Some advice on IR distribution

[shenandoah75]

i'm getting read to buy a couple of Samsung Q1s as remotes and need to get the IR side ready...

Right now i have two xantech zones driving my A/V via standard remotes. I also already have a global cache (the "18" version with 6 IR jacks) but currently using for serial only...

Anyone have opinions on whether it would be better to stick with emitters on the xantech side and use GC-CGX to tie the automation side via GC into it. Or would you recommend going the other way and have the emitters on the GC side, using the GC-CXG to tie the xantech into the GC (almost as a back for standard remote usage)? Or shall i flip a coin? If i might have to add more IR zones later, does that make a difference in your opinion?


thx
-brad

 

[sic0048]

I'm not following the question completely, but let me ask some questions to make sure I'm on the same page....

You are currently using the Xantech as an IR distribution system. I assume you are using IR remotes in the zones where you are going to replace them with the Q1. If that is the case, and you think you'll really drop the IR remotes completely in favor of the Q1, then you don't need IR receivers anymore. However, you still have equipment that can only be controlled via IR signals. So you still need the IR emitters to control those items.

Is this correct?

I assume the GC allows 6 different "zones" of IR emitters. In other words, you can specify which of the 6 outputs each signal is going to be sent to, correct?

I'd probably lean towards keeping the existing Xantech system in place and getting a USB-UIRT (or GC if it receives IR signals) as your connection between the Xantech unit and your automation software. I say this because using a touch screen to control all your A/V experience is actually not very user friendly. It is really nice to grab the remote and turn the volume down, or change the channel, or pause the movie. Using a touch screen to do this takes more time and effort and the "coolness factor" quickly wears off. If you keep the existing Xantech system in place, you could always bring back IR remotes for basic control again without having to totally redo the system again.

So keep the existing IR distribution system in place, but instead of having a bunch of emitters going from the Xantech, you'll only have one emitter. This single emitter will be placed on the receiving eye of the USB-UIRT (or GC if it receives IR signals). Then you can load the USB-UIRT Driver and teach it (or download) the IR commands. At this point, your automation software can trigger on those IR signals received and control the system.

For those IR devices that you still need IR to control, the USB-UIRT also outputs IR signals. So it can immediately turn around and send the proper signal out to the AV devices as needed. You can have up to two different zones of emitters hooked up to the back of the USB-UIRT. Of course if the equipment is all different brands, then you could use 1 zone and blast the IR signals to all the devices and only the device it is intended for will react to it.

Hopefully this is in line with what you are asking.

If the GC will receive IR signals, then you can substitute it for the USB-UIRT. I honestly don't remember if it does or not.

EDIT - changed references from CQC to generic automation software. I though I had read you were using CQC in your post, but clearly it does not say that (I must have read a GC as CQC).

 

[shenandoah75]

You are currently using the Xantech as an IR distribution system. I assume you are using IR remotes in the zones where you are going to replace them with the Q1. If that is the case, and you think you'll really drop the IR remotes completely in favor of the Q1, then you don't need IR receivers anymore. However, you still have equipment that can only be controlled via IR signals. So you still need the IR emitters to control those items.

Is this correct?

well the software i'm using allow IR distribution too, so all devices (serial and IR) will be controllable from the Q1. But i am leaning towards keeping remotes on hand anyway.

I assume the GC allows 6 different "zones" of IR emitters. In other words, you can specify which of the 6 outputs each signal is going to be sent to, correct?

i'm still not 100% on this cause i haven't done any bench testing. 6 ports, but the web-based ui for setup shows two "blocks" of three jacks. Not sure if they are totally independent or not yet (to play soon)

I'd probably lean towards keeping the existing Xantech system in place and getting a USB-UIRT (or GC if it receives IR signals) as your connection between the Xantech unit and your automation software. I say this because using a touch screen to control all your A/V experience is actually not very user friendly. It is really nice to grab the remote and turn the volume down, or change the channel, or pause the movie. Using a touch screen to do this takes more time and effort and the "coolness factor" quickly wears off. If you keep the existing Xantech system in place, you could always bring back IR remotes for basic control again without having to totally redo the system again.

Ok i am listening. I've had others tell me the UMPC based remote is bad too and that i should buy one of the upscale logitechs for similar reasons. For peope that do use them , do leave them up 24x7? Is it non-friendly because of boot up time or something else? Volume being prime example., if the UI exposed the slider on all interfaces, that in itself seems like no great loss... I currently haven't ripped DVDs (and we're moving to bluray anyway as we can) so the "select a movie" may not be all that wonderful. Without that, i have a hunch you're saying the touch is overkill? i like the ability to control lights from same UI, but integrating it with media tasks isn't so important.

If the GC will receive IR signals, then you can substitute it for the USB-UIRT. I honestly don't remember if it does or not.

Ya i forget this offhand as well. Specifically whether configuring a jack as "sensor" will accept direct IR or only the other GC devices like the learner, etc... IN fact i had hoped that the device i noted aove was just for that purpose. But it looks like it may not work that way as GC's website lists it only as feeing the GC-IRE extender)


thank you!!!

 

[sic0048]

I've had both UMPCs and the basic IR remote in my Den. 9 times out of 10, the IR remote is simply easier to use. The touchscreens tend to be tied to a specific location (either because they have to be plugged in or perhaps the docking station). You also have to be more carefull with it - ie getting it lost in the couch and sitting on it is bad.

Because of that, it seems to be easier to have a normal IR remote that always works (ie no boot time, finding dead batteries because it wasn't docked, etc) and can be left where ever you want when you are done with it. Obviously having the touchscreen is really nice for picking out a movie or checking the weather or CCTV cameras, etc. But for basic media control and transport (play, pause, etc), I think most people revert back to a regular remote control. With the regular remote, the important buttons are always available and ready to use. There is no finding the right spot on the touchscreen to press or worse yet, having to scroll through a page or two to find the correct screen because someone was looking at the weather, etc.

I'd certainly only buy one Q1 as an experiment and live with it a month or two to decide if it is better or not. Every household will be different. You just have to find what works best in your situation.

 

[shenandoah75]

Ok - been reading past posts on remote controls and you guys seem to like the universalremote devices (some have harmony, but i think the supportability / maintainance of the IR databases with URC seems to be rock solid). Depending on pricing of the following, i might look at the Harmony One). Since i have the xantech distribution, the RF really isn't a deal breaker on that one. the MSRP price tag on some of the following may be however. There are good conditions Q1s for that price on ebay. If i understand IVB's prior post correctly, no honoring warranty nor IR updates / etc if you buy unauthorized



I think i like the zigbee based option of the following with the 4 device addressability built in
MRZ-260+
MX-880z

or i could go with RF-based with some of following (list limited to Lion batts)

MRF-260 or MSC-400 +
MX-6000 / MX-3000 / MX-980 / MX-880 / MX-950



Overall, I think i like over all look of the 880 and it looks intuitive enough for the mrs and the kids. I'm assuming the base units can take a standard 3.5 male to male so i can plug into my existing xantech distribution blocks? I couldn't find much on the zigbee version in this forum other than a general discussion of its announcement.

any other thoughts/recommendations appreciated...

 

[shenandoah75]

oh and one more thing to my last post...

I use the multi-zone features on my onkyo receivers... One of my "needs" is to be able to have two remotes pointing to the same onkyo but one will interface to the primary zone for theater. The other needs to hit zone2 (for input/volume/power) only as though "it" were THE receiver. Assuming/Hoping i could do that with URC or Logitech...

 

[wlj]

I've got a Samsung Q1 Ultra that I use as a travel computer, and I've got to say that I think the device is fantastic. It's small, light (~2lbs with extended battery), relatively cool and quiet, gets 6 hours of battery life with the extended battery, and is capable of acceptably running most every application I've thrown at it -- albeit with modest performance thanks to the 800MHz Pentium M-class processor. The only thing that's truly been a problem is HD video -- 720P generally works with the right player such as Media Player Classic; 1080I/P is asking too much. No doubt modern games are also an issue, though Mine Sweeper performs just fine. I would expect that you'd be able to drive an HA UI without any issue.

To eek some extra performance out of my Q1U, I've upgraded both RAM and 802.11g NIC. Upgrading the RAM to 2GB significantly lessened paging to the 3600RPM disk, and the NIC upgrade to an Intel AGN4965 eliminated the sluggish performance of the stock Atheros 802.11g NIC. Of course, the Q1U worked just fine without these upgrades...

I'd be happy to answer any questions that you've got questions about the Q1U.

Cheers,
-Bill

 

[AnthonyZ]

One, I use the Q1U with my CQC rig as the primary theater controller and it's worked a treat. Of course, my family has been using a touch screen of one sort or another to control the theater for some six years now. What HA software are you running? That will make a big difference in how you set it all up. Also, the GC100's IR ports are individually addressable (you won't be using the Global Cache web UI for anything other than general, initial setup) and no, it doesn't receive commands.

Lastly, please stay in the URC camp (rather than Logitech, URC makes fantastic gear, as does RTI) if going the remote direction. I understand why some people use Logitech (price, the only possible reason) but, Harmonys are pure crap in my opinion. Very, very, very poor build and the operation is so danged kludgy. Personally, I think they are some of the worst CE devices made. They really are the X10 of control interfaces.

 

[shenandoah75]

Thx... J9AE is my app...

I spent some time yday talking to Mike at surfremotecontrol.com (at IVB's insistence in many past posts). He was really helpful and i'm totally convinced that URC would be the best choice in remotes. I guess the one thing i keep coming back to is the price. I can get a decent used Q1 for the same price as the MX-980 (with which i like the enhanced functions and custom images it provides for the $100 over the MX-880). And i have the same ease of lighting / other control right there.

For us we're always in the theater realizing lights are on downstairs wasting energy or lying in bed at night realizing the same or that i should override sprinkler's automated cycles cause its raining, or that we forgot to turn the thermostat to heat upstairs for the kids, etc, etc.... I realize the Q1 is overkill, but if leaving in sleep mode means that initial time to get to the screen isn't bad, i think based on price alone, i think the Q1 would be the better deal in both locations.

thx
-brad


p.s. regarding the lights upstairs, i know someone gonna say why not put a scene controller up there. this is my #1 (and probably only legit) frustration with viziaRF. You can only have a device registered with 5 controllers. That is sOOOOOOOOOOOOO limiting - and the source of my next post

 

[sic0048]

A Q1 is probably a great choice for the bedroom. You'll want the added flexibility over a simple IR remote. Even if you have a TV in that room, it probably won't be the primary reason to use the Q1 - you'll be using it to check lights, security, HVAC, etc as well. Those functions really need a nice GUI and the Q1 can certainly provide that.

I still stand by my advice - get one Q1 and play with it. Make sure you and the family are happy with it. Use it in both the theater and bedroom. I'd use it for at least several weeks or more. Let the initial "coolness" factor wear off and make sure it is still what your family wants.

I'm certainly not anti-touchscreen. We use them in our house and they are invaluable in the right locations. You just need to find out where those "right" locations are for your family.

 

[shenandoah75]

Point taken - i'll find one and give it a go! thx

 

[sic0048]

The other thing you'll want to make sure you can live with is the noise. I don't think the Q1 is too loud, but I had another UMPC at one point that sounded like a airplane turbine. That would not be something you wanted on your nightstand while you tried to sleep.

 

[wlj]

The other thing you'll want to make sure you can live with is the noise. I don't think the Q1 is too loud, but I had another UMPC at one point that sounded like a airplane turbine. That would not be something you wanted on your nightstand while you tried to sleep. :horse:

FWIW, my Q1U is very quiet with the cooling fan and hard drive running. I've got mine configured to spin down the hard drive after a period of inactivity as well as turn off the screen/backlight and downclock the CPU to 600MHz. I've found that the cooling fan tends to turn off when the system is in this 'inactive' mode, thereby making it silent. Of course, the Q1U is also silent when in suspend and hibernate modes. Using and SSD instead of the hard drive would altogether eliminate one of the sound (and heat) sources. An SSD would probably offer a nice performance boost, too.

Cheers,
-Bill

 

[sic0048]

Yeah, my Q1 isn't bad at all. But I had a TabletKiosk UMPC (either an eo i7210 or i7209 - I've forgotten now) that was very loud.

 

[RichardU]

Don't underestimate the value of RF with the URC remotes. I have 8 of the MX-900 remotes in my house and any of them can control any television in the house, four different amps, blinds, central BluRay player, HTPC, and 41 Jetstream light circuits. Very nice.