DMX and LOR

[Archer]

So it is almost a requirement to have the iDMX if your DMX components are not at the end of the chain of LOR.

[k6ccc]

Bear with me...
If there are no special settings to convert a unit (controller) from one type (DMX) to another (LOR) then why won't a controller after the DMX pick up the LOR data as I asked a message or 2 ago?

The DMX output from the iDMX will only have DMX data. There won't be any LOR data on the DMX output. As someone else pointed out, there is a LOR passthrough connection (just like any other LOR controller), so you can have LOR controllers downstream of the iDMX on the passthrough connection, but the DMX output is only DMX data.


Sent from my Droid Turbo via Tapatalk, so blame any typos or spelling errors on Android

[Archer]

I do appreciate everybody's input. Thanks be to all....

 

[basis21b]

55 minutes ago, Archer said:

So it is almost a requirement to have the iDMX if your DMX components are not at the end of the chain of LOR.

You can also run another separate network that does DMX and put the DMX devices on that network.  I use the IDMX because I'm too lazy to create yet another network from my computer.  

So you could have a network that is LOR, a network that is DMX and a network that is E1.31 or multiple combinations of the protocols.  All you have to do is make sure not to cross connect any of the cables.

Edited January 22, 2017 by basis21b
Clarified the DMX network could be separate

[Archer]

All of this raises even more questions on my part. 

My DMX component has only 3 pin input and 3 pin output. LOR has cat5 only and my computer has only cat5. The iDMX is gonna be my only answer.

[Dennis Laff]

Just buy a DMX dongle $ 50.00 run a separate network your better off.

[k6ccc]

3 hours ago, Archer said:

My DMX component has only 3 pin input and 3 pin output. LOR has cat5 only and my computer has only cat5. The iDMX is gonna be my only answer.

Build a cable that adapts from one to the other (I think you can also buy one).

 

[a31ford]

Ok. So to shed some light on this... 

BOTH dmx and lor use the same protocol (RS-485) however, i do not know if lor is a propriatary signal string ( K6 do you know??) BUT as far as connecting the wires dmx uses pin 1 as "earth" (shield) pin 2 is "data-" and pin 3 is "data+" (pins 4 & 5 on a lor cat 5 cable RESPECTIVELY)

WE need to understand that LOR uses a cat5 cable for RS-485, NOT  for ethernet.

LOR only uses the 2 centre wires in the cable ( 3 & 6 are 12vdc. BUT this has nothing to do with the data.) 

DMX by design uses a terminator resistor at EACH END of a universe. LOR can use but by default does not have them.

I use terminator resistors because of the long runs in my show (over 1600 feet) it's simply "good practice" with your data, to do so.

Aa far as the cables its only the 2 (PLUS a shield wire) that you need to worry about.

As far as DMX the controller is "out" only and has that terminator resistor built right into the box. DMX in and thru jack designations imply no terminators. The final box or connection in DMX should be an in only or even labeled out, this would imply the pressence of the other terminator resistor 120 ohm at EACH end of the data chain.

WOW that was long winded ?

Edited January 22, 2017 by a31ford

[default]

On 1/18/2017 at 4:04 AM, Archer said:

their use of moving head spotlights which are DMX and sequencing them in my LOR format..

When you get the DMX issues sorted out, here are a couple of threads that should be helpful in sequencing the moving heads in LOR, ie Sequence Editor.

Alan...

[Randytenn]

We played with a moving head light at the end of this year. We wanted to see if it would stand up to the other lights we had.

We discovered that the small moving head lights (less than$100) just weren't bright enough to stand out from the other leds. The light got lost in the display.

Sequencing was also tough. The light had quite a lag in response. It just didn't start moving fast enough. It took me several nights to get the basics down. Then a lot of trial and error.

We ended up abandoning the concept. Now we're looking for something else to add for next year.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ebuechner]

http://www.holidaycoro.com/DMX-Dongles-and-Programmers-s/1921.htm

 if it helps I have one of these that I don't use anymore that I could sell you. (Used one season only)

It's a simple and reliable USB to DMX dongle

[Darryl Lambert]

If you don't want to run 2 separate networks ( 1-LOR & 1-DMX ) you can also use ELOR from sandevice. It's basically a cheaper version of the IDMX1000. It get connected into your LOR network. It has 4-E131  universes  & 1 standard wired RS485 DMX universe output.

 

[Archer]

Great stuff so far........

[default]

14 hours ago, Randytenn said:

We played with a moving head light at the end of this year. We wanted to see if it would stand up to the other lights we had.

We discovered that the small moving head lights (less than$100) just weren't bright enough to stand out from the other leds. The light got lost in the display.

Sequencing was also tough. The light had quite a lag in response. It just didn't start moving fast enough. It took me several nights to get the basics down. Then a lot of trial and error.

We ended up abandoning the concept. Now we're looking for something else to add for next year.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

These are very good points. If the lights aren't strong enough they will get washed out, sequencing is very do-able, but does have a learning curve. It is also very tedious to sequence these lights. The speed in which the lights move has to be taken into account for timing.

It was suggested in another thread about renting moving head lights. This would help with the lights not being washed out.

I bought 2 cheap lights and came to the same conclusions as above. I am able to use mine because I do light shows in the spring/summer and rather than light up my house I have all my lights in the back 40. The audience sits in the dark and the lights are mounted above and behind them, so they dance around their feet in the grass. Once all the other lights start up, they easily get washed out. Just some food for thought.

Alan...

 

[DownTown]

On 1/21/2017 at 7:29 PM, Archer said:

In your example you had LOR to LOR to LOR to DMX to DMX...after the last DMX can other return to LOR?  

Not sure if k6ccc interpreted right, or maybe I interpreted wrong...

I go from My show PC directly to an iDMX1000, The iDMX has a 2 typical XLR connectors for the DMX data, and feeds my DMX fixtures. The iDMX also has a second RJ-45 that lets you continue to the next LOR controller in the series, and so my network looks like PC -> iDMX -> LOR -> LOR -> LOR etc...

[Archer]

If I read the LOR data sheet correctly, it tells me that LOR is smart enough to pull out the info that pertains to LOR and send to the next controller that same data that it received all the while, if DMX is required down the line then the DMX component will pull the data it needs leaving the LOR data untouched for the next controller.

[k6ccc]

15 minutes ago, Archer said:

If I read the LOR data sheet correctly, it tells me that LOR is smart enough to pull out the info that pertains to LOR and send to the next controller that same data that it received all the while, if DMX is required down the line then the DMX component will pull the data it needs leaving the LOR data untouched for the next controller.

Not exactly.  The iDMX takes LOR protocol data on one of the RJ-45 connectors, and generates DMX protocol data on the DMX Out XLR jack.  Additionally, just like every other LOR controller, the two RJ-45 connectors are hard wired together on the PC board, so whatever comes in on one RJ-45 goes out on the other (without being processed in any way, shape, or form).  What that means is that one RJ-45 on an iDMX connects to either an upstream controller or to a USB to RS-485 (or serial to RS-485) adapter that is in turn connected to a computer.  The second RJ-45 connector on the iDMX CAN be connected to other LOR controllers, and those controller will receive LOR protocol data.  The DMX Out jack will have DMX protocol data, and ONLY DMX protocol data that can control any controller that understands DMX protocol data (either a DMX only controller or a LOR controller that is operating in DMX mode).

On 1/22/2017 at 7:29 AM, a31ford said:

BOTH dmx and lor use the same protocol (RS-485) however, i do not know if lor is a propriatary signal string ( K6 do you know??)

I'm going to be a little picky.  RS-485 is not a protocol.  RS-485 is an electrical standard.  Both DMX and LOR are different data protocols that are carried over a Cat-5 or Cat-6 cable using a RS-485 electrical signal.  The two protocols generally use different pins when cabled with Cat-5 or Cat-6 cable.  LOR uses pins 4 & 5 whereas DMX uses pins 1 & 2 with 7 being the ground.  Note BTW that DMX is also commonly carried over a shielded twisted pair cable.  By spec it's a four wire (two pair) plus shield cable that has five conductor XLR connectors.  However, many DMX devices either also or instead, have three conductor XLR connector that use a single pair plus shield cable.  Use of three conductor cables and connectors is specifically prohibited in the DMX standard, but it's quite common.

DMX is a very dumb data protocol, whereas LOR uses a fairly intelligent protocol (which is why a LOR network can handle more channels than a DMX network, even when operating at a slower speed).

On 1/22/2017 at 7:29 AM, a31ford said:

DMX by design uses a terminator resistor at EACH END of a universe. LOR can use but by default does not have them.

I use terminator resistors because of the long runs in my show (over 1600 feet) it's simply "good practice" with your data, to do so

Again, to be picky.  The RS-485 spec requires a terminator at each end of the circuit.  A LOR circuit SHOULD have terminators just as a DMX circuit should.  We get away with not using a terminator because the LOR protocol is robust enough that it works without terminators as long as the speed and network complexity is not too great.  As LOR network speeds have increased, the requirement for termination will also increase.  As I understand it, when LOR is helping a customer with what appears to be data corruption issues, one of the first questions will be about terminations.

I also terminate my LOR circuits just like a31ford, just because it's good practice.

 

[Mr. P]

14 minutes ago, k6ccc said:

 

I also terminate my LOR circuits just like a31ford, just because it's good practice.

 

How would you terminate a circuit?

[Archer]

Mr P beat me to it

[k6ccc]

120 Ohm resistor across the data wires (1 & 2 for DMX standard, or 4 & 5 for LOR standard).  What I did was take a 1/8 watt 120 ohm resistor and crimp the leads into the correct slots on an RJ-45 plug.  Plug that into the second RJ-45 connector on the last controller in the string.  In my case, the terminators I built have two 120 ohm resistors - one for DMX and the other for LOR networks.  That way it does not matter what kind of network I plug the terminator into.

Take a look at this thread from December 4th of 2009:

You are looking for the 5th and 7th post.

 

Edited January 25, 2017 by k6ccc