Page 2 of 2
Posted: Tue Feb 12, 2013 4:38 pm
by joseasd
alanrichey wrote:Are you using the Custom Remote for the bravoo+ or a built-in version ?
https://www.hifi-remote.com/forums/dload ... e_id=10647
That file.
Posted: Tue Feb 12, 2013 5:03 pm
by alanrichey
I have run out of ideas then. The CH- on the C2013 BIN file sends NEC1 Device:0 OBC:94 and my S2010 also sends that identical code. I cannot explian why the C2013 works and the S2010 doesn't.
Sorry
Posted: Tue Feb 12, 2013 8:29 pm
by joseasd
alanrichey wrote:I have run out of ideas then. The CH- on the C2013 BIN file sends NEC1 Device:0 OBC:94 and my S2010 also sends that identical code. I cannot explian why the C2013 works and the S2010 doesn't.
Sorry
is there a way to edit azbox bravoo+ bin adding the proper channel + that works for me in big sat DSR5000Slim and Axil AD600? (that way i could get the ability to change channels one by one at least)
Also all these STB make my az america reacts with some functions:
big sat DSR5000Slim
Rownsonic 154
Creation DTTR-2001
Radix DT30SCI
Axil AD600
Could this help to clarify if there's a common factor to help the "NEC1 0, whereas the s922 decoded as NEC1 1:127" matter?
Thanks.
Posted: Wed Feb 13, 2013 5:17 am
by alanrichey
Not really. Two of them decode as NEC 0 and the others decode as NEC 1.127. It isn't unusual for devices to react to 2 different protocols so that isn't surprising.
What doesn't make much sense is that NONE of the buttons on the s922 I provided you work. I can't explain that.
Posted: Tue Mar 26, 2013 12:34 pm
by joseasd
Thanks a lot for the guidance, i finally made it mysef and is fully working right now.
https://www.hifi-remote.com/forums/dload ... e_id=11808
Posted: Tue Mar 26, 2013 12:43 pm
by alanrichey
What was the problem ?
Posted: Tue Mar 26, 2013 12:51 pm
by joseasd
alanrichey wrote:What was the problem ?
My subdevice is 127 (yours is empty) and protocol is NECx2 (yours is nec 1) as it's shown on remotemaster
Same EFC,OBC, HEX.
I saved it as nec 1 but it shows me NECx2, dunno why is that.
That's the only difference i see between our files.
Posted: Tue Mar 26, 2013 1:40 pm
by alanrichey
OK that does make sense. We had already figured out that the sub-device was either 0 or 127. I await a correction from the real experts but as I understand it NEC1, NEXC2, NECx1 & NECx2 are VERY close relatives and can often be interchanged,