 |
JP1 Remotes
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
eferz
Expert
Joined: 03 Jun 2010
Posts: 1078
Location: Austin, Texas
|
 Posted: Fri Mar 09, 2012 1:25 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| bnordman wrote: | | I verified the position of the IR blasters via a Skype video session. I didn't verify if the IR Blasters are firing. Can that be verified with a HD Cam via Skype? |
That would depend whether or not your webcam is sensitive to IR frequencies. One way to tell is to have someone point a remote control directly towards the webcam and press a button. Probably having the room with dim lighting would help. If it is then you'll see a flash of light from its emitter whenever the button is pressed. This is no different than how the Slingbox's IR Blasters works, so the operation would basically be the same to test it.
_________________
Remotes; JP1.2: Comcast URC-1067, JP1.3: Insignia NS-RC02U-10A, JP1.4 OARI06G, JP2.1: Cox URC-8820-MOTO (still trying to figure out how to make them self-aware.) |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
bnordman
Joined: 04 Mar 2012
Posts: 17
Location: OH / USA
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 10, 2012 10:40 am Post subject: |
|
|
| eferz wrote: | | That would depend whether or not your webcam is sensitive to IR frequencies. One way to tell is to have someone point a remote control directly towards the webcam and press a button. Probably having the room with dim lighting would help. If it is then you'll see a flash of light from its emitter whenever the button is pressed. This is no different than how the Slingbox's IR Blasters works, so the operation would basically be the same to test it. |
I just had this tested with a local digital camera and both, the remote as well as the two IR senders from the Slingbox show a visible signal output.
I also checked the positioning of the IR senders via a Skype session, which leads me to believe that the code is still not working properly. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
eferz
Expert
Joined: 03 Jun 2010
Posts: 1078
Location: Austin, Texas
|
| Posted: Sat Mar 10, 2012 12:42 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| bnordman wrote: | | I just had this tested with a local digital camera and both, the remote as well as the two IR senders from the Slingbox show a visible signal output. I also checked the positioning of the IR senders via a Skype session, which leads me to believe that the code is still not working properly. |
Thanks! Good to know. However to minimize the number of threads revolving around this issue. I'm going to lock this one temporarily until the one in the Slingbox forum titled, "HUMAX iHD-FOX C (KabelBW - Germany)" is resolved first. As I understand the upgrades for the Samsung SMT C5270 & Humax iHD-FOX C would be exactly the same anyways.
_________________
Remotes; JP1.2: Comcast URC-1067, JP1.3: Insignia NS-RC02U-10A, JP1.4 OARI06G, JP2.1: Cox URC-8820-MOTO (still trying to figure out how to make them self-aware.) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
vickyg2003
Site Admin
Joined: 20 Mar 2004
Posts: 7073
Location: Florida
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 12, 2012 1:51 pm Post subject: Re: Samsung SMT C5270 & Humax HD-FOX C |
|
|
I unlocked this post now that the Humax portion has been resolved.
Although this Samsung SMT C5270 appeared to be very similar to the Humax, the Humax version has a definite 'fixed' data portion that is the same across every function.
The samsung doesn't. If you compare something like the the zero in the Samsung to the zero in the Humax, you would think the protocols are the same (the Samsung learn qualities are very poor so if you just go with the timings you might think they are the same format. However the Samsung Power and the Menu buttons at least have very different "fixed data" than the Samsung numbers keys. So more work need to be done on the decode portion of this signal. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
eferz
Expert
Joined: 03 Jun 2010
Posts: 1078
Location: Austin, Texas
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 12, 2012 2:00 pm Post subject: Re: Samsung SMT C5270 & Humax HD-FOX C |
|
|
| vickyg2003 wrote: | Although this Samsung SMT C5270 appeared to be very similar to the Humax, the Humax version has a definite 'fixed' data portion that is the same across every function.
The samsung doesn't. If you compare something like the the zero in the Samsung to the zero in the Humax, you would think the protocols are the same (the Samsung learn qualities are very poor so if you just go with the timings you might think they are the same format. However the Samsung Power and the Menu buttons at least have very different "fixed data" than the Samsung numbers keys. So more work need to be done on the decode portion of this signal. |
Does both ICT files have poor quality learns?
If necessary, I can reload the IR profile into my Harmony and teach it to my OARI06G then upload its RMIR file for analysis.
_________________
Remotes; JP1.2: Comcast URC-1067, JP1.3: Insignia NS-RC02U-10A, JP1.4 OARI06G, JP2.1: Cox URC-8820-MOTO (still trying to figure out how to make them self-aware.)
Last edited by eferz on Mon Mar 12, 2012 2:54 pm; edited 2 times in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
vickyg2003
Site Admin
Joined: 20 Mar 2004
Posts: 7073
Location: Florida
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 12, 2012 2:53 pm Post subject: Re: Samsung SMT C5270 & Humax HD-FOX C |
|
|
| eferz wrote: | | vickyg2003 wrote: | Although this Samsung SMT C5270 appeared to be very similar to the Humax, the Humax version has a definite 'fixed' data portion that is the same across every function.
The samsung doesn't. If you compare something like the the zero in the Samsung to the zero in the Humax, you would think the protocols are the same (the Samsung learn qualities are very poor so if you just go with the timings you might think they are the same format. However the Samsung Power and the Menu buttons at least have very different "fixed data" than the Samsung numbers keys. So more work need to be done on the decode portion of this signal. |
Does both ICT files have poor quality learns?
If necessary, I can reload the IR profile into my Harmony and teach it to my OARI06G then upload its RMIR file for analysis. |
Some of Alan's signals have different fixed data. Yours has 83h for the third byte of the fixed data, Some of Alans has C1h (193) for the third byte. Look at the difference of the power button, or the Mute buttons.
I thought something different was going on with Alan's mute button, but after further consideration, I'm sure that the Mute button on Alan's ICT file is actually merging in to the next button.... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
eferz
Expert
Joined: 03 Jun 2010
Posts: 1078
Location: Austin, Texas
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 12, 2012 2:57 pm Post subject: Re: Samsung SMT C5270 & Humax HD-FOX C |
|
|
| vickyg2003 wrote: | | Some of Alan's signals have different fixed data. Yours has 83h for the third byte of the fixed data, Some of Alans has C1h (193) for the third byte. Look at the difference of the power button, or the Mute buttons. |
Hehe, all I see is <unknown>  So, all the buttons look the same to me.
| vickyg2003 wrote: | | I thought something different was going on with Alan's mute button, but after further consideration, I'm sure that the Mute button on Alan's ICT file is actually merging in to the next button.... |
I've updated my upload to v1.1 and appended an RMIR file of a OARI06G with learns from the a Harmony remote with the respective device profile installed. Hope it helps.
_________________
Remotes; JP1.2: Comcast URC-1067, JP1.3: Insignia NS-RC02U-10A, JP1.4 OARI06G, JP2.1: Cox URC-8820-MOTO (still trying to figure out how to make them self-aware.) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
vickyg2003
Site Admin
Joined: 20 Mar 2004
Posts: 7073
Location: Florida
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 12, 2012 4:47 pm Post subject: Re: Samsung SMT C5270 & Humax HD-FOX C |
|
|
| eferz wrote: | | vickyg2003 wrote: | | Some of Alan's signals have different fixed data. Yours has 83h for the third byte of the fixed data, Some of Alans has C1h (193) for the third byte. Look at the difference of the power button, or the Mute buttons. |
Hehe, all I see is <unknown> So, all the buttons look the same to me.
|
I hate to explain it this way, because most of the time we are looking at data pairs, but with the UEI version of the protocol we are looking at 100 units of time as either a 0 or a 1 depending on if the infrared is on or off.
If you look at this picture you can see that your and Alan's power toggle have different fixed data. The fixed data variation area is in the circle.
We can also see that the frequency of these learns is 50k, not the 56K we were seeing with the humax.
There is a toggle bit exactly where it was in the humax.
Uploaded with ImageShack.us
Given that the learns are coming from a database made up from learns from various users, I'm guessing that there probably are at least two different "unit codes" for this samsung and that we happened to capture both of them. The fact that the Harmony code has changed since Alan's captures, would lead me to believe that most of the units use the same fixed data as your captures. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
3FG
Expert
Joined: 19 May 2009
Posts: 3367
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 13, 2012 12:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
I haven't checked every button, but I believe that Earl's learns from the Harmony for the SMT C5270 and the Humax are identical. We already know that Alan's learns for the Humax are not good, although we don't know why. When these C5270 learns were first posted here, I spent some time trying to make sense of them. I made a histogram of durations for the entire set of learns, and concluded that the C5270 learns had no reliability. I don't know why these and the Humax learns which Alan did aren't good-- obviously Alan is more than capable at learning IR signals.
I think if you'll go to the trouble of checking several of the functions, you'll see that the fixed data of Alan's learns isn't constant among the functions. All in all, I don't see any reason to think the unit numbers or anything about the signals are different between the C5270 and the Humax.
Regarding the 50KHz versus 56KHz, as mentioned in the Humax thread, the Widget is simply not capable of measuring the frequency of this IR protocol accurately. The IR On duration is too short. The Widget is a very clever design, with excellent capability to record long signals, and to measure the number of transitions within each on burst. However, as is usual for things which are of modest cost, some tradeoffs are made. With the Widget, accurate frequency measurement is the tradeoff. For many IR protocols, the Widget will provide a nearly correct measurement. For example, the NEC IR protocol will be measured at very close to 37.5KHz. But if the real frequency is dropped, the Widget will continue to indicate 37.5KHz (or pretty close) until the real frequency drops to below 36.2KHz. Then the Widget will report 35KHz (or pretty close). The Sony protocol has an on duration of 1200uS, and it will tend to measured in steps of about 1KHz. This is just a consequence of the number of transitions (modulations) that can occur during an on burst. For the Humax protocol, there are only 5 transitions in 100uS (the maximum time for which the Widget can be sure that the burst was continuously on). For NEC, there are about 15 transitions in the measureable period of 400uS. For Sony, about 40 transitions in 1000uS.
The IR protocols with longer on durations can be measured for frequency more accurately. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
vickyg2003
Site Admin
Joined: 20 Mar 2004
Posts: 7073
Location: Florida
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 13, 2012 6:26 am Post subject: |
|
|
| 3FG wrote: | I haven't checked every button, but I believe that Earl's learns from the Harmony for the SMT C5270 and the Humax are identical. We already know that Alan's learns for the Humax are not good, although we don't know why. When these C5270 learns were first posted here, I spent some time trying to make sense of them. I made a histogram of durations for the entire set of learns, and concluded that the C5270 learns had no reliability. I don't know why these and the Humax learns which Alan did aren't good-- obviously Alan is more than capable at learning IR signals.
|
Yes, I think its a function of WHEN Alan did the learns. Its been explained to me that the harmony database is made up of user learns, and one would think they would improve over time. I know that if I learned the same set of signals on several of my UEI remotes they wouldn't be identical either. If I then "averaged" these learns in a database you'd see the histograms of durations wouldn't look reliable either.
| Quote: |
I think if you'll go to the trouble of checking several of the functions, you'll see that the fixed data of Alan's learns isn't constant among the functions. All in all, I don't see any reason to think the unit numbers or anything about the signals are different between the C5270 and the Humax.
|
Yes I did see that the functions were identical to the Humax learns and the Samsung learns. However even though the learns are not good, there is very clear evidence in Alan's lousy learns that there are several signals that were captured with a C1 instead of an 83 in the third byte of fixed data even thoug the function codes matched Earls learns of both the Humax and the Samsung. From that evidence I do believe that we should acknowledge that there just might be a second unit code for this equipment. Its really not that unusual or unprecidented.
| Quote: |
Regarding the 50KHz versus 56KHz, as mentioned in the Humax thread, the Widget is simply not capable of measuring the frequency of this IR protocol accurately. The IR protocols with longer on durations can be measured for frequency more accurately. |
It may be that some of the harmony's used to capture the signals were not capable of capturing 56k either, but do note that Earl used the OneforAll to capture the harmony signals and found them to also capture at 50k.
We do have Alan's Humax signals which showed 50K too, which could very well be an indication that some of the Harmonys just are not 56k capable.
However I also helped somebody, on an unrelated protocol. They had the same brand of TV upstairs and downstairs. There captured signals indicated they both used the same NEC1 device.subdevice.obc, but the upgrade didn't work for the upstairs tv. Upon inspection of the original learns from both TVs I found that one was shooting at 36k and the other at 56k (or something like that). So historically I've seen the same set of OBC's shot at very different frequencies.
I'll wait until someone comes back with the Samsung, so that we can test this theory, but it should be noted that there is a chance that we need a second frequency and/or a second unit code to get this to respond to a remote.
Last edited by vickyg2003 on Wed Mar 14, 2012 5:27 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
3FG
Expert
Joined: 19 May 2009
Posts: 3367
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 13, 2012 10:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
| vickyg2003 wrote: |
It may be that some of the harmony's used to capture the signals were not capable of capturing 56k either, but do note that Earl used the OneforAll to capture the harmony signals and found them to also capture at 50k.
We do have Alan's Humax signals which showed 50K too, which could very well be an indication that some of the Harmonys just are not 56k capable.
|
So far as I know, there is only one set of UEI learns of the SMT C5270. That shows 56KHz. All of the Humax UEI learns also show 56KHz.
I think we know that Harmonies, Widgets, and UEI remotes are all capable of learning 56KHz (and even higher frequency) signals. The issue with the Widget revolves around IR signals for which the duration of the On burst is short. This Humax IR protocol has very short On durations (211uS max), and the Widget can only estimate the signal frequency as 40KHz, 50KHz, or 60KHz, corresponding to 4, 5, or 6 transitions during the 100uS interval. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
vickyg2003
Site Admin
Joined: 20 Mar 2004
Posts: 7073
Location: Florida
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 13, 2012 7:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| 3FG wrote: | | vickyg2003 wrote: |
It may be that some of the harmony's used to capture the signals were not capable of capturing 56k either, but do note that Earl used the OneforAll to capture the harmony signals and found them to also capture at 50k.
We do have Alan's Humax signals which showed 50K too, which could very well be an indication that some of the Harmonys just are not 56k capable.
|
So far as I know, there is only one set of UEI learns of the SMT C5270. That shows 56KHz. All of the Humax UEI learns also show 56KHz.
|
And I am seeing 50Hz in that file, in both the the ICT and the UEI.
I think the "Humax" signals we saw from from Alan are from the same source as his Samsung signals. They both have the funky Mute where the fixed data changes from frame 1 to frame 2. His Humax has the C1 in byte 3 in several of the signals. All that combined with the running at 50Hz the same as the SMT C5270 signals above makes me think that somewhere along the line the Alan's Humax signals were really his Samsung SMT C5270.
Once we had your breakdown of the signals, we can see that the Samsung is striving to follow the same timing pattern, but is running at a lower frequency. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
3FG
Expert
Joined: 19 May 2009
Posts: 3367
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 13, 2012 9:38 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| vickyg2003 wrote: | | And I am seeing 50Hz in that file, in both the the ICT and the UEI. |
And you are seeing correctly and I was not. Yes, the UEI learns show up as 50KHz.
The UEI official executor only shoots 56KHz, so we could make one that also does 50KHz, but I don't think we have any way to test it. I believe that bnordman was only interested in the C5270 because it may have helped with his Humax. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
eferz
Expert
Joined: 03 Jun 2010
Posts: 1078
Location: Austin, Texas
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 13, 2012 10:03 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| 3FG wrote: | | vickyg2003 wrote: | | And I am seeing 50Hz in that file, in both the the ICT and the UEI. |
And you are seeing correctly and I was not. Yes, the UEI learns show up as 50KHz.
The UEI official executor only shoots 56KHz, so we could make one that also does 50KHz, but I don't think we have any way to test it. I believe that bnordman was only interested in the C5270 because it may have helped with his Humax. |
To misquote The Field of Dreams, "If you build it, they will come." I've posted in the Sling Media Technical Support forum that possible support is available for this device, so if there's one available for testing then someone will eventually be along to test it.
_________________
Remotes; JP1.2: Comcast URC-1067, JP1.3: Insignia NS-RC02U-10A, JP1.4 OARI06G, JP2.1: Cox URC-8820-MOTO (still trying to figure out how to make them self-aware.) |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
vickyg2003
Site Admin
Joined: 20 Mar 2004
Posts: 7073
Location: Florida
|
| Posted: Wed Mar 14, 2012 5:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
| 3FG wrote: | | vickyg2003 wrote: | | And I am seeing 50Hz in that file, in both the the ICT and the UEI. |
And you are seeing correctly and I was not. Yes, the UEI learns show up as 50KHz.
The UEI official executor only shoots 56KHz, so we could make one that also does 50KHz, but I don't think we have any way to test it. I believe that bnordman was only interested in the C5270 because it may have helped with his Humax. |
Oh good, I'm glad we are on the same page. We may have two slightly different protocols here, and need to tweak the official 01DD protocol to run at 50hz. Thanks to you we can read the signal, and thanks to Rob we have the OBCs. However at this point its just academic, because we don't have a tester.
| eferz wrote: | | To misquote The Field of Dreams, "If you build it, they will come." I've posted in the Sling Media Technical Support forum that possible support is available for this device, so if there's one available for testing then someone will eventually be along to test it. |
Thanks Earl, that's just what we need. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
File Section
Wiki
