URC-75xx maps. images and RDF's (Moved from Hardware forum)

[Nils_Ekberg]

continuation of this thread

In my next update of RDF's and maps I will be including updates so people will see the correct image for their remote, black for the 7540 and 7541 and silver for the 7542 and 7544. Right now I am using the silver for all models.

Nils while you are at it, you could also consider the situation of the 7560 (black) and 7562 (silver). Unfortunately, the most recent 7560s (B01 revision, black) have the same signature as the 7562 (silver), so a third RDF might be needed.Alain

Alain, I see what you are saying. The short term solution is to make an extra (redundant) RDF for the URC-7560B01. The alternative is a change in how RM parses the remote names. Currently, it takes the first half of the name for the first remote supported by the RDF and then the second 4 digits after the underscore as the second remote etc. In other words a name like EBV0EBV1 (URC-7562_7560B01 One for All 6).rdf Would display available remotes in RM as:

URC-7560B01 One for All 6
URC-7562B01 One for All 6

since everything after the second 4 numbers is considered part of the common name. Maybe the change would be for RM to accept everything up to the first underscore as part of the first name and everything up to the first space after the underscore as the complete second name. In this way, it would display as:

URC-7560B01 One for All 6
URC-7562 One for All 6

Now that I proposed this I am sure Greg will come up with a better solution.

[gfb107]

A couple of points.

Based on the latest set of RDFs I have seen, we seprated the sub-model from the model with a dash, so we would use URC-7560-B01 instead of URC-7560B01.

Changing the parsing as you suggest would also cause different parsing of the following RDFs:

HT80HT80 (URC-8080_8090-B00 Producer 8).rdf
HT80HT8A (URC-8080_8090-B01 Producer 8).rdf
HT80HT8C (URC-8080_8090-B02 Producer 8).rdf

For these RDFs we want the sub-model to be use for all remotes. I can't think of a simple fix to allow both cases.

[Nils_Ekberg]

A couple of points.

Based on the latest set of RDFs I have seen, we seprated the sub-model from the model with a dash, so we would use URC-7560-B01 instead of URC-7560B01.

Changing the parsing as you suggest would also cause different parsing of the following RDFs:

HT80HT80 (URC-8080_8090-B00 Producer 8).rdf
HT80HT8A (URC-8080_8090-B01 Producer 8).rdf
HT80HT8C (URC-8080_8090-B02 Producer 8).rdf

For these RDFs we want the sub-model to be use for all remotes. I can't think of a simple fix to allow both cases.

I forgot about the dash for sub model.

And ofcourse your right, the parsing could disrupt other remotes. Back to the drawing board.

[Nils_Ekberg]

Alain

Can you confirm that the only difference between the 7560, 7560-B01 and the 7562 are the colors? The RDF's are identical and I want to make sure that is true. If so, I can make the 7560 RDF the B01 and the 7562 for the 7560 black and 7562 silver. Also, can I assume the extender works on all 3.

[aberguerand]

Nils,

the 7560B00 and 7560B01/7562 although they have different signatures, are the same remote as far as RDFs are concerned. The 7560B01/7562 has a few additional protocols and device codes, and maybe some ROM bugs fixed. The extender works for the 3 models, but comes in two flavours, one for the "old" and one for the "new" firmware.
As far as I know, these differences only affect the extender itself, KM, RM or IR are not impacted.

I am not sure what you meant with

If so, I can make the 7560 RDF the B01 and the 7562 for the 7560 black and 7562 silver

but the situation is as follows :

• URC-7560B00 - Signature EBV0EBV0 - Color black
  URC-7560B01 - Signature EBV0EBV1 - Color black
  URC-7562 - Signature EBV0EBV1 - Color silver
  URC-756x Extender - Signature EBX0EBV0 - Colors black and silver

Alain

[Nils_Ekberg]

I am not sure what you meant with

If so, I can make the 7560 RDF the B01 and the 7562 for the 7560 black and 7562 silver

but the situation is as follows :

• URC-7560B00 - Signature EBV0EBV0 - Color black
  URC-7560B01 - Signature EBV0EBV1 - Color black
  URC-7562 - Signature EBV0EBV1 - Color silver
  URC-756x Extender - Signature EBX0EBV0 - Colors black and silver

Alain

That was just a typo on my part. I was thinking I could make the
EBV0EBV0 Silver and the EBV0EBV1 black for the 7560B01 and Silver for the 7562.

I thought the 7560B00 was the silver model? If both 7560's are black I can work it out easy.

[Nils_Ekberg]

Alain

The changes to this and the other URC-75xx remotes is in the Version 1.06 RDF's and images I uploaded before. Let me know what you think.

[tranx]

Nils,

the 7560B00 and 7560B01/7562 although they have different signatures, are the same remote as far as RDFs are concerned. The 7560B01/7562 has a few additional protocols and device codes, and maybe some ROM bugs fixed. The extender works for the 3 models, but comes in two flavours, one for the "old" and one for the "new" firmware.
As far as I know, these differences only affect the extender itself, KM, RM or IR are not impacted.

I am not sure what you meant with

If so, I can make the 7560 RDF the B01 and the 7562 for the 7560 black and 7562 silver

but the situation is as follows :

• URC-7560B00 - Signature EBV0EBV0 - Color black
  URC-7560B01 - Signature EBV0EBV1 - Color black
  URC-7562 - Signature EBV0EBV1 - Color silver
  URC-756x Extender - Signature EBX0EBV0 - Colors black and silver

Alain

Hi

I have just got a URC-7562-B00 signature EBV0EBV1 'CF9X CF - COC9 DC' and this old post is very useful as far as RDFs are concerned but find there are two extenders available:-

(URC-7562-B01, 2011)
https://www.hifi-remote.com/forums/dload ... &cat_id=57

(URC7560 One for All Six, 2005)
https://www.hifi-remote.com/forums/dload ... cat_id=152

Which one should I try please?

Regards
Chris

[The Robman]

You have the older B00 version of the remote, so use the older file (ie, not the B01 version)

[tranx]

Thanks for the quick answer

Chris