[FedCom] P25 vs PL

[John Wilson]

  Reality is that a P25 user's unencrypted audio can and does vary from 
excellent to awful.

Arthur-Bryan E. Phelps wrote:

>I believe this on-going discussion is excellent and beneficial to all of us.
>We are fortunate to have knowledgeable colleagues to rely on (and try their
>patience).  However, we may be putting the cart before the horse.  If any of
>us has actually verified (a) general and/or interagency pool frequency(ies),
>then it seems logical that whoever verified the active frequency(ies) would
>know if it P25 or not.  I would hope that such information would be posted
>with the information, including geographical location. (Transmission(s)
>heard in California would most likely be meaningless to me in NE PA.) If
>anyone simply wants to program a batch of unverified frequencies in their
>scanner, put one entry with a PL of "none" (UNIDEN) and a second entry with
>the entities PL.  This isn't the best solution, but somewhat of a
>compromise.  On the up side, if there is a transmission on any of the
>frequencies, either P25 or analog, you will hear it. Then, delete the
>unneeded duplicate frequency, if you wish. The down side is that you might
>pickup some really strange sound/noise on the frequencies with "none" as the
>PL.  This comes from the "whatever it is worth" department.   Naturally,
>life would be easier if all fed entities transmitted in P25 (and in the
>clear, right).  What a nice delusion!!!!  Perhaps, being more realistic, the
>second generation digital scanners will correct this and other "bugs".
>
>_______________________________________________
>FedCom mailing list
>FedCom at mailman.qth.net
>http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/fedcom
>
>  
>