Tom R Posted May 9, 2006 Share Posted May 9, 2006 There are so many USB-DMX interfaces out there - I just wondered which one has been found to be the best? I want something reliable and effective, but I also dont wanna break the bank getting it! Any suggestions I will be extremely grateful... Tom Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3guk Posted May 9, 2006 Share Posted May 9, 2006 The best is a pretty big title, lots have their specialities, personally I love the bluelite range with the mini being well priced and the software being packed full of features for theatre playback. I hear that Daslight is superb for busking. Just depends what you want really. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dbuckley Posted May 9, 2006 Share Posted May 9, 2006 The best one is the one that works with the software you want to use. USB/DMX interfaces are common as muck, decent software is a lot rarer... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom R Posted May 9, 2006 Author Share Posted May 9, 2006 Im looking at using the ChamSys software...think I should probably go to them with a request for a box Cheers David - hadnt thought of it like that! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rich newby Posted May 9, 2006 Share Posted May 9, 2006 My fav is defiantly the das light. It has the most amazing software, which is also free! HTHRich Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bruce Posted May 9, 2006 Share Posted May 9, 2006 Rich, but why is it your favourite? Just saying that it's your favourite isn't particularly useful... What have you compared it with? Why is the software so good? Why did you like it better than whatever you compared it with? (Hmmm - did you really mean "defiantly"? <_< ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jambo_UK Posted May 13, 2006 Share Posted May 13, 2006 I like the LightFactory software just cause of the ease of writing cues and patching plus I like the command line operation. Shame about the price tag on it But my search goes on for a similar software whcih is cut down and cheaper as I wouldn't need more than one universe and a schduler would cause more problems then its worth. ** laughs out loud ** Haven't tried the das light one yet. I like the open USB one but am interested in the Entec one but they look the same :> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
five_pin_xlr Posted May 13, 2006 Share Posted May 13, 2006 ALthough retailed at £1200 from AC Lighting, the Hog Widget is brilliant. I used it a local youth club, and programmed their pulsar chroma domes, strips, panels, floors off it, and it looked fantastic. I have used it for a few productions as I am a rgular to the Hog2. This is a great bit of kit, with effects libraries which so easy to edit and the show will run smootly, although require Pentium 3+, and multi monitors is very good. Hope this helps Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jfitzpat Posted May 14, 2006 Share Posted May 14, 2006 I like the open USB one but am interested in the Entec one but they look the same :> Yes, they are the same and they both almost, sort of, put out DMX. What I don't understand is why someone would invest in LightFactory, which is not exactly cheap, but then run on a funky, slow, FDDI based solution. Spend the extra $50 and buy somethign that at least does not inherently spit out invalid packets... Yes - it is competitor sour grapes, but not what you think. We can't build our minis fast enough. My gripe is that, after a couple of decades, PC based solutions are starting to get serious attention and I don't think that pushing a buggy, non complient solution is ultimately in everyone's interest. -jjf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AndrewR Posted May 14, 2006 Share Posted May 14, 2006 I've had some good results running MagicQ on an Enttec OpenUSB-DMX widget. Not sure about bad packets though, not noticed any wierdness (except with mac250e dimmer shutters, and thats come up before as a mac/firmware problem) But I dont have a logic analizer handy! Its certainly as good as Hog2, seemed more stable (hog2pc is about as stable as a very wobbly thing IMHO) And has many very powerful features you only get on Hog3 or Vector. Wish I had one instead my currrent desk. (a magicQ desk that is, not the PC version) And they dont charge the crazy £1200. unless you actually want a control surface with it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ken Coker Posted May 14, 2006 Share Posted May 14, 2006 For what it's worth: My third year students have just completed a show control exercise in which one group ran an event, (Beckett's "Breath" since you ask), using a Dataton/Mac system and another group did the same event using open source/free software and a PC/Enttec openDMX box. The Enttec box, it would appear, is mostly stable but would appear to occasionally produce a spurious data packet or glitch - we too only had empirical observation and no DMX analyzer! However, the boxes are fabulously cheap and have become something of a cult item amongst the undergraduate population - I have two. Would I use them to run the moving lights at the local school's production of "Grease"? Yes I would. Would I use them to run my next conference at a terrible hotel in the Midlands? Nope, I'd take my Pearl. As for control software, it would appear that there is much good stuff out there - but very few of the "freeware" packages do all the things we would like. A lot of the packages are aimed at the LJ/dance market and thus need to be tweaked a bit to work in the theatre environment; also, the ergonomics of a laptop keyboard are not as efficient as the layout of a dedicated control surface. The Chamsys MagicQ system would seem to have possibilities, especially if one links it to one or two of their wings - a very cheap "Hog" style system. Hope this helps. Next year, I think I'll be devoting part of a module to compairing the various freeware packages that exist, so stay tuned. Ken Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jfitzpat Posted May 14, 2006 Share Posted May 14, 2006 Not sure about bad packets though, not noticed any wierdness (except with mac250e dimmer shutters, and thats come up before as a mac/firmware problem) But I dont have a logic analizer handy! There are basically three sorts of bad packets assiciated with an FDDI solution. First, timings like MAB are often violated. This is because they are being generated by the application. This is the reason so many applications based on it tell users to lower data rates and the users, erroneously, get the idea that the problem is inherent to DMX - even though plenty of low end consoles send data dramatically faster. Second, several flavors of the chip manufacturers drivers have a bug in circular buffer management. So, if you send data too fast it sends up getting sent in the wrong order. Finally, the drivers are not directly accessed, but utilized via the OS's comm stack. This creates another series of latencies and timing violations that are completely beyond the application's control. Again, most of this is 'solved' by just keeping actual data rates well below what the spec can support to get things 'mostly' working, then ignore the periodic bad frames. This makes the interface useless for more demanding applications, but is obviously workable for many rigs and situations. The whole cost argument does not impress me. Remember, our mini has a street price of under $300 and includes a DMX-in, a DMX-out and a SMPTE reader generator (with true chase and lock and automatic rate conversion). Our packet refresh rates are always as fast as allowed for the channel count used and our data update rates are about twice as fast as an Enttec interface can handle. Considering we have a larger investment, smaller economies of scale, and do not do seperate licensing for our software (ala LightFactory), it is hard for me to accept that competent engineers could not have provided complient output and reliable input at the Open USB pricepoint. As far as HogPC, it isn't fair for me to comment since we are a competitor. However, I do know that none of the driver versions that I have seen properly handle all PnP power messages. Many drivers (including early drivers from many USB/COM solution providers) inherited these problems from the original Microsoft DDK 'Bulk Transfer' USB sample source. I've helped several users on a number of boards get their Hog PC setups to be dramatically more reliable by disabling power management features on their computer. -jjf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJ Dicky Posted May 19, 2006 Share Posted May 19, 2006 We have done a lot of work on the driver for our Open DMX interface and have eliminated most (if not all) of the bad packet / timing issues as far as we can tell. We manufacture both the open source interfaces and pro microprocessor units. They each have their place. DIcky Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jfitzpat Posted May 19, 2006 Share Posted May 19, 2006 We have done a lot of work on the driver for our Open DMX interface and have eliminated most (if not all) of the bad packet / timing issues as far as we can tell. We manufacture both the open source interfaces and pro microprocessor units. They each have their place. DIcky Without seeing the results, there is little to say. I've stated on a couple of occassions that replacing the kernel level driver could go a long ways towards generating a better quality stream. You still would not get the packet rate and channel capacity of a better design, but at least you could send good data. Still, doing good driver development is not trivial. But I still wonder why? The difference in price between a 'pro' adapter and a buggy FDDI one is typically about $40. We charge $100 more, but that extra $60 is essentially our equivelent of a 16 universe LightFactory license. I understand that some markets are cost sensitive, but if these psuedo DMX adapters 'have a place', is it because $40 breaks the bank, the user does not know it is non complient and sluggish, or the user does not care if it is somewhat crappy? We've gotten quite a bit of grief for driving the price point of control downward ourselves, but I can't see how a lighting application is so cost sensitive that it can't sustain the price of a good extension cord - not to put out slow, buggy, packets. -jjf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DJ Dicky Posted May 19, 2006 Share Posted May 19, 2006 We have done a lot of work on the driver for our Open DMX interface and have eliminated most (if not all) of the bad packet / timing issues as far as we can tell. We manufacture both the open source interfaces and pro microprocessor units. They each have their place. DIcky The difference in price between a 'pro' adapter and a buggy FDDI one is typically about $40. We charge $100 more, but that extra $60 is essentially our equivelent of a 16 universe LightFactory license. I understand that some markets are cost sensitive, but if these psuedo DMX adapters 'have a place', is it because $40 breaks the bank, the user does not know it is non complient and sluggish, or the user does not care if it is somewhat crappy? We offer out free DMX>USB design because there is a need for a design that can be built and modified by a home hobbyist. We sell kits of parts, bare pcb's, complete units or if someone wants to source all their own parts, a circuit design and even a stripboard design is available. Our free design units and parts are sold at near enough cost price and are used to get new people involved and used to DMX, at which point they will buy one of our pro units hopefully. We also sponsor and host a Forum and community for people developing, using or interested in freeware or open source DMX software and hardware.We can also sponsor with hardware and free web site hosting any designers who offer their software, hardware or expertise through the forum. The majority of people on this forum are pretty DMX savy, but outside of here there is a large number of people who are interested in finding out how to use DMX fixtures and whether it is right for them. Since more and more DMX enabled lighting products are coming into the country at lower and lower prices, the ability to try out DMX without committing to spending large amounts on a controller or software is desirable even if that saving is only a small amount. Ultimately this should lead to a bigger market for pro quality controllers that will benefit all of us. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.