Simoco Dalman IP Simulcast

[FMROB]

Anyone have experience with the solar 2 dalman IP simucast? If so please pm me.

Thanks, Rob

[Bill_G]

Not with their ip simulcast, but their older analog I do. Not thrilling.

[FMROB]

Bill,

Apparently the RX and TX side is pure IP and it works asweosme, so I am told. Very simple to set up, interface, run. A self healing alingnmnet routine at the push of a button. So Im told, hence looking for info before I get involved.

Thanks for the heads up..

Rob

[Bill_G]

The tx launch timing alignment was automagic on ours too. The master talks to all the remotes, does the math, and sends out all the delays. That works great.

But, trying to get the audio dialed in was difficult with their parametric equalizer. They need multiturn pots but only provided standard 3/4 turn linear pots. On any simulcast system, if you can get the tx deviation at every site within a few hz of each other (including PL), it will sounds pretty good everywhere - even in the notorious overlap zones. You need multiturn pots so you can nail it. Standard pots just don't have enough granularity.

Our Dalman systems would not let us send PL out with voice. It has a high pass and a low pass filter to restrict the voice band. No paging tone over 2500hz, and no common PL. So, we had to inject PL at each base station requiring extra extra careful alignment so they were in phase and at the correct level ... which was impossible to achieve. Causes all kinds of zub zub in the overlaps, and lots of grumbling from the customer. We tried using Dalmans GPS ref with integrated PL gen, and we tried Spectracom's solution. Both GPS 10Mhz ref - perfect. The PL gens ... eh. There was always a beat note someplace. Dalman's ref box liked to die, and it's Trimble GPS antenna can't stand high RF. Sends out garbage instead of NEMA.

Because of their low pass filter, we had to change their paging schemes to move out of the high tones that wouldn't pass. That was a blast-o-minute.

The net effect of mushy at best. Passes baritones just fine. Higher voices get lost.

It's not a system for the feint of heart, or an average tech. Someone has to get totally anal about aligning it a hundred times until it works.

[FMROB]

Eh gads, I don't want those headaches! They will be paging on it, but I will have to look at the tone scheme. I would assume your experience was with an older analog only system. The simoco systems seems to be all ip based, and just uses dalman voting algorithims? Somehow I am feeling the pain already. I don't want to be married to anything that bad

Rob

[Bill_G]

Yes. They are about 10 year old systems with T1 transport. Again, my overall issues were insufficient audio adjustment granularity, inability to inject common PL at the head end along with transmit audio, and inability to pass freqs above 2500hz.

Since you're talking about an ip based system, obviously there is going to be significantly more delay in the system in both directions - on the order of tens or even hundreds of milliseconds instead of microseconds. That will become important in voting and in syncing up receive audio.

Ask your project / engineering / sales team the following:
- who provides and maintains the transport?
- how does the the Simoco system handle site rx voting - analog s/n at the voter, or rssi / signal quality from the rcvr?
- how do they sync receive audio - bulk delay applied at the voter, or time stamps on the receive packets?
- where is PL injected - at the prime site along with tx audio, or at each transmitter?
- how is tx audio adjusted and how fine of control do you have?
- what are the audio bandpass freqs?

[d119]

The tx launch timing alignment was automagic on ours too. The master talks to all the remotes, does the math, and sends out all the delays. That works great.

But, trying to get the audio dialed in was difficult with their parametric equalizer. They need multiturn pots but only provided standard 3/4 turn linear pots. On any simulcast system, if you can get the tx deviation at every site within a few hz of each other (including PL), it will sounds pretty good everywhere - even in the notorious overlap zones. You need multiturn pots so you can nail it. Standard pots just don't have enough granularity.

Our Dalman systems would not let us send PL out with voice. It has a high pass and a low pass filter to restrict the voice band. No paging tone over 2500hz, and no common PL. So, we had to inject PL at each base station requiring extra extra careful alignment so they were in phase and at the correct level ... which was impossible to achieve. Causes all kinds of zub zub in the overlaps, and lots of grumbling from the customer. We tried using Dalmans GPS ref with integrated PL gen, and we tried Spectracom's solution. Both GPS 10Mhz ref - perfect. The PL gens ... eh. There was always a beat note someplace. Dalman's ref box liked to die, and it's Trimble GPS antenna can't stand high RF. Sends out garbage instead of NEMA.

Because of their low pass filter, we had to change their paging schemes to move out of the high tones that wouldn't pass. That was a blast-o-minute.

The net effect of mushy at best. Passes baritones just fine. Higher voices get lost.

It's not a system for the feint of heart, or an average tech. Someone has to get totally anal about aligning it a hundred times until it works.

Are you referring to COSMOS? Complete and total piece of s hit. You've got to be a European to understand their technical manuals, and they have higher quality telco lines over there than they do over here. I tried to get a system working on standard leased lines here in the US - big mistake.

[FMROB]

Wow, I am becoming even more scared of this. Bill, I will check into those items on Monday. There isn't really much out there that is good for Simulcast utilizing IP? I am dearly trying to get away from standard RX voting and Telco line, micro-mux stuff.

More to follow, Rob

[d119]

Wow, I am becoming even more scared of this. Bill, I will check into those items on Monday. There isn't really much out there that is good for Simulcast utilizing IP? I am dearly trying to get away from standard RX voting and Telco line, micro-mux stuff.

More to follow, Rob

Motorola's MLC 8000 system will do it over IP, I highly suggest you investigate it. New product.

[Bill_G]

Wow, I am becoming even more scared of this. Bill, I will check into those items on Monday. There isn't really much out there that is good for Simulcast utilizing IP? I am dearly trying to get away from standard RX voting and Telco line, micro-mux stuff.

More to follow, Rob

We use Harris IntraPlex and NetExpress products for simulcast projects now. You can read up about complete systems at Simulcast Solutions.

[Bill_G]

The tx launch timing alignment was automagic on ours too. The master talks to all the remotes, does the math, and sends out all the delays. That works great.

But, trying to get the audio dialed in was difficult with their parametric equalizer. They need multiturn pots but only provided standard 3/4 turn linear pots. On any simulcast system, if you can get the tx deviation at every site within a few hz of each other (including PL), it will sounds pretty good everywhere - even in the notorious overlap zones. You need multiturn pots so you can nail it. Standard pots just don't have enough granularity.

Our Dalman systems would not let us send PL out with voice. It has a high pass and a low pass filter to restrict the voice band. No paging tone over 2500hz, and no common PL. So, we had to inject PL at each base station requiring extra extra careful alignment so they were in phase and at the correct level ... which was impossible to achieve. Causes all kinds of zub zub in the overlaps, and lots of grumbling from the customer. We tried using Dalmans GPS ref with integrated PL gen, and we tried Spectracom's solution. Both GPS 10Mhz ref - perfect. The PL gens ... eh. There was always a beat note someplace. Dalman's ref box liked to die, and it's Trimble GPS antenna can't stand high RF. Sends out garbage instead of NEMA.

Because of their low pass filter, we had to change their paging schemes to move out of the high tones that wouldn't pass. That was a blast-o-minute.

The net effect of mushy at best. Passes baritones just fine. Higher voices get lost.

It's not a system for the feint of heart, or an average tech. Someone has to get totally anal about aligning it a hundred times until it works.

Are you referring to COSMOS? Complete and total piece of s hit. You've got to be a European to understand their technical manuals, and they have higher quality telco lines over there than they do over here. I tried to get a system working on standard leased lines here in the US - big mistake.

There's the name. Thanks. Yeah, it can age you quickly. The benefit, and I use the phrase lightly, is the parametric equalizer. If you have a mix of base stations, and a mix of transports, all with unequal audio performance, then the Cosmos is the only solution out there. That said, it still doesn't give you enough granularity to get it perfect.

[FMROB]

Bill, I have checked out the Harris equipment, however budgets might be an issue for them at current. Nice equipment but has the price tag with it. D119, as far as the Motorola stuff, I would rather not. Constructively speaking, I just can't seem to get on board with the new platform. Compared to what is currently out there an available the new MLC/GTR/GCM doesn't even come close to what I can provide with SOB. I'm not beating it up, but it just doesn't make sense. For example, you can only have one GCM in a conventional system which equates to a single point of system failure and that's not to hot. Imagine selling and installing a five site system ( 1 TX and 5 RX) with a GCM only to have a failure and have the GTR revert to ICFR with no rx's or better yet having the GTR crap out with no redundant back up and no secondary comparator at the back up site. When the Quantar series was CTD we investigated the next big thing, and IWCE a few years back really allowed us to look at a host of equipment and we just couldn't see selling systems to customers that weren't at full potential with a less price tag. Again, this is just my 2 cents. Anyway, I don't know if the G series ever made provisions for secondary comparators within the system, maybe only on trunking systems.

[d119]

Rob,

Since you are talking Dalman equipment to begin with, I'm assuming this is an analog system. If so, you would not be using a GCM 8000. GCM 8000 is a digital-only comparator and doesn't come into play here.

The MLC 8000 does not require the use of a GTR base station. You can connect it to a Quantar or anything else with an E&M interface. You provide it and the base station an external reference (TRAK 9100 or SpectraCom or whatever, 1PPS to the MLC and frequency reference to the base station), and the MLC handles the IP interface, link delay adjustments & audio tailoring. I don't know if it handles PL generation or not.

One MLC 8000 per site, plus one additional unit to act as the comparator. It can also handle a console interface, and I believe that you can run 4 channels per box. Not 100% sure on that.

I believe it can handle Analog *OR* ASTRO depending on how it's configured or purchased. Unknown on mixed mode.

Note that it is *NOT* a "G Series" product... Therefore it is my interpretation that they are not confined to using G series site equipment.

Based on pricing, comparative to previous Motorola comparator equipment, this thing is CHEAP.

[FMROB]

D119,

Yes, analog only operation, voice and two tone paging.

I stand corrected on the MLC8K over the GCM. One thing that I don't understand from your post is what actually controls the simulcast. I think that you are saying that the MLC will handle the RX voting side of the house, add the external reference, but what controls the actual simulcast operations?

- Rob

[d119]

D119,

Yes, analog only operation, voice and two tone paging.

I stand corrected on the MLC8K over the GCM. One thing that I don't understand from your post is what actually controls the simulcast. I think that you are saying that the MLC will handle the RX voting side of the house, add the external reference, but what controls the actual simulcast operations?

- Rob

The MLC does. It's an all-inclusive voting comparator & simulcast transmit system. Fully IP based. It's a new product - pretty revolutionary. I think it's Motorola's attempt to stay competitive in the analog simulcast market, and since T1 is going away and IP is the new thing, they had to develop a new product.

The hardware is fairly cookie-cutter - the MLC 8000 box is also the IP gateway for the MCD 5000 console system. Same box, different firmware.

[n3lee]

I'm a bit late on the uptake; but:

Solar2 is an inclusive IP voter (RX side) and Simulcast TX equipment for analog.

Solar25 is an inclusive IP Voter (RX side) and Simulcast TX equipment for Analog & P25 -- and is integrated directly into a base station package.

Both are available with a console interface; which is the same hardware with a few bits flipped in the firmware to route the audio properly and allow things such as console pre-emption.

--Lee