After 3 years using the MX-500 and reading the RC review I bought an MX-900.
One of its less endering qualities of the 500 was having to buy a One-for-all remote to enter 3-digit advance codes, then us it to teach the MX-500. I am now surprized to learn that, apparently, the MX-900 has this same "feature"!

Someone please tell me I'm wrong about this, but it looks like there are only 3 ways to get a 3-digit code into the MX-900. 1. accidently stumble across a function will work from one of the dozens of devices in the IR or universal browser and drag it onto the virtual remote, 2. find a file online that has the wanted code in it and is in a format that the MX editor can import, or 3. drag out my trusty OFA, enter the 3-digit code into it, and teach the MX-900. For someone who has already ferreted out the 3-digit code that works, none of these options is very appealing. Why doesn't URC all us to simply type in a known 3-digit code? Seems like a n0-braner to me.

Ed

What kind of three digit code?

If it's a One-For-All code, then it's proprietary to One-For-All remotes.

Most discrete codes are in the MX-900 database. If not, you can generally find them in another database in one of URC's formats or as a CCF or in hex codes...check the "Files" section of the site.

3 digit codes are not a standard.

Called variously discrete codes or advanced codes, as far as I can tell. When I got the MX-500 I did a lot of digging to find ones for to work the P-ON and P-Off kinds of things for my legacy components. For example, I found I could select a code for a Sony Audio unit from the built-in list on my MX-500 that worked well except for all but P-ON and P-OFF. I then dug out the codes 113 and 109 from the JP1 site and confirmed that they worked.


These may not be standard, but they work.

What would keep URC from giving me the ability to poke these codes into my MX-900 directly rather than going through the exercise of finding them again in the context of some other file? It just baffles me. Also, even if they ARE in the MX-900 databaso, how do I find them? There are dozens of Sony Audio units, excepting of course my ancient STR-D990, plus all the SONY-1, SONY-2, etc., with no hint of which one might contain the 2 codes I need. Do I try them one by one?

Anyway, thanks for your comments. I do appreciate them. I guess I'm still smarting from laying out $250 and finding that the MX-900 is not all that much better in the very resoect that I found the MX-500 to be lacking.

Ed

ed

almost every code you could want is in the database

as for your opinion ofthe 900, your off base. there are vERY few codes not in the database.

list your gear and we can probably tell you where to look.

The 3-digit codes you're referring to are specific references to a database of IR code families. That database is owned and maintained by a competitor of URC, so we are not able to reference that database without our competitor's permission. Given that they've spent a very large sum of money to build their database (as we have), it's highly unlikely that they would be the slightest bit interested in licensing access to their database to us.

The database our competitor uses is designed and suited for its line of consumer-oriented remotes. The URC database is intended primarily for our line of remotes that are designed to be programmed by professional home theater installers.

It's sort of like if you've ever looked in an auto mechanic's toolbox: you see lots of tools in there that don't make any sense, and you wonder why you can't easily find the wrench, hammer, and screwdriver you're looking for. The mechanic has knowledge you and I don't have, and his specialized set of tools let him do his work better and faster because he knows how each of those tools apply to the brand of car he services.

The same is true with MX-Editor and the MX-900. It was designed to be programmed by professionals, not by end users. Those professionals have access to programming manuals and training programs that teach them to quickly and professionally program these products using MX-Editor and the MX-900. While there are certainly end-users who are capable of programming these products, they are not the market the products are designed for.

In your case, the missing piece of information is probably one of the fundamental programming concepts that all URC installers know: There are so many models of AV gear out there, the database would be much harder to use if it listed every single model. Instead, the database lists key models that represent entire lines of products from the same manufacturer, all using the same set of IR codes. URC installers know through training and documentation that if you're programming an "XYZ-1001" TV and it doesn't appear in the database, it's very likely that the code IR set for the "XYZ-1000" contains all of the IR codes for the "XYZ-1001" and, most of the time, some codes that weren't even on the original remote.

Experienced installers even know that certain brands are privately manufactured by other companies, and therefore use IR codes sets from those other companies. In some cases, such a "brand hop" can even provide functionality to a product that the company that sold it never intended.

So in answer to the question of "why doesn't URC make it easier," the answer is, "we did." Because installers program the vast majority of these products, we designed them to make it easiest for the installer, with his specialized tool set and training, to program the remotes for his clients.

Best regards,
Dale

Thanks.

I have no doubt the codes are there somewhere, it's just a question of where.

As I said, the particular component in question is the Sony STR-D990, circa 1994.
The closest model number I can find in the database made available in the MX-900 editor is STR-D965. That provides a lot of functionality, but leaves me with the familiar problem of P-ON and P-OFF. The TUNER soft button will turn it on, and once on either the hard OFF or ON will turn it off. I went through this with the MX-500 and learned that discrete codes for power were available on the STR-D990, and I found them. Since the remote that came with the STR-D990 does NOT support the discrete power functions, I had to buy an OFA, poke the codes into it, and then use it to teach the MX-500. I can do that again with the MX-900, of course, but thought it strange to have to use a competitor's $20 remote to program the MX-900. (From other replies I now understand why that is, so no need to go into this issue.)

But, if you do know how I can find the P-ON/P-OFF for the STR-D990 in the MX Editor database, I would much appreciate your telling me. The documentation says if the exact model number isn't there one should use a generic one, e.g., SONY 1, SONY 2, ... SONY 41. By looking at the functions of those one by one I can find some that list discrete P-ON & P-OFF, but it looks like if I chose one of those instead of the STR-D965 I would lose a lot of other functionality. I'm thinking there must be a way to extract just the P-ON and P-OFF and insert them, like one can do with the OFA. Still haven't figured out how to do that though.

Again, thanks for you help. I do appreciate it, and I do like the MX-900 in many ways.

Ed

Thanks for the long and thoughtful reply, Dale. I'm beginning to get the picture. it still puzzles me though why URC can't do something like the JP1 folks have done. I mean, you don't have to incorporate the entire OFA database, just make it ease for a person to use a code that he has found elsewhere. Or, maybe I'm still missing something.

I do understand URC's business plan, emphasizing the professional installer. But, there are many people that, perhaps wrongly, would like th think they are capable of doing it themselves. In my case, I have over 40 years of computer programing experience, and I did learn how to program my VCR :-). I als do a lot of my own maintenance on my Jaguar V-12. So, i will continue to try to learn to program the MX-900, and I may be so bold as to offer URC free advice on how to make it a better product. For starters, if I ever figure it out I'll be glad to help you improve the documentation.

Ed,

There are a couple things you can do to find the codes you need.

One method is to start with a blank slate for a remote file and program all the sony codes into devices. Then test each one for the codes you are looking for. You might want to try all the keys on the remotes because a 'DVD' key on one might be an 'on' on another. Companies try to keep things the same but sometimes they are limited by the equipment's memory (especially with older units) and might have had to make some substitutions on their code numbers do to space limitations. Try all the power and on/off codes first obviously.

Another methos is to use the remotes IRDB navigator and test the codes you want to try right from the database while the remote is connected to your computer. I would try this method first as it is probably quicker. But, if you are going to test a lot of codes loading all the devices and going through the remote is probably faster.

If you find the code you can just drag it onto a key or into macro from the IRDB navigator. Or you could just have two audio devices and keep the one with the discrete codes 'hidden' so as not to confuse anyone using the system.

Also check if the code exists on a Pronto and use the universal browser to bring it in.

There is probably a good chance you'll be able to find the code.

Bob

You've already found all you need, just haven't realized it. Populate the remote with codes from multiple databases. Use the codes for STR-D965 for all buttons except power on and off, then drag the discreet on/off codes from the other generic Sony databases.

It's a pretty simple matter to test the discreen on/off codes, find the ones that work and drag them to new buttons. While you're at it, you might also find some other useful codes that don't exist in consumer databases.

hes going to find it tough tracking down EXACT codes for a 14 year old unit. I doubt it has discrete power codes. I'd sugest, as previously mentions, start with a blank templatye and load 30 codesets into the remote. Then test for proper functioning. Knowing that discrete on and off probably arent available, find work arounds. you mentions an input turns it on. Then discrete on could be one of those inputs. Power off woud be one of those inputs - delay - power. Im sure almost any of the power codes will work.

I'd suggest testing codes for ALL devices first. Then build a design for your system. AFTER and ONLY AFTER all indivudal codes are found and known to work then build macros.

THEN and ONLY THEN, attempt to work with RF.

If you dont follow some structure you will be quickly frustrated.

to recap.
Find codes needed for all desired functions. Verify proper operation of codes
Build template in logical fashion
Build macros and test delays, logic, etc
Work on RF use.
Hide all pages and codes that everyday users dont need to have access to.

Need a file for example? Send me an email.

I'd also consider replacing that Sony unit for something made in this millenium.

Sony codes are pretty universal for quite some years now. I did a couple sony receivers recently that didn't have on and off codes in the database under their respective model numbers. I did find them under another receiver, a higher end model number. Nice thing about URC remotes is if you have the remote connected to the usb cable and the software running you can test codes without ever updating the remote.

The 3 digit codes you are refering to are specific to the manufacturer of a remote. They are not an industry standard. There for 001 may be a sony tv with UEI but it may be something else with another remote. You can't be pissed at URC for not doing something that would be very unreasonable for them to do given they have a good set of codes as it is and an easy way to add codes.

Thanks. One problem I have is a non-functioning USB port on laptop...
a hardware problem unfixable at reasonable cost. But, I could create a seperate "device" for all SONY n alternatives, download, disconnect, and sit down in front of the system. However, I instead just "learned" them from the MX-500 that
I had taught from an OFA.

I did, finally, pick up on the drag-and-drop method. Usually, that is provided as a alternative to cut/paste. The latter is conventionally implemented on a menu so a new user can stumble arounf and figure it out. The proplem with just having drag-and-drop is there is no on-screen clue that that is what one is supposed to do. It is in the users manual, but one gets in the habit of not looking at the UM untill all else has failed. IOW, RTFM has largely been forgotten as a learning paridigm, except at URC.

I will get through this, as I did with the MX-500.

Ed

Thanks, Bob. I've used that approach with some success now.

Ed

Thanks. Your comments are helpful and I appreciate them.

In fact, the STR-990 does have discrete codes. I worked long and hard to find
them when I programmed the MX-500. I finally gave up searching the
MX-900 DB and just "learned" them form the MX-500.


I assume you mean from the MX-900 DB. That's the hard part.
I do know how now, but found it easier to learn from the MX-500 which I had taught
with an OFA.


That is a very generous offer. I truly appreciate it and may take you up on it
if I get really hung up. Righ now I'm just in the cry-baby stage!


That is in my future. However, it was set back a bit by paying $250 for a remote :-)

Ed

Thanks Hoggy,


One of my problems is the USB port on my laptop is broken... physically I mean.
So without buying a new laptom I have to download, disconnect, and walk into the
family room to test.


I am now absorbing the nature of the OFA codes. But, to be honest, I think that
is not an insurmountable problem if URC really wanted to make life easier for
consumers, and for that matter dealers. What I mean is AMD completely reverse engineers evry new Intel processor so that they are plug compatible. How difficult could it be to RE the OFA code protocols? OFA wouldn't like it, but it's perfectly legal so long as it's not done with info gotten by illegal means. Otherwise, there would b eno AMD processors and my macnine would be dead!

But, Im not really pissed at URC. I have loved the MX-500 the more I use the MX-900 tho more I like it. Always hoping for more....

Ed