[Gspaltenhorn]

Thank you very much for the explanation of the “short” messages!! I noticed the same behavior for “long” messages while testing with the MCL Sensor. I could imagine the “long” messages are the response from the BM, providing the status after receiving the “short” command? However that may be… With the understanding of the “short” messages, I did what you suggested:

B3OHACK3R wrote:

As the messages are short enough one could set up an automated test and just iterate through every possible command.

And success! I found the “secret” commands to unmute/mute the Powerlink speaker:

• unmute – 0x1C
• mute – 0x1D

Prerequisite is an already running Beomaster.

[Gspaltenhorn]

I also want to comment on your previous post from another thread:

B3OHACK3R wrote:

What I would try first is just sending it a virtual volume or mute key stroke.

So similar to this
https://github.com/toresbe/datalink/blob/main/datalink86-captures-new.txt#L26

But instead of the 0x09 at the end (digit-9) give it a try with 0x60 (volume up) or 0x0d (mute toggle). Maybe it will then leave the muted state it started up with.

So as mentioned I also tested your suggestions without success (no unmuting of Powerlink Ports). And while I tested, I also compared them to the Datalink’86 documentation:

The Datalink’86 document states, the transmitted commands can be split into 4 blocks. And following Figure “Fig. 2045-4 gives an example of a complete data transmission” I assumed the Header is always 14 bits long:

• Start
• Header
  • Format [4 Bits]
  • Address (to) [5 Bits]
  • Address (from) [5 Bits]
• Data [“… may be commands or ASCII codes”]
• Stop

Assuming that 0x60 is the usual command for “increase volume” and following your suggestion to start with the input from the Github link: S 0000 00001 00001 001 E. Then replacing 0x09 with 0x60 already leads to an interference with the address information of the header. Maybe I misunderstood you here?
However, confused by this, I tested several options:

1. Following your suggestion: S 0000 00001 00001 100000 E
   No response by the BM.
2. Following the DL86 documentation (sending 0x60 as data): S 0000 00001 00001 1100000 E
   No response by the BM.
3. Sending a command from my own findings when testing the MCL Sensor: S 0000 00001 01100 000 E
   Success – BM is increasing the Volume by 2.

So I can’t help but notice that 0x60 is part of the option 3 command and also the length of the command is the same as those from the Github Link, but it seems to be filled from the back, overwriting parts of the header.

This left me completely confused about the DL86 protocol and unfortunately, I can’t figure it out. Or maybe I’m misunderstanding something from the documentation…
Anyway, I’m curious what your take is on this ?

[Gspaltenhorn]

B3OHACK3R wrote:

It was intended indeed. In an option 0 (TV) / 2 (music system) setup. In that case the TV would not receive any IR commands but only the music system (where also the speakers are connected). So the music system would power up by it’s regular IR commands and then forward everything TV related over the DL / aux port to the TV. So this setup cannot be used for “spying” on a special command.
[…]
I think the MCL and the TV/AUX connector do carry the same data signal. So when the enable signal comes in through the MCL port it makes perfectly sense to not enable the local output. I’m just curious if this can somehow be overruled with a special command.

Thanks for clearing things up! I also checked the BM 6500 schematics again and like you mentioned the Datalink pin of the TV/AUX port is directly connected to the MCL and Powerlink Datalink Pins. I can imagine that B&O has left the door open to control or mute the system via a future iteration of innovative speakers like the Penta series. So maybe there is this special command. But that’s crystal ball gazing… 😀

B3OHACK3R wrote:

What pilatomic does in the other thread is simulating a tape deck or a CD player. They have those separate connectors and are speaking the older DL protocol. So when pressing the play button on the CD player it sends a command to the master device which then switches on. Without muting its output. The downside is that using this port you only have limited functionality available.
[…]
Easiest fix would probably be just simulating an activation from the CD player or the tape deck using the DL80 port. Once the system started (unmuted) just use the DL86 protocol on the other connector to switch to the actual source you want.

I get how pilatomic is achieving control and I also understand your solution approach. I guess for my personal project this would be just fine, as I could connect another pin of the Arduino to a DL80 port, just for sending the “missing” commands. Many thanks for the inspiration!
Having your “MasterDataTool” project and the use of DL86 in mind , this would unfortunately compromise the elegant plug-and-play solution…

[Gspaltenhorn]

skolesen wrote:

Please start a new thread in order not to “hijack” Pilatomic original thread.

Sorry this was not my intend! I started a new thread here.

But thanks for the input anyways, much appreciated!

 

[Gspaltenhorn]

Hey Pila, really nice project you put together here!

I´m currently looking into creating something less sophisticated for my personal use. The idea is to control a Beomaster 6500 by transmitting Datalink commands. I´m using an off-the-shelf Arduino Uno R4 WiFi and as a code basis I used this GitHub Project.

Currently I can send and receive Datalink commands on the TV/AUX Port of the BM and I was able to retrieve commands from a MCL Sensor I bought for this Project. But unfortunately the commands only startup the BM in muted state and I can´t get it to unmute (See my post here).

I think I´m lacking a deeper understanding of the actual structure/content of the Datalink protocol beyond the published Datalink’86 spec-sheet.
As it seems you succeeded in solving these difficulties, do you have some tips and tricks or a documentation about Datalink you are willing share?

Any advice is welcome!

[Gspaltenhorn]

Madskp wrote:

lordgspaltenhorn wrote: I hoped this could be solved by setting the correct Sensor and BM options. As mentioned above, maybe it´s part of the actual Datalink command. Unfortunately, I have not found a comprehensive documentation of the actual commands yet. I don’t think the option settings should make any difference as they only tell the Beomaster if it only recieves audio commands (option 1) or both audio and video commands (option 2).

I was leaning in that direction after reading this post from B3OHACK3R:
https://forum.beoworld.org/forums/topic/universal-link-adapter/page/4/#post-25565
But perhaps I misunderstood.

Madskp wrote:

As for the datalink part there are currently 2 members working on projects where they are using datalink if you are not aware of it. They might be helpfull with insights: B3OHACK3R: https://forum.beoworld.org/forums/topic/masterlink-usb-adapter/ and PILATOMIC: https://forum.beoworld.org/forums/topic/beotooth-5500-a-datalink-bluetooth-receiver/ Also there is this project on GITHUB: https://github.com/toresbe/datalink

Thank you for the hints! The Github Project is the foundation of my code. Unfortunately it´s also missing a documentation of Datalink commands used for Beomaster control.
Now that holidays are over, my next step is gettin in touch with the two users/threads you mentioned. Maybe the solution is not that distant anymore!!

Madskp wrote:

Yeah but it is somehow compatible with other products as mentined by GUY in this post https://forum.beoworld.org/forums/topic/beolink-passive-ir-eye/page/2/#post-19614

I guess this makes sense! Considering the Beolink 1000 remote (1980s) being compatible with modern products like Essence mk.2 and Beosound Core (See this video from Steve:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zW_V4ad4gYU)

[Gspaltenhorn]

Hello, Thanks for the quick reply!

Madskp wrote:

Thinking a little more about it in this situation the sensor is connected the same way as if it was in a link room. That means that it will only active the sound for the speaker 2 connections and the speaker 1 and powerlink will stay muted. I didn’t have any speakers connected for my test so didn’t notice that.

This makes sense. The MCL Concept is designed to specifically do this. And checking the PCB shows the “white” Datalink line from the MCL Sensor is actually wired through to the Beomaster. Accordingly, it makes no difference where the MCL Sensor is connected to, but probably the command itself is distinguishing if Power Link 1 is unmuted.

However you should still be able to active the powerlink speakers via the BM6500 internal IR eye?

Correct. This is all working as expected. For the test I just taped over the internal IR eye.

This leads me to asking what you are trying to achieve here? Is it because you wan’t better coverage in a large room, or is the internal IR sensor not working?

I actually don´t need the additional MCL Sensor in my day to day use. I´m using it to identify commands from the Datalink protocol. I know about the Datalink manual and I´m already able to send and receive signals. The commands from the MCL Sensor allow me to start up the BM6500, but only into the muted state.
I hoped this could be solved by setting the correct Sensor and BM options. As mentioned above, maybe it´s part of the actual Datalink command. Unfortunately, I have not found a comprehensive documentation of the actual commands yet.

There was a kit available with an external IR sensor for the BM6500 as mentioned earlier in this thread https://forum.beoworld.org/forums/topic/beolink-passive-ir-eye/page/2/#post-19496 . I might be hard to find one know though.

I was wondering if this is actually an external IR sensor, or if it is providing Datalink commands. But a brief look at the BM7000 schematic suggests that it actually is providing IR commands.

[Gspaltenhorn]

Madskp wrote:

So I made a little 7 pin DIN connector with data and ground from the MCL IR eye connected to pin 6 and 2 and a wire to a set of headphones connected to pin 1, 4 and 2. 5V power from a bench supply connected ground and +5V wires of the IR eye.

Setting the IR eye to option 1, and covering the BM5500’s IR eye full control is possible.

I´m currently trying to reproduce this. But i can´t achieve full control. Here is my Setup:

• Beolab 8000 connected to Beolab 2 connected to Power Link 1
• MCL Sensor – data (White) connected to BM6500 TV/Aux – Datalink
• MCL Sensor – ground connected to BM6500 Aux – ground
• MCL Sensor – 5V connected to external powersupply
• MCL Sensor in option 1 (Standby – while keeping the timer button on MCL Sensor depressed, press “AV” button on Beolink 1000)
• BM6500 in option 1 (Standby – press “sound”, “1”, “store”)

With this Setup I´m able to start up the BM6500 via my Beolink 1000 remote. The correct source is also selected. But unfortunately the speakers stay muted and cannot be umuted by neither the “mute” button on the Beolink nor the “mute” button on the MCL Sensor.

I guess some options are not set correctly… However, I don’t really understand the combinations of all the options yet. Therefore, I would appreciate any help!!

[Gspaltenhorn]

Thanks for the hint!

I started to research the topic and I´m currently tapping into the Datalink connection on Pin 6 of the TV/AUX using the GitHub project mentioned in this post. Let´s see how this will turn out.

[Gspaltenhorn]

Hey everyone, sorry for bringing this topic up again.

I inherited a Beomaster 6500 and am currently trying to restore it. A year ago I switched the 2 big caps of the power supply and now i want to work on the sound, following Die_Bogener´s description. But i have a question about the approach

Die_Bogener wrote:

Open the BM6500. 2 screws on the rear, 2 in the preamp plug section. Remove the black lower plate, 4 + 3 screws. Then you have access to the boards. There is no need to remove the boards out of the cabinet. Just unplug the tuner board, the hinge can be removed or unpluged from the cabinet.

I guess the black lower plate refers to board 5 with the speaker connections. So far so good, but how do you remove the caps on board 3 without taking it out? Did I miss some mechanism like the hinge on the tuner board (board 1)?

Many thanks in advance! And if you have any other tips or suggestions for someone who is just starting of, please share them with me ?

[Gspaltenhorn]

Hey there,

Kromah wrote:

Otherwise, could there be a way to make this work with an Arduino and a IR led? Or do you think I will face the same issue with the frequency being too high for what the Arduino can emit?

I inherited a Beomaster 6500 and bought two beolabs 8000 myself. I´m also interested in using an Arduino with IR as a possible remote. While doing some research, I found this Arduino Library on GitHub. It mentions the “Bang & Olufsen protocol” and it seems like it already has an implementation in place. On the hardware side of things, I´m not yet sure what is exactly needed and how hard it´ll be to build something reliable.

Maybe other forum members already have some experience in this topic and want to share their ideas and hints?

[Author]

Posts