I was just checking out the ZRP6 2way drivers for the receivers. Pretty unimpressed. With a lot of the receivers having IP control I figured it would be a cheap way to give iphone and web control of clients systems.

There are already a couple applications to control the Integra/Onkyo line of product from php so if you could have the ZRP6 triggered from a system variable you could have a lot of control over your system. I would use this for a bunch of stuff like automating itunes and pandora from a web browser. Of course I can do this now and am looking into it. But inevitably give someone the feature to turn a few things on from their computer/iphone and they will want more.

XP8 is just over kill for most of my installs. In fact the RP6 is over kill for a lot of them. But I would push the ZRP6 if it had this feature. I would still even use the 433 remotes. I emailed RTI requesting this. Hopefully it is a driver issue and not a hardware one.

Well, adding a web interface would just jack up the price. This is after all, just the replacement of the RP-6 with some very nice upgrades. There might be something else coming out between the ZRP-6 and the XP-8 soon.

I'm not talking about adding a web interface on the ZRP6. If they had inputs as a system variable you could write your own. Really I wouldn't less likely make a web server and probably just an application. Maybe an adobe AIR program so it would be cross platform. I think controlling your stereo from your laptop is a big thing and this would allow for a greater deal of control.

I could update a IP based a/v receiver and then have the ZRP6 send the rest of the macros based on the system variable. Ideally I'd just like to be able to send IP commands to the ZRP6 and and have it send the IR macros to the devices. But RTI has stated they don't plan on IP drivers for the ZRP6. And they don't even have an IP macro driver for the XP8 .

The Prodigy supposedly has a web interface but I've never seen it. I really see Prodigy as a big threat to RTI especially when the PTX3 becomes available.

OK, so network interface, not web interface, my mistake, but still something that would just add cost to a unit that they were trying to sell at the same price as the RP-6.

haha. I'm not asking for network interface. it would be nice and it does have network jack available. All I want is useful 2-way. I want the system trigger available to be a useful feature in the ZRP6. Right now its just flashy crap I could care less about.

I don't want the volume level to pop up on my T2C when I increase the volume. I'd rather have the ZRP6 track the input on my receiver and fire off macros based on that. And to say it would add to the cost URC, C4 and Prodigy all have control processors at the ZRP6 level that are far more capable than the ZRP6. And if RTI wants to stay relevant especially with there hardware issues I think they need to make the ZRP6 have a little more capability. I hope it is a driver issue and not a hardware issue.

Then why are you even bothering with RTI? Why not just stick with URC, C4, and Prodigy?


Here's another reason for you to move on to someone else.

I like their remotes. I like ID. Maybe you don't know what a system variable is with RTI? that could be your confusion on my post. I would like to see the ZRP6 be able to run a macro when the receiver changes. This would allow me to do some of the things you can do with the other lines. I could continue to support RTI which I would like to do.

I was also hoping to hear from someone who has asked if this is just a driver issue and not a hardware issue. And maybe share my idea of triggering macros from iphone/web or whatever. Currently you can do this with the XP-8. You can send macros based on changes from a receiver. So with a $600 Integra 20.1 you could control the inputs via IP and then send off macros to the rest of your equipment. I think having that in the ZRP6 would be awesome because the XP-8 would be over kill in a smaller system but with the popularity of laptops giving control over the system in some form on the laptop is a great feature to offer clients.

Being able to control RTI from your computer is in the works.

The ZRP6 also won't execute a macro based on the sense inputs.  Seems like they may have intentionally crippled a few features so you have to step up to an XP-8. 

Just my opinion; I'm not basing that on any facts.

it depends on 2way driver of course, but for sure it works. I use Denon AVR driver with ZRP-6 and i am able to test system variables (i.g. on/off a.s.o.) and trigger macros or page flips/links and other stuff.
I don't know this is what are you searching for, if not, please clarify.

Anyway, i also would like some improvements of the ZRP-6 in the future:
Controlling via IP (like XP8)
2 way driver controlling devices via IP (like XP8)
Events (like XP8)
Maybe RTI implement this as a feature for extra charge

This is what I am talking about when I setup the driver the only inputs I saw were tuner on a few of them. I looked at the integra and there was only AM/FM Tuner for a System Variable test. Is there another way to do this? I see that it does test on/off but I didn't see input?

okay, now i understand!
Yep, the drivers seems to be in a start status, and doesn't support much functions. So, i think there is no way to test the system variables you want as long as enhanced drivers are available. XP8 drivers does, but it is to expensive as you mentioned above.
This leads in a lot of questions: Why have RTI used a different engine for ZRP-6/MRP-64? For cheaper reasons only?
Drivers have to been written twice - and this means twice and not only a compiler run in my opinion!

I was thinking about this over the weekend.  I don't think we'll see any of these features on a ZRP-6, but I hope I'm wrong...

Since the ZRP-6 is based on the RP-6 then it only has 1 macro engine.  That means there is no way for it to handle an external event without then adding additional "engines" or some sort of buffer.  If you were running a macro, then a 2-way device sent feedback that caused a "Driver Event", it would be missed because the ZRP-6 would be "busy".  Exactly the same way that the RP-6 does when you try to issue a command while it's executing a macro.  You would need a minimum of another processing engine PLUS a buffer to be able to handle incoming commands from remotes/in-walls AND feedback from devices that could trigger Events.  (I think...)

I think it would require a completely different kind of processor inside the ZRP-6 for it to be able to do anything that required a constant stream of info coming into it; whether it's Events from a 2-way driver, or sense inputs, or whatever.

That's a shame, because there are a lot of other options out there in that price range that do more.  I hope I'm wrong...

There are no events with the ZRP-6 so there is no need for additional IR engines (other than what you or I want of course). The 2-way stuff won't do anything other than indicate the state of the device or give limited feedback. The feedback is done in the processor and not the IR output.

What I'm saying is that the ZRP-6/RP-6 can only do one "thing" at a time.  It doesn't have the capability to respond to any external triggers (2-way driver, sense, etc) as it would interfere with the one "thing" it can do. 

You can do:

Send IR
Delay
Close relay
Check status of Marantz AVR
Send RS232
etc

in a linear fashion, one step after another.  But what would happen if a sense input went from Low to High in the middle of that and it was supposed to trigger a Sense Event?  It would get "missed".  Same thing would happen if a Marantz AVR was manually turned ON and you had a Driver Event that was supposed to execute a macro when that happened.  If the ZRP-6 was "busy" then where would your Driver Event macro go?  Nowhere.  It doesn't get queued, it doesn't stop whatever the processor is already doing, it just goes unnoticed.  So what would be the point in including Driver or Sense events?

My point is that I highly doubt a firmware update will allow the ZRP-6 to do Driver and Sense events in the future. (I was really hoping this was the case)  I was just explaining what I think is the reasoning behind the lack of included features.  I don't think the architecture exists... but I hope I'm wrong....