• New Patreon Tier and Early Access Content available. If you would like to support AVForums, we now have a new Patreon Tier which gives you access to selected news, reviews and articles before they are available to the public. Read more.

Magic Eye - A different problem

b1nuzz

Standard Member
Hi,

I have had a wireless AV sender set up to my Sky HD box for a while, whilst the picture was OK, the IR bit of it to send the remote to the TV never really worked.

So I have spent some time routing some Coax cable through to the bedroom where the second TV is.
Plugged it all up, tuned the TV, it found the picture, but still no remote response.

I should say here that it does respond, but probably only once in every 20 button clicks.

The red light is illuminated on the magic eye, and everything is turned on as it should be.
I have also tried plugging the Sky Eye straight into the back of the sky box and i still have the same problem!
I have also tried it with a different remote and it has the same problems.

Im not really sure where the fault lies as i think i have covered all options.

Anybody got any ideas?
Thanks for your help.
 

logiciel

Moderator
You've already done the test that we always recommend - trying the "eye" close to the Sky machine.
That it doesn't work suggests that there's something wrong with it and it needs replacing.
 
Last edited:

b1nuzz

Standard Member
That was the conclusion I came to.

However it is showing the same symptoms as when I was using the wireless version, but the IR is obviously done via blaster this way.

However the IR is great when done locally in the source room.

So I assume it can't be the sky box at fault because I have IR problems remotely when either blasting or connected to the RF2.

Does anything else spring to mind? I'm very confused.
 
Last edited:

logiciel

Moderator
The IR extenders of wireless videosenders and "magic eyes" work in totally different ways.
Staying entirely on "magic eyes" the test is to take a second TV into the room where rhe Sky machine is and connect the machine to the TV with a short piece of co-ax and the "magic eye" - if remote control then works through the "eye" it is OK, if it doesn't it isn't.
 

b1nuzz

Standard Member
That makes sense.

I guess it's just a massive coincidence that is putting doubt in my mind because I seem to have the same fault whether it's wireless or wired. But like you say, I know they are completely different ways of changing the channel!

I will get the sky eye changed ASAP to see if that solves the problem!
 

logiciel

Moderator
OK - have you tested it the short-cable way?
 

b1nuzz

Standard Member
Tested it via a short cable and directly into the back of the sky box.

I had a thought that maybe something was jamming the RF signal but it works perfect in the main room via the normal RF so I guess it can't be that.
 

logiciel

Moderator
RF is what the wireless videosender uses to send the channel one way and the IR back the other, and that can get interference.
The "magic eye" uses the cable to carry its IR control signal - to the confusingly named RF2 Out socket.
 

b1nuzz

Standard Member
I think that's what I meant! The IR straight into the sky box is absolutely fine, so it rules out low batteries in the remote etc.

:)
 

Stevenage Neil

Distinguished Member
The "magic eye" uses the cable to carry its IR control signal - to the confusingly named RF2 Out socket.

Who says it is "confusingly"? The Sky box outputs an RF signal on both RF1 and RF2, the differentiation is purely for designating the RF output that will accept an incoming "Eye" signal.
 

b1nuzz

Standard Member
Update:

Being impatient, I went through all the tests again.
Connected locally to the sky box. No response from the remote. Then tried playing around with it and managed to get a solid response when holding the IR receiver in the position shown in the picture below.

image-1153406155.jpg

Orientation of the IR receiver is important. It has a dome receiver in the top of the receiver unit, however this is pointed away from the remote. It only works in that exact position. Not closer, not nearer. Has anyone seen this before? You would have thought it should work with line of sight from the front of the remote as well?!

Obviously this isn't really a solution because I can't be in that position to change the remote all the time. And it's only a few feet from the TV. Plus I would actually have to be behind the TV for this orientation to work.

So really it was just to see if this new development made sense to anyone? Or if I should still class it as broken?

Thanks
 

logiciel

Moderator
Who says it is "confusingly"?
I do, in the context of that post.
It started with the RF that a wireless videosender uses, and went on to the RF socket of a Sky machine.

The "eye" ought not to receive at all from that position!
Are you sure it's not the remote sending the control direct to the receptor in the Sky machine?
 

b1nuzz

Standard Member
No. I made sure the main box was covered up.
I have also tested this in the second room, and it is exactly the same.

It's the same across two remotes as well.
 

logiciel

Moderator
OK then - that answers your question - you should still class it as broken.
You could take it back for a refund, but at the price you could try a different make.
 
Last edited:

logiciel

Moderator
:clap::thumbsup:
 

The latest video from AVForums

Fidelity in Motion's David Mackenzie talks about his work on disc encoding & the future of Blu-ray
Subscribe to our YouTube channel

Full fat HDMI teeshirts

Support AVForums with Patreon

Top Bottom