But if there is latency with zigbee, would it not be impractical for volume and mute? Therefore is IR not required for volume and mute???

I had a lot of volume ramping latency when I was using the volume pop-up.  Got rid of that and changed to just a bar graph always on the screen and it got a lot better.  Next job I did I skipped the feedback and there was virtually no latency (no more or less than if it had been 433).  Last job, again no volume feedback, and volume ramping was perfect.

First 2 jobs were two-way Marantz SR drivers, last job was one-way Pioneer VSX rs232.

So why use 2-way products at all if all feedback is disabled? RTI better figure this out if they want these products to succeed.

Dino

Because I had already spec'ed the job with 2-way gear before I had experienced it.  I would have used 433 in a heartbeat if were to do it again.  The customer had initially asked for some slightly complex things that would have been perfect with 2-way and impossible without.  By the time the job rolled around he didn't really care about the complex things and we already had the zigbee stuff installed.... dammit...

However, I do like the upgrade path it gives me.  Maybe a few generations of firmware updates with smooth things out.

Like a little in-field beta testing for you?

SOLVED:

RTI now has a Zigbee troubleshooting guide and 2way driver that shows connectivity.

The ZM24 auto programs to the "best" channel the first time it is plugged in to the RTI.COM port on the ZRP6. Well it got it wrong on this install. Tech support instructed me to unplug from the zigbee, connect the ZM24 power supply, hold down reset button, unplug power, reconnect to the ZRP6. The ZM24 found an open channel this time and the remote works wonderfully!

Dont forget to power cycle the remote so it finds the new ZM24 channel. The remotes dont bounce from receiver to receiver. It selects the best receiver when turned on or idle for 20 minutes.

So are you saying the response time is similar to using the 433 remotes? What about after being idle for 20 minutes - if you push mute or volume after it goes to sleep, does it still respond quickly?

Also, are you using any feedback (i.e., volume level)?

Thanks.

I can live with the wakeup time, but I would like to control the timeout myself. I would put it to 2 hrs.

The ZM24 lock on is a huge problem for me, and I will be staying with 433 for as long as I can.

What a stupid design.

Could you please elaborate on exactly what you mean by the "lock on" problem? Did you try procedure outlined by SOUND.SD above?

I think he's referring to something where the Remote Wakes up and finds the closest ZM24 and then stays connected to that one, eliminating the ability to roam with the handheld control.

Yup, took my lumps on this already.  Next job is bigger than the last two and we're only doing 433mhz remotes.

Yup.  If you take a remote out of a room that has a ZM24 and try to use it in another room that has a ZM24, it will have locked on to the antenna in the first room because that WAS the strongest signal when the remote was first picked up.  You have to either power cycle the remote or leave it idle for 20+ minutes to get it to lock on to the ZM24 that is NOW the strongest signal.  Not at all how it "should" work.  You can carry the remote to another ZM24 and press buttons on it and watch the activity light NOT blink because it's only talking to the antenna it saw when it first woke up.

I dont have any situations where I have roaming handhelds so it doesnt bother me. What would be a problem is if the client puts the remote down for 30 minutes and has to wait 10 seconds to use it after picking it up.

That would be a pain in the ass. I remember a similar delay when trying to reconnect the iPronto to the netX's. I have had to eat some of those iProntos and swap to other remotes because of that scenario.

I thought you said it was working great now. Does it really take 10 seconds to respond after being idle for 30 minutes? That seems excessive.

Dino