¿ªÔÆÌåÓý

Does the CP3 have the same issue as the MC3 with regards to simultaneous IR output

Still vapor ware at this point, so who knows

--- In Crestron@..., "John" <ComeAlive@> wrote:

Does the CP3 have the same issue as the MC3 with regards to simultaneous IR output

What's the problem with simultaneous IR on the MC3?

--- In Crestron@..., "Witmarquzot" <tdurrant420@> wrote:

Still vapor ware at this point, so who knows

--- In Crestron@..., "John" <ComeAlive@> wrote:

Does the CP3 have the same issue as the MC3 with regards to simultaneous IR output

From what we saw on this group i believe it would stopped if you tried to use two ports at once i think?

It is not labeled as an easy search (MC3 Problems, MC3 Feedback, MC3 IR). Must have been January/Febuary, might have been November

--- In Crestron@..., "floyd1212"<floyd1212@...> wrote:

What's the problem with simultaneous IR on the MC3?

--- In Crestron@..., "Witmarquzot"<tdurrant420@> wrote:

Still vapor ware at this point, so who knows

--- In Crestron@..., "John"<ComeAlive@> wrote:

Does the CP3 have the same issue as the MC3 with regards to simultaneous IR output

------------------------------------



Check out the Files area for useful modules, documents, and drivers.

A contact list of Crestron dealers and programmers can be found in the Database area.
Yahoo! Groups Links

As I understand it, if you try to send two IR commands at the same time
(not sure if that means an overlapping time duration of the associated
digitals, logic wave, or logic solution), one or more of the IR commands
will be generated as a single, minimum pulse.

On 4/12/2012 8:50 PM, Witmarquzot wrote:

From what we saw on this group i believe it would stopped if you tried to use two ports at once i think?

It is not labeled as an easy search (MC3 Problems, MC3 Feedback, MC3 IR). Must have been January/Febuary, might have been November

--- In Crestron@..., "floyd1212"<floyd1212@> wrote:

What's the problem with simultaneous IR on the MC3?

--- In Crestron@..., "Witmarquzot"<tdurrant420@> wrote:

Still vapor ware at this point, so who knows

--- In Crestron@..., "John"<ComeAlive@> wrote:

Does the CP3 have the same issue as the MC3 with regards to simultaneous IR output

------------------------------------



Check out the Files area for useful modules, documents, and drivers.

A contact list of Crestron dealers and programmers can be found in the Database area.
Yahoo! Groups Links

I'm not sure I'd call it an "issue" in terms of the original phrasing. The MC3/PMC3/PMC3-XP has one IR generator that is multiplexed amongst the 5 ports. If you turn port 2 while Port 1 is generating, Port 1 will finish the min # of repeats for the given IR command Port 1 is generating, then it will start generating Port 2.


--- In Crestron@..., Steve Kaudle <crestron@> wrote:

As I understand it, if you try to send two IR commands at the same time
(not sure if that means an overlapping time duration of the associated
digitals, logic wave, or logic solution), one or more of the IR commands
will be generated as a single, minimum pulse.

On 4/12/2012 8:50 PM, Witmarquzot wrote:

From what we saw on this group i believe it would stopped if you tried to use two ports at once i think?

It is not labeled as an easy search (MC3 Problems, MC3 Feedback, MC3 IR). Must have been January/Febuary, might have been November

--- In Crestron@..., "floyd1212"<floyd1212@> wrote:

What's the problem with simultaneous IR on the MC3?

--- In Crestron@..., "Witmarquzot"<tdurrant420@> wrote:

Still vapor ware at this point, so who knows

--- In Crestron@..., "John"<ComeAlive@> wrote:

Does the CP3 have the same issue as the MC3 with regards to simultaneous IR output

------------------------------------



Check out the Files area for useful modules, documents, and drivers.

A contact list of Crestron dealers and programmers can be found in the Database area.
Yahoo! Groups Links

I'm going to go ahead and say in this day and age if you have 5 ir ports on a box and you can't fire them independently it's an issue.

The note about this has been added to the MC3 FAQ on the TB site.

--- In Crestron@..., "RobK" <fooguy89@> wrote:

I'm not sure I'd call it an "issue" in terms of the original phrasing. The MC3/PMC3/PMC3-XP has one IR generator that is multiplexed amongst the 5 ports. If you turn port 2 while Port 1 is generating, Port 1 will finish the min # of repeats for the given IR command Port 1 is generating, then it will start generating Port 2.


--- In Crestron@..., Steve Kaudle <crestron@> wrote:

As I understand it, if you try to send two IR commands at the same time
(not sure if that means an overlapping time duration of the associated
digitals, logic wave, or logic solution), one or more of the IR commands
will be generated as a single, minimum pulse.

On 4/12/2012 8:50 PM, Witmarquzot wrote:

From what we saw on this group i believe it would stopped if you tried to use two ports at once i think?

It is not labeled as an easy search (MC3 Problems, MC3 Feedback, MC3 IR). Must have been January/Febuary, might have been November

--- In Crestron@..., "floyd1212"<floyd1212@> wrote:

What's the problem with simultaneous IR on the MC3?

--- In Crestron@..., "Witmarquzot"<tdurrant420@> wrote:

Still vapor ware at this point, so who knows

--- In Crestron@..., "John"<ComeAlive@> wrote:

Does the CP3 have the same issue as the MC3 with regards to simultaneous IR output

------------------------------------



Check out the Files area for useful modules, documents, and drivers.

A contact list of Crestron dealers and programmers can be found in the Database area.
Yahoo! Groups Links

Still vapor ware at this point, so who knows

--- In Crestron@..., "John" <ComeAlive@> wrote:

Does the CP3 have the same issue as the MC3 with regards to simultaneous IR output

Agreed. It is a big issue and it makes the MC3 a poorer value for most of our purposes. Obviously, we can code around this but in 2012 I think that there are bigger/more important things that we should be spending our time on...

That said, the MC3 was originally designed specifically for a one-room/hospitality purpose and apparently the cost savings for a single IR UART was an appropriate compromise. Still seems a bit lame in retrospect, but oh well...

Chris K..........;)

--- In Crestron@..., "Andre Bouchard" <alexanbo@> wrote:

I'm going to go ahead and say in this day and age if you have 5 ir ports on a box and you can't fire them independently it's an issue.

The note about this has been added to the MC3 FAQ on the TB site.

--- In Crestron@..., "RobK" <fooguy89@> wrote:

I'm not sure I'd call it an "issue" in terms of the original phrasing. The MC3/PMC3/PMC3-XP has one IR generator that is multiplexed amongst the 5 ports. If you turn port 2 while Port 1 is generating, Port 1 will finish the min # of repeats for the given IR command Port 1 is generating, then it will start generating Port 2.


--- In Crestron@..., Steve Kaudle <crestron@> wrote:

As I understand it, if you try to send two IR commands at the same time
(not sure if that means an overlapping time duration of the associated
digitals, logic wave, or logic solution), one or more of the IR commands
will be generated as a single, minimum pulse.

On 4/12/2012 8:50 PM, Witmarquzot wrote:

From what we saw on this group i believe it would stopped if you tried to use two ports at once i think?

It is not labeled as an easy search (MC3 Problems, MC3 Feedback, MC3 IR). Must have been January/Febuary, might have been November

--- In Crestron@..., "floyd1212"<floyd1212@> wrote:

What's the problem with simultaneous IR on the MC3?

--- In Crestron@..., "Witmarquzot"<tdurrant420@> wrote:

Still vapor ware at this point, so who knows

--- In Crestron@..., "John"<ComeAlive@> wrote:

Does the CP3 have the same issue as the MC3 with regards to simultaneous IR output

------------------------------------



Check out the Files area for useful modules, documents, and drivers.

A contact list of Crestron dealers and programmers can be found in the Database area.
Yahoo! Groups Links

I have it on good authority that all (8) ports of the CP3 will be able to be triggered simultaneously...

Chris K..............;)

--- In Crestron@..., "Witmarquzot" <tdurrant420@> wrote:

Still vapor ware at this point, so who knows

--- In Crestron@..., "John" <ComeAlive@> wrote:

Does the CP3 have the same issue as the MC3 with regards to simultaneous IR output

From what we saw on this group i believe it would stopped if you tried to use two ports at once i think?

It is not labeled as an easy search (MC3 Problems, MC3 Feedback, MC3 IR). Must have been January/Febuary, might have been November

--- In Crestron@..., "floyd1212" <floyd1212@> wrote:

What's the problem with simultaneous IR on the MC3?

--- In Crestron@..., "Witmarquzot" <tdurrant420@> wrote:

Still vapor ware at this point, so who knows

--- In Crestron@..., "John" <ComeAlive@> wrote:

Does the CP3 have the same issue as the MC3 with regards to simultaneous IR output

From what we saw on this group i believe it would stopped if you tried to

It is not labeled as an easy search (MC3 Problems, MC3 Feedback, MC3 IR).

--- In Crestron@..., "floyd1212" <floyd1212@> wrote:

What's the problem with simultaneous IR on the MC3?

--- In Crestron@..., "Witmarquzot" <tdurrant420@> wrote:

Still vapor ware at this point, so who knows

--- In Crestron@..., "John" <ComeAlive@> wrote:

Does the CP3 have the same issue as the MC3 with regards to

Agreed. It is a big issue and it makes the MC3 a poorer value for most of our purposes. Obviously, we can code around this but in 2012 I think that there are bigger/more important things that we should be spending our time on...

That said, the MC3 was originally designed specifically for a one-room/hospitality purpose and apparently the cost savings for a single IR UART was an appropriate compromise. Still seems a bit lame in retrospect, but oh well...

Chris K..........;)

--- In Crestron@... , "Andre Bouchard" <alexanbo@> wrote:

I'm going to go ahead and say in this day and age if you have 5 ir ports on a box and you can't fire them independently it's an issue.

The note about this has been added to the MC3 FAQ on the TB site.

--- In Crestron@... , "RobK" <fooguy89@> wrote:

I'm not sure I'd call it an "issue" in terms of the original phrasing. The MC3/PMC3/PMC3-XP has one IR generator that is multiplexed amongst the 5 ports. If you turn port 2 while Port 1 is generating, Port 1 will finish the min # of repeats for the given IR command Port 1 is generating, then it will start generating Port 2.


--- In Crestron@... , Steve Kaudle <crestron@> wrote:

As I understand it, if you try to send two IR commands at the same time
(not sure if that means an overlapping time duration of the associated
digitals, logic wave, or logic solution), one or more of the IR commands
will be generated as a single, minimum pulse.

On 4/12/2012 8:50 PM, Witmarquzot wrote:

From what we saw on this group i believe it would stopped if you tried to use two ports at once i think?

It is not labeled as an easy search (MC3 Problems, MC3 Feedback, MC3 IR). Must have been January/Febuary, might have been November

--- In Crestron@... , "floyd1212"<floyd1212@> wrote:

What's the problem with simultaneous IR on the MC3?

--- In Crestron@... , "Witmarquzot"<tdurrant420@> wrote:

Still vapor ware at this point, so who knows

--- In Crestron@... , "John"<ComeAlive@> wrote:

Does the CP3 have the same issue as the MC3 with regards to simultaneous IR output

------------------------------------



Check out the Files area for useful modules, documents, and drivers.

A contact list of Crestron dealers and programmers can be found in the Database area.
Yahoo! Groups Links

Engineering may have designed the MC3 for a one-room/hospitality installation but once sales and marketing got hold of the MC3 it became the most powerful processor that Crestron had ever built. It was faster and had more memory than a Rack2. It was capable of running one program for all your A/V needs and you could even run a second program written in D3 to control your lighting system. It is unfortunate that the limitation in IR hardware is the only thing I have seen that separates the promise from reality.

I'm not sure that there is any way to truly program around the problem and I'd be very thankful if someone could show me that I'm wrong. The issue as I see it is that we can all carefully program our systems so IR commands during system start up or shutdown are separated by enough time so they don't collide. However, if, for example:
1) the teenage son was watching an action film the night before with the volume cranked up
2) Mom turns on the system to watch the morning news
3) As soon as the sound starts she firmly plants her finger on the volume down button and holds it there
4) The stream of volume down IR commands are now going to hammer any other commands required to properly start up the system

Now the system is in a state without all the gear properly turned on and potentially equipment not set to the proper inputs.

Of course you could block all other IR commands during the start up sequence but that isn't a good solution either.

I'd love to know if there is a way to code around this scenario such that the system would really be bulletproof. You could implement a queue, as was suggested, but since we don't get feedback as to how long it takes for any IR command to be completed by the hardware, the only way I see to implement this is to empty the queue with a timer that allows the maximum amount of time an IR command might need before sending the next one to the hardware. I believe this would have problems with the scenario where someone is holding down their finger on a volume button. The IR signals being sent out would lag behind what was being queued and you would have significant over-run where the volume moved beyond where the user wanted.

I know Crestron is aware of the problem. I'm hoping they can implement a more intelligent queuing mechanism than we have the tools for. However, as I said, I'd love for someone to tell me that there really is a bulletproof solution we can implement ourselves.

Jay

It is disappointing, even understanding the original purpose.

As an aside to your example, I always set a 'turn-on' volume for every
zone (AVR, Pad8, sonnex, etc.) to eliminate the blow your head off issue.

A queue system could be created (Apparently Chap has one) that could be
stepped thru on the release of the previous IR/digital signal so even in
this scenario:
P+H Vol+, Press TV On, Press SRC select
The release of the Vol+ could trigger the ON, Release of the on could
trigger the SRC
You would have find a way to capture each digital in order and its pulse
length.

The real issue would be with P+H Volumes, especially if there were more
than one device being controlled by IR.
First, user experience would be erratic if one person was ramping and
another started it wouldn't start for the second right away.
Then, any delay in start of the Vol Ramp coupled with a puse length
capture for later release would likely be VERY BAD!!!

This is at its root a hardware issue, so unless/until Crestron comes out
with an MC3v2 I think it would be best to limit all commands to pulses with
a queue system.

This would suck for the customer to have to pulse Vol+/- to change the
vol, but much better than a runaway volume!!
BTW, why are ALL runaway volumes, Volume UP??? and never Volume DOWN???

The good news is that most devices that control volume can be controlled
via, serial, IP, etc.

.02223 cents
Chris K............;)


--- In Crestron@..., Jay Basen <jay.m.basen@...> wrote:

Engineering may have designed the MC3 for a one-room/hospitality

installation but once sales and marketing got hold of the MC3 it became the
most powerful processor that Crestron had ever built. It was faster and had
more memory than a Rack2. It was capable of running one program for all
your A/V needs and you could even run a second program written in D3 to
control your lighting system. It is unfortunate that the limitation in IR
hardware is the only thing I have seen that separates the promise from
reality.

I'm not sure that there is any way to truly program around the problem

and I'd be very thankful if someone could show me that I'm wrong. The issue
as I see it is that we can all carefully program our systems so IR commands
during system start up or shutdown are separated by enough time so they
don't collide. However, if, for example:

1) the teenage son was watching an action film the night before with the

volume cranked up

2) Mom turns on the system to watch the morning news
3) As soon as the sound starts she firmly plants her finger on the

volume down button and holds it there

4) The stream of volume down IR commands are now going to hammer any

other commands required to properly start up the system

Now the system is in a state without all the gear properly turned on and

potentially equipment not set to the proper inputs.

Of course you could block all other IR commands during the start up

sequence but that isn't a good solution either.

I'd love to know if there is a way to code around this scenario such

that the system would really be bulletproof. You could implement a queue,
as was suggested, but since we don't get feedback as to how long it takes
for any IR command to be completed by the hardware, the only way I see to
implement this is to empty the queue with a timer that allows the maximum
amount of time an IR command might need before sending the next one to the
hardware. I believe this would have problems with the scenario where
someone is holding down their finger on a volume button. The IR signals
being sent out would lag behind what was being queued and you would have
significant over-run where the volume moved beyond where the user wanted.

I know Crestron is aware of the problem. I'm hoping they can implement a

more intelligent queuing mechanism than we have the tools for. However, as
I said, I'd love for someone to tell me that there really is a bulletproof
solution we can implement ourselves.

Jay

------------------------------------




Check out the Files area for useful modules, documents, and drivers.

A contact list of Crestron dealers and programmers can be found in the
Database area.
Yahoo!
Groups Links

Any chance of sharing the module, doing my first mc3 and really don't want
to dive into this

Doug
(435-229-5770)
Doug1369@...

On Apr 14, 2012, at 7:22 PM, nevahdun <chap@...> wrote:



We had this problem, and had to design a queue system to prevent it on an
MC3- earlier threads on this.
For us, a new ir command woudl kill the prior command, or, get "lost"
I have a queue module for this, many ways to solve, but for all their
bragging about performance, the three hours I spent on a workaround is, in
my mind, not "dealer friendly"
Chap

--- In Crestron@..., "Witmarquzot" <tdurrant420@> wrote:

From what we saw on this group i believe it would stopped if you tried to

use two ports at once i think?

It is not labeled as an easy search (MC3 Problems, MC3 Feedback, MC3 IR).

Must have been January/Febuary, might have been November

--- In Crestron@..., "floyd1212" <floyd1212@> wrote:

What's the problem with simultaneous IR on the MC3?

--- In Crestron@..., "Witmarquzot" <tdurrant420@> wrote:

Still vapor ware at this point, so who knows

--- In Crestron@..., "John" <ComeAlive@> wrote:

Does the CP3 have the same issue as the MC3 with regards to

simultaneous IR output

Yes, we must keep in mind what it was designed for! Unfortunately people like to assume that hardware "should" do certain things and then spec it into a job and curse it when it doesn't do it - hardware is generally designed in a form factor for a reason. If that wasn't the case, don't you think they would have just said "Here's a Pro2. Done." Rather than make like 15 different variations?

Then of course there are the people who will buy one processor, and try to shoehorn a gargantuan house into it, and complain when it doesn't fit the bill.


--- In Crestron@..., "ChrisK" <chris@> wrote:

Agreed. It is a big issue and it makes the MC3 a poorer value for most of our purposes. Obviously, we can code around this but in 2012 I think that there are bigger/more important things that we should be spending our time on...

That said, the MC3 was originally designed specifically for a one-room/hospitality purpose and apparently the cost savings for a single IR UART was an appropriate compromise. Still seems a bit lame in retrospect, but oh well...

Chris K..........;)

--- In Crestron@..., "Andre Bouchard" <alexanbo@> wrote:

I'm going to go ahead and say in this day and age if you have 5 ir ports on a box and you can't fire them independently it's an issue.

The note about this has been added to the MC3 FAQ on the TB site.

--- In Crestron@..., "RobK" <fooguy89@> wrote:

I'm not sure I'd call it an "issue" in terms of the original phrasing. The MC3/PMC3/PMC3-XP has one IR generator that is multiplexed amongst the 5 ports. If you turn port 2 while Port 1 is generating, Port 1 will finish the min # of repeats for the given IR command Port 1 is generating, then it will start generating Port 2.


--- In Crestron@..., Steve Kaudle <crestron@> wrote:

As I understand it, if you try to send two IR commands at the same time
(not sure if that means an overlapping time duration of the associated
digitals, logic wave, or logic solution), one or more of the IR commands
will be generated as a single, minimum pulse.

On 4/12/2012 8:50 PM, Witmarquzot wrote:

From what we saw on this group i believe it would stopped if you tried to use two ports at once i think?

It is not labeled as an easy search (MC3 Problems, MC3 Feedback, MC3 IR). Must have been January/Febuary, might have been November

--- In Crestron@..., "floyd1212"<floyd1212@> wrote:

What's the problem with simultaneous IR on the MC3?

--- In Crestron@..., "Witmarquzot"<tdurrant420@> wrote:

Still vapor ware at this point, so who knows

--- In Crestron@..., "John"<ComeAlive@> wrote:

Does the CP3 have the same issue as the MC3 with regards to simultaneous IR output

------------------------------------



Check out the Files area for useful modules, documents, and drivers.

A contact list of Crestron dealers and programmers can be found in the Database area.
Yahoo! Groups Links

I agree but don?€?t.
Yes, you need the right tool for the job ?€"but- Crestron is *really* bad about disclosing limitations like this. Yes, I?€?m making a gross generalization.
Often, the only way to find these landmines, though, is to step on them first.

Tray

==


From: RobK
Sent: Saturday, April 14, 2012 11:33 AM
To: Crestron@...
Subject: [Crestron] Re: CP3 Question


Yes, we must keep in mind what it was designed for! Unfortunately people like to assume that hardware "should" do certain things and then spec it into a job and curse it when it doesn't do it - hardware is generally designed in a form factor for a reason. If that wasn't the case, don't you think they would have just said "Here's a Pro2. Done." Rather than make like 15 different variations?

Then of course there are the people who will buy one processor, and try to shoehorn a gargantuan house into it, and complain when it doesn't fit the bill.

--- In mailto:Crestron%40yahoogroups.com, "ChrisK" <chris@> wrote:

Agreed. It is a big issue and it makes the MC3 a poorer value for most of our purposes. Obviously, we can code around this but in 2012 I think that there are bigger/more important things that we should be spending our time on...

That said, the MC3 was originally designed specifically for a one-room/hospitality purpose and apparently the cost savings for a single IR UART was an appropriate compromise. Still seems a bit lame in retrospect, but oh well...

Chris K..........;)

--- In mailto:Crestron%40yahoogroups.com, "Andre Bouchard" <alexanbo@> wrote:

I'm going to go ahead and say in this day and age if you have 5 ir ports on a box and you can't fire them independently it's an issue.

The note about this has been added to the MC3 FAQ on the TB site.

--- In mailto:Crestron%40yahoogroups.com, "RobK" <fooguy89@> wrote:

I'm not sure I'd call it an "issue" in terms of the original phrasing. The MC3/PMC3/PMC3-XP has one IR generator that is multiplexed amongst the 5 ports. If you turn port 2 while Port 1 is generating, Port 1 will finish the min # of repeats for the given IR command Port 1 is generating, then it will start generating Port 2.


--- In mailto:Crestron%40yahoogroups.com, Steve Kaudle <crestron@> wrote:

As I understand it, if you try to send two IR commands at the same time
(not sure if that means an overlapping time duration of the associated
digitals, logic wave, or logic solution), one or more of the IR commands
will be generated as a single, minimum pulse.

On 4/12/2012 8:50 PM, Witmarquzot wrote:

From what we saw on this group i believe it would stopped if you tried to use two ports at once i think?

It is not labeled as an easy search (MC3 Problems, MC3 Feedback, MC3 IR). Must have been January/Febuary, might have been November

--- In mailto:Crestron%40yahoogroups.com, "floyd1212"<floyd1212@> wrote:

What's the problem with simultaneous IR on the MC3?

--- In mailto:Crestron%40yahoogroups.com, "Witmarquzot"<tdurrant420@> wrote:

Still vapor ware at this point, so who knows

--- In mailto:Crestron%40yahoogroups.com, "John"<ComeAlive@> wrote:

Does the CP3 have the same issue as the MC3 with regards to simultaneous IR output

------------------------------------



Check out the Files area for useful modules, documents, and drivers.

A contact list of Crestron dealers and programmers can be found in the Database area.
Yahoo! Groups Links