I believe some of the items you listed are bugs. I have the same issue with the noise on cheaper preamps (if you can call $1500 cheap). I don't believe you will ever see any of them addressed. See [Link: remotecentral.com] from 2008; last post.

My MX-980 is with both IR/RF laggy (I have the MRF-260). Also the repeat issue is here, which I had to fix by unchecking the 'Repeat while button is pressed' box (with the obvious side effect to not to be able to press and hold anymore). Otherwise, it sometimes navigates 2 positions up/down.

My other remote, MX-350 has none of these issues. It's as fast as lightning.

The status led of the MRF-260 is clearly showing the immidiate response of the MX-350 and the lag of the MX-980.

I wonder if the reported double repeats rs-232 issues (I saw a few of them on this forum) are the MSC-400 fault or the MX-980 fault...

How I wish CCP weren't so poorly designed and implemented. Right now I'm wrestling with trying to get my setup to write to the remote properly. It says it's successful but when the remote reboots it has some other setup, likely a demo setup of some sort containing a bunch of devices I don't have and using different graphics, etc.

No idea how that's even possible if the remote is being erased as the new download takes place. Frustrating.

I forget the exact sequence but there is a 3-finger salute for the 980 which will blank it out. It sometimes helps. It's on the mini-help pamphlet you get with it. If you can't find it I will try to find mine (who knows where it is).

I've been able to get the remote programmed by restarting the computer (virtual machine) and rebooting the remote (reset button or remove and replace battery).

Now the biggest issue is a long-standing one where some 24bit PNG images will sometimes show a solid background depending on where they're positioned on the screen and what other images they overlap or are overlapped by. Haven't been able to figure out rhyme or reason yet.

A few things I find curiously (and annoyingly) absent from CCP and MSC-400:


Swap relay state - there's ON and there's OFF, but no ability to swap or reverse the current state whatever it may be. Obviously this wouldn't be applicable to momentary relay settings.

Workaround - set variables when setting state and then use conditionals to change the state based on the variable value.

Relay-based conditionals - there's no way to check the state of a relay with IF..Else statements.

Workaround - need to set a variable to track state.


Annoying in general about CCP (this is a fundamental design issue and not likely to every be corrected):

Since all commands in CCP are Macros, there really should be a repeat property for the whole macro, not just individual learned and database IR commands. When you have multiple steps in a macro, it's not valid to set a "repeat when holding" property on the individual step - that's either a whole macro property or a property for each part of a macro divided by a time-baed if..else

AFAIK, it's impossible to construct a repeating multi-step macro, including a very simple one containing nothing but an IR command and a delay. Only the very first command/step of the macro that has a repeat when pressed property will actually repeat. The other steps will execute once.

More confirmation that minimum repeat has always been broken on the MX-980 and likely as far back as the MX-900 at least. This post is from 2008:
[Link: remotecentral.com]

Just finished testing some commands for the Apple Remote where it's obvious that built-in database commands are transmitted much faster than those imported via universal browser or from cleanly generated Pronto Hex.

Built-in command:
-starts transmitting almost immediately when the button is pressed.
-transmits one-time code and TWO repeat/sustain codes - this is the standard behavior for NEC-style codes. aka "repeat 3 times"

Imported command:
-there is a slight delay before the IR starts
- transmits one-time code and FOUR repeat/sustain codes - this is wrong and produces an extra button press on Apple TV.

In both cases, as mentioned before, adjusting minimum repeat has no effect once programmed to the MX-980. It only works when testing from CCP. It's absolutely mind-boggling that this immensely important basic feature is broken. The MX-980 requires some serious work-arounds and learning hacks to allow it to reliably work with any device that's sensitive enough that these extra repeats will either produce too much or not enough input.

Or you could create 2 macros: 1 for relay ON and 1 for relay OFF and drop those into a new macro using the Toggle feature.


URC Voltage sensor. You have 6 ports on the back for those.

A toggle doesn't provide a workaround to tracking state, so it's possible that you'll issue he command with no effect. Setting ON when the relay is already ON. And you don't need to nest macros to toggle a relay, you can just create a single toggle macro with relay on and off in it. :)

You're right about using the voltage sensors though. I could jump a wire from the relay to one of the sensors to know when it's energized. I just shouldn't have to.

I'm not sure if my situation is related or not. But I'm getting the same sluggishness with my 980 when I have both IR and RF enabled. I'm using an MRF-350 base station.

After extensive testing it appears to me that there is definitely some sort of RF issue with the 980. I’ve tested it on at least three devices. My Motorola DCX-3400 cable box, Oppo BDP83, and my Integra 9.8 processor. I’ve gone into the setup menus on the Oppo and the Integra as that’s the easiest way to check the 980's response. I just scroll through the channel's menu on the Motorola.

In each case with IR/RF enabled I get the same sluggishness on all three devices. I get about a 1/4 to 1/2 second delay after the button press before the command registers on the device. This is becoming quite frustrating! I also have an MX-900 which is also set to both IR and RF and works perfectly on both of these devices. There's no lag at all! All commands are executed instantaneously. Changing the repeats up or down on the 980 has no effect on the response time.

I’ve also tried assigning specific ports to all three devices to no avail. I also unplugged the power to the MRF-350 to make sure there was no other interference going on. I get the same issue even when it's completely out of the picture. The only thing that eliminates the sluggishness is to disable RF and use IR only. Obviously this is not a workable solution.

I'm hoping this is not a bug in the 980 with RF as indicated by other discussions on similar issues. Tell me it ain't so!

Anyone else experiencing this issue? Keep in mind I've taken the RF base station completely out of the picture! If no one else is experiencing this I'm guessing I must have a defective remote.

I have experienced this on my own 980 from about 6-8weeks ago. My work around at the moment is I uninstalled CCP and reinstalled and did not live update. The remote definitely got more responsive. It still has erratic RF performance(not interference related) though. Sometimes it's quick, other times not so much... Still haven't updated CCP on my home laptop.

URC issued an escalation # for it when I originally told them about the issue.

I wonder if it's the same escalation report they gave me. You should call them and ask them for the escalation report number. I just talked to them again this morning and they told me the report number was "ESC-911".

I'm not at all confident that they are making this any kind of a priority. I also posted a comment here about this issue as well.

[Link: remotecentral.com]

TwistedMelon...just an FYI, you're claiming you have no RF interference on your 2 RFX-250s. How would you know this? First of all, 2 antennae in that small of a space is absolutely not necessary and may be contributing to the problem. Second, you can't test for RF interference with an MSC-400. Just because you don't see the LED lit up while not pressing a button doesn't mean there is no RF interference. You need to get an MRF-350 base station and test on channel zero. There's no way to do this with an MSC-400.

I suspect many of your issues are RF interference related. We have several dozen MX-980/MSC-400 combinations in the field and have had only one case where we couldn't solve the interference and cross talk between rooms...the solution was to use a mix of 418 and 433 product. And in no cases have we needed more than one antenna for a space that small.

Actually this is not entirely true. If there is RF interference, the RFX-250 antenna will show activity on its led regardless of RFID setting.

It will flicker when a button is being pressed and it will flicker when/if there is interference.

And yes, having 2 antennas in a close space is not only unnecessary - but usually will be very derogatory to performance. It can cause a lot of latency issues, blown commands, etc...