Does anyone have any experiences with these? I'm curious how they compare to the MX-800.

Compare in what respect, please?

This is a little off subject, but I just posted this message on integrationpros.com. Any help?

"Just read the threads from Yahoo site about guys having problems with the new ML-500. Does anybody have any experiance with this? I'm getting my first one shipped today and have to get it out to a clients house asap. Don't want to run into any unforeseens if I can avoid it.
Thanks in advance. "

Scott

I posted my response to that Yahoo ML-500 thread...

[Link: groups.yahoo.com]

The thing works great, other than the issues mentioned. The range is also very good. I walked around with the remote and used it about 100' away from the gateway (as far as possible give the dimensions of the apartment... NYC too).

I am confident enough in the performance that it is being spec'd in future projects, at least 20-25 that I can count.

Some things that I am dissapointed about....
1) softkeys on the favorites pages can do page flips to sources, but source softkeys cannot do pageflips.
2) Crestron currently only support 16 discrete ID's for this remote. I occasionally do projects that require at least twice this number.

Good to know tsvisser, will save me some time. Thanks.

I'm curious what the differences are between the two. For example:

Does one have functionality that the other does not?
How does the RF reception of one compare to the other?
What is the cost differential?

I'd be interested in any other information along these lines.



This message was edited by lhl12 on 04/09/04 07:16.

Crestron is making use of the URC engine. Essentially the button layout is the same save Crestron removing the ability to learn IR codes directly into the unit. MX-800 can fire out IR codes in addition to send RF back to the main stack. There are severe limitations on its range and the receiver's ability to regenerate IR codes.

Crestron is not sending an IR code or series of IR codes. It is sending a RF ID and button number. They can and have increased the power of its transmitter as it is a short burst transmission that does not have a lot of data and so will not interfere with other devices. Sort of a loop hole in the FCC spec's that Lutron takes advantage of as well. It is one of the main reasons why Crestron 2 way remotes have a much more limited range. They transmit much more data and so face up to RF restrictions on interferece and therefore power.

So button layout is similar but range is very much different. Crestron's remote is perhaps twice the cost of the URC version although if you are comparing it to the MX-800 the price is similar.

Alan

Any additional feedback, now that it has been out for a bit longer?

My Crestron rep tells me the early complaints about range were because the rf gateways were set for 433Mhz and the units are set for 418. I have no direct experience, just reporting what I was told.

If this were the case the units would not work at all. These are two different frequencies.

No, he said that there was enough bleed-over from 433 to 418 that it worked at short range. Again, just reporting what I was told.

I was not doubting you but I am implying the Crestron rep may be less than acurate in his assesment of the early problems.

Bump.

Anyone else have any more experience?

I have had 2 incidents of range issues. I generally keep the gateway in the same room as the remote... sometimes 1 room away. Both of these incidents were when using the MC2W. It seems to me that there is a major design flaw with the MC2W where the antenna should really be mounted on the front of the unit, just like every other gateway that Crestron makes. For some reason, it follows the antenna on the rear setup like the old ST-CP. Doesn't seem to me like a logical choice.