the scanner about a week, I live in north Newton
        > County, which you can't monitor anymore because they went to SkyLink or
        > something like that, I can barely hear Rockdale and I have to be IN Dekalb
        > County before I can hear anything there. Also when i'm in Dekalb County
        > listening to them the audio sounds garbled, and most of the time unledigable.
        > The audio also Echos sometimes. I know Dekalb is on the digitial AP25 system,
        > and Rockdale is not. Rockdale sound ok.
        >
        > So am I doing something wrong or did I purchase the wrong scanner?? I have liked
        > and used Uniden scanners for as long as I can remember, and they have always
        > worked great. However this 396XT that I have is far from great, it's like the
        > receiver is just not sensitive enough to hear the signals.
        >
        > I am a Ham Operator, (since 1987) so I know a little about receiver sensitivity,
        > and the likes.
        >
        > Thanks in advance for any help.
        >
        > Hamradionut
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > ------------------------------------
        >
        > Yahoo! Groups Links
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        >
        > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        >
      • nocreativety
        It s only there for non XT digital scanners. The threshold can t be changed using software. ... Evidently the setting is changable, because in the FreeScan
        Message 3 of 19 , Jun 24 5:40 PM
        • 0 Attachment
          It's only there for non XT digital scanners. The threshold can't be changed using software.

          --- In BCD396XT@yahoogroups.com, "hamradionut@..." <kc4cgy@...> wrote:
          >
          Evidently the setting is changable, because in the FreeScan software the options are there.
          >
          > Hamradionut
          >
          >
        • ECobb2
          I know this is a little late, but I also live in the metro Atlanta area. Reception on these digital systems is not nearly as metro-wide as the older systems.
          Message 4 of 19 , Jun 28 12:40 PM
          • 0 Attachment
            I know this is a little late, but I also live in the metro Atlanta area. Reception on these digital systems is not nearly as metro-wide as the older systems. I used to be able to pick up Gwinnett County like they were next-door (I live in Cobb County). But I cannot pick up their digital system, you just about have to be inside the county line.
            Ditto for city of Atlanta.
            Just FYI.
            RC
          • hamradionut@bellsouth.net
            Thanks RC for the reply. Yes I m finding that out with most of the systems around here. As long as i m somewhere within the county the reception is not bad
            Message 5 of 19 , Jun 28 4:58 PM
            • 0 Attachment
              Thanks RC for the reply. Yes I'm finding that out with most of the systems around here. As long as i'm somewhere within the county the reception is not bad barring the garbled audio sometimes when the scanner does not decode the audio correctly.

              Any way thanks again,

              Ham


              --- In BCD396XT@yahoogroups.com, ECobb2 <cavitt2@...> wrote:
              >
              >
              > I know this is a little late, but I also live in the metro Atlanta area. Reception on these digital systems is not nearly as metro-wide as the older systems. I used to be able to pick up Gwinnett County like they were next-door (I live in Cobb County). But I cannot pick up their digital system, you just about have to be inside the county line.
              > Ditto for city of Atlanta.
              > Just FYI.
              > RC
              >
            • john bucki
              Uniden I hope you are out there reading these posts john To: BCD396XT@yahoogroups.com From: kc4cgy@bellsouth.net Date: Sun, 28 Jun 2009 23:58:11 +0000 Subject:
              Message 6 of 19 , Jun 28 5:59 PM
              • 0 Attachment
                Uniden I hope you are out there reading these posts


                john







                To: BCD396XT@yahoogroups.com
                From: kc4cgy@...
                Date: Sun, 28 Jun 2009 23:58:11 +0000
                Subject: [BCD396XT] Re: Not Impressed with the BCD396XT







                Thanks RC for the reply. Yes I'm finding that out with most of the systems around here. As long as i'm somewhere within the county the reception is not bad barring the garbled audio sometimes when the scanner does not decode the audio correctly.

                Any way thanks again,

                Ham

                --- In BCD396XT@yahoogroups.com, ECobb2 <cavitt2@...> wrote:
                >
                >
                > I know this is a little late, but I also live in the metro Atlanta area. Reception on these digital systems is not nearly as metro-wide as the older systems. I used to be able to pick up Gwinnett County like they were next-door (I live in Cobb County). But I cannot pick up their digital system, you just about have to be inside the county line.
                > Ditto for city of Atlanta.
                > Just FYI.
                > RC
                >










                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              • pmanu44
                Yes I am. I have even replied to this thread (and I d suggest that it is worth a re-read). http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BCD396XT/message/2158 The first (and
                Message 7 of 19 , Jun 28 6:05 PM
                • 0 Attachment
                  Yes I am. I have even replied to this thread (and I'd suggest that it is worth a re-read).

                  http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BCD396XT/message/2158

                  The first (and primary) requirement for good decode is good reception.

                  --- In BCD396XT@yahoogroups.com, john bucki <johnbucki58@...> wrote:
                  >
                  >
                  > Uniden I hope you are out there reading these posts
                  >
                  >
                  > john
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > To: BCD396XT@yahoogroups.com
                  > From: kc4cgy@...
                  > Date: Sun, 28 Jun 2009 23:58:11 +0000
                  > Subject: [BCD396XT] Re: Not Impressed with the BCD396XT
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > Thanks RC for the reply. Yes I'm finding that out with most of the systems around here. As long as i'm somewhere within the county the reception is not bad barring the garbled audio sometimes when the scanner does not decode the audio correctly.
                  >
                  > Any way thanks again,
                  >
                  > Ham
                  >
                  > --- In BCD396XT@yahoogroups.com, ECobb2 <cavitt2@> wrote:
                  > >
                  > >
                  > > I know this is a little late, but I also live in the metro Atlanta area. Reception on these digital systems is not nearly as metro-wide as the older systems. I used to be able to pick up Gwinnett County like they were next-door (I live in Cobb County). But I cannot pick up their digital system, you just about have to be inside the county line.
                  > > Ditto for city of Atlanta.
                  > > Just FYI.
                  > > RC
                  > >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  >
                  > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                  >
                • hamradionut@bellsouth.net
                  Yes Mr. Uniden, I remember your reply and I did try all the things you mentioned and the situation is unchanged. I am also using a file from this message board
                  Message 8 of 19 , Jun 28 6:55 PM
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Yes Mr. Uniden,
                    I remember your reply and I did try all the things you mentioned and the situation is unchanged. I am also using a file from this message board that another member programmed or setup, so either this person did not know what they were doing when they created this file or the systems or the scanner has a problem, so which is it.

                    Like I said I admit i'm new to digitial scanning but i'm not new to scanning period. When I was using my old BC245XLT trunk tracker II I didn't have these problems. But now most of the system I like to listen to have gone digitial so I had to change also.

                    HamRadioNut


                    --- In BCD396XT@yahoogroups.com, "pmanu44" <pmanu44@...> wrote:
                    >
                    > Yes I am. I have even replied to this thread (and I'd suggest that it is worth a re-read).
                    >
                    > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BCD396XT/message/2158
                    >
                    > The first (and primary) requirement for good decode is good reception.
                    >
                    > --- In BCD396XT@yahoogroups.com, john bucki <johnbucki58@> wrote:
                    > >
                    > >
                    > > Uniden I hope you are out there reading these posts
                    > >
                    > >
                    > > john
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > > To: BCD396XT@yahoogroups.com
                    > > From: kc4cgy@
                    > > Date: Sun, 28 Jun 2009 23:58:11 +0000
                    > > Subject: [BCD396XT] Re: Not Impressed with the BCD396XT
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > > Thanks RC for the reply. Yes I'm finding that out with most of the systems around here. As long as i'm somewhere within the county the reception is not bad barring the garbled audio sometimes when the scanner does not decode the audio correctly.
                    > >
                    > > Any way thanks again,
                    > >
                    > > Ham
                    > >
                    > > --- In BCD396XT@yahoogroups.com, ECobb2 <cavitt2@> wrote:
                    > > >
                    > > >
                    > > > I know this is a little late, but I also live in the metro Atlanta area. Reception on these digital systems is not nearly as metro-wide as the older systems. I used to be able to pick up Gwinnett County like they were next-door (I live in Cobb County). But I cannot pick up their digital system, you just about have to be inside the county line.
                    > > > Ditto for city of Atlanta.
                    > > > Just FYI.
                    > > > RC
                    > > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > >
                    > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    > >
                    >
                  • cavitt2
                    I thought respond to this thread, although its a bit old. I ve been a power-user of scanners for decades, and have been using the 396/996T models since they
                    Message 9 of 19 , Jun 30 7:20 PM
                    • 0 Attachment
                      I thought respond to this thread, although its a bit old.

                      I've been a power-user of scanners for decades, and have been using the 396/996T models since they came out. In metro Atlanta, we've had quite a bit of digital migration so we jumped on the chance in our newsroom to snatch up the 396XT when it came out. I am, as always, the programmer and beta-tester.

                      I've been using the 396XT for several weeks, and unfortunately after that time have been a tad disappointed. I primarily monitor the Cobb County P25 TRS, the oldest digital system in the metro. In the past three weeks I can not remember losing so many addresses or call details due to garbled transmissions than in the past year of the "T" model.

                      I had a chance to monitor Atlanta during the garage collapse this week and its performance was about the same. I also have used it to scan DeKalb County's new P25 system.

                      Tweaking is a bit limited on the XT, but I've checked the obvious problems (Squelch is low; ATT, AGC, and LP Filter are OFF). The one thing I have not played with is the P25 Waiting Time (I'm not convinced it would change things).

                      There are a lot of things to like about the 396XT; it seems to program much faster, has more memory, and some neat features.

                      But given the first few weeks of use, I think I will tell our folks to put off buying the boxful of 996XTs and instead purchase just one for another round of testing (our desk desperately needs some digital scanner help).

                      Any other suggestions anyone has for improving P25 decode performance would be welcome!

                      Thanks all, Ross Cavitt WSB-TV


                      --- In BCD396XT@yahoogroups.com, Uniden UPMan <uniden.upman@...> wrote:
                      >
                      > You might also check in on the Georgia forums at RadioReference. I seem to recall seeing that the Atlanta and Dekalb systems are pretty tough to receive unless you are right there. As with many newer systems, they tweak the signal coverage so that receive cutoff is pretty sharp with little extension beyond the intended area. Digital >>> snip <<<
                    • gcr33
                      Are you trying to listen to systems that are far away? Newer systems are lower powered and are designed to work within 3 miles of their jurisdiction. It s
                      Message 10 of 19 , Jul 2, 2009
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Are you trying to listen to systems that are far away? Newer systems are lower powered and are designed to work within 3 miles of their jurisdiction. It's not the old days with 1000 watt transmitters. It is possible that the file you are using has a problem. I use freescan. It's free and works fine. I don't need bandscope and other such stuff, I just want to program my radio which is currently 14% full.

                        My 396xt seems to be far more sensitive than my Pro96.

                        May I also again encourage others to post their files in the files section.

                        --- In BCD396XT@yahoogroups.com, "hamradionut@..." <kc4cgy@...> wrote:
                        >
                        > Yes Mr. Uniden,
                        > I remember your reply and I did try all the things you mentioned and the situation is unchanged. I am also using a file from this message board that another member programmed or setup, so either this person did not know what they were doing when they created this file or the systems or the scanner has a problem, so which is it.
                        >
                        > Like I said I admit i'm new to digitial scanning but i'm not new to scanning period. When I was using my old BC245XLT trunk tracker II I didn't have these problems. But now most of the system I like to listen to have gone digitial so I had to change also.
                        >
                        > HamRadioNut
                        >
                        >
                        > --- In BCD396XT@yahoogroups.com, "pmanu44" <pmanu44@> wrote:
                        > >
                        > > Yes I am. I have even replied to this thread (and I'd suggest that it is worth a re-read).
                        > >
                        > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BCD396XT/message/2158
                        > >
                        > > The first (and primary) requirement for good decode is good reception.
                        > >
                        > > --- In BCD396XT@yahoogroups.com, john bucki <johnbucki58@> wrote:
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > > Uniden I hope you are out there reading these posts
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > > john
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > > To: BCD396XT@yahoogroups.com
                        > > > From: kc4cgy@
                        > > > Date: Sun, 28 Jun 2009 23:58:11 +0000
                        > > > Subject: [BCD396XT] Re: Not Impressed with the BCD396XT
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > > Thanks RC for the reply. Yes I'm finding that out with most of the systems around here. As long as i'm somewhere within the county the reception is not bad barring the garbled audio sometimes when the scanner does not decode the audio correctly.
                        > > >
                        > > > Any way thanks again,
                        > > >
                        > > > Ham
                        > > >
                        > > > --- In BCD396XT@yahoogroups.com, ECobb2 <cavitt2@> wrote:
                        > > > >
                        > > > >
                        > > > > I know this is a little late, but I also live in the metro Atlanta area. Reception on these digital systems is not nearly as metro-wide as the older systems. I used to be able to pick up Gwinnett County like they were next-door (I live in Cobb County). But I cannot pick up their digital system, you just about have to be inside the county line.
                        > > > > Ditto for city of Atlanta.
                        > > > > Just FYI.
                        > > > > RC
                        > > > >
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > >
                        > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                        > > >
                        > >
                        >
                      • MCH
                        The 3-mile limit only applies to the NPSPAC systems (866-869 MHz, or 851-854 MHz if rebanded). Other systems are not under this requirement and usually (but
                        Message 11 of 19 , Jul 2, 2009
                        • 0 Attachment
                          The '3-mile' limit only applies to the NPSPAC systems (866-869 MHz, or
                          851-854 MHz if rebanded). Other systems are not under this requirement
                          and usually (but of course not always) will cover farther.

                          As for your 396 being more sensitive, I bet your 96 is being overloaded.

                          Joe M.

                          gcr33 wrote:
                          > Are you trying to listen to systems that are far away? Newer systems are lower powered and are designed to work within 3 miles of their jurisdiction. It's not the old days with 1000 watt transmitters. It is possible that the file you are using has a problem. I use freescan. It's free and works fine. I don't need bandscope and other such stuff, I just want to program my radio which is currently 14% full.
                          >
                          > My 396xt seems to be far more sensitive than my Pro96.
                          >
                          > May I also again encourage others to post their files in the files section.
                          >
                          > --- In BCD396XT@yahoogroups.com, "hamradionut@..." <kc4cgy@...> wrote:
                          >> Yes Mr. Uniden,
                          >> I remember your reply and I did try all the things you mentioned and the situation is unchanged. I am also using a file from this message board that another member programmed or setup, so either this person did not know what they were doing when they created this file or the systems or the scanner has a problem, so which is it.
                          >>
                          >> Like I said I admit i'm new to digitial scanning but i'm not new to scanning period. When I was using my old BC245XLT trunk tracker II I didn't have these problems. But now most of the system I like to listen to have gone digitial so I had to change also.
                          >>
                          >> HamRadioNut
                          >>
                          >>
                          >> --- In BCD396XT@yahoogroups.com, "pmanu44" <pmanu44@> wrote:
                          >>> Yes I am. I have even replied to this thread (and I'd suggest that it is worth a re-read).
                          >>>
                          >>> http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BCD396XT/message/2158
                          >>>
                          >>> The first (and primary) requirement for good decode is good reception.
                          >>>
                          >>> --- In BCD396XT@yahoogroups.com, john bucki <johnbucki58@> wrote:
                          >>>>
                          >>>> Uniden I hope you are out there reading these posts
                          >>>>
                          >>>>
                          >>>> john
                          >>>>
                          >>>>
                          >>>>
                          >>>>
                          >>>>
                          >>>>
                          >>>>
                          >>>> To: BCD396XT@yahoogroups.com
                          >>>> From: kc4cgy@
                          >>>> Date: Sun, 28 Jun 2009 23:58:11 +0000
                          >>>> Subject: [BCD396XT] Re: Not Impressed with the BCD396XT
                          >>>>
                          >>>>
                          >>>>
                          >>>>
                          >>>>
                          >>>>
                          >>>>
                          >>>> Thanks RC for the reply. Yes I'm finding that out with most of the systems around here. As long as i'm somewhere within the county the reception is not bad barring the garbled audio sometimes when the scanner does not decode the audio correctly.
                          >>>>
                          >>>> Any way thanks again,
                          >>>>
                          >>>> Ham
                          >>>>
                          >>>> --- In BCD396XT@yahoogroups.com, ECobb2 <cavitt2@> wrote:
                          >>>>>
                          >>>>> I know this is a little late, but I also live in the metro Atlanta area. Reception on these digital systems is not nearly as metro-wide as the older systems. I used to be able to pick up Gwinnett County like they were next-door (I live in Cobb County). But I cannot pick up their digital system, you just about have to be inside the county line.
                          >>>>> Ditto for city of Atlanta.
                          >>>>> Just FYI.
                          >>>>> RC
                          >>>>>
                          >>>>
                          >>>>
                          >>>>
                          >>>>
                          >>>>
                          >>>>
                          >>>>
                          >>>>
                          >>>>
                          >>>> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                          >>>>
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          > ------------------------------------
                          >
                          > Yahoo! Groups Links
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
                          >
                          >
                          > No virus found in this incoming message.
                          > Checked by AVG - www.avg.com
                          > Version: 8.5.375 / Virus Database: 270.13.2/2215 - Release Date: 07/02/09 18:06:00
                          >
                        • hamradionut@bellsouth.net
                          No not really, when I listen to Dekalb, i m in Dekalb and it s still garbled some of the times, as with the other metro systems. I listen to them when i m in
                          Message 12 of 19 , Jul 11, 2009
                          • 0 Attachment
                            No not really, when I listen to Dekalb, i'm in Dekalb and it's still garbled some of the times, as with the other metro systems. I listen to them when i'm in there county. I don't really care what's going on it Dekalb if I'm in Rockdale or Fulton.

                            AnyWay thanks to all for the replies and information. It has helped me understand the scanner a little better.

                            So that being said I guess the scanner is what it is, and until either the systems improve on there signals, or something else changes then it's just that, it is what it is.....


                            HamRadioNut


                            --- In BCD396XT@yahoogroups.com, "gcr33" <gcr33@...> wrote:
                            >
                            > Are you trying to listen to systems that are far away? Newer systems are lower powered and are designed to work within 3 miles of their jurisdiction. It's not the old days with 1000 watt transmitters. It is possible that the file you are using has a problem. I use freescan. It's free and works fine. I don't need bandscope and other such stuff, I just want to program my radio which is currently 14% full.
                            >
                            > My 396xt seems to be far more sensitive than my Pro96.
                            >
                            > May I also again encourage others to post their files in the files section.
                            >
                            > --- In BCD396XT@yahoogroups.com, "hamradionut@" <kc4cgy@> wrote:
                            > >
                            > > Yes Mr. Uniden,
                            > > I remember your reply and I did try all the things you mentioned and the situation is unchanged. I am also using a file from this message board that another member programmed or setup, so either this person did not know what they were doing when they created this file or the systems or the scanner has a problem, so which is it.
                            > >
                            > > Like I said I admit i'm new to digitial scanning but i'm not new to scanning period. When I was using my old BC245XLT trunk tracker II I didn't have these problems. But now most of the system I like to listen to have gone digitial so I had to change also.
                            > >
                            > > HamRadioNut
                            > >
                            > >
                            > > --- In BCD396XT@yahoogroups.com, "pmanu44" <pmanu44@> wrote:
                            > > >
                            > > > Yes I am. I have even replied to this thread (and I'd suggest that it is worth a re-read).
                            > > >
                            > > > http://groups.yahoo.com/group/BCD396XT/message/2158
                            > > >
                            > > > The first (and primary) requirement for good decode is good reception.
                            > > >
                            > > > --- In BCD396XT@yahoogroups.com, john bucki <johnbucki58@> wrote:
                            > > > >
                            > > > >
                            > > > > Uniden I hope you are out there reading these posts
                            > > > >
                            > > > >
                            > > > > john
                            > > > >
                            > > > >
                            > > > >
                            > > > >
                            > > > >
                            > > > >
                            > > > >
                            > > > > To: BCD396XT@yahoogroups.com
                            > > > > From: kc4cgy@
                            > > > > Date: Sun, 28 Jun 2009 23:58:11 +0000
                            > > > > Subject: [BCD396XT] Re: Not Impressed with the BCD396XT
                            > > > >
                            > > > >
                            > > > >
                            > > > >
                            > > > >
                            > > > >
                            > > > >
                            > > > > Thanks RC for the reply. Yes I'm finding that out with most of the systems around here. As long as i'm somewhere within the county the reception is not bad barring the garbled audio sometimes when the scanner does not decode the audio correctly.
                            > > > >
                            > > > > Any way thanks again,
                            > > > >
                            > > > > Ham
                            > > > >
                            > > > > --- In BCD396XT@yahoogroups.com, ECobb2 <cavitt2@> wrote:
                            > > > > >
                            > > > > >
                            > > > > > I know this is a little late, but I also live in the metro Atlanta area. Reception on these digital systems is not nearly as metro-wide as the older systems. I used to be able to pick up Gwinnett County like they were next-door (I live in Cobb County). But I cannot pick up their digital system, you just about have to be inside the county line.
                            > > > > > Ditto for city of Atlanta.
                            > > > > > Just FYI.
                            > > > > > RC
                            > > > > >
                            > > > >
                            > > > >
                            > > > >
                            > > > >
                            > > > >
                            > > > >
                            > > > >
                            > > > >
                            > > > >
                            > > > >
                            > > > > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                            > > > >
                            > > >
                            > >
                            >
                          Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.