I just noticed the Pro-96 is no longer available on the radioshack.com
website, even though the 2096 is still listed. (I don't visit the
website often, so have no idea how long it has been gone.)

Anybody know why it is no longer listed? I thought it was advertised
as their "flagship" scanner. (At least the price certainly reflected
that!)

Does it have some problems as I've seen a few others in the NG
suggest? Hard to believe that it would be "obsoleted" yet...

-Dan

Dan wrote:
I just noticed the Pro-96 is no longer available on the radioshack.com
website, even though the 2096 is still listed. (I don't visit the
website often, so have no idea how long it has been gone.)

Anybody know why it is no longer listed? I thought it was advertised
as their "flagship" scanner. (At least the price certainly reflected
that!)

Does it have some problems as I've seen a few others in the NG
suggest? Hard to believe that it would be "obsoleted" yet...

-Dan

What problems are you talking about? Mine has given no worries whatsoever.

Cheers.

Ken

On Fri, 24 Mar 2006 08:35:41 +1200, Ken Taylor
wrote:

Dan wrote:
I just noticed the Pro-96 is no longer available on the radioshack.com
website, even though the 2096 is still listed. (I don't visit the
website often, so have no idea how long it has been gone.)

Anybody know why it is no longer listed? I thought it was advertised
as their "flagship" scanner. (At least the price certainly reflected
that!)

Does it have some problems as I've seen a few others in the NG
suggest? Hard to believe that it would be "obsoleted" yet...

-Dan

What problems are you talking about? Mine has given no worries whatsoever.

Cheers.

Ken

I've seen a few posts regarding choppy or garbled audio reception with
the PRO-96. A Google web search of "Pro-96 garbled audio" brings up a
few hits as well. Explanations I have seen:

1. Problems with scanner
2. Encrypted audio (but not being detected as such)
3. Poor signal
4. Faulty/Buggy transmission network (doesn't seem likely as I would
think the PD department would be all over this in a heartbeat...)

I was just wondering if they *actually* did find some issue with the
PRO-96 since it seems to have vanished from the website...

-Dan

Dan wrote in
:

I was just wondering if they *actually* did find some issue with the
PRO-96 since it seems to have vanished from the website...

Perhpas, with the issues you mentioned, and the rebanding of public safety
together, they have decided to work on an entirely new model, rather than
release an upgraded model or firmware updates.

On Fri, 24 Mar 2006 12:06:05 GMT, Dan wrote:

I've seen a few posts regarding choppy or garbled audio reception with
the PRO-96. A Google web search of "Pro-96 garbled audio" brings up a
few hits as well. Explanations I have seen:

1. Problems with scanner
2. Encrypted audio (but not being detected as such)
3. Poor signal
4. Faulty/Buggy transmission network (doesn't seem likely as I would
think the PD department would be all over this in a heartbeat...)

I was just wondering if they *actually* did find some issue with the
PRO-96 since it seems to have vanished from the website...

Digital audio will almost never be as clear as analog audio. I say
"almost" because a good technician, given the proper equipment and
enough time, can make a current Motorola digital transmitter sound
hi-fi. But if you drop a few bits of signal, ant there was a change
of audio during those bits, you'll hear garble. Garble is digital's
"noise burst" or "picket fence". Make sure you never drop a bit, and
use 100 KHz bandwidth, and all digital will sound better than analog.

What happened to forward error correction to help in bit loss.

..


"Al Klein" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 24 Mar 2006 12:06:05 GMT, Dan wrote:

I've seen a few posts regarding choppy or garbled audio reception with
the PRO-96. A Google web search of "Pro-96 garbled audio" brings up a
few hits as well. Explanations I have seen:

1. Problems with scanner
2. Encrypted audio (but not being detected as such)
3. Poor signal
4. Faulty/Buggy transmission network (doesn't seem likely as I would
think the PD department would be all over this in a heartbeat...)

I was just wondering if they *actually* did find some issue with the
PRO-96 since it seems to have vanished from the website...

Digital audio will almost never be as clear as analog audio. I say
"almost" because a good technician, given the proper equipment and
enough time, can make a current Motorola digital transmitter sound
hi-fi. But if you drop a few bits of signal, ant there was a change
of audio during those bits, you'll hear garble. Garble is digital's
"noise burst" or "picket fence". Make sure you never drop a bit, and
use 100 KHz bandwidth, and all digital will sound better than analog.

On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 12:09:50 -0600, "JSF" wrote:

What happened to forward error correction to help in bit loss.

Ever hear a new Motorola digital radio? I'd guess there's some ECC or
FEC in there.

Of course they don't cost $400, and they don't scan 30-2000 MHz, or
1000 channels, but they sound better than analog if the system is set
up properly.

Then, again, why doesn't your cell phone have FEC? Same reason? Only
1 channel effectively, and some of them are pretty expensive when they
first come out.

Al Klein wrote:
On Sat, 25 Mar 2006 12:09:50 -0600, "JSF" wrote:


What happened to forward error correction to help in bit loss.


Ever hear a new Motorola digital radio? I'd guess there's some ECC or
FEC in there.

Of course they don't cost $400, and they don't scan 30-2000 MHz, or
1000 channels, but they sound better than analog if the system is set
up properly.

Then, again, why doesn't your cell phone have FEC? Same reason? Only
1 channel effectively, and some of them are pretty expensive when they
first come out.

FEC would be fine but there's always a tradeoff between bandwidth, power
and price.

Cheers.

Ken

On Fri, 24 Mar 2006 18:30:06 -0500, lsmyer wrote:

Posted today at the Radio Shack Scanner forum at RadioReference.com:

The Pro-96 Scanner is still an active part of RadioShack's product line.
However, our stock is low at this time due to high demand. We hope to
restock this scanner soon and apologize for any inconvenience this may
cause you.

Here's the link:
http://radioreference.com/forums/showthread.php?t=33975

Interesting reply from R/S... and while I don't deny that it certainly
is "plausible", it seems a bit fishy... and I know all too well how
the world of PR works.

Why actually "pull" the item from the website? Why not simply show it
as "Out of Stock"? (As they currently do for the Pro-2096)

-Dan

Dan wrote in message
...
On Fri, 24 Mar 2006 18:30:06 -0500, lsmyer wrote:

Posted today at the Radio Shack Scanner forum at RadioReference.com:

The Pro-96 Scanner is still an active part of RadioShack's product line.
However, our stock is low at this time due to high demand. We hope to
restock this scanner soon and apologize for any inconvenience this may
cause you.

Here's the link:
http://radioreference.com/forums/showthread.php?t=33975

Interesting reply from R/S... and while I don't deny that it certainly
is "plausible", it seems a bit fishy... and I know all too well how
the world of PR works.

Why actually "pull" the item from the website? Why not simply show it
as "Out of Stock"? (As they currently do for the Pro-2096)

-Dan

That makes too much sense for upper management!