MAC vs Stage scan

[Gnome]

Any views about the relative merits of MAC 500 and Stagescans? To be used for a mixture of theatrical and concert work in a smallish fixed location.

 

I have used MAC500 in this context and was fairly happy with them although only on the basis of one show.

 

Especially interested in relative maintainability, programability and flexibility rather than value for money.

 

Thanks in advance.

[peter]

Moderation: Thread title spelling corrected.

 

Can't really contribute to the thread, as I've not used stagescans although I can tell you that the Mac 500s are certainly not the easiest units to maintain. Programability depends on your desk, but assuming you have a moving head capable desk then there is very little to choose between the fixtures - the mac may have the edge slightly in that area because of its speed control channels. If you're recieving, I'd recommend the macs as touring LDs would be more likely to have encountered Macs than StageScans. Although I imagine stage scans are faster than Mac 500s, so you might want to go for them for their speed. Hopefully some others can contribute something useful.

[johnhuson]

I think for your application you would be better going of the MAC's. In terms of maintainability there probably on a similar par, although the Stage Scan may just win that one as it has a bit more space inside. This brings me to my second point, the Stage Scans are big old units, heavy and not that easy to move round and rig, particulalry if you want to end up rigging them off booms/ladders things like that.

 

The MAC's will be more familiar to visiting LD's if you have any so another good reason for going for them. The MAC's have more gobo slots giving you more effects capabilitys, although the optics of the Stage Scans are a lot better in my opinion. The other advantage of the Stage Scans is that they have zoom(ish) capability. The scans also have colour mixing, something else you might want to consider. As far as programming is concerned I would say that they are both at the same level, it really depends on your desk.

 

I think it's difficult to say which would be best for your application. Your the person who can make that decision best, hopefully the information I have given you will help.

[mac500]

Really are comparing 2 completly different types of lights. For a more theatrical situation I would choose MAC 500's over stagescans because the mac's have more gobo's.

 

For actual brightness of lamp the stagescan uses a 1200w discharge lamp compared with a 575w discharge lamp.

[Ike]

John has mentioned most of the pros and cons I can think of.

 

I would go with the stagescans if you are woried about brightness, if not go for the 500s.

[Guest lightnix]

I would nearly always select a moving head over a moving mirror, simply because of the wider range of focus available.

 

Even so, the point about brightness is worth making. MAC500s aren't the brightest of lights and can have difficulty "cutting through the wash", especially when trying to lay down gobo textures in a bright state.

 

Have you looked at any Robe movers at all ?

[johnhuson]

For a more theatrical situation I would choose MAC 500's over stagescans because the mac's have more gobo's and more colour choices.

 

I agree with the gobos, but how does a MAC 500 with two colour wheels, have more colour options than a Stage Scan with full colour mixing and an additional colour wheel???

[mac500]

Ahh sorry I forgot that the stage scans had RGB mixing.