Jump to content
Light-O-Rama Forums

DMX controller


gwallman1

Recommended Posts

I'm looking into incorporating DMX into next year's display. But I feel overwhelmed by the subject, not entirely sure what all is compatible with LOR and what is not. I've read a great deal through these forums, which has been extremely helpful.

If I do proceed with DMX, I would definitely go with intelligent lighting (each node programmable).

Out of all of the discussions, I've not seen any mention of this particular controller. Any DMX pros out there that could confirm for me if this would be compatible with LOR and any reason why this particular controller wouldn't be sufficient as opposed to the $200 or more like Enttec (since so many people seem to swear by that particular one)?

http://www.environmentallights.com/14791-dmx512-px-2801.html

Thanks in advance, all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I appreciate the links/suggestions, WilliamS. However, I didn't explain well in my original post. Part of what I'm also trying to accomplish (understand) is the "hows" and "whys." For example, why might Enttec or either of the two controllers you've provided links for be better than the item I was inquiring about? And when I'm doing various searches, how do I know what equipment will and won't work as part of LOR?

Thanks for any expanded info.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LOR can output in an a protocol called 1.31 or DMX over ethernet. The DMX controller you used in your link is a RAW DMX controller, it can control pixels but so will the 2 pages I pasted. As well the one you posted will require a DMX signal, so you will need an Entec or spare USB485 where the ones I posted you run a Lan cable from that controller to your home network. Much easier. As well most if not all the ones on the pages I posted will control 4-12 DMX universes so 680-2040 total pixels, where your post will run 170.

They do not work on the LOR controller network, they run straight off your home network switch.

Trust the links I posted, if anyone in this community disagrees with those 2 as the 1.31 pixel controllers that are directly controlled by LOR please post here. We all went through this less than a year ago. There are hundreds maybe thousands of posts in the 1.31 section.

Edited by WilliamS
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

There is one more thing not addressed.. you will need two power supplies. This controller works from 8-24vcd and the 2801 takes 5vdc.. not a huge deal, but you need to make sure you don't try to run them both from the same supply..

At least that is what I see from a glance.. along with what the other guys said above..

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 weeks later...

Ok, I think I'm sold on the sandevice.  But before I order it, I want to be sure I order everything else I need.  Can someone verify if I'm understanding everything correctly?

 

  • sandevice - appears to have 16 "channels" (16 separate outputs, meaning I could run 16 separate light strings.....similar to 16 outputs on an LOR controller).  Is that correct?
  • power supply - this controller provides the power to the light strands, meaning no additional power supply is needed (beyond the one to power this controller).  So only one power supply needed.  Is that correct?
  • light strands (pixels) - how can I tell the limit to the # of lights in a single strand that this controller could handle?
  • lights - going with the pixel approach, are there different types of lights I need to look for?  Or is just any DMX pixel light controllable by this?

 

Thanks everyone.  I know this is a lot of questions.  I just can't wrap my mind around this technology.  Maybe I just need to buy some equipment and play with it for it to make sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ok, I think I'm sold on the sandevice. But before I order it, I want to be sure I order everything else I need. Can someone verify if I'm understanding everything correctly?

Great choice on that device. And, the owner of the company is a member of a different Christmas light forum, and he stands behind his product. I used one last year and ordered two more for this year.

sandevice - appears to have 16 "channels" (16 separate outputs, meaning I could run 16 separate light strings.....similar to 16 outputs on an LOR controller). Is that correct?

Yes, with caveats. Every four inputs is a single "cluster." Every cluster must be the same TYPE of pixel string (2801, GECE, etc). Other clusters can have a different chipset. And, within a cluster, the strings CAN be different lengths.

power supply - this controller provides the power to the light strands, meaning no additional power supply is needed (beyond the one to power this controller). So only one power supply needed. Is that correct?

First, you will have to purchase the power supply in addition to the 682. It can handle a wide variety of voltages, so you need to look at what voltage your pixels use to direct you. Most pixels are 5 or 12 volts.

You also need to think about how many amps you need. Again, your pixels will direct this: look at power consumption for each red, blue, green led. Add those together and multiply by length of string.

Then multiply that by your number of strings.

Another factor with running power from one location is the distance from controller to the first pixel of each strand. With DC current, voltage drops pretty quickly down a wire. So, you will want to run your strings as close as you can to the controller. If you can't, then you may need additional power.

light strands (pixels) - how can I tell the limit to the # of lights in a single strand that this controller could handle?

lights - going with the pixel approach, are there different types of lights I need to look for? Or is just any DMX pixel light controllable by this?

I'm not sure that there is a theoretical limit to the pixels in one output, other than the controller limit of 1020.

But there are practical limitations. The primary one is the voltage issue I mentioned earlier. If you run too many in a row, you may find the ones furthest away are not as bright and may not have consistent color. A reasonable length would be around 50, then use another output.

Thanks everyone. I know this is a lot of questions. I just can't wrap my mind around this technology. Maybe I just need to buy some equipment and play with it for it to make sense.

Hope that helps!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Great choice on that device. And, the owner of the company is a member of a different Christmas light forum, and he stands behind his product. I used one last year and ordered two more for this year.

Yes, with caveats. Every four inputs is a single "cluster." Every cluster must be the same TYPE of pixel string (2801, GECE, etc). Other clusters can have a different chipset. And, within a cluster, the strings CAN be different lengths.

I'm not sure that there is a theoretical limit to the pixels in one output, other than the controller limit of 1020.

 

 

Agreed about Jim at SanDevices!  Great guy to work with and great product.

 

 

Yes, each string in a cluster can be different lengths, but you sort of waste channels that way.  For example on a star I am building, there will be 6 concentric starts with 2811 pixels on them  They will have 80, 70, 60, 50, 40, and 30 pixels.  The cluster that will drive those strings is set for 90 pixel strings.  The outer 2 strings (80 & 70 pixels) will waste 10 and 20 pixels (30 & 60 channels respectively), and the 3rd & 6th physical strings will actually be one logical string, and the 4th and 5th physical strings will be one logical string.  So for that cluster, I will tie up 360 RGB channels, but have only 330 physical pixels present.

 

 

Also remember that a logical pixel can actually have more than one physical pixel.  For 2012, that same star consisted of 93 2811 pixels that were configured as one RGB pixel, so you could actually have far more than 1020 physical pixels in use.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Will S3 run E1.31 and LOR signal at the same time with two dongles or do you have to convert all of your controllers to E1.31?

I will run bothh signals at the same time E131 from you E131 port and LOR's from your dongle

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Will S3 run E1.31 and LOR signal at the same time with two dongles or do you have to convert all of your controllers to E1.31?

 

Yep sure will, but you don't need two dongles.  You would use one dongle for your LOR controllers and the E1.31 is on you ethernet LAN.

  For Christmas last year, I was using one LOR network for my landscape lighting, and added E1.31 for my RGB pixel tree.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm looking into incorporating DMX into next year's display. But I feel overwhelmed by the subject, not entirely sure what all is compatible with LOR and what is not. I've read a great deal through these forums, which has been extremely helpful.

If I do proceed with DMX, I would definitely go with intelligent lighting (each node programmable).

Out of all of the discussions, I've not seen any mention of this particular controller. Any DMX pros out there that could confirm for me if this would be compatible with LOR and any reason why this particular controller wouldn't be sufficient as opposed to the $200 or more like Enttec (since so many people seem to swear by that particular one)?

http://www.environmentallights.com/14791-dmx512-px-2801.html

Thanks in advance, all.

This year i am going to DMX but dont have that much money right now but the way im doing it is theres a guy from www.holidaycoro.com that has dmx stuff fairlly cheap but the only thing is that u haft to upgrade the software to the max and buy one of his communication device... Its well worth it cause when u upgrade your software u can do alot more then buying the dmx device from light o rama but agian its all prefference... But i could pay for it so i went with this way 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

LOR is rumored to have a smaller, cheaper DMX device in the works.

A stripped down version of their iDMX1000, I believe.

 

No detais other than that, from Dan Baldwin last year around the April timeframe.

 

Should be fun, but it's not a show stopper for me; just keeping on programming new songs, ya know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...