I received some codes from Wadia to work some functions that are not available on the supplied remote. They are in the NEC format according to the info I was given and am trying to varify I am on the right track as I do not have a iTransport here to test them on before I go to my client's house.

so I figure I have to use windows calculator to take the digits from hex to decimal and from the info they sent the 88 and 77 are the device codes I would use them seperated by a (.) in make hex.

If I am on the right track here please let me know & if not getting pointed in the right direction would be awesome.

thanks in advance,
Chris




PLAYLIST DOWN 88 77 1D E2 N
PLAYLIST UP 88 77 1C E3 N

You could convert both 88 and 77 from hex to decimal and put a dot between and use that as the device number in MakeHex.

There is also an NEC protocol rule that when those two numbers add up to FF, the second number is implied (in hex 88 + 77 = FF) so either
Device=136
or
Device=136.119
would give the same results.

Then for the function number, use the third documented value. The fourth one is implied by the third.

Either convert that third value to decimal or run MakeHex in Hex mode.

I don't have a good guess about what they mean by the "N" on the end of each of those.

You also need to guess (or prepare both) whether they need NEC1 or NEC2. Usually either will work right except for long presses of certain commands, such as VOL+ where a long press specifies a continuous ramp. Then only whichever is right of NEC1 or NEC2 will act the right way for a long press.

the n was for the repeat, I should have made note of that.

I greatly appreciate the help, as it turns out the guys at wadia have turned out to be very responsive and after I mentioned a ccf file would work for my application he talked to an engineer who happened to have one.

As it turns out I was on the right track but I used the 3rd and 4th value separated by the dot to generate the code in both nec 1 and 2 to be safe, then got the call this morning that all my work was not necessary but guess I learned something which certainly can not be bad.

Thanks again John you always seem to come to the rescue!