I have been using a Lintronic code-converter to convert B&O codes into 3rd party IR codes. However, using the Beo5 to directly control 3rd party devices is very appealing. It would save a lot of time to no longer need to program the Lintronic device. The problem, however, is getting the Beo5 signal to the third party devices which are concealed in cabinets. It seems that an IR repeater is needed.

1. Does anyone know if the Lintronic device can be programmed/used to simply repeat multiple 3rd party IR codes (via the Beo5) without converting those codes?

2. Can a B&O "hockey puck" IR sensor be used with IR repeaters such as those made by Niles? I know that the B&O IR sensor can be connected to the Lintronic code-converter. However, in that instance it is still receiving B&O IR codes. Could the B&O IR sensor be used to receive non-B&O IR codes and send them to a Niles IR repeater? The B&O IR sensor is a very good sensor, and it would be nice to keep the B&O "look."

Yes, the LinTronic device can be used to do that, but when you cut my product out and do not even invite me to participate, then I am not really open to share.

Why this closed network ?

Together we can a lot more.

Rgds,
Michael Lindgaard
http://www.lintronic.dk

Michael,

I had no involvement in the development of the XML generator. I have always valued your knowledge and help just as I value that of Keith. Perhaps the two of you could work together to the benefit of all of us.

Does anyone know if the B&O hockey puck sensor can be used to receive the Beo5 third-party IR commands to send to an IR repeater inside a cabinet?

To my knowledge it does not support the frequency required. With the hardware you have you can easily do it using B&O commands converted through the Lintronic box.

This would appear to solve all your problems.

That is what I've been doing. However, it would be attractive to have the Beo5 control the 3rd party devices simply using the XML files. The only problem is that the devices are in cabinets. Therefore, an external IR sensor and and IR repeater would be necessary.

That is exactly what you have with the Lintronic. The reason you cannot just use the Beo5 is simply because like my setup the devises are hidden. So I use the Lintronic to do just what you are asking for.

Now you are confusing me.

With the Beo5 we can send the proper IR signals directly from the Beo5 without the need for code-conversion. All that is needed to transmit the signal into the cabinet is a simple IR repeater, which can be found at most home theater retailers for around $70 USD. Code-conversion is no longer necessary.

My question was whether the B&O IR receiver is limited to detecting only B&O IR signals.

beojeff:

My question was whether the B&O IR receiver is limited to detecting only B&O IR signals.

I'm pretty sure it is - they never were designed to do anything else, and the carrier frequency difference makes certain that it won't work by accident, either (unless somebody else uses 455 kHz as well - I've never heard of that).

Thank you, Mika.

I'm certainly not against using the Lintronic products at all. I've found the products to be very useful. I was just curious about other members' experiences with using the Beo5 to generate third party signals. The obvious advantage of the PUC as well as the Lintronic code-converter is the ability to conceal the third party devices in a cabinet. I was hoping that we might still be able to use the Lintronic devices that we already own to simply repeat the signals without converting them. However, it is logical that we could also do this with any IR repeater.

Another issue of curiosity is the strength of the Beo5 non-B&O IR signal. A great advantage of the B&O IR signal is its strength. We really don't even need to point the Beo4 or Beo5, and the range of reception is quite wide. This is certainly an advantage of using the PUC or Lintronic's code-converter to act upon the B&O IR signal. I'm interested in hearing users' comparisons and experiences.

beojeff:

Another issue of curiosity is the strength of the Beo5 non-B&O IR signal. A great advantage of the B&O IR signal is its strength. We really don't even need to point the Beo4 or Beo5, and the range of reception is quite wide. This is certainly an advantage of using the PUC or Lintronic's code-converter to act upon the B&O IR signal. I'm interested in hearing users' comparisons and experiences.

The strength of the IR signal for B&O products is a bit greater with Beo5 than with Beo4. The non-B&O signal strength is weaker than the B&O signal due to the fact that the time which the IR LEDs are on is variable / configurable. With the fixed B&O IR signal the on time for the LEDs are known guaranteed to be short. This means you can operate the LEDs with a much higher power because the average power is still quite small. For non-B&O IR nothing is guaranteed. The RAW format almost allows you to do whatever you want. Therefore the output power is reduced to a level at which the LEDs can be turned on for a long time and still "survive".

However, I still believe that the Beo5 has at least as good a range as the original non-B&O remote. I haven't heard of the opposite.

Br,
Burnix