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

Re: pl tones

Expand Messages
  • rangerwatch42
    Thanks for the help guys. Keith.
    Message 1 of 22 , Jun 1, 2004
    • 0 Attachment
      Thanks for the help guys. Keith.
    • rtoplus
      ... Hi Among the other answers you got, I ve read that some tones decode quicker than others...it IS noticable. Might have been on this board that the issue
      Message 2 of 22 , Jun 1, 2004
      • 0 Attachment
        --- In GMRS@yahoogroups.com, "rangerwatch42" <rangerwatch42@y...>
        wrote:
        > Does anyone feel that some pl tones work better than others on a
        > repeater? I was wondering if some react better than others? Thanks.

        Hi

        Among the other answers you got, I've read that some tones decode
        quicker than others...it IS noticable. Might have been on this
        board that the issue was discussed, I can't remember.


        Bob, GMRS WPVV845, Amateur KG4WAD, LMRS WPXC892
      • Richard
        Yes, the higher frequencies tend to decode faster. Richard, N7TGB, WPWX407 ... From: rtoplus [mailto:rtoplus@yahoo.com] Sent: Tuesday, June 01, 2004 5:32 AM
        Message 3 of 22 , Jun 1, 2004
        • 0 Attachment
          Yes, the higher frequencies tend to decode faster.

          Richard, N7TGB, WPWX407
          -----Original Message-----
          From: rtoplus [mailto:rtoplus@...]
          Sent: Tuesday, June 01, 2004 5:32 AM
          To: GMRS@yahoogroups.com
          Subject: [GMRS] Re: pl tones


          --- In GMRS@yahoogroups.com, "rangerwatch42" <rangerwatch42@y...>
          wrote:
          > Does anyone feel that some pl tones work better than others on a
          > repeater? I was wondering if some react better than others? Thanks.

          Hi

          Among the other answers you got, I've read that some tones decode
          quicker than others...it IS noticable. Might have been on this
          board that the issue was discussed, I can't remember.


          Bob, GMRS WPVV845, Amateur KG4WAD, LMRS WPXC892


          Yahoo! Groups Sponsor
          ADVERTISEMENT





          ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
          --
          Yahoo! Groups Links

          a.. To visit your group on the web, go to:
          http://groups.yahoo.com/group/GMRS/

          b.. To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
          GMRS-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com

          c.. Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to the Yahoo! Terms of Service.



          [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
        • N2DUP@aol.com
          Actually, I have been told by technicians setting up radios for me that the lower codes don t decode as quickly. I used to like using 67.0 Hz, but was always
          Message 4 of 22 , Jun 1, 2004
          • 0 Attachment
            Actually, I have been told by technicians setting up radios for me that the
            lower codes don't decode as quickly. I used to like using 67.0 Hz, but was
            always advised to not use the lower half-dozen or so codes because they don't
            open the receiver as quickly. Likewise, I *personally* don't like the upper
            codes, especially those above 173.8 Hz, because they are much more audible to my
            ear (I actually can tell you a PL tone by ear more often than not, without
            looking at a decoder). In any event, if you stick with those codes from 97.4 to
            173.8, you should be good. I have a preference myself these days for 100.0 Hz
            (nice round number). Reiterating a previous poster, the DPL codes don't have
            the "audible" factor, but they also can come across sounding different.
            Experiment while listening to your signal on a scanner or other good receiver.

            73,
            Chuck, N2DUP / KAB3210
            www.RadioHams.net

            In a message dated 6/1/04 08:33:46 Central Daylight Time, "rtoplus"
            rtoplus@... writes:
            --- In GMRS@yahoogroups.com, "rangerwatch42" <rangerwatch42@y...>
            wrote:
            > Does anyone feel that some pl tones work better than others on a
            > repeater? I was wondering if some react better than others? Thanks.

            Hi

            Among the other answers you got, I've read that some tones decode
            quicker than others...it IS noticable. Might have been on this
            board that the issue was discussed, I can't remember.


            Bob, GMRS WPVV845, Amateur KG4WAD, LMRS WPXC892


            [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
          • walter
            Stay away from multiples of 60 Hz. Like 118.8, 179.9 and 241.8. Power supply hum can false the decoders. And, in general, the higher the tone frequency, the
            Message 5 of 22 , Jun 1, 2004
            • 0 Attachment
              Stay away from multiples of 60 Hz.
              Like 118.8, 179.9 and 241.8.
              Power supply hum can false the decoders.

              And, in general, the higher the tone frequency, the quicker the decoder detects it.
              It takes less time to see enough energy at the frequency.

              Walter

              -- GMRS@yahoogroups.com wrote:
              ________________________________________________________________________

              Message: 2
              Date: Sun, 30 May 2004 00:54:26 -0000
              From: "rangerwatch42" <rangerwatch42@...>
              Subject: pl tones

              Does anyone feel that some pl tones work better than others on a
              repeater? I was wondering if some react better than others? Thanks.
            • Lake Hodges Radio
              ... I have heard is that the 67 tone may be inferior to the other tones, because a 60 hz AC hum can occasionally cause the repeater to be triggered
              Message 6 of 22 , Jun 1, 2004
              • 0 Attachment
                At 12:54 AM 05/30/2004 +0000, rangerwatch42 wrote:
                >Does anyone feel that some pl tones work better than others on a
                >repeater? I was wondering if some react better than others? Thanks.

                I have heard is that the 67 tone may be inferior to the other tones,
                because a 60 hz AC hum can occasionally cause the repeater to be triggered
                unintentionally (falsely). However, we have used the 67 tone with some
                success. So, I can't say for sure that this is true.

                Some of the higher tones do start to become audible (especially on cheap
                radios), so my conclusion would be that the middle tones (77 to 151) are
                better if they are available -- but they also tend to be the ones used most
                often.

                -- Kurt



                [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
              • A10382
                As to hum on the higher sub-audible tones, some people might be able to actually hear the higher tones. The bottom of the audible range varies from
                Message 7 of 22 , Jun 1, 2004
                • 0 Attachment
                  As to 'hum' on the higher sub-audible tones, some people might be able to actually hear the higher tones. The bottom of the audible range varies from individual to individual.

                  The Navy used to test new recruits, looking for those who's range of hearing exceeded the norm - both at higher and lower frequencies. They would then try to get them to volunteer for sonar schools. While those with exceptional hearing are still prized today, now computers do much of the sonar signal processing - able to identify individual ships and submarines if a sound signature was previously recorded and identified. The individuals with an exceptional range of hearing might be able to identify individual whales or even glaciers calving thousands of miles away.

                  =====
                  Frank
                  ._._.
                  ----- Original Message -----
                  From: Richard
                  To: GMRS@yahoogroups.com
                  Sent: Tuesday, June 01, 2004 9:01 AM
                  Subject: RE: [GMRS] Re: pl tones


                  Yes, the higher frequencies tend to decode faster.

                  Richard, N7TGB, WPWX407
                  -----Original Message-----
                  From: rtoplus [mailto:rtoplus@...]
                  Sent: Tuesday, June 01, 2004 5:32 AM
                  To: GMRS@yahoogroups.com
                  Subject: [GMRS] Re: pl tones

                  --- In GMRS@yahoogroups.com, "rangerwatch42" <rangerwatch42@y...>
                  wrote:
                  > Does anyone feel that some pl tones work better than others on a
                  > repeater? I was wondering if some react better than others? Thanks.

                  Hi

                  Among the other answers you got, I've read that some tones decode
                  quicker than others...it IS noticable. Might have been on this
                  board that the issue was discussed, I can't remember

                  ---
                  Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
                  Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
                  Version: 6.0.692 / Virus Database: 453 - Release Date: 5/28/04


                  [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                • Justin Mattes,KC2GIK
                  Diffrent radio shops and user groups like the same tone. I know a radio shop owner who uses a set number of PL s on just about everything! Chuck probablly got
                  Message 8 of 22 , Jun 1, 2004
                  • 0 Attachment
                    Diffrent radio shops and user groups like the same tone. I know a radio shop owner who uses a set
                    number of PL's on just about everything! Chuck probablly got that "tin ear" from decades of
                    listening! A police department around here went from 71.9 to 225.7 until the finally switched to
                    DPL in a matter of a week! The 100.0 tone seems to also be common around here especially for the
                    fire deparment! It's basically personal- preference although you should do= a little searching
                    before you decide what tone to use. Use some not so obvious ones like 82.5, 88.5, 91.5. Some GMRS
                    repeater owners usse uncommon tones to prevent jamming.
                    Justin, WPUM871

                    --- N2DUP@... wrote:
                    > Actually, I have been told by technicians setting up radios for me that the
                    > lower codes don't decode as quickly. I used to like using 67.0 Hz, but was
                    > always advised to not use the lower half-dozen or so codes because they don't
                    > open the receiver as quickly. Likewise, I *personally* don't like the upper
                    > codes, especially those above 173.8 Hz, because they are much more audible to my
                    > ear (I actually can tell you a PL tone by ear more often than not, without
                    > looking at a decoder). In any event, if you stick with those codes from 97.4 to
                    > 173.8, you should be good. I have a preference myself these days for 100.0 Hz
                    > (nice round number). Reiterating a previous poster, the DPL codes don't have
                    > the "audible" factor, but they also can come across sounding different.
                    > Experiment while listening to your signal on a scanner or other good receiver.
                    >
                    > 73,
                    > Chuck, N2DUP / KAB3210
                    > www.RadioHams.net
                    >
                    > In a message dated 6/1/04 08:33:46 Central Daylight Time, "rtoplus"
                    > rtoplus@... writes:
                    > --- In GMRS@yahoogroups.com, "rangerwatch42" <rangerwatch42@y...>
                    > wrote:
                    > > Does anyone feel that some pl tones work better than others on a
                    > > repeater? I was wondering if some react better than others? Thanks.
                    >
                    > Hi
                    >
                    > Among the other answers you got, I've read that some tones decode
                    > quicker than others...it IS noticable. Might have been on this
                    > board that the issue was discussed, I can't remember.
                    >
                    >
                    > Bob, GMRS WPVV845, Amateur KG4WAD, LMRS WPXC892
                    >
                    >
                    > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                    >
                    >





                    __________________________________
                    Do you Yahoo!?
                    Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
                    http://messenger.yahoo.com/
                  • Justin Mattes,KC2GIK
                    Diffrent radio shops and user groups like the same tone. I know a radio shop owner who uses a set number of PL s on just about everything! Chuck probablly got
                    Message 9 of 22 , Jun 1, 2004
                    • 0 Attachment
                      Diffrent radio shops and user groups like the same tone. I know a radio shop owner who uses a set
                      number of PL's on just about everything! Chuck probablly got that "tin ear" from decades of
                      listening! A police department around here went from 71.9 to 225.7 until the finally switched to
                      DPL in a matter of a week! The 100.0 tone seems to also be common around here especially for the
                      fire deparment! It's basically personal- preference although you should do= a little searching
                      before you decide what tone to use. Use some not so obvious ones like 82.5, 88.5, 91.5. Some GMRS
                      repeater owners usse uncommon tones to prevent jamming.
                      Justin, WPUM871

                      --- N2DUP@... wrote:
                      > Actually, I have been told by technicians setting up radios for me that the
                      > lower codes don't decode as quickly. I used to like using 67.0 Hz, but was
                      > always advised to not use the lower half-dozen or so codes because they don't
                      > open the receiver as quickly. Likewise, I *personally* don't like the upper
                      > codes, especially those above 173.8 Hz, because they are much more audible to my
                      > ear (I actually can tell you a PL tone by ear more often than not, without
                      > looking at a decoder). In any event, if you stick with those codes from 97.4 to
                      > 173.8, you should be good. I have a preference myself these days for 100.0 Hz
                      > (nice round number). Reiterating a previous poster, the DPL codes don't have
                      > the "audible" factor, but they also can come across sounding different.
                      > Experiment while listening to your signal on a scanner or other good receiver.
                      >
                      > 73,
                      > Chuck, N2DUP / KAB3210
                      > www.RadioHams.net
                      >
                      > In a message dated 6/1/04 08:33:46 Central Daylight Time, "rtoplus"
                      > rtoplus@... writes:
                      > --- In GMRS@yahoogroups.com, "rangerwatch42" <rangerwatch42@y...>
                      > wrote:
                      > > Does anyone feel that some pl tones work better than others on a
                      > > repeater? I was wondering if some react better than others? Thanks.
                      >
                      > Hi
                      >
                      > Among the other answers you got, I've read that some tones decode
                      > quicker than others...it IS noticable. Might have been on this
                      > board that the issue was discussed, I can't remember.
                      >
                      >
                      > Bob, GMRS WPVV845, Amateur KG4WAD, LMRS WPXC892
                      >
                      >
                      > [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
                      >
                      >





                      __________________________________
                      Do you Yahoo!?
                      Friends. Fun. Try the all-new Yahoo! Messenger.
                      http://messenger.yahoo.com/
                    • Bruce - WPXY958
                      Just my pennys worth, and I hope someone will correct me if I m wrong about this, but I believe that 114.8? (don t have my tone list close at hand) is the
                      Message 10 of 22 , Jun 1, 2004
                      • 0 Attachment
                        Just my pennys worth, and I hope someone will correct
                        me if I'm wrong about this, but I believe that 114.8?
                        (don't have my tone list close at hand)
                        is the common tone for the National 'travel/emergency'
                        channel ("675" ?), so if one is using a programmable
                        rig it makes little difference, but those relegated
                        to using reeds or single analog PL board, you might
                        consider using the same PL as the 'travel/emerg' to
                        make setting things up more simple.

                        I know this wasn't the EXACT question asked, but I
                        thought it may make a difference in ones choice.

                        73 - Bruce
                      • Scott Ziegler
                        The National Travel tone is141.3 See www.g-m-r-s.org for more info Scott Ziegler WPZE972 ... From: Bruce - WPXY958 To:
                        Message 11 of 22 , Jun 3, 2004
                        • 0 Attachment
                          The National Travel tone is141.3
                          See www.g-m-r-s.org for more info

                          Scott Ziegler
                          WPZE972

                          ----- Original Message -----
                          From: "Bruce - WPXY958" <wpxy958@...>
                          To: <GMRS@yahoogroups.com>
                          Sent: Tuesday, June 01, 2004 10:55 PM
                          Subject: Re: [GMRS] pl tones


                          >
                          > Just my pennys worth, and I hope someone will correct
                          > me if I'm wrong about this, but I believe that 114.8?
                          > (don't have my tone list close at hand)
                          > is the common tone for the National 'travel/emergency'
                          > channel ("675" ?), so if one is using a programmable
                          > rig it makes little difference, but those relegated
                          > to using reeds or single analog PL board, you might
                          > consider using the same PL as the 'travel/emerg' to
                          > make setting things up more simple.
                          >
                          > I know this wasn't the EXACT question asked, but I
                          > thought it may make a difference in ones choice.
                          >
                          > 73 - Bruce
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          > Yahoo! Groups Links
                          >
                          >
                          >
                          >
                        Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.