Re: Intercom

[Dennis O'Connor]

Me too... I need 5 places... I am looking at all the choices... So I am
interested in opinions..
Currently I have an portable 2 place, that I then pulg a 4 place box into,
but it is a kludge with cables running 'everywhere', including around
peoples ankles, etc.... It works, but annoying...

Denny

"Rochat" > wrote in message
...
> We have an old Sigtronics SPA-400 intercom in our Cessna 210 and would
like
> to replace it with a new 6 places intercom.
>
> We have studied different solutions replacing it with a NAT or a PS
> Engineering, but the simplest and easiest
> solution would be to replace it with a "new generation" SCI-6 or SCI-S6
> Sigtronics intercom.
>
> Does the SCI-6 intercom solves the problems of the old SPA-400 (outputs in
> parallel, etc) ?
> Is the SCI-6 good enough or should we forget it ? (we have an alternate,
but
> more complex
> solution with a ps engineering model)
>
> Thanks for any info, comment
>
> Denis
>
>
>
>

[Ron Natalie]

"Rochat" > wrote in message ...
> We have an old Sigtronics SPA-400 intercom in our Cessna 210 and would like
> to replace it with a new 6 places intercom.
>
> We have studied different solutions replacing it with a NAT or a PS
> Engineering, but the simplest and easiest
> solution would be to replace it with a "new generation" SCI-6 or SCI-S6
> Sigtronics intercom.

I too hate the SPA-400 for the same reason. If one person plugs in a set of
Dave Clarks, you can't hear anything (even when cranking the volume all the way up).
Oddly the SPO's don't have this problem (I've never figured that out).

I can tell you that I've used the NAT and the PS engineering units and both are
fine intercoms. I've got a PS 1000-II in my plane. The 170 I used to fly had
the NAT. Can't complain about eihter. The reason I went with the PS was that
it had crew isolate were as the NAT only had Pilot Isolate (important with kids in
the back seat).

[Doug Vetter]

Rochat wrote:
<snip>
> We have studied different solutions replacing it with a NAT or a PS
> Engineering, but the simplest and easiest solution would be to
> replace it with a "new generation" SCI-6 or SCI-S6 Sigtronics intercom.

What makes you say that it would be easier to replace the SPA-400 with
the SCI-6 rather than some other intercom? The SPA-400 is a 4 place
intercom while the SCI-6 is a six-place. That automatically means it's
not a plug-and-play replacement, and if you're going to do some
rewiring, you should definitely take a very close look at some other units.

> Does the SCI-6 intercom solves the problems of the old SPA-400 (outputs in
> parallel, etc) ? Is the SCI-6 good enough or should we forget it ? (we
> have an alternate, but more complex solution with a ps engineering
> model)

I must admit I have no personal experience with the SCI-6, but I can
offer my opinion on the PS-Engineering Intellivox systems based on my
100 or so hours of experience with our PS7000B audio panel.

In short, it mixes headset brands / mic types (electret vs. dynamic)
well, and desquelches at all the right times. It also only opens the
mic of the person(s) talking, which further reduces background noise.
And, of course, this all comes with the benefit of no annoying squelch
controls.

Best thing of all is the support -- Mark Scheuer, the President of the
company, frequents this newsgroup and is more than happy to provide
help. He took the time to answer several of my pre- and post-sale
emails. He even built up a one-off modification to amplify my cell
phone's audio output when I determined that it was a bit too low for my
taste.

The only downside is the price, but IMHO, you get what you pay for. Our
previous intercom? An SPA-400.

-Doug

--
--------------------
Doug Vetter, CFIMEIA

http://www.dvcfi.com
--------------------

[Rochat]

"Doug Vetter" > wrote in message
et...
> Rochat wrote:
> <snip>
> > We have studied different solutions replacing it with a NAT or a PS
> > Engineering, but the simplest and easiest solution would be to
> > replace it with a "new generation" SCI-6 or SCI-S6 Sigtronics intercom.
>
> What makes you say that it would be easier to replace the SPA-400 with
> the SCI-6 rather than some other intercom? The SPA-400 is a 4 place
> intercom while the SCI-6 is a six-place. That automatically means it's
> not a plug-and-play replacement, and if you're going to do some
> rewiring, you should definitely take a very close look at some other
units.

The others intercoms are bigger in size and will not fit at the same place
meaning mechanical changes to the panel + rewiring.

Our alternative is the PMA-7100, but we will have to remove an AM/FM
cassette entertainement center to put the PMA-7100 at the place.

If the PMA-7100 is a very good intercom, I thing that the behavior
of the CD input and audio #2 input lack of possibilities, audio #2 can
be used only in crew mode, it's not possible to select between CD
and input #2 internaly or externaly with a switch, for a unit of this
class it's is a pity.

If the SCI-S6 is not "to bad" or good enough (that's what I would like
to be sure), we would conserve our stereo and have all the flexibility with
music audio inputs.

Denis

[Rochat]

"JimC" > wrote in message
...
> I recently replaced a SPA-400 with a SCI-4S. My -400 was only wired for
the
> front seats and I thought I should upgrade when going to the trouble of
> wiring the back seats. The -4S has performed very well and is liked by
the
> whole family. It is a stereo unit, has two music inputs (one for the back
> seats and another for the front seats - and I added a 3PDT switch so the
> front input could supply all seats if desired ), separate voice/squelch
> controls for front and back seats, and pilot/crew/all selection. I've not
> tried the -6 or -6S but imagine they would perform equally as well.
>
I have heard that Signtronics hat not a not a lot of audio power and
you have to push the levels to compensate + the Vox circuit is not
very precise, what is your opinion on those two points, did you
notice any differences form the SPA-400 ?


> As for plugging in an old DC headset - that I can't answer. I typically
use
> one DRE6000 and two Lightspeed Solos in my plane. All are stereo/mono
> selectable and work well in combination with no noticeable difference in
ICS
> operation as the headsets are plugged in/out.
>
> One nice feature of the Sigtronics unit as compared to PS Eng is that you
> can install the Sigtronics unit yourself and not void the warranty.
Having
> worked for more than 20 years as an electronic engineer I thought it was a
> bit silly for PS to require I hire someone to install the intercom or have
> the warranty voided! The Sigtronics unit also comes with the harness set,
> making it a better buy for me.
>
> As always, your mileage may vary, but I have no complaints with the
> Sigtronics unit.
>
> JimC
>
> "Rochat" > wrote in message
> ...
> > We have an old Sigtronics SPA-400 intercom in our Cessna 210 and would
> like
> > to replace it with a new 6 places intercom.
> >
> > We have studied different solutions replacing it with a NAT or a PS
> > Engineering, but the simplest and easiest
> > solution would be to replace it with a "new generation" SCI-6 or SCI-S6
> > Sigtronics intercom.
> >
> > Does the SCI-6 intercom solves the problems of the old SPA-400 (outputs
in
> > parallel, etc) ?
> > Is the SCI-6 good enough or should we forget it ? (we have an alternate,
> but
> > more complex
> > solution with a ps engineering model)
> >
> > Thanks for any info, comment
> >
> > Denis
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>

[Thomas Borchert]

Rochat,

I would definitely go with something that has separate mic
amps/circuitry for each station. That's much better for mixing headsets
of different brands. Also, when squelch breaks, it should only do so at
the one mic that's spoken into. If not (as with the SPA-400), all the
other mics pipe noise into the system. AFAIK, Sigtronics doesn't do
that. PSE does, for sure. Don't know about NAT, but I think they have
it.

If music is at all of interest to you, you'll want a stereo intercom
with the music input wired. Also, if you have kids, you want a second
music input for the back, so you don't have to listen to their kid's
story cassettes or teenager music. Crew and Pilot isolate are nice,
too. If your com antennas are on separate sides of the fuselage (one
topside, one belly), you might look into the split com feature some
offer (PSE, for one), where the pilot uses one radio while the co uses
the other. All that requires some wiring, which you might be able to do
yourself under supervision.

I really love PSE's autosquelch, but that's only available in their
audio panels (and the portable intercom), not in their panel intercoms.
--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[JimC]

"Rochat" > wrote in message
...

> I have heard that Signtronics hat not a not a lot of audio power and
> you have to push the levels to compensate + the Vox circuit is not
> very precise, what is your opinion on those two points, did you
> notice any differences form the SPA-400 ?
>

The SCI-4S has no problem driving my headsets. I actually keep the volume
turned down fairly low to keep the sound from getting too loud. The music
input devices control their own volume, driven through an amplifier in the
ICS, and also have no problem generating plenty of volume to the headsets.
I find that the volume settings for the portable MP3 players my wife and
daughter have are about the same whether using the factory supplied headsets
or when plugged into the SCI-4S driving the aviation headsets (maybe a
slightly higher setting due to the extra background noise in the plane).

As for the Vox, it performs quite well. I'd expect some difference between
the PS Eng and the Sigtronics unit on Vox as the PS Eng unit dynamically
adjusts to account for changes in background noise. There are probably some
situations where that's a benefit, but in a 30 hour 10-leg xcountry I just
finished I don't think I ever re-adjusted the Vox settings.

As for Vox operation and active mikes, I think only the mike that has broken
the Vox is active and the others are not "live". A quick check of the
information on the Sigtronics website should confirm this.

I am really quite pleased with the ICS and believe it is a great value.

JimC

[Rochat]

"Thomas Borchert" > wrote in message
...
> Rochat,
>
> I would definitely go with something that has separate mic
> amps/circuitry for each station. That's much better for mixing headsets
> of different brands. Also, when squelch breaks, it should only do so at
> the one mic that's spoken into. If not (as with the SPA-400), all the
> other mics pipe noise into the system. AFAIK, Sigtronics doesn't do
> that. PSE does, for sure. Don't know about NAT, but I think they have
> it.
>
> If music is at all of interest to you, you'll want a stereo intercom
> with the music input wired. Also, if you have kids, you want a second
> music input for the back, so you don't have to listen to their kid's
> story cassettes or teenager music. Crew and Pilot isolate are nice,
> too. If your com antennas are on separate sides of the fuselage (one
> topside, one belly), you might look into the split com feature some
> offer (PSE, for one), where the pilot uses one radio while the co uses
> the other. All that requires some wiring, which you might be able to do
> yourself under supervision.
>
> I really love PSE's autosquelch, but that's only available in their
> audio panels (and the portable intercom), not in their panel intercoms.
> --
> Thomas Borchert (EDDH)
>

Our alternative to the Sigtronics is the PMA-7100, but we would have to
remove an AM/FM cassette entertainement center to put the
PMA-7100 at the place.

The PMA-7100 is a very good intercom with all the features you
discribed for the intercom, but I thing that the behavior
of the CD input and audio #2 input lack of possibilities, audio #2 can
be used only in crew mode, it's not possible to select between CD
and input #2 internaly or externaly with a switch, for a unit of this
class it's is a pity.

If the SCI-S6 is a good unit (that's what I would like to be sure),
we would conserve our stereo center and have all the flexibility with
music audio inputs.

Denis Rochat

[Thomas Borchert]

G.R.,

> Individual *volume controls*, yes,
>
those are on the headsets. Good ones, at least.

--
Thomas Borchert (EDDH)

[Rochat]

The alternative is PCD7100 not PMA-7100, sorry for the mistake.
Denis

> Our alternative to the Sigtronics is the PMA-7100, but we would have to
> remove an AM/FM cassette entertainement center to put the
> PMA-7100 at the place.
>
> The PMA-7100 is a very good intercom with all the features you
> discribed for the intercom, but I thing that the behavior
> of the CD input and audio #2 input lack of possibilities, audio #2 can
> be used only in crew mode, it's not possible to select between CD
> and input #2 internaly or externaly with a switch, for a unit of this
> class it's is a pity.
>
> If the SCI-S6 is a good unit (that's what I would like to be sure),
> we would conserve our stereo center and have all the flexibility with
> music audio inputs.
>
> Denis Rochat
>
>

[G.R. Patterson III]

Thomas Borchert wrote:
>
> G.R.,
>
> > Individual *volume controls*, yes,
> >
> those are on the headsets. Good ones, at least.

I've never seen a headset with a volume control for the microphone. *That's*
what I want.

George Patterson
The optimist feels that we live in the best of all possible worlds. The
pessimist is afraid that he's correct.
James Branch Cavel

[Ron Natalie]

"G.R. Patterson III" > wrote in message ...
>
>
> Thomas Borchert wrote:
> >
> > G.R.,
> >
> > > Individual *volume controls*, yes,
> > >
> > those are on the headsets. Good ones, at least.
>
> I've never seen a headset with a volume control for the microphone. *That's*
> what I want.

Look more carefully at the microphone. You may have to pull off that little
foam jobbie.

[G.R. Patterson III]

Ron Natalie wrote:
>
> Look more carefully at the microphone. You may have to pull off that little
> foam jobbie.

Nothing on the Bose. There are two small screws on the Peltor and Sigtronics
mics, but they appear to simply be what holds it to the boom. Nothing else.

George Patterson
The optimist feels that we live in the best of all possible worlds. The
pessimist is afraid that he's correct.
James Branch Cavel

[Jim Weir]

You are correct. For all the hoopla about how good and expensive the Bose are,
nobody yet has been able to find the mic level control.

HOWEVER, on almost everything else, it is either a little TINY screwdriver
adjust on the mic itself, or if there is an external amplififer board, it is on
the amplifier board, either in the earcup or on a little external box on the
cordset.

Jim


"G.R. Patterson III" >
shared these priceless pearls of wisdom:

->
->Nothing on the Bose. There are two small screws on the Peltor and Sigtronics
->mics, but they appear to simply be what holds it to the boom. Nothing else.

Jim Weir (A&P/IA, CFI, & other good alphabet soup)
VP Eng RST Pres. Cyberchapter EAA Tech. Counselor
http://www.rst-engr.com

[Sydney Hoeltzli]

Rochat wrote:

> I have heard that Signtronics hat not a not a lot of audio power and
> you have to push the levels to compensate + the Vox circuit is not
> very precise, what is your opinion on those two points, did you
> notice any differences form the SPA-400 ?

It has ample power to drive our headsets, the volume is turned
pretty low, I don't know what you mean by 'precise', it seems
to work well once the squelch is set.

It is quieter, with much better sound quality than SPA-400.
(I assume you mean, in addition to all the features SPA-400
doesn't have, like all/crew/pilot isolate settings, only
the mic of the person pushing the PTT transmits, dual music
inputs etc etc.

>>worked for more than 20 years as an electronic engineer I thought it was a
>>bit silly for PS to require I hire someone to install the intercom or have
>>the warranty voided! The Sigtronics unit also comes with the harness set,
>>making it a better buy for me.

This was a major selling point for us as well. We don't have your
work background but reasonable experience w/ electronics and electrical
wiring. And we're not too interested in having the local shops which
are "PSE dealers" work on our plane (in fact in one case I would shoot
first). It seemed silly to have to shell out hundreds of dollars for
a wiring harness we would probably half rebuild to suit our particular
circumstances, or have no warranty vs. 5 yrs no matter what.

Cheers,
Sydney