|
|
|
The following page was printed from RemoteCentral.com:
MX990/MRF350 erratic channel change on...
| |
|
Topic: | MX990/MRF350 erratic channel change on Comcast X1 This thread has 7 replies. Displaying all posts. |
|
Post 1 made on Monday December 19, 2016 at 21:26 |
PatMac Long Time Member |
Joined: Posts: | February 2014 214 |
|
|
I had a 3 hour trial and error session Saturday with the MX990/MRF350 not playing nice with a Comcast X1 DVR. (This is a new system...all devices are less than 1 week old.) I had an emitter properly operating the box...most of the time. However, I was testing the favorite channels (about 15 of them) when I noticed the erratic behavior. That is, if the macro called for 9 .2 sec delay 0 .2 sec delay 6 .2 sec delay enter it might instead appear as 90006 on the DVR. It went to channel 999 somehow a few times. Weird. Database code set: 195 I have been able to resolve a nearly identical symptom before when using the MRF350 or MRX2 by moving the base station about 20" - 30" away from the X1 DVR. Not this time. I moved it, or the antenna, or the emitter wire in every reasonably direction. No help. I also tried a different emitter and a different port on the MRF350. I finally discovered a workaround by using the IR from the remote or, more permanently, the IR blaster of the MRF350. I just had to make a few "DO NOT MOVE" labels for the DVR and the MRF350. Not a first choice, but I was out of patience. Anyone else been down this road before? Thanks!
|
|
Post 2 made on Monday December 19, 2016 at 22:34 |
Ernie Gilman Yes, That Ernie! |
Joined: Posts: | December 2001 30,104 |
|
|
No. However.
Try reducing the repeats to zero. Lengthen the delay to 0.3 or 0.4 seconds. And a strange thing occurred to me -- in between number commands, put a command from some other device. I can't explain why I think this might help.
I did something like this once, and it worked. It was for DirecTV favorites. I created a command that was used in between the numbers, and experimented with which commands aliased to that one. Again, I have no idea why it worked.
|
A good answer is easier with a clear question giving the make and model of everything. "The biggest problem in communication is the illusion that it has taken place." -- G. “Bernie” Shaw |
|
Post 3 made on Tuesday December 20, 2016 at 01:12 |
tomciara Loyal Member |
Joined: Posts: | May 2002 7,962 |
|
|
When people ask me about changing to the X – 1, I tell them that I would be able to make their remote work with it, but if they have favorites then forget the favorites. Once in a great while they will work consistently, but most times not, so I am moving away from them.
|
There is no truth anymore. Only assertions. The internet world has no interest in truth, only vindication for preconceived assumptions. |
|
Post 4 made on Tuesday December 20, 2016 at 01:16 |
Brad Humphrey Super Member |
Joined: Posts: | February 2004 2,593 |
|
|
Check that code set you are using. I do NOT think 195 is the correct one. When you look, you will see 3 code sets = one says its for IR (I think that is 195), one is for RF, and one is for IP. The one for RF is the one for the X-1 DVR (I think it's 200 something). The other 2 will give you erratic behavior.
|
|
Post 5 made on Tuesday December 20, 2016 at 04:11 |
24/7 Senior Member |
Joined: Posts: | April 2008 1,244 |
|
|
On December 20, 2016 at 01:16, Brad Humphrey said...
Check that code set you are using. I do NOT think 195 is the correct one. When you look, you will see 3 code sets = one says its for IR (I think that is 195), one is for RF, and one is for IP. The one for RF is the one for the X-1 DVR (I think it's 200 something). The other 2 will give you erratic behavior. The code set is wrong. Use 202. It's labeled "RF" only
|
|
|
OP | Post 6 made on Tuesday December 20, 2016 at 09:05 |
PatMac Long Time Member |
Joined: Posts: | February 2014 214 |
|
|
ok....thanks for the input...but...if the repeats and codes sets were not changed, why would the IR signal work flawlessly?
|
|
Post 7 made on Tuesday December 20, 2016 at 12:55 |
Brad Humphrey Super Member |
Joined: Posts: | February 2004 2,593 |
|
|
I know in my area, the IR set (code 195) worked fine until a month ago. Then I had several customers call about problems controlling the box (suspect firmware update on boxes). I updated the URC remotes to the code set 202 and it worked perfect. I do remember the code set 195 has a 'search' code in it, that is not present on the RF code set. Not a deal breaker thou.
|
|
Post 8 made on Wednesday December 21, 2016 at 21:24 |
24/7 Senior Member |
Joined: Posts: | April 2008 1,244 |
|
|
On December 20, 2016 at 09:05, PatMac said...
ok....thanks for the input...but...if the repeats and codes sets were not changed, why would the IR signal work flawlessly? The URC techs spent time to develop an RF working code set. Codes 202 are different from the ir code set.
|
|
|
|
Before you can reply to a message... |
You must first register for a Remote Central user account - it's fast and free! Or, if you already have an account, please login now. |
Please read the following: Unsolicited commercial advertisements are absolutely not permitted on this forum. Other private buy & sell messages should be posted to our Marketplace. For information on how to advertise your service or product click here. Remote Central reserves the right to remove or modify any post that is deemed inappropriate.
|
|