Remotes... yes again...

[itschris]

Okay, apparently I still don't get it and I need someone to fill in the blanks and connect the pieces that I do understand.

My issue: My equipment is in a BDI cabinet that really makes it difficult for the remotes to work... plus I want a universal remote so that I have just one that I can program with macros to make it easy for the wife and daughter to work the system.

I'm under the impression I want an RF remote. The reasons for this I think are because 1) It's able to run the components even if they're in the cabinet and 2) because you don't have to keep the thing pointed when running a macro (this part is key)

I thought I was either going with the Harmony 1000 or the URC MX900. I thought I was pretty much set. The more I read though, it seems that I need some other box, an RF controller like the MSC 400 to really make it work.

I guess I just don't understand how RF works and how it actually controls my system. I don't need the remote to work from accross the street... just from the couch. Can you guys just tell me what I need? I don't understand what the RF boxes do with IR extenders and all that. Do I even need that?

If I get say the Harmony 1000... do I need the Harmony RF Extender? I just need this to access the components in the cabinet and not have to remain pointed at the equipment once you select the macro.

As always... thanks in advance.

 

[Adam]

Chris, I haven't looked up the specifics on those units, but here's some info. The remotes that you are looking at (I'm assuming) broadcast commands over RF - and probably IR, as well. The reason that you would need an RF receiver is if your components (A/V receiver, DVD player, etc.) don't have the ability to receiver RF commands. A lot of equipment doesn't - they just have IR sensors on the front panels. The RF receiver would accept the RF commands from the remote and would likely have a set of IR "blasters" - these would be IR emitters on the ends of cables. One end of the cable would connect to the RF receiver, the other end with the emitter would be placed so that your components could "see" it. That way, when you push a button on the remote, an RF command gets sent from the remote to the RF receiver, the RF receiver then translates that into the proper IR signal and sends it out the IR blaster, and your components then see the IR signal from the blaster. It's like using a normal IR remote but with extra pieces in the chain. The benefits of such a system are that they can be used in your situation - when you don't have a line of sight between a remote and your equipment for the IR light to transmit between them.

 

[Haoleb]

Adam pretty much nailed it as to why you need the seperate box. If you go the URC route you dont need the MSC400, You can get by just fine with something like the MRF260 which is much cheaper.

You could also get an IR repeater type system which has a sensor somewhere, which connects to a little box which repeats what the sensor detects then sends it out via IR eyes to your components, This way you could still have the stuff inside the cabinet. Although its not as fool proof as the RF remote's

You can also pick up something like the TX1000 for much cheaper than the 900, I find that its sometimes easier for people because it has less buttons and because its slightly more versatile. Also has bigger buttons which are easier to see. Downside is that there is no number hard buttons which can be a pain if you type in your channels. With something like the TX though its easier to pre program buttons to the most watched channels which would then send out the appropriate IR sequence for that channel. I was able to get the TX1000 off amazon for about $240

You would still need to get the RF extender for the Harmony.

 

[MDS]

The MSC-400 master controller is way overkill and totally unnecessary for most home setups. My opinion is that you also don't need to spend the money for the MX-850 or MX-900 either.

The higher end remotes in the URC line have enough memory and pages of LCD buttons to control 20 or more devices. Do you have a need to control 20 devices? They also require you to use their software to program it on your computer. Some people think that is a plus but I think it is a minus. Sure it will be a little easier to set up complex macros and you can save your configuration but again just how complex is your setup? You'll get pretty color icons but the remote + basestation will cost you close to $900.

I think everyone knows that I like the MX-350 and I just replaced my older model with the newest one and got the MRF-260 RF basestation to go with it. That is all you need and even then you won't use its full capacity.

The RF20 + its associated basestation is super cheap ($100 for BOTH) and is similar to the MX-350. It is programmed the same way but differs slightly in that it always sends both IR and RF at the same time and the emitters are not assignable (which is only a problem if you have more than one of the same component that uses the same IR commands).

 

[itschris]

The clears a lot up. Thanks guys! (Oddly enough, my THANKS button is working today) Anyway, I think I got it now.

I like the MX350 you suggested. I'm thinking I might want to lean towards more of a touchscreen kinda setup like the Harmony 1000. I know it has some lmitations, but my setup and what I need it to do is pretty basic. I think the Harm 1000 would be better for the family and daughter likes the cool factor of it. Also, it's likely it'll be treated better and not tossed around and lost in the cushions.

I'm going to re-read the review from RemoteCentral on it again. As far as I can tell, it should to what I need it to. How does it send the IR commands if it doesn't have the extra module? They offer an RF Extender, but that looks just like it for boosting the signal. I don't see anything about IR emitters and all that.

 

[Warpdrv]

Depending on how in depth you might want to get, It might be a bit more expensive, but the pronto lines are some really great products, and don't have anywheres near the roadblocks that the Harmony 1000 has...

 

[BMXTRIX]

Depending on how in depth you might want to get, It might be a bit more expensive, but the pronto lines are some really great products, and don't have anywheres near the roadblocks that the Harmony 1000 has...

You know, as cool as those Pronto remotes are, I struggle to ever recommend a product from a company that designs a universal remote that BEGS for discrete functionality, but then is completely unable to design any products that actually HAVE discrete functionality.

I would avoid Philips for their severe lack of understanding basic business common sense and go with a company that actually just builds quality remotes in either the Harmony or the URC design.

 

[Alex2507]

I'm thinking I might want to lean towards more of a touchscreen setup.

The fact that the URC doesn't have a touch screen is why I got it. Touch screens have to be 'looked' at. When I'm watching a movie, I'm already 'looking' at something. The hard buttons of the URC allow you to find your way around by feel in the dark. the MX-350 has been called more "intuitive".

 

[Hi Ho]

I am opposite MDS when it comes to remotes. I definitely prefer PC programming. I don't have 20 devices (the MX-900 supports 40) but programming a remote like the MX-900 is far easier on a PC. Not only is the graphical interface much more intuitive, the IR database which contains far more IR codes for components than OEM remotes have, is invaluable. For example, the database contains hundreds more commands for my Yamaha receiver than are available on the original remote. Having discrete codes for virtually every function allows for unlimited macro functionality.

HERE is a screen shot of my setup.

As for the Harmony remotes; I used to be a fan. My first universal remote was a Harmony 688 and I loved it, until I started working as an installer and gained some experience with the URC remotes. URC remotes are geared toward the professional and have a non-linear programming interface. This requires a learning curve but is infinitely more powerful and efficient. The Harmony remotes (they all program the same way) are consumer oriented and have a linear programming interface. This is great for the novice who simply zips through the wizards and is content with the macros the remote programmed for him but if you ever want to add additional steps to a macro or rearrange buttons be prepared for a frustrating round-in-circles experience.

If you do decide to go with the URC remote make sure that your dealer can provide you with the software. URC provides the fully functional software only to dealers. Some dealers will provide you with the software if you want to do the programming yourself.

 

[Haoleb]

I am opposite MDS when it comes to remotes. I definitely prefer PC programming.

I'm with you there, I can do an MX in a typical system in about 10 minutes with their software, The last time I did a 350 I wanted to throw it at the wall and leave...

 

[Beans]

Stay Away from the Harmony 1000!

I can not stress enough how much you should stay away from the Harmony 1000. In fact its what I have had (with RF) for the last couple of years and I am trying to get find its replacement and I dont even have the heart to sell it its so bad. Its the single worst piece of HT gear I have ever bought in this hobby. I am not an example of just one person with one bad experience (see link below). I have had two 1000s and a detailed history with Logitech Harmony support that makes me now not only stay away from the 1000, but Harmony all together. I am no bragging, but I would challenge anyone who felt they had more experience then me with this remote, and dealing directly with Harmony over every issue that has come up.

I am a very informed buyer, and only expect reasonable performance from what is promised. Below is a list of current problems and Logitec's response.

1.) Originally launched as Zwave compatible: After buying 1000 because of its Zwave support I (alone with all others) found out it did not support Zwave. Logitech had 4 promised firmware updates come and go before finally anouncing they were dropping Zwave support for the 1000. Did or anyone get anything for them dropping Zwave? Nope. That reason alone tells me what kind of company Logitech is.

2.) Freezing: The 1000 when used witht he RF extender is plagued with freezing issues. Its what caused Harmony to send me a new remote. Its not the hardware, but firmware which has never been fixed. It freezes 2-3 times a week and the only way to stop the freeze is to take the battery out out and reboot the remote which shuts off the entire system. Harmony's official response is that they have fixed the problem. They have not i can assure you.

3) Volume Run off: Every 7-10 times you press the volume up or down it continues to go all the way up or all the way down on its own. It happens a lot! Logitec denies it happens with anyone else but me. Check the thread below to see just how many people experience it.

take it from somoene who has logged 13 calls with harmony support. Normally I would sell my old HT equipment but in good conscience I can not. Someone offered me $50 for it and I told him I could not accept it and I would send it to him for free if he donated the money to the SPCA. I couldnt sleep at night knowing i sold one...harmony knowingly sells 100s.

http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=730522&page=44

BTW...the review on remote central is missleading, and should have been updated to indicate the widespread issues.


So as far as advice on what else to buy, I am personally looking at RTI. I have had a MX remote in the past but they just arnt sexy enough for me. Id love to need a creston, but I just dont. RTI is good, but you need a good dealer to program it, and they arnt cheap.

 

[Hi Ho]

So as far as advice on what else to buy, I am personally looking at RTI. I have had a MX remote in the past but they just arnt sexy enough for me. Id love to need a creston, but I just dont. RTI is good, but you need a good dealer to program it, and they arnt cheap.

Have you seen the MX-980? I would have bought one if it existed when I got my 900.

 

[Beans]

Have you seen the MX-980? I would have bought one if it existed when I got my 900.

HEY! that looks miles better then the MX 600 I had before and the other MX products. Thanks Ill look into it.

 

[Alex2507]

I'm with you there, I can do an MX in a typical system in about 10 minutes with their software, The last time I did a 350 I wanted to throw it at the wall and leave...

Oh, that's not good news. I have yet to use my 350 and you're scaring me now.
I was planning to just go with what the instruction manual has to say on using the thing but now I understand that there is programming software?
Maybe tomorrow will be the day I get my feet wet with my very first universal remote.

 

[Adam]

Oh, that's not good news. I have yet to use my 350 and you're scaring me now.
I was planning to just go with what the instruction manual has to say on using the thing but now I understand that there is programming software?
Maybe tomorrow will be the day I get my feet wet with my very first universal remote.

Sounds like it just might take a little longer to get it set up. Hey, it's a Sunday. Sit back, relax, and get it all set up!

 

[Warpdrv]

You know, as cool as those Pronto remotes are, I struggle to ever recommend a product from a company that designs a universal remote that BEGS for discrete functionality, but then is completely unable to design any products that actually HAVE discrete functionality.

I would avoid Philips for their severe lack of understanding basic business common sense and go with a company that actually just builds quality remotes in either the Harmony or the URC design.

I guess I'm not sure where your coming from here, I have yet to not be able to utilize discrete programming on my 9600... there might be times that are more laborious for implementation but I can't say I can't get to work perfectly...

I'm sorry you have so much trouble with Philips remotes, I'm not a huge fan of Philips products whatsoever, but they truly hit a homerun with their remotes, putting themselves in the class of AMX and other custom installer products for 1/10th the price... IMO

 

[BMXTRIX]

I guess I'm not sure where your coming from here, I have yet to not be able to utilize discrete programming on my 9600... there might be times that are more laborious for implementation but I can't say I can't get to work perfectly...

I'm sorry you have so much trouble with Philips remotes, I'm not a huge fan of Philips products whatsoever, but they truly hit a homerun with their remotes, putting themselves in the class of AMX and other custom installer products for 1/10th the price... IMO

Don't get me wrong, but AMX/Crestron are well beyond what Pronto or most other remotes are on the best of days.

While Philips got lucky with the Pronto, that's about the best I can say for them. As a company they seem clueless, which means if you actually have issues you are likely on your own. Companies which are more dedicated to remotes and have other well established quality products are more likely to offer excellent support for those products for consumers. As well, you generally will see first rate products from any number of other manufacturers which easily match the Pronto remotes these days. So, given two equal products, go with the one that costs less and gives better service would be my recommendation.

Personally I've programmed Harmony, URC, Philips, Marantz (been a while), AMX, and Crestron.

I didn't have any issues with the Harmony remote at all and I was fairly happy with the online programming setup. I did not play with the timing of things, but did go in and rename some buttons and move some things around which only ended up taking a few minutes. Very nice!

The URC I think I need the full programming suite, but what I have was only marginal for programming. I couldn't seem to find a way to have the full IR suite for a product available for me to put on buttons as I wished. Kind of annoying, but workable.

The Philips, with any graphics, was a lot of work, and touchscreens, while they can be intuitive, also require you to look at them during use instead of looking at the display.

Both AMX and Crestron offer hard button remote controls as well as touchpanels - but they definitely are expensive. The plus side is that on more complex rooms they are truly flawless systems and you have options to deal with products which don't have discrete codes for certain functions as well as serial control and potentially two-way control.

The main Crestron hard button remote is licensed from URC and is their MX-850 remote. I imagine we may see this change to a newer URC model this year, but I'm not positive on that.

I think it's super important that people put functionality FIRST over the look of the remote. A touchscreen remote LOOKS sexy - but it's a pain in the rump to have to look down to use a remote every time you want to do anything. Especially basic functions like changing channels or volume adjustments. Just something to keep in mind. A hard button remote isn't as sexy, but when you look at it and start memorizing the button layout, you can operate it without even turning the backlight on. Plus, you can put identical remotes in all the rooms of your home and once your family knows how to use the remote, they can oeprate any room in the house.

 

[MDS]

I'm with you there, I can do an MX in a typical system in about 10 minutes with their software, The last time I did a 350 I wanted to throw it at the wall and leave...

It certainly does take a lot longer than 10 minutes to set up the MX-350 but I like to be able to add or change functions sitting in front of the TV.

One example where the on remote programming can be a chore is with my new Toshiba LCD. Functions like picture size and picture mode bring up an onscreen menu and then you can either scroll to your selection and hit enter or press a number that represents the selection. In order to have one button that changes to 'native' picture size I need one button programmed to be the picture size menu and then another button that is a macro that consists of the picture size button followed by the number. That is kind of tedious with going back and forth among the pages but it really isn't that bad. That kind of operation would be simple with the software.

 

[MDS]

Oh, that's not good news. I have yet to use my 350 and you're scaring me now.
I was planning to just go with what the instruction manual has to say on using the thing but now I understand that there is programming software?
Maybe tomorrow will be the day I get my feet wet with my very first universal remote.

There is no programming software for the MX-350 or MX-650. They have to be set up on the remote itself.

The way I approach it is to first label all the LCD buttons then learn the commands from the original remotes. You can put any function from any device on any button or page so think about what functions you use most and put them on the first page. For example, I put 'late nite' from the receiver and 'pic size' from the TV on the cable page because I used them a lot and don't want to have to go main->audio->lnite->main->cable every time I want to use the lnite function.

 

[Alex2507]

There is no programming software for the MX-350 or MX-650. They have to be set up on the remote itself..

Good. I didn't need anything else to figure out.

The way I approach it is to first label all the LCD buttons then learn the commands from the original remotes. You can put any function from any device on any button or page so think about what functions you use most and put them on the first page. For example, I put 'late nite' from the receiver and 'pic size' from the TV on the cable page because I used them a lot and don't want to have to go main->audio->lnite->main->cable every time I want to use the lnite function.

Tips like that are invaluable to me. It would have taken me forever to see the convenience of something that simple. It's taken me 2 years or so to finally break down and get a programmable remote as you assured me that I would way back then. When I say 'I may be slow but I get there', I mean it.

I imagine that I'll be starting a 350 'how to' thread once I get to playing with it and start having questions. Thanks again.