Jump to content

GaryM

Members
  • Content Count

    320
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4

GaryM last won the day on October 25 2012

GaryM had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

-1 Poor

About GaryM

  • Rank
    Member
  1. Yes, its been screwed up since the upgrade.
  2. If "some terrorist wrote a catchy tune.."...yea, they spend a lot of time doing that.
  3. A "non-American"..? Interesting term.
  4. No. Two different network topologies.
  5. A Sandevices controller runs E131, not DMX, so to answer your question, no. Take daisy-chaining out of your thought process when thinking about E131, its not the same approach as a string of LOR controllers, or DMX controllers using RS485.
  6. You're assuming the offered channel bandwidth for the non-ELL solutions is the same as the ELL. Thats not going to be the case. Pure channel count is one thing, but at the end of the day, its going to be desired data throughput that dictates the required channel bandwidth size, and thats not necessarily dictated by channel count.
  7. Wifi is definitely a better option than ELLs. I'd want to know a little more about channel bandwidth on the chauvet unit before considering that as an option. Its possible that you don't even have the bandwidth of a standard 2.4 wifi channel (22 mhz). As far as usable distance, any vendor that is giving you a specific max usability distance (like chauvet, saying 656 feet) is making a lot of assumptions, and very possibly some incorrect assumptions. Take that spec with a low level of confidence, it could be better, or worse, depending on your specific deployment.
  8. 2.4 is ism unlicensed stuff. You wont have any cell carriers using it. Pcs carriers at 1.9 and clearwire at 2.5, but other than maybe some muni wifi stuff still hanging around, nothing else. Bigger issue will be all the unlicensed crap in the band.
  9. If you are running DMX devices on your E131 network, you would use this. If you are all E131, its of no use to you.
  10. So what kinds of nuts do you eat?
  11. I'd call it hateful and jealous, and i too call them as i see them.
  12. How many controllers are you looking for now that you have all these lights?
  13. Would you agree that if reducing max intensity from 100 down to 86 extends the life of a LED string, then others who do not do that should be seeing a high(er) incidence of failure? That was my reasoning behind asking if others were experiencing what you experienced. I see nothing that says running LED strings at 100% intensity will "sap" them. Show me the data, meaning, multiple people who are seeing high incidences of failure, and then have reduced max intensity, and no longer experience failures, and then I'll be a lot closer to being convinced. I'd more inclined, at most, unless you have m
×
×
  • Create New...