[JBS]

We're looking at having a Crestron A/V distribution system (6 input/ 15 output) professionally installed. This would include Crestron CNX-PAD8 (audio), CNX-PVID8x3 (video), CNX-B12 keypads and MC3 controller.


The problem we're running into is that we don't want the seven TV zone remotes to require charging bases, and we don't like the button layout on the new Crestron MLX3 remote (which isn't even shipping yet). So we were looking at the URC MX900.... which presents a whole new round of issues.


We thought the URC MX900 would send simple IR commands back to the Crestron processor and source components through the CNRFGWA (433MHz) as suggested by someone else. But the installer, who is very knowledgeable, says:

• Crestron only works with RC5 commands, so he would have to program the MX900 with RC5 commands, and convert the RC5 commands back to proper IR signals in the MC3 before sending out to the source components (satellite, dvd, etc.)
• The MX900 would not communicate with the CNRFGWA so we will have to use an IR emitter/receiver interface (CNXRMRID) to connect to the MC3. That seems like a "weak link" for reliability.

Is there something I'm missing, or is Crestron just not made for interfacing with other mfgr remotes?

 

[Neurorad]

Search and/or ask nicely here at the remotecentral.com Crestron subforum. I haven't seen any Crestron installers here at AVS the last several days, but they'll eventually show up if you're patient - and the ones who frequent AVS may be more helpful.

http://www.remotecentral.com/cgi-bin...stron/list.cgi

 

[fletch999]

The URC just send trigger codes to the Crestron processor which then translate that to Crestron land. Its done quite commonly. A reasonable cost solution when no 2-way feed back is required. RTI remotes can also accomplish this same function.


One question to you. Why a PVID? Component video is on its way out at some point in time, maybe not terribly soon, but its worth thinking about. A DM system is about the best and most current technologically, video distribution system out there, albeit not cheap. But, if you are already going down the Crestron path, why buy 10 year old technology that you may have to replace in 1 or 2 or 5 years?

 

[fletch999]

See post #5 in this thread:

http://www.remotecentral.com/cgi-bin...&highlight=urc

 

[ifor]



Quote:
Originally Posted by fletch999 /forum/post/20770830


See post #5 in this thread:

http://www.remotecentral.com/cgi-bin...&highlight=urc

The new URC "i" remotes use the 433MHz frequency range but Crestron has a 433MHz gateway for this.

The original remotes still use the 418MHz freq and can use the Crestron 418 gateway.

 

[ifor]



Quote:
Originally Posted by JBS /forum/post/20770203


We're looking at having a Crestron A/V distribution system (6 input/ 15 output) professionally installed. This would include Crestron CNX-PAD8 (audio), CNX-PVID8x3 (video), CNX-B12 keypads and MC3 controller.


The problem we're running into is that we don't want the seven TV zone remotes to require charging bases, and we don't like the button layout on the new Crestron MLX3 remote (which isn't even shipping yet). So we were looking at the URC MX900.... which presents a whole new round of issues.


We thought the URC MX900 would send simple IR commands back to the Crestron processor and source components through the CNRFGWA (433MHz) as suggested by someone else. But the installer, who is very knowledgeable, says:

• Crestron only works with RC5 commands, so he would have to program the MX900 with RC5 commands, and convert the RC5 commands back to proper IR signals in the MC3 before sending out to the source components (satellite, dvd, etc.)
• The MX900 would not communicate with the CNRFGWA so we will have to use an IR emitter/receiver interface (CNXRMRID) to connect to the MC3. That seems like a "weak link" for reliability.

Is there something I'm missing, or is Crestron just not made for interfacing with other mfgr remotes?

I suggested the CP2E controller, why change this?


Or... keep the MC3 because it wont matter as the gateway bypasses the ir for rf and the RC5 ir commands wont matter.


Why wont the MX900 communicate with the gateway?


Do you not like the Crestron ML-600 remote? It is made by URC

 

[herdfan]



Quote:
Originally Posted by JBS /forum/post/20770203


The problem we're running into is that we don't want the seven TV zone remotes to require charging bases, and we don't like the button layout on the new Crestron MLX3 remote (which isn't even shipping yet). So we were looking at the URC MX900.... which presents a whole new round of issues.

While not exactly answering your question, have you considered the MX-880? Much better ergonomics and looks. Does not require a charging cradle, but instead just uses a plug. The one in the MBR lasts 2 weeks on a charge, the living room 3-4 days. I drop the cord behind my night stand and pull it up when needed. The 880 is functionally the same as the 900, so whatever the 900 can do, the 880 can do. Plus it can be operated while plugged in.

 

[JBS]



Quote:
Originally Posted by fletch999 /forum/post/20770816


One question to you. Why a PVID? Component video is on its way out at some point in time, maybe not terribly soon, but its worth thinking about. A DM system is about the best and most current technologically, video distribution system out there, albeit not cheap. But, if you are already going down the Crestron path, why buy 10 year old technology that you may have to replace in 1 or 2 or 5 years?

Not sure what you mean by a "DM system" ...HDMI switcher?


We are switching RGB Component video feeds with the PVID to two zones with large (50"+) HD tv's. The rest of the zones are only prewired with coax and cat5, and have tv's of 20" or less -- so we didn't feel composite would be that objectionable. We did consider HDMI distribution, but the length of feeds require encoding/decoding of some type, and the Crestron installer is not comfortable with the reliability and handshaking of HDMI for 80' runs.

 

[JBS]



Quote:
Originally Posted by herdfan /forum/post/20771130


While not exactly answering your question, have you considered the MX-880? Much better ergonomics and looks. Does not require a charging cradle, but instead just uses a plug. The one in the MBR lasts 2 weeks on a charge, the living room 3-4 days. I drop the cord behind my night stand and pull it up when needed. The 880 is functionally the same as the 900, so whatever the 900 can do, the 880 can do. Plus it can be operated while plugged in.

We looked at the 880, and preferred the 980 which I would instantly choose if we were talking about only one or two remotes. But to have 7 of them in different rooms around the house, including the guest suite means a huge hassle in making sure they are always on a charger base or plug.


It's a practical decision, not a choice [wife's opinion - and she's right

].

 

[JBS]



Quote:
Originally Posted by ifor /forum/post/20771113


I suggested the CP2E controller, why change this?


Or... keep the MC3 because it wont matter as the gateway bypasses the ir for rf and the RC5 ir commands wont matter.


Why wont the MX900 communicate with the gateway?


Do you not like the Crestron ML-600 remote? It is made by URC

With seven zone remotes, I would like to be able to update the programming when a local (IR controlled) component is changed. I can do that with URC, but not easily with a Crestron remote.


I'm just told that the MX900 will not communicate directly with the CNRFGWA (418 or 433MHz) because it's not sending Crestron codes. So it has to connect with RC5 codes and have programming in the MC3 to convert the RC5 code to necessary hex IR codes. It might just be the way their program template is written. The CP2E doesn't have adequate memory for their template Crestron program.

 

[fletch999]

DM is Crestron's Digital Media video switching system.

http://www.crestron.com/products/dig..._distribution/


It flat out works. HDMI over 80' is no issue, even with a non-DM solution. HDMI extenders have come a long way.


AFAIK, there should be no issue with MX900/980 communicating with Crestron RF gateways.

 

[ifor]



Quote:
Originally Posted by JBS /forum/post/20771287


With seven zone remotes, I would like to be able to update the programming when a local (IR controlled) component is changed. I can do that with URC, but not easily with a Crestron remote.


I'm just told that the MX900 will not communicate directly with the CNRFGWA (418 or 433MHz) because it's not sending Crestron codes. So it has to connect with RC5 codes and have programming in the MC3 to convert the RC5 code to necessary hex IR codes. It might just be the way their program template is written. The CP2E doesn't have adequate memory for their template Crestron program.

Crestron RF codes are in the URC database.

 

[cpchillin]

Here's what you need to know. URC can talk to the Crestron processor. The Crestron programmer should be the one who at first programs the URC remotes also. If done right you will have the ability to change out programming for "local" components controlled via IR by the URC remote. So if you change a TV or DVD player you can update the URC remote for that change. You will need a list of the macros on the Crestron processor and the join number that triggers that macro. Be prepared to pay more for this info and be 100% honest about your intentions from the start.


What you are asking for happens everyday so it should be easy for the Crestron programmer. If he makes it seem like integrating the URC with the Crestron is hard then find another programmer. Good luck.

 

[JBS]



Quote:
Originally Posted by cpchillin /forum/post/20794132


Here's what you need to know. URC can talk to the Crestron processor. The Crestron programmer should be the one who at first programs the URC remotes also. If done right you will have the ability to change out programming for "local" components controlled via IR by the URC remote. So if you change a TV or DVD player you can update the URC remote for that change. You will need a list of the macros on the Crestron processor and the join number that triggers that macro. Be prepared to pay more for this info and be 100% honest about your intentions from the start.

No problem as the dealer & installer have already committed to providing an uncompiled copy of the project program files. However, if I'm controlling the local zone components via IR from the URC remotes, then why do I need a list of the macros on the Crestron processor (and the join number)?