Just received an MVP-5200i

TonyAngeloTonyAngelo Code MonkeyPosts: 315
I just pulled it out of the box. First impressions are good. Very solidly built and the kick stand works nice. I'm going to dump some GUI's and see how she performs but so far I like it a lot.

Screen is small though, certainly not a whole house controller.

Comments

  • Spire_JeffSpire_Jeff Formerly Caffeinated Programmer Posts: 1,917
    We received one yesterday. I loaded it with a functional set of graphics and had it up and running in about 5 minutes. The display is nice and altho it is a little smaller, it seemed to work well. It was loaded with graphics designed for a CV7 and functioned reasonably well. The only thing I had a problem with was wireless reception. It doesn't seem to have the range of the 8400. I will admit that currently we have a lot of RF noise because we have a job in the setup for testing right now including 4 APs, but I would say that the 5200i starts to loose reliable operation at less than half the distance from the AP as the 8400.

    Jeff
  • jjamesjjames AMX Sustaining Engineer Posts: 2,898
    Spire_Jeff wrote: »
    ....but I would say that the 5200i starts to loose reliable operation at less than half the distance from the AP as the 8400.

    Hmmm - I'd like to hear more on this. Even though a panel this size should NEVER be used as a whole house controller (a floating panel that can be taken from room to room), we all know we have clients that try to. ;)
  • TonyAngeloTonyAngelo Code Monkey Posts: 315
    jjames wrote: »
    Hmmm - I'd like to hear more on this. Even though a panel this size should NEVER be used as a whole house controller (a floating panel that can be taken from room to room), we all know we have clients that try to. ;)

    My thoughts were to use it as a whole house audio control panel, doing music server control with feedback. I have noticed that the range is not what our 8400 is, but I haven't played with it that much yet.
  • jjamesjjames AMX Sustaining Engineer Posts: 2,898
    TonyAngelo wrote: »
    My thoughts were to use it as a whole house audio control panel, doing music server control with feedback.
    Seriously? The "head in urinal" avatar makes me think your joking most of the time.

    I just don't think a panel this size would be easy to use as a whole house audio controller. It'd like, trying to view amx.com on your phone (and NOT an iPhone.)
  • TonyAngeloTonyAngelo Code Monkey Posts: 315
    I didn't say they were good thoughts, just that they were thoughts. Now that I have the thing in my hands I'm thinking other stuff.
  • a_riot42a_riot42 AMX Wizard Posts: 1,619
    jjames wrote: »
    Hmmm - I'd like to hear more on this. Even though a panel this size should NEVER be used as a whole house controller (a floating panel that can be taken from room to room), we all know we have clients that try to. ;)

    I am sure someone told Apple that they should never attempt to have the internet on a phone. I have CV7s in a house that have whole house control including AV, HVAC, security, lighting, distributed audio etc and it works fine. I would put the UI on a 5200 with some modifications. Why do you say that should NEVER happen?
    Paul
  • TonyAngeloTonyAngelo Code Monkey Posts: 315
    My thoughts were more along the lines of the Sonos controller, something small and nimble for laying on the couch and scrolling through your music library. I can't help but think that was the inspiration.

    The job we got it for, it's designed to be used to control a whole floor, six rooms, with lighting, security and HVAC. There are other controls, keypads and handhelds, but this is the master floor controller. I left it with the home owner over the weekend to see if the current UI will still be operable, but in the limited time he spent with it he seemed to really like it.
  • GSLogicGSLogic Original Member Posts: 562
    a_riot42 wrote: »
    I have CV7s in a house that have whole house control including AV, HVAC, security, lighting, distributed audio etc and it works fine. I would put the UI on a 5200 with some modifications. Why do you say that should NEVER happen?
    Paul
    I have whole house control on the R4s. It is all in how you lay it out and then training. I think the days of the large touchpanels are fading. I can see maybe two larger tp in the home to set event but why would you want a large panel in a bedroom or a theater room... never did make sense to me.
  • jjamesjjames AMX Sustaining Engineer Posts: 2,898
    a_riot42 wrote: »
    I am sure someone told Apple that they should never attempt to have the internet on a phone. I have CV7s in a house that have whole house control including AV, HVAC, security, lighting, distributed audio etc and it works fine. I would put the UI on a 5200 with some modifications. Why do you say that should NEVER happen?
    Paul
    I believe my point was more towards the practicality of taking it from room to room if it only had half the distance capability of an 8400. When your clients all have 10k, 12k, 16k, or up to 20k sq. ft. homes, you start to think about those types of things. Plus, these types of clients do not want to "play" with their touch panels and go through four screens before getting to what they want. They want to hit one or two buttons and be done with it.

    I'm starting to think my new motto in life is, "just because you can, doesn't mean you should." I mean, sure - I can display all sorts of weather forecast information, moving doppler radar, up to the minute baseball scores, latest headline news stories, email, or a drag-and-drop application for setting their favorite DirecTV presets - but should I because I can? And yeah, I can cram 18 rooms of audio and 12 sources all on one page . . . should I?
  • a_riot42a_riot42 AMX Wizard Posts: 1,619
    jjames wrote: »
    I believe my point was more towards the practicality of taking it from room to room if it only had half the distance capability of an 8400. When your clients all have 10k, 12k, 16k, or up to 20k sq. ft. homes, you start to think about those types of things. Plus, these types of clients do not want to "play" with their touch panels and go through four screens before getting to what they want. They want to hit one or two buttons and be done with it.

    I'm starting to think my new motto in life is, "just because you can, doesn't mean you should." I mean, sure - I can display all sorts of weather forecast information, moving doppler radar, up to the minute baseball scores, latest headline news stories, email, or a drag-and-drop application for setting their favorite DirecTV presets - but should I because I can? And yeah, I can cram 18 rooms of audio and 12 sources all on one page . . . should I?

    It's always a judgement call depending on the system and what the client wants. That's why I didn't understand the 'never' part. I have clients that want that so I give it to them. Some clients are enthralled by technology and love surfing panels and others just want it to do what they want. I guess that's why they hire us right? :)
    Paul
  • viningvining X Member Posts: 4,348
    Spire_Jeff wrote:
    It doesn't seem to have the range of the 8400.
    Well it would be really stupid if maximizing wi-fi signal reception wasn't highest on the list of the design criteria. After all who cares what it can do or what it looks like if it can't communicate.

    I should be getting mine this week and I really hope it's a noise issue at your end. I also hope they managed to improve on the hand off from AP to AP since the way the MVP8400 would associate w/ APs was the cause of many problems. When you can watch the connections of a stationery MVP drop one AP an associate with another and so on back and forth because you happen to be in an overlapping coverage area and both APs are near the same dBmv levels isn't good. I've since tried to design the wireless network so that APs are near primary MVP locations but if I don't have to do this for laptops I shouldn't have to do this for a more expensive MVP which should be made from the best of the best, well at least that's what we're paying for, isn't it.
  • jjamesjjames AMX Sustaining Engineer Posts: 2,898
    I never compare a laptop's reception to an MVP-8400's. The laptop's connectivity is much better than an 8400 hands down. Unfortunately, that's just how it is (at least in our experience.)
  • viningvining X Member Posts: 4,348
    jjames wrote:
    I never compare a laptop's reception to an MVP-8400's. The laptop's connectivity is much better than an 8400 hands down. Unfortunately, that's just how it is (at least in our experience.)
    Why not? There's no reason it shouldn't be equal and several thousand dollars worth of reasons it should be better. Yet as you stated the MVP don't compare and I can live with that because, yes were are used to it but if the new 5200i are going to be worse then we have to start bitching and letting the engineers and designers know we expect more not less.
  • GSLogicGSLogic Original Member Posts: 562
    vining wrote: »
    Why not? There's no reason it shouldn't be equal and several thousand dollars worth of reasons it should be better. Yet as you stated the MVP don't compare and I can live with that because, yes were are used to it but if the new 5200i are going to be worse then we have to start bitching and letting the engineers and designers know we expect more not less.
    I agree 100%
  • TonyAngeloTonyAngelo Code Monkey Posts: 315
    The new MVP has a setting called something like Auto-channel roam that makes the handoff between WAP's smoother.

    I could be wrong, but I thought one of the main reasons that the R4 was not WiFi was because of how much battery power it takes.
  • Spire_JeffSpire_Jeff Formerly Caffeinated Programmer Posts: 1,917
    The MVP-8400s also support the auto-roam feature as well. I think that was added in a recent firmware upgrade. I also recall that it is recommended to avoid using this feature for some reason.

    Jeff
  • jjamesjjames AMX Sustaining Engineer Posts: 2,898
    I would agree with that. We do NOT use the auto-roam feature since we want each panel to connect to a particular WAP.

    From what I've heard, and we've yet to implement it anywhere - though I'm sure we will soon - using WPA allows the panel for a much smoother and quick transition from WAP to WAP.
  • viningvining X Member Posts: 4,348
    TonyAngelo wrote:
    The new MVP has a setting called something like Auto-channel roam that makes the handoff between WAP's smoother.
    Isn't that fixed for channels 1, 6 & 11 though. In the real world we use other channels. although we always use 1 & 11 we'll often use 2-10 depending on the distance to 1 and 11 and the other WAPs in between. I find that in large houses repeating the 3 primary numbers doesn't cut it so we'll stagger and offset by at least one when repeating. So if we've already assigned 11 on the other end of the house we may use 10 so that we repeat but not exactly on the same channel cuz RF propogation changes constantly.
  • mpullinmpullin Obvious Troll Account, Marked for Deletion Posts: 949
    jjames wrote: »
    Seriously? The "head in urinal" avatar makes me think your joking most of the time.
    Your avatar makes me feel like I'm giving magic to a monkey.
  • TonyAngeloTonyAngelo Code Monkey Posts: 315
    In the house it's installed we have two WAP's covering the main floor and they are addressed to 1 and 6 and were using WPA. Before I turned the Auto-channel roam feature on the panel would not switch from one WAP to another until it completely lost connectivity with the one it was connected to. Once I turned that on the transition happened without any dropout.

    I hadn't seen that feature on the 8400 before.
  • Use only channels 1, 6, & 11!
    vining wrote: »

    Isn't that fixed for channels 1, 6 & 11 though. In the real world we use other channels. although we always use 1 & 11 we'll often use 2-10 depending on the distance to 1 and 11 and the other WAPs in between. I find that in large houses repeating the 3 primary numbers doesn't cut it so we'll stagger and offset by at least one when repeating. So if we've already assigned 11 on the other end of the house we may use 10 so that we repeat but not exactly on the same channel cuz RF propogation changes constantly.

    In reality there are only 3 non-overlapping channels that should ever be used; 1, 6, & 11. The fact that the WAP allows settings in between doesn't matter. Please refer to the AMX on-line training class Getting Started with Wireless http://amx.learnflex.net/users/index.aspx for more information.
  • viningvining X Member Posts: 4,348
    B_Clements wrote:
    In reality there are only 3 non-overlapping channels that should ever be used; 1, 6, & 11.
    If all WAPs were side by side that would be true but when you take in account the distance between them and the drop in signals levels the roll off makes it permissable to use the other channels. I would link you to the Cisco reference but I don't have it handy. Using just 1, 6, & 11 can limit you to just 3 WAPs in a house which is generally inadequate. If you can give me guide line where repeating channels will not affect and step on the original channel I'd like to see it. The pretty picture in the "how to do wireless" guide or what ever its called are nice but in no way reflects how RF actually works in a building with varying wall desinty, halls which virtually act as a wave guide, etc.

    What happens in an office, condo or commercial environment where your surrounded by other systems using 1, 6 or 11 and they're right next door w/ signal levels comperable to yours, stay on the same channel, no, of course not. The real world uses other channels and so should we.
  • viningvining X Member Posts: 4,348
    Use only channels 1, 6, & 11!

    The active roaming does work very nicely if enabled and if you indeed are set up on channels 1, 6 & 11 but otherwise it doesn't change and won't re-associate on an AP even after the previous channel has drop off completely and you place the MVP on top of the AP that's something other than 1, 6 or 11. Same SSID obviously.

    For reason previously mentioned I think this is a considerable design flaw and really unacceptable. Now were dicated as to how we set up our networks regardless of the fact that there may be valid reasons why we can't be on these 3 channels. If I'm in a condo and my neighbor is set up on 1 & 6 and I want to set up on 3 & 9, well I can but I can't roam. Putting a limitation on what channels we can roam on is IMHO, well I won't say what I think. It's so simple to write a script to handle any channels on the same SSID I really fail to understand why they chose to limit the panels in such a manner. It completely blows my mind and makes no sense. I'm sure on a sketch pad somewhere that the designer used to make an imaginary wireless network it made perfect sense but I live the real world where others channels have to be used and the idea of "Use Only 1, 6, & 11" is rediculous.

    Now you guys out there that work with IT guys that handle all the networks, they only used 1, 6 & 11, right!
  • DavidRDavidR Junior Member Posts: 62
    anyone notice the colour balance on this panel is really shifted towards blue?

    my standard touchpanel template has a neutral gray stainless steel background. on my calibrated monitor it appears correct but on the 5200i it is quite blue. I am aware all touchpanel do this to a degree but not as much as the 5200i.

    does anyone know if there are hidden commands to calibrate the panels colour balance. tech support is looking into it.
Sign In or Register to comment.