DMX vs Light O Rama

[pabryang]

Hello everyone.

I have been using LOR for about 5 years... i have 4 boxes (64 channels) At a wedding last night I was introduced to another light enthusiast who just started 1 year ago. He has DMX light controllers and we were trying to explain to each other the difference. I thought I remember that DMX was more difficult to control however he was telling me he has over 1100 channels that he purchased for 1000 dollars. My four boxes probably have cost me that much, and i have only 64 channels.

Can someone explain to me what the difference between them are?

[Philip]

I'm not that into DMX but one thing you have to remember is that DMX uses multiple channels for each light, one moving head might have RGB + pan + tilt for a total of 5 channels for one lighting fixture (it could be more depending on the lights)

The main difference in them is how the software talks to the hardware. In LOR it sends a signal to the hardware at a given point in time that says start doing this now and fade it down for x amount of time.

DMX sends out 512 signals over and over and over to every piece of hardware (the light) and each piece of hardware waits to see his name come across the network to tell him what to do, at any given point there are signals being sent to every piece of hardware, but some of them will say "you stay turned off" when the hardware gets his turn, he's basically following commands that say stay on, stay on, stay on, stay on, fade down, fade down, fade down.... you get the idea.

you may have 64 channels, but each channel is completely independant of the others. You'll find people this year moving towards RGB who will have fewer lights yet more channels, because you could add one ccr which will use 157 channels. toss in some wall runners of RGB floods and the channels add up very quickly.

[LightORamaDan]

I responded to your email to Light-O-Rama.. did not realize that you had posted a question in the forums or I would have answered it in only once, here in the forums.

Summary of the email I sent back. The comparision is not really one of DMX vs LOR but "raw" DIYers vs completed product. There is no place where you can purchase a DMX light system for less than $1 per channel. Actually I believe it would be impossible for DIYers to build anything for less than $1 per channel that controls an AC load and has plugs and an enclosure....

Dan


Edit: My assumption is that this person was a DIYer AND that the channels mentioned were AC channels. I could be wrong about this but I am sure if there were DMX AC Dimmer Packs selling for less than $1 per channel we would know.

[zman]

Pabryang,

On my web site is a good DMX Primer if you want to look at it. I have another more updated copy that will get posted after next weekends Chicago Mini. This is slanted toward co-existence with LOR so should fit your needs very well.

DMX is nothing more than another option for you in your display. IMHO, it is the future for our hobby, that is really here and starting now. If you start to poke around, RGB is getting huge attention this year.

DMX and LOR are really very similar in more ways than they are different. They both are a protocol that drive hardware. One proprietary and highly controlled, and one is a world wide standard.

DMX is not hard, it is at times more detailed than LOR, but still just as much fun to work with and will open all sorts of different options for your display

Keep asking questions.

[edvas69]

It is actually a shame that LOR doesnt support cheaper DMX dongles or even better the new Ethercongateway (ECG) through the software. Instead you have to pay an extremely high price for an IDMX 1000 dongle. This in itself has become very limiting to what you can do with DMX in LOR and really traps you to just using the LOR protocol and gear unless you spend up big on the idmx1000.

The future of lighting is low voltage pixel based LEDs and these require lots of channels, there are a lot of options out there now but unfortunately LOR cant take real advantage of these options due to the $259 price tag for 1 DMX universe.

[pabryang]

RGB? have not heard of it. You mean DMX users will be moving towards this?

So would it be safe to say, My 64 LOR channels is equal to xxx amount of DMX channels? or in otherwords 1 lor channel equals say 10 DMX channels ( i understand that it would depend on what you are trying to accomplish.)



Thanks for all your help guys, just wanting to make sure I can move forward in the best way possible. More channels less dollars.

I am not a DIY'er i wish I were. so the LOR box is the real deal for me.

[edvas69]

pabryang wrote:

RGB? have not heard of it. You mean DMX users will be moving towards this?

So would it be safe to say, My 64 LOR channels is equal to xxx amount of DMX channels? or in other words 1 lor channel equals say 10 DMX channels ( i understand that it would depend on what you are trying to accomplish.)



Thanks for all your help guys, just wanting to make sure I can move forward in the best way possible. More channels less dollars.

I am not a DIY'er i wish I were. so the LOR box is the real deal for me.

LOR channels and DMX channels are the exact same what is different is the language the computer speaks to the controllers. So you cannot use a DMX controlled board with an LOR dongle as the languages (protocols) are different. Thats why LOR have the IDMX1000 which converts LOR language to a DMX language.

RGB stands for red green blue which are the primary colours. This will enable you to then mix these colours to create any colour you wish. This will take 3 channel, one for each colour and is the same for LOR or DMX so 3 channels are used regardless for an RGB light.

Now the LOR boards and controllers speak either LOR or DMX language (protocol). The LOR S2 software only outputs the LOR protocol so to take advantage of any DMX only equipment then you require a 'gateway' that converts LOR protocol to DMX which is the IDMX1000.

The main difference between the two is that for DMX you have a maximum of 512 channels per universe. LOR will allow 1000s per dongle/universe. So with a DMX universe you could put in 3 CCRS and with LOR you could theoretically have 12 CCRS if not more, but the limitations are the bandwidth and would be very dependant on sequence timings and what you are doing. But saying that 1 IDMX1000 gateway will set you back $259 for 1 DMX universe. The ethercongateway DR4 will give you 4 DMX universes for a cost of around $120 so the price difference is big per universe between using DMX in LOR compared to other software packages.

[hbomb341]

RGB - Here are some of the BEST RGB examples {Below} - the 3rd video AMAZING with all the stars. LOR did a GREAT move last or (maybe the one before) added DMX nativly to the controllers (considering it is the commercial lighting standard - so DMX and LOR are just 2 languages) - I am with edvas69 LOR need to add to the software DMX Dongle support and even better Ethercongateway (ECG) E1.31 support - the iDMX cost is a big prohibitory beside the limits of the software to handle large channel counts (1,000's+) and the easy of RGB.


http://vimeo.com/13722462

http://vimeo.com/13382282

http://vimeo.com/13843069

<<<< MUST SEE


I think you buddy's numbers are a little off but DIY vs commercial there is a savings - your paying for time (your or someone else). LOR beats commercial DMX dimmer packs but half if not more - so best bang for buck in town. But if you buddy is talking about pixel control (like the CCR's) then his numbers could be right - there are some options out there for DMX to pixel languages (protocol bridges)

But here is a good example {from video 3} 96 Channels for just the stars - 6 DC Cards (~$600 WITH OUT lights) or 32 3 Channel DMX units (~$450 with Lights http://CheapDMX.com) if you chose to us LOR software you need the iDMX.

I think this next year you will some more competition and growth in the software side of this hobby and some people switching to commercial lighting software. Also start to see more pixel control options.

Harrison

[hbomb341]

Also a good note is RS485 {LOR & DMX} has a best practice of 32 recievers max per network and 4000 feet run (without boosting or signal regeneration - yes I am sure you can push these without issues but what is in the documentation) - so LOR example 16 x 32 = 512 Channels.

Harrison

[LightORamaDan]

hbomb341 wrote:

Also a good note is RS485 {LOR & DMX} has a best practice of 32 recievers max per network and 4000 feet run (without boosting or signal regeneration - yes I am sure you can push these without issues but what is in the documentation) - so LOR example 16 x 32 = 512 Channels.

Harrison

Your info is correct per the 485 specification but a couple of things need to be clarified.

The 485 specification dictates that you must support 32 units on the bus. In actuality that is 32 unit loads and a receiver does not necessarily have 1 unit load. LOR equipment uses special 485 chips that only place a 1/8 unit load on the bus so it takes 8 LOR controllers to make up a single load. Thus we can support 8*32 or 256 LOR controllers on a network. ( we limit it at 240 controllers per network)

A LOR controller can have over 16 channels. CCRs can have over 150 so you now have the potential for tons of channels on a LOR network. The issue becomes one of bandwidth. In practice somewhere around 1000 channels on a network is practical... With 4 networks that puts you at about 4000 channels.

When we introduced the CCR with 150 channels, we realized that there is a need to modify software and communications to support lots of channels. Sequencing tools will change and communications hardware will also change to support the higher channel counts. That is all being worked on now.

Today it takes 4 LOR USB adaptors (about $112) to handle 4000 LOR channels. Some people may get more some less but that is not too bad. When people want to handle TONS of DMX channels with LOR things get a little sticky. The iDMX was designed to be part of the LOR network and driven by devices such as the DC-MP3 as well as full power PCs. Thus the cost is higher than the DIY and open solutions where the PC does the work rather than the adapter. We are working on a native DMX interface as well. It is considerably less expensive but will require that a PC be used to run the show.

Will LOR keep up with the high channel counts that individual RGB pixel products will require? Yes we will! In addition, we are working on a number of new RGB products that will require those additional channels.

At the same time we will continue to make it easy and economical for folks who are sticking with more traditional holiday lighting to make their displays dance.

Dan

[zman]

Harrison and Eddy, nice input to the tread.

Dan, as always, great information. What is not fully acknowledged at times, is that LOR as a company, has a lot more to manage. Legacy, Support and Development. In all that, is quite a bit bandwidth that sucks up resources.

The DIY world has somewhat of an advantage, as one individual working on one specific widget, doesn't necessarily have the legacy and support to worry about. In one respect, that is the advantage of only leveraging a standard protocol such as DMX.

One aspect of LOR that is great, is that today, you can still run it on an older, very basic PC, that does not have to be fully loaded with ram or a recent microprocessor. One thing that gets overlooked in the cost of the iDMX is the processing that it offloads from the PC.

The native DMX dongle you mention, and the other items will be exciting to see when they come out. OK, so I would be remiss if I did not poke on the timeframe question

[hbomb341]

Dan that is AWSOME news and thanks for the tech info. LOVE the product and LOR!!!

Very much looking forward to the native DMX support.

Harrison

[dmoore]

pabryang wrote:

Hello everyone.

I have been using LOR for about 5 years... i have 4 boxes (64 channels) At a wedding last night I was introduced to another light enthusiast who just started 1 year ago. He has DMX light controllers and we were trying to explain to each other the difference. I thought I remember that DMX was more difficult to control however he was telling me he has over 1100 channels that he purchased for 1000 dollars. My four boxes probably have cost me that much, and i have only 64 channels.

Can someone explain to me what the difference between them are?

Let me first say that I really admire LOR as a company - they have always had excellent service and good products in the price points they are located. I myself was a customer starting in 2006.

I'd generally agree with what has been said above - DIY is a fair amount of work, even the well organized co-ops like the Lynx - you need to get the cables, attach the connectors, solder the board, order the controller boxes, program the chips (varies), replace any failed items (no warranty) working out all the details yourself, as opposed to placing an order and getting a 100% complete product in one box – even if some minor assembly is required. There are no free lunches. I equate this to buying a pre-build home, ready to move it as opposed to a completely custom home you had a hand in making the decisions all along the way - sure, you get exactly what you want and at a savings but was the time spent worth the effort? In some cases that maybe, in others it may not. So, if you are new - I would without a doubt recommend LOR equipment, especially in light that they support DMX, which you don’t need now but which has started to make some major inroads in residential animated lighting.

I also agree that there is no “real” $1 per channel, high amp A/C controller out there – DIY or not. Even a cheap DIY case for a 16 channel controller is $9 each, without the controller. It is also important to note that there ARE differences in the controllers, which can be found here: http://www.holidaycoro.com/2010LSHWorkshop/Controller%20Features%20and%20Functions%20Comparison.pdf along with pricing comparisons that can be found here: http://www.holidaycoro.com/2010LSHWorkshop/Controller%20Cost%20Comparison.pdf – you will see that the lowest prices are right around in the $6-7 per channel range for a moderate power range 16 channel A/C controller.

Myself, as someone in 2010 that will have nearly 3,000 channels in a display that is about 80% (by bulb count) RGB this year, I can say that it is an entirely different world. My display dropped from 50,00 incandescent lights to just over 30,000 RGB lights but flipped from 160 channels to nearly 3,000. I don’t see primarily pixel based RGB displays as the “next thing” – I see them as a new generation of display, much in the same way that we still have static in addition to animated displays – RGB will just be another “style” of display – not everyone will be moving to it completely. I suspect it’s adoption will also be shallow in comparison to typical (as of today) animated displays, since the costs are very high ($4-10k+) and they are extremely technically complex at this point, relying on nearly 100% DIY equipment.

Stick with the LOR equipment for the time being, you can’t go wrong and you’ll know if your needs drive you toward DIY. If you’d like to learn more, here is a “DIY for LOR People” presentation: http://www.holidaycoro.com/2010LSHWorkshop/DIY%20Workshop%20Powerpoint.pdf

As to the protocol – for an example of what a mixed LOR/DMX network looks like, check this diagram: http://www.holidaycoro.com/2010LSHWorkshop/Lynx%20with%20LOR%20Cabling%20Topology.pdf – this shows how you can use LOR S2 in a LOR+Lynx (DIY) environment. Those with the technical stomach for the differences between the LOR and DMX protocol, check here: http://www.holidaycoro.com/2010LSHWorkshop/DMX%20and%20LOR%20Protocols.pdf

LOR S2, while “technically” able to handle 122,880 channels per 485 adapter, it is limited as Dan stated. The reason that Dan can’t say exactly how many channels is because S2 doesn’t expose it’s bandwidth output – so you don’t know when you’ve used up the available bandwidth (dependent on the network speed configured.) As in prior posts on this forum, there needs to be a bandwidth meter that tells you when you need to split your network when using the LOR protocol based on your specific sequence. I am aware of one network that was in the 800 channel range and experienced lots of odd problems – stickies and non-firing channels which was solved with a simple split in the network but that was only discovered after /much/ trial and error. A very simple warning/meter by S2 could solve this. This is one reason why the DMX protocol, while only able to handle 512 channels per “adapter” is guaranteed to work 100% - because every channel (well….. except for the iDMX from what I can tell) is resent ~44 times per second. LOR S2 at its current state, while able to “handle about 2,800 to 4,000 channels, will be dwarfed by 5,000 or 10,000 channel displays coming next year and in 2012. At this point, animated Christmas lights going forward will not be about hardware, it will very much be about the software. Read this for more details: http://www.planetchristmas.com/magazine/Spring2010/index.htm#/18/

[Dennis Cherry]

Most very large displays of 880+ channels in the DFW area are using 4-6 USB/485 LOR Dongles, the isolated type, and do not have mis-fires.

Have seen these displays and talked to the owners. Going that big you need to use extra protection to your computer.

They have 8+ years experience in animated display so they have gone done it all the other ways. I respect these people and talk to them over the year and have been very helpful with there knowledge.

In other word do not try to cram everything down one set of wires if you have a large complex display.

Eliminate the grief if possible.

[dmoore]

Dennis Cherry wrote:

Most very large displays of 880+ channels in the DFW area are using 4-6 USB/485 LOR Dongles, the isolated type, and do not have mis-fires.

In other word do not try to cram everything down one set of wires if you have a large complex display.

Eliminate the grief if possible.

There is the problem - WHEN to split the LOR network. It's really not possible for a "regular" person to know. This issue was covered here:

http://lightorama.mywowbb.com/forum76/21541-1.html

Thus you get unpredictable results. DMX was designed for people that MUST have predictable results, the LOR protcol appears to be designed around efficency and the ability to tolerate bad wiring and slow speeds.

Of course this affects VERY few people, so I suspect that's why it's not been added.

[jeffl]

I will be pushing 640 channels this year. Am I going to have to add my second dongle and split things up?

I forget. Is there two networks per 485 USB dongle or one? I have a spare USB 485 adapter just in case.

[hbomb341]

jeffl wrote:

I will be pushing 640 channels this year. Am I going to have to add my second dongle and split things up?

I forget. Is there two networks per 485 USB dongle or one? I have a spare USB 485 adapter just in case.

There is just 1 per "dongle".

Harrison

[LightORamaDan]

hbomb341 wrote:

jeffl wrote:

I will be pushing 640 channels this year.  Am I going to have to add my second dongle and split things up?

I forget.  Is there two networks per 485 USB dongle or one?  I have a spare USB 485 adapter just in case.

There is just 1 per "dongle".

Harrison

Q
Should not be a problem with a single network. Make sure to bump the speed up to max.

Dan

[jeffl]

I noticed a speed setting in the hardware utility I think but is this speed set in the sequence or another location?

[LightORamaDan]

jeffl wrote:

I noticed a speed setting in the hardware utility I think but is this speed set in the sequence or another location?

In the Sequence Editor Click ... Edit->Preferences->Network Preferences

Dan