Possible LOR competition?

[toymakr000]

mnkyboy wrote

But once you get past the threashold of 48+ channels with specific designed elements, IMHO you will have to go to custom sequencing that may require certain patterns to make that element really pop... an auto sequencer has no way of knowing if its an arch or megatree, or just shrub with lights on it... and would never work in a display like mine and many others where we can change the colors of virtually every element

Who would ever use more than 48 channels??

[chrisl1976]

Looking over many of the forums I have noticed a trend....more so with some of the newbies also.....People want the big fancy displays without the hard work and time involved. I think people are just getting lazy.

There is no computer program that will ever create a sequence as good as person can do themselves. I'm just sayin.

[james campbell]

I wanted more control of my display,so you can"t say lazy here,I would have just used my gemmy box again...........yuck

[terrypowerz]

You do all realize that we are responding to a thread based on the belief of a claim in a piece of advertizing nonsense?

I feel pretty comfortable saying that no one has a true "auto sequencing" feature in their software at this time.... and even if they call it that, the results will be much less than satisfactory...

So all the polls, multicolor posts (impossible to read, so I always skip em), demands, and what ifs in the world won't make it a reality.

A lot of energy that could be put to better use pounding out a decent sequence...

Just sayin'

[Tim Herberger]

“If ifs and buts were candy and nuts, we’d all have a merry Christmas.”

[terrypowerz]

[George Simmons]

james campbell wrote:

I find myself thinking things are redunant... This is something you can not learn to do overnight.

You are absolutely correct on both counts. Things ARE redundant and that holds true pretty much with everyone's display. Sure, the more channels, the more toys and eye candy one has to play with, but even then most display elements have a limit to the number of patterns or options they offer. If you're clever in the way you use the elements in your display (less is often more) and in the way you interact different elements with each other, your viewers won't see the redundance we all know is there. The more diversity in the music choices the longer before boredom sets in - for you and them both.

And yes, sequencing does take time to learn. One way you can tell how you're progressing is to keep a copy of your very first sequence. Forever. In the short term, it allows you to monitor your improvement and progress. If you look at that sequence again in six months and don't see any difference in the quality of what you're doing then as compared to now, you might want to consider listing your controllers for sale. In the long term it helps to keep you grounded. Whenever you start feeling too full of yourself pull it out and take a look. Works wonders.

[rodman1369]

terrypowerz wrote:

You do all realize that we are responding to a thread based on the belief of a claim in  a piece of advertizing nonsense?

I feel pretty comfortable saying that no one has a true "auto sequencing" feature in their software at this time.... and even if they call it that, the results will be much less than satisfactory...




Actually...what got ME fired up about the possibility of auto-sequencing is THIS post over in Cosmic Color Ribbon on this very forum...

http://forums.lightorama.com/forum89/26466.html

As we all know...even us newbies (for I have been reading every scrap of info out here)...Superstar CCR has been bought and will be integrated into the upcoming LOR release. This post, by the author of Superstar (who I believe now programs for LOR) showing the auto-sequencing of CCRs with his software. If it is integrated...it's a small jump to believe it will work on regular lights with LOR controllers as well...We will have an auto-sequenced base to build upon and customize ad infinitum... The author DID say that the auto part of the sequence required some manual tweaking...which was always a given to make it right And the author's OWN.
Go look at the youtube and come back somewhat impressed.

[rodman1369]

Sorry if I messed up that last post...trying to quote and messed it up.

[DanglinModifiers]

I'll throw in my two cents.

Cent 1: I voted in Clay's poll against adding this option. To those that say, "why would you be against a new feature, just don't use it," the answer is simple. LOR has finite time and resources.

LOR is a premium Christmas lighting solution. I'd rather they put their manpower into pushing the envelope, adding RGB, improving the visualizer, any number of new features. This is much more useful to the extreme decorator, and would probably net them more sales than making it "so easy a caveman can do it."

Cent 2: There are plenty of people who make their sequences available for free, and plenty more who custom sequence for a fee. I have to imagine that I'm going to wind up with a better quality show if I start with a Richard Holdman sequence and modify it to fit my needs, than if I start with a computer generated one.

On top of that, I'm calling BS on the whole thing. There's no way any of the videos they show were created automatically. In fact, they sure look like Holdman clones to me.

And are we sure we have our facts straight? I couldn't find a single mention on their site of the software automatically sequencing. They say it has automated tools (which LOR has as well) but nowhere do I see a claim that it auto-sequences. If I missed it, can someone point me to that claim on their site?

[james campbell]

George Simmons wrote:

james campbell wrote:

I find myself thinking things are redunant... This is something you can not learn to do overnight.

You are absolutely correct on both counts. Things ARE redundant and that holds true pretty much with everyone's display. Sure, the more channels, the more toys and eye candy one has to play with, but even then most display elements have a limit to the number of patterns or options they offer. If you're clever in the way you use the elements in your display (less is often more) and in the way you interact different elements with each other, your viewers won't see the redundance we all know is there. The more diversity in the music choices the longer before boredom sets in - for you and them both.

And yes, sequencing does take time to learn. One way you can tell how you're progressing is to keep a copy of your very first sequence. Forever. In the short term, it allows you to monitor your improvement and progress. If you look at that sequence again in six months and don't see any difference in the quality of what you're doing then as compared to now, you might want to consider listing your controllers for sale. In the long term it helps to keep you grounded. Whenever you start feeling too full of yourself pull it out and take a look. Works wonders.

I see your point, for the viewers it may be harder to pick up repeated patterns and such.I am looking at the same sequence for hours at a time and know about them.My first sequence compared to my last is very different,my first is choppy and my last is very smooth so I can see a progression

[james campbell]

terrypowerz wrote:

You do all realize that we are responding to a thread based on the belief of a claim in a piece of advertizing nonsense?

I feel pretty comfortable saying that no one has a true "auto sequencing" feature in their software at this time.... and even if they call it that, the results will be much less than satisfactory...

So all the polls, multicolor posts (impossible to read, so I always skip em), demands, and what ifs in the world won't make it a reality.

A lot of energy that could be put to better use pounding out a decent sequence...

Just sayin'

I think this tread is more about if a auto sequencer were available would you use it

[scubado]

This has been an interesting thread, here are my thoughts.
I would love to have an auto sequencer for off season use. I have landscaping lights year round mostly static or lightly animated. It would be fun to run the radio and have the lights dance to the music, but this would not really work for me because some items are single color and others are 4 color. An auto sequencer would only work best with all items single color in a single row fairly close to each other.
Auto sequencers usualy do their thing 'live'. If it could record what it did during a song would be helpful and then pick which version you liked best and work with it. You would also need to be able choose which channels to use for 'auto' such as all your white channels, then go back and modify it for your colors.
It was mentioned early in the thread that LOR could do a form of auto sequencing using a single controller, how do you do it?
For Halloween, I use two systems. I have a 12 channel Gemmy box that plays the Halloween music and dances the pumpkins on top of my flowerbed. The LOR system then controls the lightning, thunder, howls and such at a lot higher volume.
In the end, nothing will beat doing the sequencing yourself, but in a very limited way, could be a very useful tool.

[Tim Herberger]

james campbell wrote:

I think this tread is more about if a auto sequencer were available would you use it

Thread title: Possible LOR competition?
Revival Control Systems - Anyone heard of them?

[Guest guest]

chrisl1976 wrote:

Looking over many of the forums I have noticed a trend....more so with some of the newbies also.....People want the big fancy displays without the hard work and time involved. I think people are just getting lazy.

Lazy, maybe.


chrisl1976 wrote:

There is no computer program that will ever create a sequence as good as person can do themselves. I'm just sayin.

This I can agree with completely!

[Guest guest]

Cray Augsburg wrote:

Thanks, Chuck. Didn't know Orville's name was Clay. Ah well . . . I always seem to be a day late and a $ short.

My name IS Orville, middle name is Clay and what a lot of folks know me by.

Just to clear that up.

[Frank Picozzi]

Orville wrote:

Cray Augsburg wrote:

Thanks, Chuck. Didn't know Orville's name was Clay. Ah well . . . I always seem to be a day late and a $ short.

My name IS Orville, middle name is Clay and what a lot of folks know me by.

You'll always be Clay to me

[Guest guest]

DanglinModifiers wrote:

On top of that, I'm calling BS on the whole thing. There's no way any of the videos they show were created automatically. In fact, they sure look like Holdman clones to me.

And are we sure we have our facts straight? I couldn't find a single mention on their site of the software automatically sequencing. They say it has automated tools (which LOR has as well) but nowhere do I see a claim that it auto-sequences. If I missed it, can someone point me to that claim on their site?

Someone must have called them out on it! Because now the wording is different, it now says "automated tools", when I first looked at the site at the software area, it did state "our robust automated sequencer to build your shows."

So it has been reworded from what it originally was as I had the page bookmarked and went to get it to paste the link. Pointless now since they changed it.

[Guest guest]

scubado wrote:

It was mentioned early in the thread that LOR could do a form of auto sequencing using a single controller, how do you do it?

I think you're thinking of LORVis that I mentioned.

http://www.nopotatos.com/LORVis/

This will not create an auto-sequence, but what it does is allow you to select a single controller and play a playlist of music using Windows Media Player (WMP).

LORVis is a visualizer plug-in for WMP. And you can go in and set each controller channel up by setting and varying the Power or Frequency options to make the lights dance to the music at different times or intensities.

It should work for what you're wanting to do.

I've been playing around with it and it's pretty cool, but not something I'd use for an actual display (although someone might).

Make note: It WILL work with a CTB16PC controller, but it doesn't turn the lights off at the end of the song. So some lights will stay lit until the next song starts. When you close WMP, all the lights WILL GO OUT within a few seconds or so.

[Guest guest]

Tim Herberger wrote:

james campbell wrote:

I think this tread is more about if a auto sequencer were available would you use it

Thread title: Possible LOR competition?
Revival Control Systems - Anyone heard of them?

It went into the ditch many posts ago...

It IS interesting that if the descriptions of what the unit can do did change since this thread started, it means either they lurk here (not a bad idea if you're the competition), or someone called them out.

I looked at them long ago, but to me, its pretty obvious they have a product that works, but overall, when you look at who can offer the whole package, they don't measure up.