Insteon a worthwhile upgrade over X-10?

dscline

Active Member
I read the Insteon vs. Z-wave thread. It seems some are disappointed with Insteon, particularly the reliability of some of the modules. But there are still some aspects of Insteon that are very attractive to me, not the least of which is price. I already have most of my lights controlled by X-10, but as I acquire more PCs, surge protectors, and other electronic gadgets, the reliability of my X-10 system is degrading rapidly. A recent subwoofer upgrade to my den has pretty much taken out that entire room, in addition to other issues I had even before that.

I have (and have had for some time) a passive phase coupler. At this point, to increase reliability, I'd be looking at installing filters at problematic devices, and probably some repeaters too (which I know some can make dimming commands flaky). By the time I invested in all that, I could start replacing the problematic devices with Insteon, and the wireless repeaters are actually more economical than good X-10 repeaters. The ability to slowly upgrade to Insteon, only as needed for problem areas, while keeping compatibility to the existing X-10 devices, is a huge plus to me. Z-wave, or even UPB, may be better, but they aren't really financially feasible for me at this point in time.

So for those who have made the switch, do you consider Insteon a decent upgrade over X-10? Has it helped you in areas where X-10 may have been problematic? I know the Insteon devices support soft-start (fixed in the low end devices, and programmable in the better ones), and I also believe they both support two-way communication, so automation software always knows the state of device (correct?). Is my assumption correct that they (both the Icon and higher end units) also support direct dim commands, so that automation software wouldn't have to force them to 100% first to get to a specific dim level? And I'm assuming that that combined with the increased speed, I could set multiple dimmers in to various levels MUCH faster than the relatively long time it takes now for everything to ramp up and back down using X-10? Since all my current devices are the "old" (not extended) models, this would be a huge upgrade for me that I could implement one at a time.

Any input would be greatly appreciated!
 
Before you give up completely on X-10 you might want to take a look at this.

The way I am using Insteon is mostly for manual control with tabletop ControLincs and KeypadLincs. For all my automation stuff I use X-10 addresses (in the Insteon switches) so I can keep using my Stargate. This was supposed to be a temporary situation until RoZetta is available to let the Stargate talk native Insteon but it is starting to feel awfully permanent.

If you use a lot of palmpads and hawkeyes you will still be using X-10 mode since the Insteon RF stuff is not even on the horizon yet. For some things I use the X-10 to Insteon translator module but if you have a lot of X-10 noise causing false X-10 activations, the translator will convert them into false Insteon activations. (Also the translator is no longer available so it is a moot point).

In general I am better off with Insteon than I was with X-10 because I only put X-10 addresses in switches I really need Stargate to control. All my manual keypad type transmissions are pure Insteon and are very reliable.

I have also been playing with PowerHome and found it to be very solid and reliable for controlling Insteon. I set up some X-10 to Insteon conversions in PowerHome just to try it and it works great. Just be sure to turn background polling off once you have your system configured or you will crash the Insteon SDM every few days (This is a feature of the SDM, not a PowerHome problem.)

Don't know if this answered any of your questions?
 
upstatemike said:
Before you give up completely on X-10 you might want to take a look at this.

Thank you very much... that is something I have not seen, and definitely something I would likely do if I continue with X-10. Of course, the question I'm battling now is whether or not I want to keep putting money into X-10 with better options out there now.

If you use a lot of palmpads and hawkeyes you will still be using X-10 mode since the Insteon RF stuff is not even on the horizon yet.
I don't use Hawkeyes very much, nor the palmpads, but I DO use some wireless wall mounted transmitters (older house, so they are convenient). But your comments make me wonder if I've misunderstood something. What exactly is "X-10 mode"? I thought they could both operate side by side? Do you mean that it's still using powerline mode (except for the wireless repeaters)? Or does that mean that each insteon module must be designated to respond to either Insteon OR X-10 signals... it can't have an address for both? But the Insteon Powerlinc controller can work with both simultaneously, correct? So, lets assume I'll be using Homeseer... am I correct in assuming that I could continue to use my wireless x-10 controllers, which would trigger "macros" I could set up in Homeseer that would be used to set up scenes, that could set various modules, possibly even a mix of Insteon and x-10 devices, though the Insteon Powerlinc controller? Worse case, I still have my x-10 PC interface... shouldn't I be able to do scripts that basically make scenes comprised of a mix of x-10 and Insteon devices possible? Unless I'm misunderstanding, it seems the biggest limitation of mixing x-10 and insteon would be the ability to use an x-10 controller (like my wireless transmitters) to dim/bright individual modules, because it could only address x-10 modules. Lighting scenes could be done via scripts on the PC... yes?

And if I read your reply correctly, you definitely have found an improvement in signal reliability for Insteon over X-10? I don't have ANY issues of false x-10 commands, but major issues with disappearing ones.

Thanks again for your help!
 
Yes, you can definitely have an address for both X-10 and Insteon at the same time. In fact, you can't not have an Insteon address since it is hard coded into the switch; not something you set like in X-10.

My point was that most people do not want to program X-10 addresses into their Insteon devices because that makes them susceptible X-10 noise issues. If you don't have that problem then you can switch to Insteon and still keep the old X-10 addresses in everything.

One important thing to remember: SignaLincs repeat Insteon signals but not X-10 signals. If you use X-10 addresses in your Insteon switches you will still need your couplers, repeaters, and boosterLincs.
 
upstatemike said:
Yes, you can definitely have an address for both X-10 and Insteon at the same time.
Ok, that sounds good (I think).

One important thing to remember: SignaLincs repeat Insteon signals but not X-10 signals. If you use X-10 addresses in your Insteon switches you will still need your couplers, repeaters, and boosterLincs.

But that just means that IF I put a wireless repeater in a room I'm having problems with (e.g., my den), then any device that is having problems with needs to be an Insteon device in order to receive any improvement, correct? That's not really so bad, sine the four devices in there are the bulk of my problematic devices. I can then upgrade devices in other areas of the house as budget and desire for the improved speed/features drives it. I guess the biggest challenge would be getting X10 control signals BACK from the den to to the PC/PLC interface at the other end of the house that would be "transcribing" them to Insteon commands. I have an x-10 IR to PLC transmitter that lets me control the lights from my HT remote. I'm now having problems getting those commands from the IR interface back to the X10 interface (to trigger the scene macros) as I am getting the macro triggered light commands back to the den. I do have an HTPC in that room that is 24/7, along with another PC back in the kitchen that is connected to the PLC interface... I wonder if I could do IR -> Den PC -> ethernet -> kitchen PC -> homeseer lighting scenes -> insteon interface -> wireless repeater -> den lights?
 
I am running my Insteon system for now in X10 Mode and playing with some software from third parties for Insteon tests. In my case the .1uf AC cap phase coupler is enough to pass my Insteon signals. No RFLincs yet but expect to add them shortly.
OH yes I am one of the ones that has blown ApplianceLinc V2s with a simple 14 watt under counter flourescent lamp
 
I saw some references to that in the other thread. Are the appliance modules the only ones that are having trouble? I use dimmables on the vast majority of my lights, and need very few contactor based modules.
 
dscline said:
also believe they both support two-way communication, so automation software always knows the state of device (correct?).
Yes, the load-controlling modules like wall switches do support the old X10 Status Request command. There is also an Insteon version of this command too.


dscline said:
Is my assumption correct that they (both the Icon and higher end units) also support direct dim commands, so that automation software wouldn't have to force them to 100% first to get to a specific dim level?
Yes, both use the PRESET Dim command set for directly controlling the dimmer's light level.

SJ
 
Back
Top