JP1 Remotes

Hi guys,

I have recently received a remote (URC-9660) and JP1 cable from rob - so i just getting into it...

Now i have a Thomson Set Top Box for my digital TV - i can get the remote to learn all the codes (EFC's) for each button. And ir.exe can see that the protocol is Thomson.

so my question is do i need to upgrade a new protocol to the remote because the KeyMap spread sheet doesnt have the Thomson one listed.

If i do how do i create the protocol???


Matt E

RemoteMaster has a Thomson listed. It selects protocol 004B. KM can generate an upgrade for protocol 004B, even if it doesn't know that is Thomson.

Thanks Johnsfine...

I upgraded with that protocol and it worked nicely.

However i have some questions:

1) How would i have known that 004B is the Thomson protocol without this forum - is there a list somewhere - or do i look somewhere in the learned code?

2) Most of the buttons that i learnt from the Thomson remote had 2 alternatives for there EFC - for instance the POWER button could either be - 78 or 236. Now i believe that these are discrete POWER-ON and POWER-OFF codes. The reason i believe this is that i have learnt the POWER button a few times and it works as TURN-OFF or TURN-ON only, so the same button cannot do both.

So my question is how do i make this learnt command as POWER-ON and POWER-OFF - as the original remote does.

3) When i hold volume down on the control (URC-9660) it will only turn down the volume once - instead of continually sending the code - is there anyway to change that???

4) The button presses seem to be a bit slow - as in if i go from channel 7 to channel, i would have to hit the "channel up" twice - now if i try and hit it quickly twice it only picks up the first button hit, and not the second - so i have to hit it again. So is there anyway of speeding this up???

matteastburn wrote: 1) How would i have known that 004B is the Thomson protocol without this forum - is there a list somewhere - or do i look somewhere in the learned code?

It's mentioned in the readme file that comes with DecodeIr. I'm not sure if it's anywhere else.

You aren't supposed to need to know that sort of thing. It's supposed to be built into KM. But some things drop through the cracks. Hopefully that change will go into KM sometime soon.

matteastburn wrote: 2) Most of the buttons that i learnt from the Thomson remote had 2 alternatives for there EFC - for instance the POWER button could either be - 78 or 236.

I'm surprised to see that info is NOT in the readme. I don't recall what I might have been thinking when I failed to document that point.

There is a version of 004B in the URC-7560 which requires the first EFC shown by the decode. There is a version of 004B in the URC-8060 which requires the second EFC decoded.

Even though IR knows which model remote you have, we haven't provided a way to pass that information to DecodeIR, so any case where different OFA models require different EFCs results in multiple EFCs displayed by the decode.

Most OFA models don't have 004B at all. I'm not sure which version you get as a protocol upgrade when KM makes the device upgrade for a model that doesn't include 004B.

matteastburn wrote: Now i believe that these are discrete POWER-ON and POWER-OFF codes. The reason i believe this is that i have learnt the POWER button a few times and it works as TURN-OFF or TURN-ON only, so the same button cannot do both.

So my question is how do i make this learnt command as POWER-ON and POWER-OFF - as the original remote does.

I'm confused by that description. I think you're confused by the misbehavior of learned signals when a the protocol includes a toggle bit.

With the toggle bit, EVERY command has two versions and the device will not accept the same version of the same command twice in a row quickly. A learned command is necessarily only one of the two versions, whichever the original remote happened to send when you learned. But using an upgrade with 004B will generate alternating versions.

With limited testing you might conclude that one version of the power command is On and the other is Off, but with more careful testing you would discover that either can be On and either can be Off depending on previous commands.

Does that explain the whole power behavior? Otherwise try to give a clearer description of the behaviors.

matteastburn wrote: 3) When i hold volume down on the control (URC-9660) it will only turn down the volume once - instead of continually sending the code - is there anyway to change that???

That's strange. I need more information, see below.

matteastburn wrote: 4) The button presses seem to be a bit slow - as in if i go from channel 7 to channel, i would have to hit the "channel up" twice - now if i try and hit it quickly twice it only picks up the first button hit, and not the second - so i have to hit it again. So is there anyway of speeding this up???

That's stranger. Maybe the protocol upgrade has a timing error, or maybe it isn't even correct for the 9960. But maybe you forgot to delete the learned signals. It's a good idea to save an eeprom image file containing the learned signals, and you may need to email that to me to get answers to some of the stranger behaviors. But when you want to test the upgrade you should make sure THAT eeprom image does not still contain the learned signals. Those learned signals may confuse you during testing so you aren't testing what you think you are.

OK that clears things up... I have emailed you with the .txt file.

See what i thought (i now know it is wrong because of your explanation) is that the 2 efc codes were the 2 that toggled - but obviously not. they are for 2 different remotes.

So should i just use the OBC codes instead - or should i stick with collecting the EFC instead???


Matt E

Generally speaking, using OBC codes avoids alot of confusion that the EFC codes can introduce. This is especially true when you're dealing with protocols like Sony, etc.

If KM had built in support for the Thompson protocol, it would un-doubtedly also know when to convert an OBC into one EFC or the other. I expect that RM already knows how to handle this if you use OBCs

So remote master (RM) is kept up to date more then Key Master???

Which one should i use - i assume they do the same thing but one maybe better.

Matt E

matteastburn wrote:So remote master (RM) is kept up to date more then Key Master???

I wouldn't say that... the only reason I haven't added the Thomson protocol is because I haven't had time to work out all the details needed by KM.

i assume they do the same thing

Correct... they are both used to create device upgrades.

but one maybe better.

RM has a nicer (i.e. easier to understand) user interface and doesn't require Excel. KM has been around forever (in terms of JP1 anyway ). Saying one is better than the other is somewhat subjective IMHO.

matteastburn wrote:So remote master (RM) is kept up to date more then Key Master???

No. Some features get into RM first. More features get into KM first (it had a very large head start).

matteastburn wrote: Which one should i use - i assume they do the same thing but one maybe better.

Most of the time, use whichever you prefer. They do the the same thing and for most protocols they have the same level of support. In a few cases one is significantly better than the other. But that can go either way.

Sorry I took so long to respond to the email that contained the files relevent to this thread. To bring any lurkers up to speed, the .ir file included:

On the AUX device were 7 learned signals for Thomson device 5.

The one on Power was a single frame learned as repeating. It also had toggle state 1 and the email says it acts as On only, not Off (I still don't believe that is accurate).

The others were all learned as two frames non repeating, as if the original remote button were not held long enough during learning. The one of those that is claimed to act as Off only, not On has toggle state 0.

The base variant of 004B is installed as an upgrade. I assume by KM, since I think RM would provide variant 7 if it made an upgrade for Thomson.

There is a decive upgrade CBL/2000, which looks to be correct functions for this device and correctly based on this variant of 004B. That setup code is selected for both the CBL and AUX device keys.

If you test AUX you'll get the learned signals on those 7 keys and the upgrade on other keys. If you test CBL you'll get the upgrade on all keys (since there are no KeyMoves nor macros).

The testing results reported in the email don't say very much, but generally sound like AUX mode was tested (in other words the learned signals, not the upgrade).

The reported (here and in the email) problems with holding and repeating the vol and ch keys are exactly what one would expect in AUX mode using the learned signals. Even if learned well (which I think they're not), Thomson signals can't be perfect in learned form and should use an upgrade.

Since I said earlier to be sure to use the upgrade not the learned signals and I got the email after that, maybe he really did test the upgrade to get the symptoms I'd expect from the learned signals, in which case I don't have a next guess (which is why I prefer to believe testing error).

Thanks for our suggestions...

First of all i use AUX as the learning part of the remote so i can add upgrades to the other devices on the remote...

I was testing witht the cable device (i am not that silly) i understand that learned commands take precedence over Upgrade codes...

But none of this matters anymore - because as Rob Suggested i used the OBC codes for the upgrade instead and everythig works perfectly (even holding down the buttons for volume).

So thanks again all for the help... and dont pick on me, i have only had the remote for 4 days...

Thats why i have more questions in another thread i am about to start.

Matt E

Hey Matt,
John wasn't picking on you at all, he was just looking at the evidence presented and trying to guess as to the possible causes.

If you're ever bored, take a look through the old posts here and you'll be surprised how often we spend alot of time trying to figure out why something isn't working only for the original poster to come back and say "Duh, sorry, I was still using the learned signals" or "I forgot to assign the new setup code to an actual device button" or "I forgot to install the protocol upgrade", etc etc.

So it wasn't meant as in insult whatsoever.

I wasnt insulted - i am very happy with how well you guys help out.

and i understand what you mean.

Matt E