Robert Burton Posted May 30, 2014 Share Posted May 30, 2014 Some time back I heard something to the effect of LOR and Nutcracker joining up. What's up with this? I know Nutcracker is free and what it's limits are (I think....). Superstar - How much is it if you want to go with say 16 to 24 strings and have the S3 Advanced license? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Posted May 30, 2014 Share Posted May 30, 2014 Dan's last update here. If you don't have a SuperStar license, you would need to purchase one. See here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Burton Posted May 30, 2014 Author Share Posted May 30, 2014 I see the movement over to the .NET. Also the "Pixel Wizard". I guess that is a part of the Nutcracker software they purchased? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Burton Posted May 30, 2014 Author Share Posted May 30, 2014 ....and if I want to go more than 8 pixel strings / nodes I have to pay $299.95.....as a add on?!?! Even with the Advanced S3 software? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrianBruderer Posted May 30, 2014 Share Posted May 30, 2014 Yes, I realize that is a lot to pay for software. A lot of software is free these days. SuperStar is a niche product and the volume of sales is not as high as a product such as the Sequence Editor. As such the price needs to be such as it is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Simmons Posted May 30, 2014 Share Posted May 30, 2014 As such the price needs to be such as it is. Which, in turn, insures it will always be a niche product and that there will always be lower priced, or even free alternatives. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Burton Posted May 31, 2014 Author Share Posted May 31, 2014 ....and unfortunately I agree with George. I say unfortunately because I REALLY support LOR. But unfortunately too, this is a hobby. Some folks can spend that kind of money. Several years back I added controllers and then found myself paying for an upgrade (S3 Advanced). Wasn't prepared for that so that "deal" that was dangled out in front of me to go all the way with Superstar...just couldn't swing it. So now that prices have dropped somewhat on pixels, I can get into that part of the hobby. But this really angers me that I have been so devoted to LOR and the pixels are just going to be a tiny portion of my display. Software costing more than half of what I might spend on the "Beginner pixel" tree I was planning....sorry no. I know you need to pay for the programmers. If LOR goes and see what "Apps" are making the most money, it's the Free or .99 cent ones. Not the Bloated Microsoft or Adobe ones.Guess I need to study up on Nutcracker now. Very sad. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrianBruderer Posted May 31, 2014 Share Posted May 31, 2014 You've got a point. For what it is worth, the way I came up with the original pricing is to charge 10% of the cost of the CCRs that the software supports. CCRs cost about $250 each. 2 CCRs cost $500, so the 2 CCR license is $50. I followed that formulae for the first 3 licenses and then gave a lower price per CCR for the higher licenses. So the cost of the software as a percentage of the cost of the number of CCRs is: 2 CCR license (exports 100 pixels) - $50 - 10% of the cost of 2 CCRs4 CCR license (exports 200 pixels) - $100 - 10% of the cost of 4 CCRs8 CCR license (exports 400 pixels) - $200 - 10% of the cost of 8 CCRs24 CCR license (exports 1200 pixels) - $300 - 5% of the cost of 24 CCRs40 CCR license (exports 2000 pixels) - $400 - 4% of the cost of 40 CCRs With CCRs you get 50 pixels for $250 so the cost per pixel for CCRs is $5.00 per pixel.With CCPs you get 100 pixels for $240 so the cost per pixel for CCPs is $2.40 per pixel So the above table changes if you are using CCPs. The 3 lower licenses are 21% of the cost of the CCPs it supports. The 24 CCR license is 10% of the cost of the CCPs it supports. And the 40 CCR license is 8% of the cost of the CCPs it supports. If I understand what you guys are saying, as the price of pixels goes down, you would like the price of SuperStar to go down as well. You make good points. However, my current plan is to keep the price the same but to continue improving the product and giving good support so as to make SuperStar a good value for my customers today and in the future. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Burton Posted May 31, 2014 Author Share Posted May 31, 2014 Ok, I understand your point as well. But let's look at this.The cost of pixels are coming down, WITH OTHER DEALERS. If I go the pixel strip route, I am purchasing 16 pixel strips for under $400.00. I know that LOR sells a bunch of plug and play CCRs. But more and more people are now looking at other vendors. More and more vendors are also getting into the market as well. I am with LOR because it works and it is also the sequencing program that I am use to. So would love to stay with it. Even Sean (with Nutcracker) mentioned in what I want to do (in talking with him on another forum) the Superstar program would do better. So I was almost there. But if I am going to be able to put the rest of my design together for my display, I have to go another route. :-( The demo does look great. Kudos to putting together a great program. Robertwww.burtonchristmaslights.weebly.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caniac Posted May 31, 2014 Share Posted May 31, 2014 Ok, I understand your point as well. But let's look at this.The cost of pixels are coming down, WITH OTHER DEALERS. If I go the pixel strip route, I am purchasing 16 pixel strips for under $400.00. I know that LOR sells a bunch of plug and play CCRs. But more and more people are now looking at other vendors. More and more vendors are also getting into the market as well. I am with LOR because it works and it is also the sequencing program that I am use to. So would love to stay with it. Even Sean (with Nutcracker) mentioned in what I want to do (in talking with him on another forum) the Superstar program would do better. So I was almost there. But if I am going to be able to put the rest of my design together for my display, I have to go another route. :-( The demo does look great. Kudos to putting together a great program. Robertwww.burtonchristmaslights.weebly.comwhat I don't think you are factoring in is what products your are talking about. Pixels/RGB's and CCR's ARE NOT one in the same. The simple difference is that for CCR's and CCR related products (including CCP's, CCB's, and CCF's) are designed to WORK WITH LOR software, including SuperStar. If you want LOR "plug and play" then you got to pay a premium!! The way around that is the DIY world of RGB's et al. For the time being you can't have it both ways. If your on a budget then you have to go the Nutcracker/RGB route. This is not a slam to you or to LOR but has been the reality the last few years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
George Simmons Posted May 31, 2014 Share Posted May 31, 2014 (edited) I think you're missing the point a little Chet. I don't believe the price of LOR pixels is the issue here, but rather the price of the SS add-on. $400 extra (above and beyond the cost of the LOR Showtime software) for the privilege of using SS to sequence pixels almost as well as free software seems more than a wee-bit exorbitant to many of us. I'm a big fan of LOR products myself, but there's no way I'd pay that price for software that isn't even seamless with S3. At 62, I've heard enough political bulls**t in my life that I recognize it for what it is. Which means I give absolutely no credence to Brian's claptrap relating the cost of SS as a percentage of the cost of CCRs. C'mon - who's kidding whom here? If Dan and company used that absurd pricing policy for sequencing conventional lights, a lot of us would be paying thousands of dollars to use S3 to sequence a song. What I hear Brian saying is that if you can afford 40 CCRs then you shouldn't complain about the cost of SS - just bend over and pony up. I, on the other hand, say that if a person spends over 8 grand for 40 CCRs, it's not only bush league but stupid to try to force them to pay an extra $400 to be able to sequence those CCRs. Anyone ever hear of a product called Madrix? Edited May 31, 2014 by George Simmons 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caniac Posted June 1, 2014 Share Posted June 1, 2014 idk, if you just dropped over $8k on CCR's then another $400 shouldn't kill you BUT I get your point. Which is why most of you have gone RGB instead and use other products. Sorta reminds me of good old IBM, back in the day they had a much more superior product to Windows 3.0 in something called OS2. it was GUI based and really powerful BUT the entry level of that operating system was $300 and the "deluxe" edition was $900. Microsoft gave Windows away for free and sometimes thru in MS Office. We all know the rest of that story. Personally it should be priced in proportion to what we pay for LOR, he would sell tons more copies and Dan would move lots of CCR's. But what do we know. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caniac Posted June 1, 2014 Share Posted June 1, 2014 I guess it comes down to: 1) do you want to sell more software plus an annual maintenance fee. or 2) create an exclusive club for your software where only a few will buy in. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Posted June 1, 2014 Share Posted June 1, 2014 Just to play devils advocate here ... None of us "regular" people know what type revenue LOR brings in each year. We don't know how well the products are selling, nor do we know how many people buy the Superstar software. Brian and Dan probably know, but they aren't going to be releasing the numbers here. (If they did, I'd be stunned.) Second devils advocate point - The LOR world is much larger than these forums. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
john fulkerson Posted June 2, 2014 Share Posted June 2, 2014 i still say that lor software is way over priced and it would benefit them to lower it to get more customers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert Burton Posted June 2, 2014 Author Share Posted June 2, 2014 Hope Dan's announcement of a "Pixel Wizard" will include something that will not require the "Superstar" license. Possibly some of Bob's software will help with some of the effects as well. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iflights Posted June 2, 2014 Share Posted June 2, 2014 You've got a point. For what it is worth, the way I came up with the original pricing is to charge 10% of the cost of the CCRs that the software supports. CCRs cost about $250 each. 2 CCRs cost $500, so the 2 CCR license is $50. I followed that formulae for the first 3 licenses and then gave a lower price per CCR for the higher licenses. So the cost of the software as a percentage of the cost of the number of CCRs is: 2 CCR license (exports 100 pixels) - $50 - 10% of the cost of 2 CCRs4 CCR license (exports 200 pixels) - $100 - 10% of the cost of 4 CCRs8 CCR license (exports 400 pixels) - $200 - 10% of the cost of 8 CCRs24 CCR license (exports 1200 pixels) - $300 - 5% of the cost of 24 CCRs40 CCR license (exports 2000 pixels) - $400 - 4% of the cost of 40 CCRs With CCRs you get 50 pixels for $250 so the cost per pixel for CCRs is $5.00 per pixel.With CCPs you get 100 pixels for $240 so the cost per pixel for CCPs is $2.40 per pixel So the above table changes if you are using CCPs. The 3 lower licenses are 21% of the cost of the CCPs it supports. The 24 CCR license is 10% of the cost of the CCPs it supports. And the 40 CCR license is 8% of the cost of the CCPs it supports. If I understand what you guys are saying, as the price of pixels goes down, you would like the price of SuperStar to go down as well. You make good points. However, my current plan is to keep the price the same but to continue improving the product and giving good support so as to make SuperStar a good value for my customers today and in the future.I believe IBM mainframe software used a similar pricing model! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnfish Posted June 16, 2014 Share Posted June 16, 2014 (edited) In the end it is LOR and Brian that will set these prices. If they feel that they are providing a quality product and software that people feel are worth the price then they will be successful. For me personally I wish I had researched superstar a little further before deciding to upgrade. I only bought in at the 2 strip level and had no intentions of buying the LOR CCRs. I originally bought it thinking the auto sequence would work well for my non RGB sequencing. It didn't work well for my application and have been having some buyer remorse about it. I do think the CCRs and the software is overpriced but that is a business decision that Brian and LOR have made. If it works for them more power to them. For me it is not worth the price. John Edited June 16, 2014 by Johnfish Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrianBruderer Posted June 16, 2014 Share Posted June 16, 2014 Buyer's remorse is bad! Please email your visualization and one of your songs to me and I will see if I can get Instant Sequence to give you a descent sequence. Email to brian@superstarlights.com The visualization file will be at:c:/ (your lightorama folder) / Visualizations / Editor The audio file will be at:c:/ (your lightorama folder) / Audio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ron Boyd Posted June 16, 2014 Share Posted June 16, 2014 I have the 40 CCR version of SS and IMHO, it is invaluable to me for my show. My show this year will be 100% RGB and Pixels, over 10K channels. To get the level of control that I personally want, SS is that program. I want the single pixel control that SS offers, whereas, the free programs do effects at the element level. I have not found a way to do single pixel level control in the free softwares. In my case, I do use Nutcracker for effects that I cannot create for a 180 degree pixel tree with SS, ie., Spirals. (My 360 degree tree, a spiral is simple.) This is just an opinion of someone that is happy to pay for the control SS offers. Once the "Pixel Editor" is incorporated into S3, the software Superstar and S3, will more than likely be the only editor I need. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now