Choreography...a How to For Dummies edition?

[Klayfish]

OK, this is a concept I'm still really struggling with, as I suspect all newbies do. For 2012, I was just figuring out how to make the lights blink. I only had 16 channels. My sequencing skills consisted of just learning how to make them fade, twinkle, etc...and more importantly trying to figure out when they should do those things. The very basic stuff, which I'm slowly getting the hang of.

As most of you are doing, I'm working on my 2013 layout now. I'm planning on having 32 channels this year. Would love 48, but I doubt I'll have the money or time to program that many channels. But even with 32, I'm probably going to have several groupings of things. 8 mini trees, 6 or 7 arches (each arch will have 7 channels, but each channel is shared with all the arches), curtains or other shapes laid on the ground, etc... Here's my question: How do you choreograph everything? In watching videos on YouTube, I've seen all the features work together, such as light up each group of things one at a time until they're all on, or they all chase from one to the other, etc... But I've also seen where the groups are doing their own thing, such as a mega tree is spinning while the mini trees chase. What factors make you decide to do one or the other, or even switch back and forth during the song?

Edited February 14, 2013 by Klayfish

[Orville]

For me, it just basic personal preference.   I watch it in the animation window {not the visualizer} and see how it works, if I like what I see and the flow is smooth enough, I'll usually keep.  If it looks rough or too jerky, I'll try to tweak it until I feel satisfied with what I'm looking at.

 

Then I may and usually connect up a controller or two and lights to see how it looks in real world setting, sometime what looks good on the computer screen, ends up looking like crap in the real world, so more tweaking and retesting until the results are what I want or can get as close too as possible.    Again, it really all boils down to personal preference as to where, when, what and how you want your lights to react within any piece of music.

 

Just the way I do, other methods may differ and all are open to end user/viewer interpretation.

[George Simmons]

I have to agree with Orv.  (And I can't describe how difficult those words are to type... I think my keyboard is melting...)

 

Do yourself a favor and spend whatever time it takes to do a precise job with either the animation or the Visualizer.  The animation is easier, the Visualizer is better, especially in that it allows you to easily move things around the yard to see what different arrangements look like.  The better the job you do setting up the A or V, the less time you'll need to spend re-doing sequences when you set up the actual display.  

 

As you add more channels and more display elements, the sequencing job actually gets easier.  It takes longer perhaps, but it becomes easier from the perspective of having more things interacting with each other and more things to work with.  

 

My recommendation, beyond the above, is to focus on the thing that you see first in your mind as you're contemplating the music.  If, for instance, you say wow - this song would look cool with the arches doing this or that, then sequence the arches first and add the other stuff afterward.  And always keep in mind that just because you have 32 or 48 or however many channels, they don't all need to be in action all the time.  Easier said than done, maybe, but well worth the end result.

[shfr26]

Wow George, I could not have said it better.

[sasmuse]

I agree with George regarding the A and/or V. Before I do any sequencing, I have my layout planned, and then I listen to the song at least a hundred times all the while keeping my layout in mind. If there are repeated sections, I will repeat the light sequencing also. It helps peoples' eyes move around the display. They'll know that the lights did that particular action the last time they heard that part of the music.  To add variation, I may add additional lights, but I always repeat music/light sections.  Additionally, if a particular instrument and rhythm is prominent in a song, I'll assign it to a set of lights. It's fun to hear..."hey those lights are playing what the guitar is playing". People will notice.

 

I try to mix things up and not use every element in every song. That way when I want to make a big impact I have more items to work with. I start with the "less is more" philosophy and build from there reserving the right to use all the lights at special high intensity moments.

[Brian Mitchell]

Listen to the music. Feel the music flow through you. Become one with the music and let it guide your mouse.

 

Remember what I have taught you and learn to sequence you will.

[Guest Don Gillespie]

Listen to the music. Feel the music flow through you. Become one with the music and let it guide your mouse.

 

Remember what I have taught you and learn to sequence you will.

 

Love this, sounds like a quote from Happy Gilmore, and a bit of Kung Foo, newbies would be wise to heed the words from guys like George and Brian, although it sounds like George's keyboard has gone into melt down mode, at least listen to Brian.

[George Simmons]

Love this, sounds like a quote from Happy Gilmore, and a bit of Kung Foo...

 

Looks like Yoda never made it to Canada...

[scubado]

Wow george, you sold out sequencing early this year.

[George Simmons]

Wow george, you sold out sequencing early this year.

 

That's a fact.  Looks like I need to raise my rates.

 

But mostly it's due to existing clients renewing, and that's okay with me.  I'm glad they like my work that much.  It's a lot more efficient and lends to greater creativity when I already know their display and know the things they like and/or don't like.  And I've gotta admit it's kind of cool to see their displays grow each year and to be able to sequence so many different display elements and to pick up so many great ideas.

[Brian Mitchell]

Love this, sounds like a quote from Happy Gilmore, and a bit of Kung Foo, newbies would be wise to heed the words from guys like George and Brian, although it sounds like George's keyboard has gone into melt down mode, at least listen to Brian.

Apparently my inner Yoda isn't the same without the voice.   But at least George got it.

[Klayfish]

 

Do yourself a favor and spend whatever time it takes to do a precise job with either the animation or the Visualizer.  The animation is easier, the Visualizer is better, especially in that it allows you to easily move things around the yard to see what different arrangements look like. 

As you add more channels and more display elements, the sequencing job actually gets easier.  It takes longer perhaps, but it becomes easier from the perspective of having more things interacting with each other and more things to work with.  

 

My recommendation, beyond the above, is to focus on the thing that you see first in your mind as you're contemplating the music.  If, for instance, you say wow - this song would look cool with the arches doing this or that, then sequence the arches first and add the other stuff afterward.  And always keep in mind that just because you have 32 or 48 or however many channels, they don't all need to be in action all the time.  Easier said than done, maybe, but well worth the end result.

 

Thanks everyone! This is where I think I'm hitting that mental roadblock. I used the animation last year, because it was fairly easy to set up. I tinkered with the visualizer and plan to try to use it this year.

I know some people sequence one group at a time through the whole song, and others sequence all groups at once as the song goes...but for sake of discussion, let's assume I'm sequencing groups all the way through one at a time. Here's what's tripping me up: So let's say I sequence out my arches through the whole song. Now I'm going to start at the beginning of the song again to start sequencing my mini-trees. I struggle with "In this part of the song the mini-trees should work in unison with the arches", or "The mini-trees should be doing xx while the arches are doing yy"? Guess a lot of it is just letting it fly and do what my mind tells me. I do agree that not everything needs to be going all the time. Last year, with only 16 channels, I didn't have as many idle channels, but this year I'm sure I'll have more.

Edited February 15, 2013 by Klayfish

[Brian Mitchell]

I probably spend as much time thinking about what I want the props to do as I do actually sequencing them.  I will play sections of a song over and over just trying to visualize what I want to see.  Actually putting it to the screen is the easy part.

[caniac]

Listen to the music. Feel the music flow through you. Become one with the music and let it guide your mouse.

 

Remember what I have taught you and learn to sequence you will.

when you can take the sequence from my hand grasshopper, then and only then the student will be the teacher!

[SteveMaris]

The visualizer gives a more accurate representation of what the show will actually look like.

I am going on my third year, and I am just starting to set up my show with it now. 

It took me a while to figure out (Not too smart, but can lift heavy things)

I am really liking it so far....

[Orville]

Apparently my inner Yoda isn't the same without the voice.   But at least George got it.

I was thinking the same as George, more to Yoda's way of speaking than anything else I've heard.

 

BTW: Sorry your keyboard went into meltdown George.  

[Guest Don Gillespie]

The visualizer gives a more accurate representation of what the show will actually look like.

I am going on my third year, and I am just starting to set up my show with it now. 

It took me a while to figure out (Not too smart, but can lift heavy things)

I am really liking it so far....

First year using the new viz myself, we will see if it will  help me out more than the old version, I also can lift heavy items but am at that stage where I delegate who gets to lift them now.

[Orville]

_{BTW: I think the visualizer is a lot better than the animation window, but I use the animation because that is how I started and been using for a few years, now that I am getting ready to upgrade to be able to use the SuperStar software, I'm sure the visualizer is something I'm going to start learning, and hopefully using this year.} 

 

_{Mainly because I think the visualizer is better suited to the SS software as opposed to the animation option.} 

 

_{That and I''m considering ordering some LOR CCB's this year if all goes as planned, so I think I'll be needing the SS and the visulaizer to get the most out of the CCB's.  If I'm thinking correctly.}

Edited February 15, 2013 by Orville

[George Simmons]

_{... If I'm thinking correctly.}

 

Darn you Orv - I haven't had any warning points for a couple of weeks now and there you go just feeding me straight lines.  So now I've gotta figure out a way of answering that without actually answering it...

 

Oh heck - what's a few warning points... I kind of feel naked without them anyway... 

 

No Orv, to the surprise of absolutely no one, you're not thinking correctly.

 

SS is okay if you've got the time to learn how to use it, but it certainly isn't required to get the most out of any CCDs.  I've got about a dozen CCRs and a set of CCBs (will be adding a bunch more this year) and I don't feel I've missed out on anything by sequencing them manually.  In fact, some of the things I've done with them, as best as I can tell, is quite difficult, if not impossible to replicate using SS.  And quite frankly, I think Bob's Vegomatic might even be a better option for casual users.

[Orville]

Darn you Orv - I haven't had any warning points for a couple of weeks now and there you go just feeding me straight lines.  So now I've gotta figure out a way of answering that without actually answering it...

 

Oh heck - what's a few warning points... I kind of feel naked without them anyway... 

 

No Orv, to the surprise of absolutely no one, you're not thinking correctly.

 

SS is okay if you've got the time to learn how to use it, but it certainly isn't required to get the most out of any CCDs.  I've got about a dozen CCRs and a set of CCBs (will be adding a bunch more this year) and I don't feel I've missed out on anything by sequencing them manually.  In fact, some of the things I've done with them, as best as I can tell, is quite difficult, if not impossible to replicate using SS.  And quite frankly, I think Bob's Vegomatic might even be a better option for casual users.

Aw come on George. give me a break here, I have only been able to play with SS in Demo mode, so I don't know what it can or can't really do.  And that's why I stated that at the end, because I was under the impression from reading some posts around these and other forums that to get the most out of any type of RGB device, like CCB's or CCR's that SS was recommended. maybe not actually required, so I worded it wrongly perhaps, but who hasn't made those type of mistakes?

 

Just because it may have been worded incorrectly is no reason for the "No Orv, to the surprise of absolutely no one, you're not thinking correctly.".   And then folks around here wonder why I get defensive at times.  But I'm not even gonna let that one bother me George.   I'll still play around with SS in demo mode until l can get the upgrade for it, because I think I will be using it over time.  

 

And I will also be looking into many of Bob's software when I take the plunge and actually have some RGB items to play around with.    I know Bob makes some really nifty software add-ons for LOR, and that they are very nice to have, especially since they complement the LOR suite so well.

 

So thanks for the answer/  Now I know for sure, but really wasn't sure prior to your informative answer.