dje

That's certainly very interesting, and in my opinion, skills which the industry is largely lacking in. In my experience, most tours don't have people who are all that controls-savvy. Most people can do basic fault finding with a meter and beyond that they're calling the manufacturer for support (IMO this is not cool and devalues the profession). But of course, it's a valuable thing having somebody on tour (/show/install/etc) who does get it. I've certainly found myself far more employable as a result of being able to play with the back-end as confidently as the front-end. In reality, the control systems found in stage automation are not actually vastly different to what is used in industrial manufacturing etc. Are you comfortable with Siemens, Omron, Beckhoff? I'd say these are the main three used in stage engineering. Some of the Americans use Rockwell (Allen Bradley) but you seldom see it here. I think rather than discussing it here I'll try and drop you a message at some point with some options. In terms of training courses it's still pretty limited to be honest, but I can certainly give you some ideas of people to get in touch with where your skillset would be valued and possibly in short supply. Personally I wouldn't really agree with that. Tours tend to have a mixture of leased and owned kit. But actually a lot of automation manufacturers only sell - rather than rent (as is customary with sound/light etc), even for touring; because stocking such a huge variety of options as you'd need to run a hire shop would be so expensive. As a result, having Production Automation Techs who can work with the controls side is valuable to shows with elaborate automation. I've certainly found myself with the covers off on many occasions whilst working for the production rather than for the manufacturer. Ironically the only work I've ever done for a manufacturer was programming. But 'programming' is quite a broad term, there's some distance between banging in target positions and AVDs, vs writing rules, setting up anti-collision etc. Working on the bigger tours and shows - which will tend to service their own equipment rather than relying on the manufacturer (probably because manufacturer support is generally rather expensive) - should provide opportunities to learn some more in-depth skills. With the OP having a background in electrics and industrial controls I would say that they are in a strong place to try and pursue that.

The trolleys I built several years ago (8ft long, for 4x 8x4 decks) were on 8 equal size swivel castors and I cannot say we ever had any problems pushing them up truck ramps or with them falling over. They were relatively rudimentary, built by our flightcase manufacturer. Essentially a piece of 24mm plywood with 8 flightcase castors on the bottom and some UHMW strips on top for the decks to sit on, to save the wood. These things went on tours for months at a time and I never saw a broken one and never heard of one falling over etc. They were fine. I'll see if I can find any pictures. Alternatively I can put you in touch with the manufacturer so they can just build some for you, if that's easier.

It's a bit of a difficult one really. Yes, there are companies who offer training in how to use their consoles. But being able to use a console does not make one able to do automation. Automation is such a vast discipline. There is an aspect of console programming. But also aspects of mechanical engineering, electrical engineering, electronic engineering, industrial controls, logic, and rigging. Not to mention communication skills, probably the most important of all. It's a very complex job which is frequently underestimated. Console operation is just one small segment and frankly it is not the best one to start with either. Most entry-level positions will actually focus more on deck tracks and maintenance, with people being introduced to the console by the operator, over time. I think this may be a reason why manufacturer training is not actually all that big a thing. What is it that you're trying to achieve? Do you just want to understand a bit more about it or are you looking to take your career in that direction? Do you need some training on a specific product? If you need training on a specific product you can likely call the manufacturer. Manufacturers will usually offer free training on their products for people using their products; whilst charging for training which is "prospective" (ie for people who might want to use their product in the future). The Kinesys course is quite good as a very entry level course... with some theoretical and some practical. But really to begin working as an automation technician you would need to have much more skills than the course can provide.

I think you'll get better life out of HDPE or UHMW The simple answer is to add 2 additional sets of castors in the middle, totally 8 castors. This way, you get a third of the trolly sticking up in the air, but as you go over the lip of the ramp, the 4 central wheels stay on the ramp so you don't get a tipping point... you get a smooth transition. Yes it's that simple... just do 4 pairs not 3.

I see that in normal forum fashion, nobody has actually answered the question. This is just what happens on the Internet I think. I know of 3 things in a fly system which can be a dog: 1. There are the rope locks you use on the counterweight hauling lines. It's like a D-shape handheld decide with 3 u-shape Jaws, which you can install on a lineset to provide ebough friction to prevent the set moving even if the rope brake if not engaged. 2. If you have any temporary wire rope grips, ie a u-bolt through a saddle... These are commonly referred to as dogs. 3. If you have automated scenery, dogs are the blocks which run in the floor tracks that you can attach your spade into so that your set can be driven by the track.

I did this as a presentation to a lot of our touring engineers when I worked at a hire company. We put 4 motors on a 15m length of A-Type and loaded it with a fairly typical 'festival package' of large moving heads (Vipers I think), strobes, molefays and then all the associated cabling. Unlike the touring systems, I put loadcells on it. I sent the plot around a few days prior and asked everyone to bring their loading calculations. Then we trimmed it to everyone's satisfaction in the warehouse. I asked everyone what the point loads on each motor were. Everyone was fairly confident they knew pretty much what was taking what load. Then I put the Loadcell screen up on the projector. The estimates were mostly ballpark correct, but there were deviations up to about 250kg from what people had written down. Then clicked each motor up or down an inch (indistinguishable to the eye) and we all watched together as the loads changed hugely. Then I also ran motors up and down until the 'theoretical' load distribution was showing on the cells... the truss was rather "wonky". People were very surprised how far away estimations were from reality. It was interesting because when we'd previously talked about touring loadcells, it was unanimously voted down, due to the extra time to rig, loss of trim height, and cable faff. After doing the demonstration, it become much more normal for people to come to me and ask if they could have loadcells for certain aspects of their shows - particularly video walls. I think (and, to be fair, hope) that the more people come aware of this, the more common loadcells may start to become in entertainment applications.

Just wanted to add this is a completely valid concern. Old 243s are surprisingly brittle and I have damaged one the past pushing something too hard. So I would definitely go for the delicate option - as you are.

I have some thoughts but I don't know that they're appropriate here... this business is still trading and I think it'd be better to let them speak for themselves than speculating wildly. I can't see that it'd make any sense for a manufacturer to buy a big hire company. All they'd be doing is buying back a lot of their own equipment (much of which would be technically obsolete anyway). And yes, you're right about venture capital. It's all the same bunch of vampires operating that game, whether your business is PA speakers, coffee or health insurance.

A practice commonplace in the huge industrial corporations is relying on 'partners' to handle sales and integration whilst the brand develops, then once the brand reaches a strong enough market position, acquiring one or some of the partners and moving the sales and integration aspect in-house. You can offer a better price to the end client and make more money than you were before. Squeeze out the competitors, then snap them up for bargain prices too. Not suggesting D&B will do that, mind. I don't think L'Acoustics have. They still seem to be doing a good job of supporting their other UK users - Solotech (SSE/BCS being the LAcoustics carriers), Brit Row, Adlib etc. But often at the top of these companies the shareholders, CEOs etc went to the same businesses schools that head up the huge multinationals corporations... so it's hardly surprising when the seeds are planted for not dissimilar business practices is it? I guess the moral of the story is that when running an intermediary business (ie a hire shop, installer, sales etc), becoming too reliant on a sole supplier is a risky business.

As an alternative take on this (on account of RDM stuff being typically quite expensive). How about you stick with the Showtecs. Then in the event you need to reconfigure something over RDM, go in the patch room, plus a DMXCat into the DMX line running direct to the bar, change your config, and plug it back in the splitter?

You could most likely just send a specimen from the existing system to Stage One and ask them to produce you a load more. I'm sure their engineers could offer an upgraded carrier design too if that'll help you. For clarity I have no commercial interest in Stage One I just recommend them as a quality supplier of stage machinery who can work with both metals and plastics in-house.

I painted my DC headset with black enamel model paint and it looks fine. The DC headset are super easy to disassemble so I took the shells away from the headset, painted them and then reassembled.

Thanks for this feedback, I've been looking for something I can wear under a helmet but still having a boom mic, this is a really helpful suggestion.

I don't like Beyer headsets. They're too fragile. The Sennheiser HMD-26 is a nice headset. But I have always liked David Clark headsets. They are well known for their pilots headsets but they do offer a pro audio version. They are not cheap, granted. My personal one has been on tour for years and is in every bit the same condition it was in when I bought it. I really like the noise isolation (very good), the sound is very clear and cuts through whatever noise isn't isolated. The mic is gooseneck which I much prefer to a rigid arm. Another great thing about them is that they are very user-serviceable and all the parts are replaceable. And because of their popularity in the aviation industry (and the number of common parts), getting spares in other countries isn't problematic. I have an H8532... buy it with the case, which is unusually cheap! https://www.davidclarkcompany.com/pro-audio/headsets.php

Procell are what most of our industry use... I think they might now be branded as Duracell industrial or something. https://www.gaffatape.com/duracell-industrial-aa-batteries/ They're the same Duracell batteries you get in the shop but sold with a cheaper price tag by buying them 10s or 100s.

I'd take slight issue with this, Paul essentially asked a question that might occur to anyone who spots one of these consoles and isn't aware of the underlying issues. Many of the replies in this thread, whilst forcefully made, have been quite enlightening. Plus there was some genuinely useful advice and alternatives offered. Hopefully anyone from Avo reading through will be heartened by the support and affection for their company. I think it'd be counter-productive if any post that mentions less-than-genuine consoles is instantly nuked. This thread, imperfect as it is, stands as a pretty good example of how open discussion can work. I absolutely agree with you. I was just pointing out that if abiding by the blue room rules to the most literal degree, then even discussing illegal practices is, theoretically, prohibited.

Bit drastic. I don't think anyone is judging your ability to moderate. And I don't think anyone went too far. Maybe you need to take a moment and look at this from another angle rather than just throwing the teddies out of the pram. Counterfeiting, whether like total counterfeiting (ie trying to pass a fake off as the real thing) or just stealing the IP and offering a product somebody else developed as your own (usually at a fraction of the cost) is, I don't think it can be denied, ethically wrong. But not only is it ethically wrong, it is deeply harmful to the companies who produce the original equipment at great expense in terms of design, build, development and support. The Blue Room rules states the following: Frankly, the theft of intellectual property in producing fake consoles is illegal (well - it may not be in the country of manufacture, but it is here) as is the hacking of copyrighted software such that it can be installed on counterfeit consoles. Therefore I think it is not beyond fair assumption to suggest that condoning (or indeed, even just discussing) the manufacture, supply, purchase and use of counterfeit lighting consoles is in direct contravention of the forum policies. I think you are a valued moderator Paul and nobody is calling for your head on a pike... but maybe you will wake up in the morning and realise that, no matter your financial circumstances (because everyone's had a tough year - Avolites included), coming on a British technical theatre forum where you are meant to represent the law and the higher ground; and advocating the purchase and use of counterfeit consoles which are a direct rip-off of a British-made lighting console, in a manner which is known to harm that company; was, by all accounts, really daft. I hope you'll look at this fresh at 10am Monday morning and realise it was a stupid thing to say and that an apology and a reality check would be more than enough to get yourself back on track.

Basically: - Expertise of designers, who design the product in the first place (none of which the pirates do) - Expertise of electronics technicians and software developers who build the prototypes, test them, develop them and progress them to the point that they're ready for sale. (none of which the pirates do) - Expertise of the engineers who check that they comply with all the relevant standards and buying the standard itself and having it CE marked etc etc (none of which the pirates do) - Choice of the most suitable parts to make the product to a high standard (where the pirates just choose the cheapest) - QC of the product to ensure that the end user gets something which fully works and is built to a standard where it can be expected to work every day for the rest of its life in show-critical environments (none of which the pirates do) - Construction and provision of training facilities to ensure that everyone who owns and even uses the product is able to do so to the fullest extent of the product's capability (where the pirates couldn't care less, it's just a box) - After sales support to ensure that issues are rectified at the speed which is necessitated by our show-critical industry. (Where the pirates will just shrug and maybe send you a new box if you're lucky which may or may not be the same thing you broke) - Repairs and replacements on warranty (good luck with the pirates... warranty?) - And basically, keeping a premises. Paying staff wages. Supporting education. Paying the bills. Investing in people and their careers. Like somebody else said, I am shocked that a moderator on a British technical theatre forum is publicly advocating the theft of intellectual property and the use of unlicensed software (both of which are not just immoral but illegal) because it works out better on price. Avolites are, frankly, a cornerstone of our stage lighting industry. They employ some fantastic people who have innovated and created and taken risks to produce the products that you now seem to see no harm in buying a plagiarised version of, as long as your bottom line is cheaper. But don't take it from me, perhaps you should just call Avolites on Monday. Ask them, in their words - the people whose jobs will be gone when everybody just buys copies instead - why their products are nine or ten times the price? Maybe they can change your mind?

Having dealt with hireing these thing out for a number of years I contradict you opinion of the longevity of headsets Perhaps so in a hire environment, they're probably not treated too well. I've always seen a headset as something worth owning your own, both on hygiene grounds and comfort. Mine's been going 10-11 years of touring and daily use and doesn't look far different from the day I bought it. It took accidental damage in an incident once, but David Clarke had parts on a FedEx the following day.

What Tim said. These Chinese ripoffs are, like it or not, a real problem to the industry. If you want to know more, call Avolites or MA Lighting (probably the two most affected brands) and have a chat with them about it - I'm sure they'll be happy to give you an idea of what the piracy costs them. I appreciate that if you're not going to spend 'Avo money' then like, they're not losing a sale. Valid. But the pirates are still gaining a sale, which helps them continue to exist. Also bear in mind that, where those consoles are using some 'hacked' adaptation of the Avolites software; you would be using unlicensed software which is illegal and if reported could leave you open to prosecution. There's not much we can do to stop those things appearing in India and China but I think we should at least try not to see them on British shows. In a post-Brexit Britain, we need more than ever to ensure we're supporting our own manufacturers as best we can.

I've never personally understood the attraction to cheap comms headsets. You spend hours with this thing on your head, and being able to hear and speak clearly is fundamentally important to being able to do your job properly. Just buy a good one, they last forever anyway.

Those desks were backwards and awkward when they were new... I remember that much. I never remember seeing one on a gig when it didn't come with it's own programmer. They seemed to only exist as a bi-product of the chosen designer. I'd be surprised if anyone here can recall that off the top of their head, they don't exactly have a huge user base. You'd be better off looking for a manual.

Knipex do one, seen below. Apparently it's called a pliers wrench. When I was touring the USA, a lot of the local stagehands would carry these rather than crescent wrenches (American term for adjustable spanner). I had a go but in my opinion they combined the disadvantages of using an AJ as pipe grips and the disadvantages of using pipe grips as an AJ... Then again these are the people who invented decimal feet because they can see the value in counting in 10s rather than 12s but don't want to let go of the old way entirely...

This is one of the problems with scaf towers, everyone seems to be an expert, until... Inversely there was a well-known corporate events venue in London with a roof height of about 8m. They have 'computer floor' (ie the stuff you can pull up in sections and run cable under... some bozo actually thought corporate events would have time for that) so can't have an MEWP. So they had a scaff tower (Boss style) for installing rigging on the beams. It was good and quite obviously the safe way to do it. Then one of the outriggers broke. The H&S guy said that therefore the tower needed condemning, because it wasn't safe to use it without 4 outriggers. Solution? Use the 14 Rung Zarges instead (which was mainly there for focussing) for everything. That's the kind of logic you can only come up with when you do the Health and Safety qualification without having done the job first.

Oddly enough I'm going to take his side on this one. Maybe not on account of 'training' (as if he really felt he wasn't trained he ought to have made the complaint PRIOR to falling) but I should imagine the solicitor has advised him to take this angle since failure to ensure staff competence is a clear breach of HASAWA. It really is about time we stop taking this daft approach that the ladder is the answer to the question. That everyone can use a ladder. That it is obvious. That it's risk-free if common sense is applied. It's about time we stop finding it totally acceptable to carry a lighting fixture up one and rig it to a bar all on your own, using the hands which ought to be on the ladder. To do 3 points of contact you need 4 limbs available. There are times ladders are appropriate, but we need to end the culture of that time being all the time. There are a plethora of bespoke made options to reduce this risk... from clever towers (I bought a 'Solo' access tower for not much more than a Zarges which folds down tiny and goes up 6m) to motorised grids to powered access to tension wire grids... I am pleased to see that the school has opted for some kind of platform as well as pole up fixtures, this is a step in the right direction; it'd just be nice to see theatres doing this BEFORE people got hurt.