I'm currently using an MX-850 and MRF-250. I've been thinking about getting a MSC-400 for some time. Almost none of my equipment has discreet codes, so the only way to make full automation macros that are sure to work is if I can test for the on/off state of devices. And after reading the review here, I'm sure the MSC-400 would be perfect.

Before reading about the MSC-400, however, I was considering the MX-950. At least it has variables, so as long as no one screws with the devices and I set up all the emitters well, I could be reasonably sure that the macros would all work right. Then, when I saw the pictures of the MX-980, well, the geek in me said that I am forbidden from buying a new remote that doesn't have a color screen.

Which bring me to this thread. It occured to me that if I'm using the MSC-400 to do all the heavy lifting, then I don't really have to have that hefty of a remote. Instead of the MX-980, I could just use the MX-810. I know the programming for the MX-810 is pretty different (supposedly more for the do-it-yourself crowd) than the higher level remotes, but all I would really need to do with it is stick in the commands to send to the MSC-400. The MSC-400 is where all the complicate programming would take place. Doing it this way would save me around $300. But then again, after this upgrade, it will be a very long time until I make any changes again. So it might be worth it to spend the extra $300. What do you all think?

Also, even though the MX-810 has the wizard software, does that mean you have to use it, or can you still use the standard programming software? How much can you manipulate the menu design, or is that all automatic? If so, that might be a deal breaker right there.

Although it might be a tad rude to ask in this section of the forums, but does anyone know of practical alternatives to the MSC-400? In all honesty, the only reason I'd go with the MSC-400 and a remote instead of the MX-980 by itself is for the added certainty that comes with the power sensors. But if there is a cheaper way to do it, please let me know.

Sorry for all the questions. I really appreciate anybody who takes the time to read and respond. :)

The MX-810 makes a great, affordable interface for the MSC-400. You do need to use the wizard, but it's so customizable that beta-testers have been very happy with it.
And no, there is no better alternative to the MSC-400 :)

Jeff

Oh that's good. Looking through the forums at some of the initial responses, it sounded like people felt the wizard was limiting. But that's not the case? So how malleable is the menu structure? If the remote is on the page for some device, can I make a button that, when pressed, goes to another page with more buttons, sort of like going through Window's Start Menu? Or will I have to use the next/prev page buttons? With the other software, I could do this by just making a button with a macro where the only function is to goto a page.

I'll have to get back to you on that - I haven't seen the latest version of the software yet (was busy with CEDIA) and don't know the full capabilities that it will offer yet.

Jeff

The MX-810 is not anything akin to the "little brother" of the MX-980. The ProWizard editor works differently because it's targeted at a different installer. As such, the wizard guides the installer through the programming , working towards a defined goal. This is not to say that the MX-810 offers no ability to customize: it's just not the free-form OpenArchitecture programming style that might be preferred by an experienced Complete Control programmer.

In short, if you've seen the MX-3000 editor and you're looking for something that will give you all the same options in a wand-style remote, that product is not the MX-810. The MX-980 will be much closer to what you have in mind. But if you look at the MX-3000 and think, "I'd like to get graphical results, but I don't program enough of these to get graphically skilled with the editor, then the MX-810 could definitely be for you.

Thanks for the feedback guys.

The only URC editor I'm familiar with is for my MX-850. Could you maybe try to describe what the MX-810 does better/worse/differently? I know it sounds like I'm asking for a full review, but just a couple examples would be great.

It'd be nice if I could just get my hands on the software and take it for a spin. I could probably learn tons more doing that than I could going back and forth on the forums. Oh well.

I hate to give this kind of an answer, but it's just the truth:

ProWizard does everything differently from any of our other editors. Because of that, basically every feature about it is going to be considered better by some installers and worse by others.

If I were to describe the basic difference, it would be this way: ProWizard is designed to arrive at a particular UI structure with your client's gear, preferences, and desired graphical style in place. You don't have to learn as much, but you don't get as much flexibility. MX-Editor is designed to let installers decide exactly what the end result should be for each of their clients. There may be a longer learning curve, but the payoff is greater flexibility in the end result. Programming may be faster or slower, depending on the skill of the programmer and the desired end result.

That's why I say the MX-810 isn't a "little brother." It's just designed for a different set of installer needs.

Hmm. Alright then. Thanks for all the info guys. I really appreciate it.