back_ache Posted February 24, 2006 Share Posted February 24, 2006 or canadian http://www.pathwayconnect.com/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrisf Posted February 24, 2006 Share Posted February 24, 2006 While it does not fit the title of this thread, you could always go with something like Wireless DMX as made by the chaps here http://www.wirelessdmx.com/ AFAIK it is a good system and rather robust. Otherwise you could also look at consoles which work with networking, which will allow you distribute your data to remote nodes without the need to transmit DMX over ethernet. There are a few of these around. Cheers ChrisFPS/HES Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
xmath Posted March 19, 2006 Share Posted March 19, 2006 Okay then, so I think we are all agreed that although the AL DMX over LAN is a good device, when installed in an isolated network. It does however have quite a few "serious" draw backs (as have been kindly pointed out), so may not be the choice of device for this application. Do we know wether the LAN Box has the faults?The LanBox uses normal configurable IP addressing, not ArtNet's weird stuff. It broadcasts on UDP port 4777 which afaik isn't used by anyone else, so it shouldn't conflict with anything. It does however always produce broadcasts, not unicasts. No multicast support at all. It does accept unicasts of course so if broadcast is impossible you can still sync the lanboxes from a central computer... the packet format is quite simple. As for how it's used.. you've got a few options there. It can distribute the actual DMX data for up to 3072 channels (high bandwidth), or just synchronization signals (low bandwidth). What's best depends a bit on the details of the setup of course. Matthijs van Duin -- www.lanbox.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.