Using family radios or walkie talkies in lieu of baby monitors
Tripp Knightly
Both were susceptible more than I liked to interference from, ie,
neighbor's babies (god bless 'em) and cordless phones.
Seems to me a better route to go might be to use family radios /
walkie talkies.
Key benefits would be:
a) Far larger channel / subchannel selection would alleviate
interference
b) Some radios have ways to embed codes to further squelch others'
transmissions
c) I can use the things as more than just baby monitors - more
practical
Downsides seem to be:
1) longer range might mean cleaner transmissions, but also you
sacrifice your privacy some
2) greater sensitivity means you're potentially open to more
interference absent having (c) above implemented
3) They don't have the light meters like baby monitors, though I think
there are some units out there w/ vibrate capability
My key questions are:
- Has anybody used these radios & if so what are their experiences?
- Do these radios provide for full-time broadcast a la baby monitors
such that you can listen in? (My concern is that VOX / voice
activated capability may not let me hear all that I need to.)
Thanks for any / all input!
- TK
Richard G Amirault
against the regulations) because they have a time-out feature to limit
transmissions.
Radioman
> walkie talkies.
>
> Key benefits would be:
>
> a) Far larger channel / subchannel selection would alleviate
> interference
Subtones don't create more "channels".
> b) Some radios have ways to embed codes to further squelch others'
> transmissions
Subtones don't prevent interference.
> c) I can use the things as more than just baby monitors - more
> practical
Why?
> Downsides seem to be:
>
> 1) longer range might mean cleaner transmissions, but also you
> sacrifice your privacy some
Baby monitors can be great fun in apartment complexes. They allow you to know
your neighbors better then with just their cordless phones.
> 2) greater sensitivity means you're potentially open to more
> interference absent having (c) above implemented
Receiver or microphone sensitivity?
> 3) They don't have the light meters like baby monitors, though I think
> there are some units out there w/ vibrate capability
?????????????
> My key questions are:
>
> - Has anybody used these radios & if so what are their experiences?
I use my FRS radios.
> - Do these radios provide for full-time broadcast a la baby monitors
> such that you can listen in? (My concern is that VOX / voice
> activated capability may not let me hear all that I need to.)
I have used one as a crossband repeater for ham receive only.
Phil Stripling
> I recently purch'd 2 diff sets of baby monitors (both 49 & 900 Mhz).
> Both were susceptible more than I liked to interference from, ie,
> neighbor's babies (god bless 'em) and cordless phones.
>
> Seems to me a better route to go might be to use family radios /
> walkie talkies.
Tripp, hon -- why are you going to harrass other FRS users with _your_
interference from _your_ babies?
Believe it or not, FRS radios are subject to rules; kindly drop by
http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/waisidx_00/47cfr95_00.html
and take a look at the set of rules beginning at 95.191. I would direct
your attention, though, to 95.193(a):
You may use the FRS unit to transmit one-way
communications only to establish communications
with another person, send an emergency message,
provide traveler assistance, make a voice page,
or to conduct a brief test.
--
Philip Stripling | email to the replyto address is presumed
Legal Assistance on the Web | spam and read later. email to philip@
http://www.PhilipStripling.com/ | my domain is read daily.
Tripp Knightly
> All the FRS radios I am aware of cannot be used this way (plus it would be
> against the regulations) because they have a time-out feature to limit
> transmissions.
Well, I guess I can see how the always-on broadcast feature could
create a tragedy of commons if lots of people used them that way. An
interesting alternative might be to have a remote mic'ing where the
receiver triggers a (15 sec? 30 sec?) transmission on the unit you
want to transmit. Not that regulations don't have something to say
about that as well...
Tripp Knightly
Phil, baby (sic) --
One person's harrassment is always another's communication.
Yeah, I know they're subject to rules (not withstanding their
enforcement or lack thereof). But It almost seems to me that what you
cite supports my application of FRS as fair use. Not to get
litigious, but absent seeing legal rulings to the contrary, using VOX
functionality potentially qualifies on at least 2 of 5 of those
reasons. (I'm sure your emminently qualified to do so, but don't
waste your time looking them up!)
Besides, if they're used for 2-way, than your citation becomes
completely irrelevant (imagine the parent that coos back, for
example). Indeed, you conveniently left out the first sentence of
95.193(a) which addresses 2-way:
"You may use an FRS unit to conduct two-way voice communications
with another person."
But if nothing else, you've certainly validated that free legal advice
is
-TK
G. M. Alf
Knightly) wrote:
...
>Besides, if they're used for 2-way, than your citation becomes
>completely irrelevant (imagine the parent that coos back, for
Imagine the vocabulary the child will learn when the neighborhood kids
take note of the system.
>Indeed, you conveniently left out the first sentence of
>95.193(a) which addresses 2-way:
>
>"You may use an FRS unit to conduct two-way voice communications
>with another person."
I believe Phil assumed you knew that FRS is intended to be used as a
two way voice service between humans.
>But if nothing else, you've certainly validated that free legal advice
>is
Seems more like you are trying to justify an action that doesn't sit
very high on the ladder of radio etiquette. But then I am sure the
child will monitor the frequency before gurgling or crying to insure
that he/she does not interfere with an ongoing exchange.
Mike
Phil Stripling
>It almost seems to me that what you
> cite supports my application of FRS as fair use.
"Almost" and 5 bucks will get you a cup of coffee. Go for it, hon.
stewart
> - Do these radios provide for full-time broadcast a la baby monitors
NO!
>(My concern is that VOX / voice
> activated capability may not let me hear all that I need to.)
Too bad - this service is not designed for broadcast applications...
the 49Mhz and 900Mhz services you mentioned are.
I would guess that the reason baby monitor products don't have CTCSS
codes is that there are too many idiots and lawyers out there who
would sue the radio companies if anything happened to any kid being
monitored by one of those products - claiming they couldn't hear their
baby because they didn't understand how CTCSS worked. Blame it on our
litigation-crazy society.
> Thanks for any / all input!
You're welcome!
> - TK
Tripp Knightly
You're being overly alarmist, but I think etiquette died not long
after FRS hit the mainstream at Walmart. Tell my neighbors' kids who
insist on conducting their Eminemesque banter on 4-20, for example.
John L. Wilkerson Jr.
>
> You're being overly alarmist, but I think etiquette died not long
> after FRS hit the mainstream at Walmart. Tell my neighbors' kids
who
> insist on conducting their Eminemesque banter on 4-20, for
example.
So what the hell... you figure then you may as well also join the
degenerates out there who care nothing for etiquette, as well as
the regulations. Thanks for helping to contribute to the
corruption of FRS.
--
John L. Wilkerson Jr. <johnw...@sbcglobal.net>
NOTE: This address is used for Usenet posting ONLY!
All incoming email is extensively screened for spam.
Tripp Knightly
> trippk...@hotmail.com (Tripp Knightly) wrote in
> news:120d8f1c.03091...@posting.google.com:
>
> >
> > You're being overly alarmist, but I think etiquette died not long
> > after FRS hit the mainstream at Walmart. Tell my neighbors' kids
> who
> > insist on conducting their Eminemesque banter on 4-20, for
> example.
>
> So what the hell... you figure then you may as well also join the
> degenerates out there who care nothing for etiquette, as well as
> the regulations. Thanks for helping to contribute to the
> corruption of FRS.
And the alarmism continues. My OP is lost from this thread, but I
don't even own a radio (yet) and am not even sure I'm going to get one
(at least for this purpose). Besides, in practice it would behoove me
to use channel codes w/ minimal to no traffic in my neighborhood so
that I don't hear garbage on my own monitor, which marginalizes the
etiquette concern.
Ultimately, I'd blame the FCC's management of spectrum... but that's
akin to shaking one's fist at the moon.
Phil Stripling
> And the alarmism continues. My OP is lost from this thread, but I
Perhaps lost to you, but not to the rest of us. I've "reprinted" below for
your edification.
> I recently purch'd 2 diff sets of baby monitors (both 49 & 900 Mhz).
> Both were susceptible more than I liked to interference from, ie,
> neighbor's babies (god bless 'em) and cordless phones.
>
> Seems to me a better route to go might be to use familfamily radios /
> walkie talkies.
>
> Key benefits would be:
>
> a) Far larger channel / subchannel selection would alleviate
> interference
>
> b) Some radios have ways to embed codes to further squelch others'
> transmissions
>
> c) I can use the things as more than just baby monitors - more
> practical
>
> Downsides seem to be:
>
> 1) longer range might mean cleaner transmissions, but also you
> sacrifice your privacy some
>
> 2) greater sensitivity means you're potentially open to more
> interference absent having (c) above implemented
>
> 3) They don't have the light meters like baby monitors, though I think
> there are some units out there w/ vibrate capability
>
> My key questions are:
>
> - Has anybody used these radios & if so what are their experiences?
>
> - Do these radios provide for full-time broadcast a la baby monitors
> such that you can listen in? (My concern is that VOX / voice
> activated capability may not let me hear all that I need to.)
>
> Thanks for any / all input!
Notice that in your original "lost" post, you want "full-time broadcast,"
not two-way communication, a point you have conveniently forgotten. Notice
that VOX isn't satisfactory to you, as it may not let you hear all you need
to. Your concern is to have CTCSS to squelch others' transmissions as you
broadcast your own full-time interference.
Full-time broadcast, hon, is not two-way communication.
And you're welcome for any and all input, as you requested.
If you've lost any of your other posts, please feel free to ask for it to
be recalled for you.
mar...@nospamsixgirls.org
> Phil, baby (sic) --
There are good reasons for the current regulations for FRS.
Notice that FRS units do not even have the function that
you need to do what you what to do(VOX is intended primilarly
for use with a hands-free headset)-it works poorly otherwise
in most situations.
First of all-FRS has way too much range for your purposes,
and the radio will transmit ALL local sounds, including
ones that you might not want to be broadcast for a mile or
more in all directions-basically, you're BUGGING your own
house!
Of course, you would be tying up a FRS channel nearly
non-stop for long periods of time(the channels are suposed
to be SHARED).
Doing the above is downright RUDE, as well as a violation
of FCC regulations.
Also, CTCSS(sub-codes) are NOT channels-they are just
a selective speaker muting system(squelch)-so you won't
hear other users on the channel, BUT if more than 1
user is transmitting at the same time, both users will
be interfered with(even though one or both might not
know it, except they don't hear some of what they should hear).
IOW, the sub-codes are really are quiet codes.
> Besides, if they're used for 2-way, than your citation becomes
> completely irrelevant (imagine the parent that coos back, for
> example). Indeed, you conveniently left out the first sentence of
> 95.193(a) which addresses 2-way:
A infant crying or cooing is sort of stretching the ides of
voice communications-as generally voice communications
presuppose that a actual lanuage be used.
The parent that coos back is nonsense-the infant's unit
will be randomly transmitting, so the infant will not
hear the parent much of the time(an FRS radio is NOT a
full-duplex device, so when it's transmitting, it is not
receiving, and vice-versa).
What you are descriving is NOT 2-way communications, but
2 one way communications, and again-this is NOT within the
FRS regulations.
> "You may use an FRS unit to conduct two-way voice communications
> with another person."
See above.
> But if nothing else, you've certainly validated that free legal advice
> is
Correct, but common sense should tell you that non-stop
communications in a SHARED communications service is selfish and
rude!!
> -TK
Oh, BTW, most FRS gear probably will not last long used the
way you want you to use it-the transmitters are generally
designed for a ICAS duty cycle(5% transmitting, 5% receiving, 90%
standby), so the radio will probably overheat and fail after a while.
MK
stewart
Baloney. This is verboten for at least two reasons:
1) You must monitor the frequency for activity before transmitting.
2) You can't hook up external apparatus on FRS.
Tripp Knightly
Thanks. That's a thoughtful informative and sensible response.
Radioman
>
> 1) You must monitor the frequency for activity before transmitting.
Even if you have no PL tone?
> 2) You can't hook up external apparatus on FRS.
You mean I have to throw away my speaker/mike?
Phil Stripling
> > Baloney. This is verboten for at least two reasons:
> >
> > 1) You must monitor the frequency for activity before transmitting.
>
>
> Even if you have no PL tone?
I'm sorry to say, yes. :-> Listening without the PL is the only way to hear
all the others with PL tones. It's _easier_ to monitor when you are
operating with no PL tone.
>
>
> > 2) You can't hook up external apparatus on FRS.
>
>
> You mean I have to throw away my speaker/mike?
I hope not. I'd have to toss my speaker mike and my headset earpiece/ boom
mike as well. But we both know that's not the case. Rule 95.194 says, in
part,
(c) You may not attach any antenna, power amplifier, or other
apparatus to an FRS unit that has not been FCC certified as part of that
FRS unit. There are no exceptions to this rule and attaching any such
apparatus to a FRS unit cancels the FCC certification and voids
everyone's authority to operate the unit in the FRS.
You are quoting a poster who has pretty correctly summarized the poorly
written rule. Maybe apparatus is defined somewhere, but we'll have to
assume we don't have to toss our external mikes and earpieces. (Since
neither my lapel speaker mike nor my headset were made by the manufacturer
of my FRS radios, I'm confident they have not been certified as "part of
that unit." Oh, well.)
DxxxxxBxx
Use a VOX operated transmitter, that way your kid (who can't operate
PTT) can still key the transmitter.
If someone complains, argue the child has a disability which prevents
him from operating PTT and must use VOX.
As for monitoring before transmitting, no problem. The kid is always
monitoring when he isn't transmitting. He can't likely turn off his
ears.
These blow hards that talk about rude probably don't realize how many
people they cut off on the roads. Most places I've been around have
totally empty FRS channels, save for the big amusment parks and the
like.
This sounds like a good use of an underutilized radio service. This
is exactly what it is for--family communication.
On 12 Sep 2003 10:34:28 -0700, trippk...@hotmail.com (Tripp
Knightly) wrote:
Spammers, please send email to:
lis...@listme.dsbl.org
and get your SMTP server blacklisted!
stewart
> mar...@NoSpaMsixgirls.org wrote in message news:<IH69b.193293$Ay2.51...@news4.srv.hcvlny.cv.net>...
> > Oh, BTW, most FRS gear probably will not last long used the
> > way you want you to use it-the transmitters are generally
> > designed for a ICAS duty cycle(5% transmitting, 5% receiving, 90%
> > standby), so the radio will probably overheat and fail after a while.
> >
> > MK
>
> Thanks. That's a thoughtful informative and sensible response.
Too bad it is wrong.
You shouldn't use an FRS radio as a broadcast device, but this ISN'T
the reason why you shouldn't. It has more to do with common sense and
being a good citizen/neighbor, and sharing, that kind of thing.
If you want to be a dick, just buy a FRS "base station" and put a rock
on the transmitter button - I can assure you it isn't going to
"overheat" putting out that WHOPPING 500mW (drill some extra cooling
holes in the case, if you are THAT worried about it)... but then,
hopefully, some radio-savvy neighbor will DF you and turn you into the
FCC.
Dude - have you ever considered running a fricken' wired intercom
between the baby's and your room... I remember when houses used to
come wired with Intercoms... ah, those were the days.
G. M. Alf
>Dude - have you ever considered running a fricken' wired intercom
>between the baby's and your room... I remember when houses used to
>come wired with Intercoms... ah, those were the days.
>
>- Stewart
>http://groups.yahoo.com/group/MURS-OPEN
How about voice over internet?
Mike
Daniel Martin
Actually personbally I don't like the idea of subjecting infants to R.F.
even in small doses.... Where did I put my tinfoil hat?
Dan
"stewart" <horse...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:5f4fe4c2.03091...@posting.google.com...
JRW
You don't use a rock...you glue together four bricks like II
and then glue another brick to a hardware hinge to rest on
the radio's PTT switch. Disclaimer: PTT is NAUGHT a valid
copyright of Nextel.
Daniel Martin wrote:
> Crap! I Have to agree with Stewart re the wired intercom. CRAP CRAP CRAP!
G. M. Alf
<dwma...@idirect.com> wrote:
>Crap! I Have to agree with Stewart re the wired intercom. CRAP CRAP CRAP!
>Actually personbally I don't like the idea of subjecting infants to R.F.
>even in small doses.... Where did I put my tinfoil hat?
>
>Dan
Mike
Phil Stripling
>
> http://zapatopi.net/afdb.html
and if it's too late for an afdb, try
http://www.noah.org/trepan/trepan_clinic/trepan_clinic_why.html
Why worry about your diet, exercise, carcinogens, murder, and war,
when the real cause of misery and death is worrying about these
things? And the real cause of worry is your brain. Yet, how can
you not worry? The answer is to attack the problem and not the
symptoms. The problem is your brain.
This site tells you how to attack your brain. :->
Remember, only your brain stands in your way of your happiness.
Beloved Leader
> I'm sorry, but I don't see any clear violation of the rules.
>
> Use a VOX operated transmitter, that way your kid (who can't operate
> PTT) can still key the transmitter.
VOX-actuated? That changes things. It would be a violation of the
rules to glue the PTT button in the "on" position, but if the radio
transmits only when it is actuated by the VOX switch, then it's OK.
I saw a radio that would be ideal for this application, the
discontinued Radio Shack base station FRS, catalog number 21-1845, "AC
Powered Desktop FRS Intercom." Take a look at my thread, "Discontinued
Desktop FRS at Radio Shack" from June 5, 2003. I decided against
keeping it, as I had no use for it. It was $9.97 at the time; it's
probably down to $4.97 by now. Here's what I said:
>>
It' s catalog number 21-1845, "AC Powered Desktop FRS Intercom." I got
the last one in stock at my local store, and I got everything: the
unit itself, the 500 mA 9 volt DC power adpater, the owner's manual,
and all the packing material. The date code on the owner's manual is
01A00, the date code on the box is 05A00, and the date code on the
unit is 03A01. The unit's serial number is 10353626, and the FCC ID is
AAO2101845. The unit was originally priced at $69.99, but the current
price is $9.97. The current price was set on May 22 of this year;
before then, it had been $14.97. Thus, the price might go down again
in another few weeks - or it may not. It's made in Chaina, and it has
a 90-day warranty.
As you can imagine, the 500 mA 9 volt DC power adapter is quite
oversized for an FRS, even one with 500 mw audio output power.
Transmit power is 500 mw as well. Oddly, there is no provision to run
on an internal battery, but the unit is big enough that a 9 volt
transistor radio battery could be wedged inside. On the other hand,
it's just as easy to run it from an external battery pack, so why
bother? The radio can be mounted on a wall. There are 2.5 mm and 3.5
mm jacks on the side for an optional VOX-operated microphone and
external speaker. There is a swivel antenna on the back, about which I
have more to say later.
The big disadvantage is to set which of the fourteen channels and 38
security codes you want to use, you have to open a little door on the
bottom of the radio and set some DIP switches. Also, the unit does not
scan. I suppose that makes sense when you consider the intended use of
this radio. My notion of the ideal owner is a car junkyard. This base
station would be in the office, while the workers out in the yard used
handheld radios. Four DIP switches set the frequency, and six DIP
switches set the security code. I wonder what happens if you try to
use one of the two frequency settings or 26 security codes that are
not accounted for.
Radio Shack has stopped doubling the warranty on display items, or so
I was told. I haven't opened the radio, but it's obvious that there
are four hidden screws under the rubber feet, one at each corner of
the radio. It is also obvious that if you do open the radio, you can -
gasp! - remove the rod antenna and put on some sort of jack. Rooftop
antenna, anyone? Naughty, naughty.
The radio appears on page 84 of the 2002 catalog and page 81 of the
2001 catalog. It does not appear in the 2000 catalog. Audiovox (I
think) had a similar unit that was discontinued at Target over a year
ago. I do not know how it compared.
<<
Tripp Knightly
>
> Use a VOX operated transmitter, that way your kid (who can't operate
> PTT) can still key the transmitter.
>
> If someone complains, argue the child has a disability which prevents
> him from operating PTT and must use VOX.
>
> As for monitoring before transmitting, no problem. The kid is always
> monitoring when he isn't transmitting. He can't likely turn off his
> ears.
>
> These blow hards that talk about rude probably don't realize how many
> people they cut off on the roads. Most places I've been around have
> totally empty FRS channels, save for the big amusment parks and the
> like.
>
Thx. Either that or those blowhards are the same ones who waste their
breath complaining about someone who has left their turn signal on.
You know, I have to say that some of the reactionary responses I got
reminded me of the way those guys in the A/V room in high school acted
when I went in to take their super 8 projector to review our team's
prior Saturday football games. ;)
> This sounds like a good use of an underutilized radio service. This
> is exactly what it is for--family communication.
>
<snip>
Phil Stripling
> You know, I have to say that some of the reactionary responses I got
Your definition of reactionary response seems to depend on whether you are
agreed with, hon. "You don't agree with me???? What a blowhard reactionary
response!" "You agree with me? Of course you do. And what a thoughtful,
reasoned reponse you made."
stewart
> >
> > These blow hards that talk about rude probably don't realize how many
> > people they cut off on the roads. Most places I've been around have
> > totally empty FRS channels, save for the big amusment parks and the
> > like.
> >
BLAH BLAH BLAH... quit changing the subject... inconsiderate is
inconsiderate.
> Thx. Either that or those blowhards are the same ones who waste their
> breath complaining about someone who has left their turn signal on.
> You know, I have to say that some of the reactionary responses I got
> reminded me of the way those guys in the A/V room in high school acted
> when I went in to take their super 8 projector to review our team's
> prior Saturday football games. ;)
>
Quit changing the subject... inconsiderate is inconsiderate.
> > This sounds like a good use of an underutilized radio service. This
> > is exactly what it is for--family communication.
Bullshit - BROADCASTING is NOT a good use of this service - if you do
this in a suburban area, you would simply be an inconsiderate jerk.
Now, if you did it in an unused channel in a rural area it WOULDN'T be
a big deal. However, if you were paying attention to the thread, you
would have seen that the guy was obviously operating in a congested
area, and WOULD be affecting other users.
We are simply asking him to think of others, and were explaining the
purpose of the service... but INCONSIDERATE JERKS simply DON'T WANT TO
HEAR ANY OF IT. Well then, to them I saw SCREW YOU, and BUZZ OFF.
Now, again, I ask the original poster, what the hell is the matter
with using a wired intercom connection?
Tripp Knightly
> trippk...@hotmail.com (Tripp Knightly) wrote in message news:<120d8f1c.03091...@posting.google.com>...
> > >
> > > These blow hards that talk about rude probably don't realize how many
> > > people they cut off on the roads. Most places I've been around have
> > > totally empty FRS channels, save for the big amusment parks and the
> > > like.
> > >
>
> BLAH BLAH BLAH... quit changing the subject... inconsiderate is
> inconsiderate.
>
> > Thx. Either that or those blowhards are the same ones who waste their
> > breath complaining about someone who has left their turn signal on.
> > You know, I have to say that some of the reactionary responses I got
> > reminded me of the way those guys in the A/V room in high school acted
> > when I went in to take their super 8 projector to review our team's
> > prior Saturday football games. ;)
> >
>
> Quit changing the subject... inconsiderate is inconsiderate.
Conversations progress. Sorry if we hit a nerve or something.
>
> > > This sounds like a good use of an underutilized radio service. This
> > > is exactly what it is for--family communication.
>
> Bullshit - BROADCASTING is NOT a good use of this service - if you do
> this in a suburban area, you would simply be an inconsiderate jerk.
> Now, if you did it in an unused channel in a rural area it WOULDN'T be
> a big deal. However, if you were paying attention to the thread, you
DxxxxxBx was talking about VOX, not broadcast. Practice what you preach, reverend.
> would have seen that the guy was obviously operating in a congested
> area, and WOULD be affecting other users.
>
> We are simply asking him to think of others, and were explaining the
> purpose of the service... but INCONSIDERATE JERKS simply DON'T WANT TO
> HEAR ANY OF IT. Well then, to them I saw SCREW YOU, and BUZZ OFF.
>
> Now, again, I ask the original poster, what the hell is the matter
> with using a wired intercom connection?
>
Maybe cuz wireless wire is easier to pull. ;)
bentpixel
one or two nieghbor did to so I switched channel when I need to hear hear
clearly. I understand they are not prefect: I had to remember to stop
transmitting if I used an RC car to harass the house cat. (fun cat toy...
was too tried to play with her otherwise)
Rudeness, FCC regs aside, VOX'd FRS or walkie talkies either won't work or
are potentially very dangerous. The VOX feature requires the use of the ear
bud and wire mic. I needed to have the mic near my lips (less than 2 inches
at any sense level ) to trip the VOX. And I sound pretty dumb to passersby.
"aaaaHH. ya I can here you...... aaahhh can you here me now???" The ah's
would start the transmitter, but many errors.
But let's say you still want to try. The ear bud is small. So small it is
a choking hazard to children under 3 year of age. Don't want to go there.
Why not sew it into the pajamas. The wire could become a strangle hazard.
Again, no go. Why risk it? Child proofing a house is work.
I love my kids. My baby monitor was a great comfort. Before sleeping I would
turn volume up for a minute or two just to hear my baby breathe. The gain
was so hight the rustling of the sheets sounded like crushing soda cans.
Can't hear that with a VOX.
I wanted peace of mind, not a heart attack everytime the two-way chripped.
Good luck,
Congrats to you and yours.
bentpixel