• You can now help support WorldwideDX when you shop on Amazon at no additional cost to you! Simply follow this Shop on Amazon link first and a portion of any purchase is sent to WorldwideDX to help with site costs.
  • Click here to find out how to win free radios from Retevis!

ANYTONE AT-5555N2 receive noise work-around

Does anyone here have a 'noisy radio' they would be willing to send me to test against my own radio's that don't have this issue? I would really like to measure the differences and report the results back to Qixiang. (I have all the required equipment - a full radio test setup).
The problem is that I am in Australia, and most you will be across the pond from me... Shipping could be a challenge.
I thought I would ask, because we could really use real measurement data if we are going to get to the bottom of this one.

73
I won't send you my radio, but I will colab remotely against my equipment.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pez
The QT-60 I received yesterday, shows the CH-52 setting "AM RFG", as the photo in the start of this thread does. I did not see anyone say what mode they were trying to adjust. I don't operate AM, so I would be more interested in an *IF Gain* setting for SSB, which is not present in the radio I have.

They also claim that this radio has the WX band. I cannot find a way to select WX band.

Owners manual page 9. Press Menu then Mode you should enter weather channels. Link above has download link for manual and software to programm the radio etc. Have fun. 73
 

Owners manual page 9. Press Menu then Mode you should enter weather channels. Link above has download link for manual and software to programm the radio etc. Have fun. 73
QT-60 manual is in error. It states MENU + MODE.
 
@WK766 you are welcome. i know they set the S9 of the meter with a certain dB of signal. that is only one point on the meter.

i wish i had the test equipment to to test weaker incoming signals from a signal generator.

73

Hey BCH, they line up well - about the same as any Icom or Yaesu in this test, using calibrated signal generators. And if you want to change the levels, you can set them in the engineering menu (S1, S3, S5, S7, S9, S9+) but you need the equipment to do this. I always like my radios to be -73dBm for S9 (not -67dBm like some use), so I always give them a tweak if it's needed.

I see the noise floor topic is still ongoing. IMO, some key points are::

- I have a AT-5555Nii and a CRT SS-7900V here. Both of them will show and S1, and even lower on a quiet band, when connected to either a 3el Yagi or a 5/8 vertical. I am in a quiet RF environment and the S meter performance is near perfect here. I have had a few other AT-5555Nii's here on the bench and they have all been the same. No issue.

-So, if you live in a more common noisy RF environment, and you see a higher S meter noise floor reading, please remember that regardless of the S meter "noise floor" you see, it is the Signal to Noise Ratio (SNR) that matters. i.e, What you can actually "hear"... If you put the AT-5555Nii up against almost any of the old school rigs (or even the "new" ones made by Ranger) under normal conditions, even IF these other rigs show an S1, and the AT-5555Nii shows an S3 or S5, you will still usually hear more, and better, on the AT-5555Nii. I can test this on my equipment, and on the air with different radios side by side. I find the AT-5555Nii wins every time. You hear more and it just sounds better :)

I actually had a mint Uniden Grant XL next to my AT-5555Nii the other day. I love the XL, but when doing some A/B tests side by side on the air I was actually shocked how much better the AT-5555Nii was hearing on a very busy band.

73
 
Last edited:
Hey BCH, they line up well - about the same as any Icom or Yaesu in this test, using calibrated signal generators. And if you want to change the levels, you can set them in the engineering menu (S1, S3, S5, S7, S9, S9+) but you need the equipment to do this. I always like my radios to be -73dBm for S9 (not -67dBm like some use), so I always give them a tweak if it's needed.

I see the noise floor topic is still ongoing. IMO, some key points are::

- I have a AT-5555Nii and a CRT SS-7900V here. Both of them will show and S1, and even lower on a quiet band, when connected to either a 3el Yagi or a 5/8 vertical. I am in a quiet RF environment and the S meter performance is near perfect here. I have had a few other AT-5555Nii's here on the bench and they have all been the same. No issue.

-So, if you live in a more common noisy RF environment, and you see a higher S meter noise floor reading, please remember that regardless of the S meter "noise floor" you see, it is the Signal to Noise Ratio (SNR) that matters. i.e, What you can actually "hear"... If you put the AT-5555Nii up against almost any of the old school rigs (or even the "new" ones made by Ranger) under normal conditions, even IF these other rigs show an S1, and the AT-5555Nii shows an S3 or S5, you will still usually hear more, and better, on the AT-5555Nii. I can test this on my equipment, and on the air with different radios side by side. I find the AT-5555Nii wins every time. You hear more and it just sounds better :)

I actually had a mint Uniden Grant XL next to my AT-5555Nii the other day. I love the XL, but when doing some A/B tests side by side on the air I was actually shocked how much better the AT-5555Nii was hearing on a very busy band.

73
Welcome back Pez, glad to see you drop by!
Thanks again for sharing your findings.
 
Anytone's without some kind of noise floor on them ? Using the RF Gains to quiet things down ? Mans gotta do what mans gotta do for his own listening comfort . (Thumbs up ) I got the well known and praised AT6666 last year , the noise floor was not pleasant at all , especially after running 148s and Grants for decades , I had heard the newer AT5555N2's had a noise reduction circuit and did the same power as the AT6666 did so I purchased one brand new for under 250.00 shipped to me.

It was night and day compared to the AT6666 for me ! The noise reduction circuit made all the difference in the world to my ear holes ! It even made people sound all the better . Not only that , a much better sized radio and heat sink situation compared to the the smaller compact AT6666 (only to find out later that the AT5555N2 has the same board as the Stryker 955 and cheaper !) No need to touch the RF gain , all's that does is take out the smaller guy if he even has a chance to get in , or maybe I'm wrong about that ? I have put the AT5N2 side by side with 148s and Grants that I own and they have met there match !

I hear that they will be coming out with a newer AT6666 called the pro model , yep ! What makes it the pro ? There going to add the Noise Reduction circuit to it , better late then never , more money in there pockets. I'm no expert and just an old cb'er for many years but for my dollars spent these days for 250.00 shipped and after 6 months of use , The Anytone 5555 N 2 I'd say was the best glorified cb radio 10 meter radio out there . It's a pleasure using it and getting away from my old school radios . The Chinese have done a good job on this radio out of the freaking box ! Clip a wire and move a jumper and your good to go . I'm very impressed .
 
Hey BCH, they line up well - about the same as any Icom or Yaesu in this test, using calibrated signal generators. And if you want to change the levels, you can set them in the engineering menu (S1, S3, S5, S7, S9, S9+) but you need the equipment to do this. I always like my radios to be -73dBm for S9 (not -67dBm like some use), so I always give them a tweak if it's needed.

I see the noise floor topic is still ongoing. IMO, some key points are::

- I have a AT-5555Nii and a CRT SS-7900V here. Both of them will show and S1, and even lower on a quiet band, when connected to either a 3el Yagi or a 5/8 vertical. I am in a quiet RF environment and the S meter performance is near perfect here. I have had a few other AT-5555Nii's here on the bench and they have all been the same. No issue.

-So, if you live in a more common noisy RF environment, and you see a higher S meter noise floor reading, please remember that regardless of the S meter "noise floor" you see, it is the Signal to Noise Ratio (SNR) that matters. i.e, What you can actually "hear"... If you put the AT-5555Nii up against almost any of the old school rigs (or even the "new" ones made by Ranger) under normal conditions, even IF these other rigs show an S1, and the AT-5555Nii shows an S3 or S5, you will still usually hear more, and better, on the AT-5555Nii. I can test this on my equipment, and on the air with different radios side by side. I find the AT-5555Nii wins every time. You hear more and it just sounds better :)

I actually had a mint Uniden Grant XL next to my AT-5555Nii the other day. I love the XL, but when doing some A/B tests side by side on the air I was actually shocked how much better the AT-5555Nii was hearing on a very busy band.

73

Not to hijack this thread, but I think I know what the issue is with the later Q5N2 radios being "noisy" on RX.

But I need some more data, especially from Q5N2's that were built before 11/2022.

@Pez - I know you were one of the members who first received a Q5N2 and you have mentioned that your radio isn't "noisy". Would you mind sharing your Service menu settings - both default and what you "tweaked" them to?

@anyone that has an earlier Q5N2 (one that was built earlier than 11/2022) that they feel isn't noisy, please share your service menu settings if you can. The more data we have, the better.

If you want to PM me, that's fine.

I am noticing a pattern but I need more data to confirm.

Thanks
 
Not to hijack this thread, but I think I know what the issue is with the later Q5N2 radios being "noisy" on RX.

But I need some more data, especially from Q5N2's that were built before 11/2022.

@Pez - I know you were one of the members who first received a Q5N2 and you have mentioned that your radio isn't "noisy". Would you mind sharing your Service menu settings - both default and what you "tweaked" them to?

@anyone that has an earlier Q5N2 (one that was built earlier than 11/2022) that they feel isn't noisy, please share your service menu settings if you can. The more data we have, the better.

I am noticing a pattern but I need more data to confirm.

Thanks
I have a 7900v turbo of the first released and a q5n2 as well. Both built before those dates but I've not been into the service menu on either of them.

I'm curious as to what you're suspecting.
 
I realize each radio is unique and the numbers will change from one radio to the next. But the numbers will be within a "range".

I only have 1 set of data (Oct 2022) to use (that's why I need more data sets of earlier Q5N2's.

I attached a small spreadsheet that will show what I am looking at.

The RFG setting has remained consistent at 86 across all production runs.

The settings for rows AF RS1 & AF RS3 and UL RS1 & UL RS3 are what I am noticing.

The 10/2022 settings are significantly lower than the later default SM settings. By S5 the settings have pretty much caught up.

Also note the "calibrated" settings for S1 & S3 are much lower than the factory Defaults. Again, by S5, they have pretty much caught up and for S9+60 they are higher.
 

Attachments

  • Q5N2 RX S meter settings .xlsx
    9.9 KB · Views: 35
I realize each radio is unique and the numbers will change from one radio to the next. But the numbers will be within a "range".

I only have 1 set of data (Oct 2022) to use (that's why I need more data sets of earlier Q5N2's.

I attached a small spreadsheet that will show what I am looking at.

The RFG setting has remained consistent at 86 across all production runs.

The settings for rows AF RS1 & AF RS3 and UL RS1 & UL RS3 are what I am noticing.

The 10/2022 settings are significantly lower than the later default SM settings. By S5 the settings have pretty much caught up.

Also note the "calibrated" settings for S1 & S3 are much lower than the factory Defaults. Again, by S5, they have pretty much caught up and for S9+60 they are higher.
Hi @Dr_DX

Please see the attached S meter values.

This is data from 3 radios, an early Nii, an Nii from around 12 months ago, and a CRT SS7900V.

Note - I adjusted the SS7900V S meter readings for exactly S5 (-97dBm) / S7 (–85dBm) / S9 (-73dBm). Not because of any S meter problem, but because I wanted a semi-accurate -73dBm S9 as the SS7900V is used as a monitor radio on my bench.

None of these radio's have had any issue with noisy RX or increased S meter readings, They all work correctly. They will all rest at S1 or lower on external antennas on a quiet band.

The CH-52 RFG = 00086 setting has not been touched on any of these radios. They are all the default value.

Also, regarding your other question about the "RSS12" settings - I would simply "adjust this to taste", and only if you need to. Mine track well enough at levels over S9 (-73dBm) as they came, so I did not look at what S meter point this "S12" will set. A general indication over S9 is all that is really needed for 99.9% of users. It works fine here at the defaults.

FWIW: Most (but not all) of the issues reported on this topic appear to be based on what the user "sees" on the meter, and not what they actually "hear" from the speaker. I have hoped to see a "noisy" radio on my bench to confirm if this is environmental, hardware, or a perhaps just an S meter calibration issue, but as yet all of the radios I have seen have worked correctly.

73
 

Attachments

  • CRT SS7900V _ AT5555Nii _ S Meter.pdf
    39.6 KB · Views: 28
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Dr_DX
FWIW: Most (but not all) of the issues reported on this topic appear to be based on what the user "sees" on the meter, and not what they actually "hear" from the speaker. I have hoped to see a "noisy" radio on my bench to confirm if this is environmental, hardware, or a perhaps just an S meter calibration issue, but as yet all of the radios I have seen have worked correctly.

Thank you for the data!

100% agree. IMHO, it is an S meter calibration issue. Your data further proves the point.

Your 2 Q5N2's have 158 & 167 respectively for ULRS1; mine is 345. Your AFRS1 = 387 & 489; mine is 609. I consider mine to have a high noise floor.

The change came somewhere in the 176022258 production run.
Radios that are 176022258380 and above seem to have a higher setting for RS1 and RS3 than radios with an earlier SN.

By S5, things are back inline with the earlier runs. And all of the radios after that SN are having a "perceived" high Noise floor. In reality, it just a S meter calibration issue.

I haven't "calibrated" mine yet, but I will bet you that when it is done, my RS1's will be <100.
 
Thank you for the data!

100% agree. IMHO, it is an S meter calibration issue. Your data further proves the point.

Your 2 Q5N2's have 158 & 167 respectively for ULRS1; mine is 345. Your AFRS1 = 387 & 489; mine is 609. I consider mine to have a high noise floor.

The change came somewhere in the 176022258 production run.
Radios that are 176022258380 and above seem to have a higher setting for RS1 and RS3 than radios with an earlier SN.

By S5, things are back inline with the earlier runs. And all of the radios after that SN are having a "perceived" high Noise floor. In reality, it just a S meter calibration issue.

I haven't "calibrated" mine yet, but I will bet you that when it is done, my RS1's will be <100.
Good detective work!

Do you have a sinad meter? It would be good to measure the -12dB sinad results of the receiver in all modes, in order to prove that your radio with it's "perceived high noise floor" is actually receiving correctly, and with as much sensitivity as my earlier version radios. I strongly suspect the sinad results will show that your radio is receiving just fine. (y)

73
 
Last edited:
Let me clarify. "High Noise floor" is a misnomer. The radio's "appear" to have a high noise floor due to a S meter calibration issue that started somewhere after your low # 176022258 radio and before 176022258~380. The sensitivity is fine, on par or better than my other radios. Just the S meter is showing 4 S units higher on a -121 dBm signal.

The radio I got was used and someone had changed Service Menu settings for TX. All of the TX related settings Power, Mod, ALC, etc. were cranked to 255. So I can't use my radio for "Default SM settings".

Having said that, I highly doubt they changed the S Meter settings. My RSG is at 87 (the higher the #, the less sensitive). I don't know if they changed it from 86 or if it came that way.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Eldorado828
Let me clarify. "High Noise floor" is a misnomer. The radio's "appear" to have a high noise floor due to a S meter calibration issue that started somewhere after your low # 176022258 radio and before 176022258~380. The sensitivity is fine, on par or better than my other radios. Just the S meter is showing 4 S units higher on a -121 dBm signal.
Yes, I understand this perfectly well, and I think your findings are correct. I just wanted to know if you have a way of confirming / measuring the RX performance. So that we can add this data to the findings so far.

73
 
  • Like
Reactions: Eldorado828

dxChat
Help Users
  • No one is chatting at the moment.