A problem has been identified with the RF when controlling certain DVR Cable Boxes from Motorola and Comcast. This issue tends to come up when the RFX-150 antenna wire has been extended using a piece of Cat-5 run through the walls, and multiple DVR's are being controlled. What happens is that, even when the routing is properly programmed, the wrong DVR, or multiple DVR's, are controlled with the remote. The issue seems to be caused by a low level signal being induced on the antenna wire thats strong enough to control the box, but usually not strong enough to light up the emitter.

If you are experiencing this problem, the fix is outlined below;

Set the IR level of the emitter to minimum (I recommend doing this to all ports right out of the box)

Move the emitter off of the IR sensor on the DVR until it no longer controls unit.

Then move it back just slightly until you re-establish control.

If you still experience the 'bleed through' issue, try a piece of black tape with a pin hole in it.


We are following up on this problem and hope to have more information on causes and fixes in the future.

Glenn

Thanks for the info.

does the pinhole in the tape really work? and how reliable is it on a consistant basis?

WOW! Thats good to hear! I guess we can now start using the MRF300. We have a whole stock of them and considered them crap because we had this problem and tech support thought we were nuts.

Glenn,

Question?

Has this known only to accure when the multiple DVR's are off (1)ONE MRF300?

I can honestly say i used to be a HUGE URC supporter! But of late every dam MRF 300 or 250 is so unrielable or doesnt even work!
It is to the point when now i am about to drop them and use RTI ,and it is a sham as there tech support is great, hank is the man, and they have remote solutions for every consumer.
You would thnk that htey would make this a priority to fix this problem as a majority of there customers are custom installers.

One would tend to think so!

I too have been a URC supporter since the MX-700 debut.

I will say RTI is the ONLY rock solid RF remote system.

I went the RTI route for an entirely different reason but was pleasently supprised that RF installations were 'plug-n-play'.

If URC could eliminate the 'mysterious' RF bug as well as another issue that I don't care to bring up at this time, I would most likely deal only with them!

I like the style of the remotes better and the people I have met at URC are as dedicated to there product as I am to my clients.

Come on pilgram, I'm dying to know what that "other" issue is?

I agree, though. I replaced a really buggy (RF wise) MX-3000/MRF-300 combo with an RTI T3 and RP6 and it has been absolutely bullet proof. With the MRF-300, I had to play games with antenna placement and antenna gain, etc., and it still only worked maybe 90% of the time (not acceptable).

With the RTI, I just put the antenna in the first, most convenient place I could think of, and the T3 (and T1 upstairs) work absolutely 100% of the time.

Dino

Did you elevate the problem to Hank or Eric? My recent experience is that once those two guys get involved something gets done.

Recently my MRF300 installs have been bullet proof but I've been on the other side of it too.

For large systems controlling multiple pieces of equipment I'll definately be specing RTI first but for a stand alone home theater the URC line has been good to me lately.

I have had issues with IR learning on the MX-900 and resolved it by sending the remote in to URC to have them learn the codse and add them to the library.