Madskp, thanks for the clarification - I've read your thread, and it looks like all that would be required to make this work is to place a BB to monitor the DL80 connection (and possibly the DL86 connection, as a command-sending interface to the 2300). It would be great to test out my proposed kludge on the workbench, but the 2300 I have is code locked, and waiting for me to write a brute-force algorithm to free it from its hibernation. What I'm not entirely sure of is the logic and safety of having two sources share a single audio channel without some form of protection circuitry, so I'll leave that to others.
In my mind, I can see this working, because BB can behave as a surrogate BeoMaster, a surrogate component, and an end-user remote. It can be programmed to monitor the state of the connected devices and insert any missing status or commands via triggered macros, programmed as needed to achieve the desired effect (example as given above- monitor that only one source is reporting playing; tell the other source to stop playing; tell the 2300 that a source is playing, if needed). I have a working 4000 - does it share the same Aux Dual-DL pin-outs as the 2300? If so, I could test and see how it behaves with this setup.
In my mind, I can see this working, because BB can behave as a surrogate BeoMaster, a surrogate component, and an end-user remote. It can be programmed to monitor the state of the connected devices and insert any missing status or commands via triggered macros, programmed as needed to achieve the desired effect (example as given above- monitor that only one source is reporting playing; tell the other source to stop playing; tell the 2300 that a source is playing, if needed). I have a working 4000 - does it share the same Aux Dual-DL pin-outs as the 2300? If so, I could test and see how it behaves with this setup.
