12-03-2008 12:35 PM
Solved! Go to Solution.
12-03-2008 12:44 PM
(Note: I am not affiliated with Logitech®, Inc.) Have you seen the FAQ Sticky? Useful Links Definition of Delays
12-04-2008 08:13 AM
02-04-2009 07:11 PM - edited 02-04-2009 07:14 PM
I've run into the same issue and am looking forward to remapping the volume control like you describe. However, I want to address your question as to why someone would want to use the cable box to control the volume.
In my case, controlling the volume of the receiver via a remote is unfortunately fairly awkward, which I think has more to do with the receiver than the remote, as I had the same issue with my old cable remote. Tapping the volume button once will fine-tune the volume by an almost imperceptible amount (1/2 dB). Holding the volume button down rockets the volume up or down very quickly, so it's very hard to land where you want. For me, the volume control on the cable box has a much smoother and predictable response, even if it is much less granular.
This is my first day with the remote, so maybe it provides a solution to controlling the receiver volume in a satisfactory way that I'm not aware of.
Motorola QIP 6200-2
02-05-2009 07:41 AM
06-05-2010 07:17 AM
Reasons to control volume with cable box rather than tv:
1) TV vc range is very narrow, slow to change, or non-linear (ie accelerates longer hold the button down). Cable box may be smoother, more linear, or have more dynamic range in same time holding the button down (granularity).
2) TV vc provides "extra" features (such as tap) that are undesirable
In my case, since I change the channels using the cable box, it is not un-intuitive at all to have the cable box also control the volume and mute functions. In this case I think of the TV as a "monitor".