If anyone tells you digital radio had better audio quality than analog they are lying. And another thing, all commercial radio systems regardless of manufacturers, protocol, etc use the AMBE2+ vocoder so as far as digital audio goes, they are all going to sound pretty much the same.
On Wed, Nov 4, 2015, 7:45 PM Jaime Solorza <[email protected]> wrote: > I am talking about sound quality...don't like the digitized voice...sounds > robotic and requires repetition to understand....many are changing from > Motorola to Harris and ones I mentioned. I prefer the analog voice....I > have worked on all of the above.....yes a 140.00 dollar Icom is not a > 450.00 Motorola....but it sounds better to my delicate ears. Wasn't > kicking a sacred cow > > Jaime Solorza > On Nov 4, 2015 6:36 PM, "Lewis Bergman" <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Good to know you base your opinion on fact. >> There are several reasons Kenwood and ICOM are inferior but most of them >> don't show up until you have a larger commercial system with lots of users. >> >> On Wed, Nov 4, 2015, 6:01 PM Jaime Solorza <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > Sounds crappy....no matter what anyone says. I like the Kenwood and Icom >>> better >>> >>> >>> Jaime Solorza >>> On Nov 4, 2015 4:57 PM, "Brian Webster" <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> P25 or Project 25 was a Motorola proprietary technology that was >>>> developed in the 80’s. They championed it to APCO to become the digital >>>> standard for public safety radio systems. APCO would not adopt it until >>>> Motorola agree to license it to other manufacturers. That delayed the >>>> process a very long time and Motorola went kicking and screaming in to the >>>> agreements at first. It was not cheap for a manufacturer to go that way but >>>> APCO did not want a single vendor solution. In the rest of the world the >>>> Tetra standard was adopted but again this are older technologies. Now the >>>> push is for LTE and Voice over LTE. When the FCC mandated narrowbanding for >>>> analog VHF and UHF radio systems they gave a 15 year window to migrate. >>>> Even with that much lead time big cities like NYC, Boston, DC and others >>>> did not make the deadline because it was typically a complete system >>>> replacement. These big cities got waivers with a plan to migrate, those >>>> plans were special licenses for the Firstnet spectrum and the plan to >>>> develop a public safety grade/reliable voice over IP type network to become >>>> their primary dispatch radio system in conjunction with their data >>>> deployments. That VoLTE development is ongoing. They need a lot more >>>> reliability than what Nextel and CDMA push to talk cellular solutions >>>> currently deliver. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Given that VoLTE development and the push for FirstNet systems, many >>>> folks argue that it’s a waste of money to go P25 at this point. There are >>>> even some Tetra deployments now in the US. Seems to me a standard that >>>> follows LTE and will also work in the narrowband spectrum of public safety >>>> radio systems is more productive. I started my wireless career in public >>>> safety radio designing and selling Motorola systems. I think they build a >>>> great product but P25 radios are way too expensive for smaller agencies to >>>> afford them. With the proliferation of sub $100 FCC approved Chinese radios >>>> out there, it’s real hard to justify these digital systems when one is on a >>>> budget. P25 radios are in the $1500 per radio price range. Small fire, EMS >>>> and law enforcement agencies have a hard time paying those prices. There >>>> are benefits to digital systems but in all honesty many users don’t take >>>> advantage of them. The cost of the central site controllers for the system >>>> really pushes the price tag up. To add insult to injury almost all federal >>>> grant programs now state that if there are radios involved, they HAVE to be >>>> P25 compliant. The DOD has mandated all radios be P25 compliant. If Utah is >>>> getting grant money that is probably why they are going P25. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Thank You, >>>> >>>> Brian Webster >>>> >>>> www.wirelessmapping.com >>>> >>>> www.Broadband-Mapping.com >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> *From:* Af [mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *[email protected] >>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, November 04, 2015 4:56 PM >>>> *To:* [email protected] >>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] OT 2-way radio systems >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Thanks, that is helpful. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> *From:* George Skorup <[email protected]> >>>> >>>> *Sent:* Wednesday, November 4, 2015 2:50 PM >>>> >>>> *To:* [email protected] >>>> >>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] OT 2-way radio systems >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Illinois has state-wide P25 (owned and operated by Motorola Solutions). >>>> Interoperability between agencies and all of the other P25 stuff is nice, >>>> but every little town can't afford it and that's why we still have little >>>> dispatch centers that represent small communities and make use of regular >>>> old analog VHF. Plus, a lot of users on the state system say the coverage >>>> sucks, and that would be Motorola not building enough sites. >>>> >>>> On 11/4/2015 1:16 PM, [email protected] wrote: >>>> >>>> In Utah, there is a very very large proposal to change all the 2-way >>>> radios for public safety out to a P25 system.� Some of the opponents say >>>> this is an outdated system.� I had not heard that before.� Looking for >>>> opinions.� >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>
