Your Universal Remote Control Center
RemoteCentral.com
URC's Consumer Remotes Forum - View Post
Previous section Next section Up level
Up level
The following page was printed from RemoteCentral.com:

Login:
Pass:
 
 

Topic:
Problem with MX800 & RF200
This thread has 13 replies. Displaying all posts.
Post 1 made on Monday August 2, 2004 at 14:17
robeng32
Long Time Member
Joined:
Posts:
August 2004
28
just installed and programmed an mx800 and rf200 in a closet with an HK AVR230, philips dvd795sa 5disc changer, vcr, and avc system from a 37" sharp aquos. With the closet door opened the IR works great. I mounted the RF200 above the door header aimed down towards the equipment. I'm finding that the RF is not consistent nor reliable. It seems that sometimes is receives the RF and works and other times it doesn't. Is there anything special I need to do to to the remote or rf receiver to get this thing to work right? I've monitored the flashing status light that indicates that it is recieving an rf signal, but certain times it simply doesn't receive the command. Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks,
Rob

This message was edited by robeng32 on 08/02/04 14:31.
Post 2 made on Monday August 2, 2004 at 14:52
wolfsnake
Long Time Member
Joined:
Posts:
June 2004
10
As stated in some other posts, you need to make sure your 200 is not a version 1.0 or 2.0. It seems as if these have problems. Universal Remote confirms that the MRF-250 which is sold primarily for the 3000, works with the 800 much better than the 200's do. I am using a 250 with a 3000 and an 800 in our showroom and they both work flawlessly.
Post 3 made on Monday August 2, 2004 at 16:20
MikeSRC
Loyal Member
Joined:
Posts:
July 2001
5,958
Versions 0 and 2.0 are identical and should work reliably in most situations. The current version of the MRF-200 is 3.0 and should not have any problems absent outside RF interference. The MRF-200, Version 3.0 is the same unit as the MRF-250, Version 1.0

Mike
www.SurfRemoteControl.com

This message was edited by MikeSRC on 08/04/04 12:34.
www.SurfRemoteControl.com

THX-certified video calibrator and contributing writer, ProjectorReviews.com
Post 4 made on Wednesday August 4, 2004 at 08:37
AVGuy12
Long Time Member
Joined:
Posts:
March 2004
16
Try changing the MRF-200 unit ID on the back and also chage it to the same number in MX editor (under RF control, then receivers). Had the same problem on a job and works perfect now.
Post 5 made on Thursday August 5, 2004 at 10:17
splogue
Founding Member
Joined:
Posts:
November 2001
342
How long has version 3.0 been out?
"If you can't win, change the rules."
Post 6 made on Thursday August 5, 2004 at 10:36
MikeSRC
Loyal Member
Joined:
Posts:
July 2001
5,958
Version 3.0 has been out for a few months now. All the 800s we've received have included a Ver. 3.0 MRF-200.
www.SurfRemoteControl.com

THX-certified video calibrator and contributing writer, ProjectorReviews.com
Post 7 made on Friday August 6, 2004 at 15:10
mr2channel
Select Member
Joined:
Posts:
August 2002
1,701
I have found the RF base station to be a real pain in the ass, and got some really good advice from Eric Johnson (a consultant for URC, also teaches an IR class at CEDIA) Make sure you have the newest version of the base station, if not get the newest version from URC, but before you do that, do what I did. 1) remove the RF antenna from the base station 2) if you do not have a ton of devices to control get rid of those pathetic emitters that comes with the base station and use Xantech emitters, but you will need micro to mini plug adaptors (the genius engineers at URC thought it would be a good idea to make every installers job more difficult by doing things differently that what most of the industry does). The adaptors limit you to being able to only plug in three emitters, but if you use the Xantech 284 emitters that means you are good for six devices, but you lose the ability to assign your outputs. If you need more than that use a connecting block and go to town with as many emitters as you need. Once again you loose the ability to assign the output (I find that to not be an issue, unless you have several of the same make and model devices. Make sure the IR blaster is turned off and that you select the option that allows for both IR & RF so if needed you can point the remote directly at the gear with out having to have the emmiters attached.
What part of "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." do you not understand?
Post 8 made on Friday August 6, 2004 at 21:39
oex
Super Member
Joined:
Posts:
April 2004
4,177
couldnt agree more. the stock emmitter really SUCK!!! i have been changing them to Sonance. they actually stick. URC/HTM ARE YOU LISTENING????
Diplomacy is the art of saying hire a pro without actually saying hire a pro
Post 9 made on Tuesday August 10, 2004 at 23:40
marcus923
Long Time Member
Joined:
Posts:
January 2004
34
robeng32,

If you're still having issues, heres something to try.

I was having similar problems. I tried moving the MRF-200 to the next room. Nothing. Tried changing the number on the bottom of the MRF-200. Nothing. Then I assigned the emmiters specifically to the components and chose RF only and it works like a champ! I even have a Motorola DCT-5100 (which has a lot of RF interference) and it hasn't skipped a beat. Just something to try before you go returning anything.

p.s. Mabye a dumb question, but why do they only let you assign 4 emmitters to specific devices in MX Editor when there are 6 flashers?
Post 10 made on Wednesday August 11, 2004 at 01:35
Pete Harrison
Founding Member
Joined:
Posts:
December 1999
147
On 08/02/04 16:20, MikeSRC said...
Versions 0 and 2.0 are identical and should work
reliably in most situations. The current version
of the MRF-200 is 3.0 and should not have any
problems absent outside RF interference. The
MRF-200, Version 3.0 is the same unit as the MRF-250,
Version 1.0

Mike are you saying that version 3 will perform better than version 0?

Thanks
Post 11 made on Wednesday August 11, 2004 at 11:27
MikeSRC
Loyal Member
Joined:
Posts:
July 2001
5,958
Version 3 takes care of some problems people had with reliability. If you have a Version 0 or 2 and are not having problems, then the Version 3 won't do anything different. I have a Version 0 I've been using at home for years now without a problem.

p.s. Mabye a dumb question, but why do they only let you assign 4 emmitters to specific devices in MX Editor when there are 6 flashers?

You can assign all six flashers.

Mike
www.SurfRemoteControl.com
www.SurfRemoteControl.com

THX-certified video calibrator and contributing writer, ProjectorReviews.com
Post 12 made on Thursday August 12, 2004 at 22:47
rudolpht
Founding Member
Joined:
Posts:
March 2002
192
I have sent 3 emails to URC to trade up from ver 1 to ver 3 and get zero/null/nada response.
Post 13 made on Friday August 13, 2004 at 21:28
ejfiii
Select Member
Joined:
Posts:
July 2003
2,021
Editged due to wrong thread replied to. Sorry.
Post 14 made on Wednesday September 1, 2004 at 23:54
toyzs
Lurking Member
Joined:
Posts:
September 2004
1
I recently got the same problem someone else had; the RF part of the remote will only work intermittently. In order to fix my problem, in "9. RF control" in PROGRAM, I deleted my current RF Receiver, Uploaded, Saved, Restarted MX800 Editor, Created a NEW RF Receiver, Uploaded, and Saved.

It works again! I am using MRF200 Ver 2.0.


Jump to


Protected Feature 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.

Hosting Services by ipHouse