Hi all!

I have both a PRO-97 and an older Realistic PRO-2022. I have come
across an interesting problem on which I would like your collective
input. While my PRO-97 scans the 923 - 927MHz range for portable phone
handset frequencies, my PRO-2022 scans the 902 - 905MHz range for
portable phone base frequencies. When someone activates their phone,
my PRO-97 will stop on, for example, 924.525MHz and my PRO-2022 will
stop on 903.125MHz. On BOTH scanners, I hear BOTH sides of the same
conversation. If, during that conversation, I switch my PRO-2022 over
to 924.525MHz, I STILL hear both sides of the conversation. HOWEVER,
and here's the issue, if I tune my PRO-97 to 903.125MHz, I hear
NOTHING but static. Both of the scanners are sitting right beside each
other.

So why would my PRO-2022 be able to hear both sides of the
conversation on BOTH frequencies, but my PRO-97 only be able to hear
the conversation on ONE frequency? This disturbs me since the PRO-97
is much more advanced...and much more expensive! If any one can shed
light on this, I sure would appreciate it.

Thanks all!

Matthew

On Jun 28, 1:50*am, Connah wrote:
Hi all!

I have both a PRO-97 and an older Realistic PRO-2022. I have come
across an interesting problem on which I would like your collective
input. While my PRO-97 scans the 923 - 927MHz range for portable phone
handset frequencies, my PRO-2022 scans the 902 - 905MHz range for
portable phone base frequencies. When someone activates their phone,
my PRO-97 will stop on, for example, 924.525MHz and my PRO-2022 will
stop on 903.125MHz. On BOTH scanners, I hear BOTH sides of the same
conversation. If, during that conversation, I switch my PRO-2022 over
to 924.525MHz, I STILL hear both sides of the conversation. HOWEVER,
and here's the issue, if I tune my PRO-97 to 903.125MHz, I hear
NOTHING but static. Both of the scanners are sitting right beside each
other.

So why would my PRO-2022 be able to hear both sides of the
conversation on BOTH frequencies, but my PRO-97 only be able to hear
the conversation on ONE frequency? This disturbs me since the PRO-97
is much more advanced...and much more expensive! If any one can shed
light on this, I sure would appreciate it.

Thanks all!

Matthew

Perhaps the image of the first IF and the tx/rx split is the same?

Perhaps the image of the first IF and the tx/rx split is the same?

Hi, Brad! Thanks for your input. I must admit, I am ignorant of the
subject of images though I have heard of this topic repeatedly. Would
you mind explaining your thoughts in layman's terms or pointing me to
a site where I could educate myself on this? I'm very interested in
learning about. Thanks again, Brad! Have a good one.

Matthew

On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 08:08:28 -0700 (PDT), Connah
wrote:

Perhaps the image of the first IF and the tx/rx
split is the same?

Hi, Brad! Thanks for your input. I must admit, I
am ignorant of the
subject of images though I have heard of this
topic repeatedly. Would
you mind explaining your thoughts in layman's
terms or pointing me to
a site where I could educate myself on this? I'm
very interested in
learning about. Thanks again, Brad! Have a good
one.

Matthew


Every modern radio receiver uses intermediate
frequencies in the demodulation process. This
results in better quality signals being fed to the
audio anplifier; thus, better quality sound from
the loudspeaker. Usually the IF is given in the
specs of the scanner, and by convention, 10.7 MHz
is used in consumer radio sets. To get the image
frequency of any given channel, double the IF and
add and/or subtract the result to/from the given
frequency.

For example, my local NOAA frequency is 162.4 MHz.
Image frequencies for it will be at 162.4 MHz. ±
21.4 MHz., or at 183.8 MHz. and 141.0 MHz. (2 X
10.7 MHz. = 21.4 MHz.)

Tune your scanner to a given station's image
frequency, and you may hear a signal strong enough
to make you think that the station is operating on
that channel; or stations operating on an image
frequency may effectively jam reception of a
desired frequency. Which as Brad points out, may
be the case with your base/handset channel pair.
Receivers which employ multiple intermediate
frequencies aren't as susceptible to this issue.


~db~®

On Jul 1, 7:50*am, ~db~® wrote:


I think db's answer pretty much covered it. I can't improve on it!

Brad

On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 17:50:50 -0400, ~db~®
wrote:

On Mon, 30 Jun 2008 08:08:28 -0700 (PDT), Connah
wrote:

Perhaps the image of the first IF and the
tx/rx
split is the same?

Hi, Brad! Thanks for your input. I must admit, I
am ignorant of the
subject of images though I have heard of this
topic repeatedly. Would
you mind explaining your thoughts in layman's
terms or pointing me to
a site where I could educate myself on this? I'm
very interested in
learning about. Thanks again, Brad! Have a good
one.

Matthew


Every modern radio receiver uses intermediate
frequencies in the demodulation process. This
results in better quality signals being fed to
the
audio anplifier; thus, better quality sound from
the loudspeaker. Usually the IF is given in the
specs of the scanner, and by convention, 10.7 MHz
is used in consumer radio sets. To get the
image
frequency of any given channel, double the IF and
add and/or subtract the result to/from the given
frequency.

For example, my local NOAA frequency is 162.4
MHz.
Image frequencies for it will be at 162.4 MHz. ±
21.4 MHz., or at 183.8 MHz. and 141.0 MHz. (2 X
10.7 MHz. = 21.4 MHz.)

Tune your scanner to a given station's image
frequency, and you may hear a signal strong
enough
to make you think that the station is operating
on
that channel; or stations operating on an image
frequency may effectively jam reception of a
desired frequency. Which as Brad points out, may
be the case with your base/handset channel pair.
Receivers which employ multiple intermediate
frequencies aren't as susceptible to this issue.


~db~®


To add a little bit of hopefully useful
information to the above, high end receivers will
say in their specs that they employ "dual
conversion" (two IF's) or "triple conversion"
(three IF's). A good explanation of how radio
signals are demodulated can be found in Robert W.
Shrader's "Electronic Communication," published by
McGraw-Hill. The most recent edition retails for
over $100 US; one might try to pick up a used copy
somewhere, or borrow one from the public library.


~db~®