SuperStar worth the $$?

[zvacman]

Hi all. I really hate even posting this topic.  I've always said that things are worth what someone is willing to pay.  Is SuperStar worth the money? I am looking at $299 for the level I would need right now and more $$ in the future. Everything I've read about it sounds good.  What I am asking for is feedback, on why you can't live without it or why you wish you never bought it.  I already need to upgrade my S4 to Pro for the pixels and CCR's that I'm adding this year.  I haven't played with SS at all, the show computer is sitting idle while I build props, so I am relying on the feedback of the users.

Thanks, Z

[Rickster]

Yes, yes, yes.  SS is wonderful and the support is just as wonderful.

[BrianBruderer]

I am biased since I am the programmer for superstar, but realize that the free demo version of SuperStar that comes down with every download of S3 or S4 is fully functional in every way except that you cannot export the sequence to play to your actual lights. This means you can create and save a sequence for any number of pixels or channels. You can also experiment with instant sequence. It Sounds like you have a large display, if you don't already have a visualization of your display you can create a visualization and import it into superstar and create sequences for it. If you need help creating the visualization and getting it to map to the sequencing grid the way you want, I can help you with that.

There are video tutorials on superstar, go to the lightorama main page, click on Support, then click on Tutorials, the superstar tutorials are near the bottom. The first two tutorials on scenes and morphs will give you a good introduction. Then you might want to look at one of the "Instant Sequence" tutorials.

[Ron Boyd]

Been sequencing with SS since year 2 and have never regretted spending the money I did. I have a bit over 11 k channels and it's the bomb. 

My favorite analogy:

If you're building a fence, you're not going to buy a hand saw will you. Nope, the right tool for the job. Superstar is the right tool for the job.

Play around with the parts Brian spoke of above. Once you have an "Aha" moment, you'll love it too.

[dougd]

40 minutes ago, Ron Boyd said:

Been sequencing with SS since year 2 and have never regretted spending the money I did. I have a bit over 11 k channels and it's the bomb. 

My favorite analogy:

If you're building a fence, you're not going to buy a hand saw will you. Nope, the right tool for the job. Superstar is the right tool for the job.

Play around with the parts Brian spoke of above. Once you have an "Aha" moment, you'll love it too.

Ron, you left me hanging, what is the right tool for building that fence.

Oh, and SS is a very cool sequencer once you get the hang of it. Defiantly has the ability to do certain things that most other sequencers don't have.

[Grinch]

I asked myself that exact same question last year, and after watching the videos of the CCR trees and wishing my lights would look like the videos, I decided to jump in.  Once you get the hang of using SuperStar you will love it.  So it really comes down to what do you want your display to look like?  The Pixel editor has its place but I spend the majority of my time in SuperStar.   My only regret is that I should have jumped in earlier.

Edited March 31, 2016 by Grinch

[saxon]

Superstar is all I use. Brian is constantly adding things and listens to ideas. It's an investment you won't regret. 

As mentioned play with the demo. I personally steer people to the tutorial on morphs first.

[k6ccc]

Another person speaking forth for how wonderful SuperStar is.  Fantastic and worth EVERY PENNY!  It does have a bit of a learning curve, but once you have the Aha moment (and you will), it will all start falling into place.

And Brian's support can not possibly be beat (short of him moving into your house for a while to teach you).  Every question gets answered and if it's not a simple answer, Brian will look at your files or even remote into your computer to help figure out the problem (and they are generally not the program's fault, but rather us idiot users who don't know what we're doing).  Brian also has added many features that were requested by us users, or adjusted the way things work because of user requests.

 

[PURSUIT OF EXCELLENCE]

Waiting for that aha moment.  Most people seem to be programming all their dumb lights with it which seems odd to me.  I like the full control and ease of programming I get from the sequence editor for that.  I find it rarely displays a decent grid of the pixel prop I want to program.  Maybe it just can't do what I want it to since I like to make original props of varying styles and functions.  It seems to be locked into ribbon trees and matrices (getting boring, everybody has those).  The hype says I will get total control of every pixel, but it's like pulling teeth to me.  Aha, no, false alarm....

[Ron Boyd]

4 hours ago, dougd said:

Ron, you left me hanging, what is the right tool for building that fence.

Oh, and SS is a very cool sequencer once you get the hang of it. Defiantly has the ability to do certain things that most other sequencers don't have.

Power saw.

[Ron Boyd]

2 hours ago, PURSUIT OF EXCELLENCE said:

Waiting for that aha moment.  Most people seem to be programming all their dumb lights with it which seems odd to me.  I like the full control and ease of programming I get from the sequence editor for that.  I find it rarely displays a decent grid of the pixel prop I want to program.  Maybe it just can't do what I want it to since I like to make original props of varying styles and functions.  It seems to be locked into ribbon trees and matrices (getting boring, everybody has those).  The hype says I will get total control of every pixel, but it's like pulling teeth to me.  Aha, no, false alarm....

It does very well for me. It's all in the set-up. The mini trees, Snowflakes and Bethlehem star are Dumb RGB. All the others are Pixels. First pic is what the display looks like and the second is the visualizer I sequence to. Real and Row, respectively.

Edited April 1, 2016 by Ron Boyd

[zvacman]

Ok, I'm taking a break from controller/prop building to play around with SS. Is there a secret to getting it to open in demo mode? When I click on it nothing happens.  Help!

Z

[BrianBruderer]

In release 4.1.2 there was a bug where if you installed superstar on a computer that had never run superstar before then it failed to launch.

If you are running v4.1.2 then the easiest fix is to install any release after v4.1.2

If you are running something other than v4.1.2 let me know.

[zvacman]

Thanks Brian, I found something you wrote in 2015 about just reinstalling LOR.  It worked. I'm attempting to do an instant sequence right now.  I'm lost and computer challenged.  In demo mode can I sequence and save everything until I pull the trigger on buying the level I need?

Z

[BrianBruderer]

Yes, you can create and save sequences with the free demo. The free demo is functional in every way except that you cannot export the sequences to play them on your actual lights.

If you haven't looked at them already, there are some video tutorials; go to the lightorama main page, click on Support, then click on Tutorials. The superstar tutorials are near the bottom. The first two on scenes and morphs are a good introduction. There are some on instant sequence as well.

[bobschm]

Right now there are some conflicts between SuperStar and Pixel Editor. Basically, you cannot use both to run the same RGB prop (universe and channels) in the same sequence, even if you carefully avoid overlapping commands. If you have an effect in SS that looks perfect, but a PE effect looks better for another part of the song, you're out of luck. The entire prop has to be done in one or the other.

If a future release fixes this issue, then SuperStar will certainly be worth every penny to bring back to my arsenal of tools.

With SS, I was creating effects, then copying and pasting them into the Sequence Editor. I could also program the prop in the sequence editor right down to individual pixels, or move the effects at will along the timeline without going back to SS.

PE puts effects on large props a lot easier, but you cannot touch them in SE. You should play around with both programs and decide which will be more useful for your particular props. In my case, PE is a better choice now.

Edited April 1, 2016 by bobschm
first para, last sentence. Entire prop must be in one or other. the song can use both.

[B.Y.R.G.]

12 hours ago, Ron Boyd said:

12 hours ago, Ron Boyd said:

 

It does very well for me. It's all in the set-up. The mini trees, Snowflakes and Bethlehem star are Dumb RGB. All the others are Pixels. First pic is what the display looks like and the second is the visualizer I sequence to. Real and Row, respectively.

 

How do you get your props to show up on the grid with the separation spaces between them?  That is exactly what I'm trying to do but my props all show up next to each other in a horizontal row on the grid.

Edited April 1, 2016 by B.Y.R.G.

[k6ccc]

32 minutes ago, B.Y.R.G. said:

 

How do you get your props to show up on the grid with the separation spaces between them?  That is exactly what I'm trying to do but my props all show up next to each other in a horizontal row on the grid.

You do that by specifying the location of props and fixtures when creating the visualization.  That one capability in my opinion is huge.  Allows for arranging things in ways that make sense instead of the way the computer thinks makes sense.  To do that, bring up the Prop Properties and click the SuperStar button.  On the new box, click the checkbox for "Force SuperStar Row/Column.  Then enter the desired row and column for the start of the prop in the SuperStar grid.  Same concept for fixtures, EXCEPT that it is a relative location.  For example, if you specify the Prop to start at 10,15, and the fixture at 1,5, that fixture will be 10,20.  You will have to play with it a bit to get the hang of it, but once you do, it's wonderful.  Also note that SuperStar will happily overlap your props if you tell it to, resulting in not what you expected.  Also note that props that you DON'T specify will get placed automatically by SuperStar and MAY overlap the props that you specified.  So the best bet is if you specify locations for some props do it for EVERYTHING.  Takes some extra time in Visualizer, but well worth it.

The other huge advantage is that if over years you add additional props, your existing props don't move on the grid which screws up your existing sequences.

 

[Ron Boyd]

Thanks Jim for the explanation.

Now, one other thing I would like to add. If you have a packed prop, meaning one run of pixels span universes, (such as the bursts I have in mine), There's one command you have to use in the visualizer prop properties box. A better explanation using my prop above. Each arm on these bursts have 25 pixels on them.The first 6 arms are channels 1-75, 75-150, 151-225 up to 375-450. Since I use one output for each of these bursts, on arm 7, I only have 60 channels in the first universe available, but I need 75 channels. So the last 15 channels are on the next universe. In the visualizer, to make this split fixture work, in the "Comments" section on your prop properties box, I have to add this comment

superstar matrixLength=25 

It has to be typed exactly as the example. If it had have been a full 50 pixel string, the number would be 50 instead of 25. 

Without this comment, the program adds 20 pixels on one column and the other 5 on the next column, which makes a single morph a major PITA. 

[B.Y.R.G.]

Thank you both Ron and Jim for the response.  I've actually tried playing around with the Force SuperStar row/column and it never moves anything around.  Is their a certain way I have to import the visualization when doing that?