Newbie trying to understand Pixielink

[sodajosh]

So I am brand new to pixels and attended my first expo this year. I have a large property and was advised that using Pixielinks would be the best route for me. I also have ZERO knowledge on DMX universes and how they run. I will have 21 Pixie8 controllers and 4 regular AC controllers at various points of the layout. When I attempt to play a sequence with the LOR USB-485 connected to first Pixie8, daisy chained to second Pixie8, daisy chained to third Pixie8, it works fine. But due to distances I was advised to use 4 Pixielinks with network switches based on my layout. When I plug the network cable into a network switch, then into the Pixielink, then daisy chain the Pixie8s after that, I get nothing. My questions are:

1. In this setup I should NOT be using USB-485 adapter, right?

2. What do the Unit IDs need to be set to in the preview? DMX or Unit IDs

3. If my PC does not have an Ethernet port and I am using a USB to Ethernet adapter, is that a problem?

Thanks for any help!

Josh

[TheDucks]

Just curious: Why not home run (to PL) more of those Pixies? That LOR network (the PL port) is getting busy :)

Edited September 16, 2023 by TheDucks

[k6ccc]

1 hour ago, sodajosh said:

I will have 21 Pixie8 controllers and 4 regular AC controllers at various points of the layout.

That sound like a LOT of pixels.  Distance is not your issue with wanting to use the PixieLink devices, but rather simply number of connections required.  Unless some of those Pixie controllers are lightly loaded, if you were running RS-485, you could easily need a dozen or more LOR networks - each with it's own USB to RS-485 adapters.  That is certainly doable, but may or may not be practical.  Distance on the RS-485 networks is generally not a big issue as that can be up to 4,000 feet.   Ethernet on the other hand is limited to 100 meters between network devices.

1 hour ago, sodajosh said:

1. In this setup I should NOT be using USB-485 adapter, right?

I would assume you will still use one LOR network for your AC controllers - with an associated USB to RS-485 adapter.

 

1 hour ago, sodajosh said:

2. What do the Unit IDs need to be set to in the preview? DMX or Unit IDs

It would be DMX.  Then in the Network setup, you would define the DMX networks with the IPs for the various PixieLink devices.

1 hour ago, sodajosh said:

3. If my PC does not have an Ethernet port and I am using a USB to Ethernet adapter, is that a problem?

Not a problem.  Using a higher speed USB port (if your computer has different speed USB ports) would be recommended.

I have never set up a PixieLink, so I can only help in that regard in very general terms, however I have used E1.31 via LOR since 2012.

 

[Jeremiah Ackermann]

The main advantage with them is you can use E1.31 instead of using serial (LOR/ELOR using USB-485 adapter). So yes, you should NOT have to use one of those adapters (question 1).

As @k6ccc said, use DMX. Because you will output E1.31 and the PixieLinks will convert that to ELOR for the pixies. Just need to configure the PixieLinks for the correct DMX universe ranges on each of the ports.

 

A USB to Ethernet adapter should work fine, but you will need a router between your computer and the network switches or just have the router and run multiple lines to each pixielink depending on the distance. Without the router, your IP traffic (E1.31 data) likely isn’t get routed to the PixieLinks correctly. 

[TheDucks]

10 hours ago, Jeremiah Ackermann said:

The main advantage with them is you can use E1.31 instead of using serial (LOR/ELOR using USB-485 adapter). So yes, you should NOT have to use one of those adapters (question 1).

As @k6ccc said, use DMX. Because you will output E1.31 and the PixieLinks will convert that to ELOR for the pixies. Just need to configure the PixieLinks for the correct DMX universe ranges on each of the ports.

 

A USB to Ethernet adapter should work fine, but you will need a router between your computer and the network switches or just have the router and run multiple lines to each pixielink depending on the distance. Without the router, your IP traffic (E1.31 data) likely isn’t get routed to the PixieLinks correctly. 

The router is for handling outside traffic (AKA the Internet) AND usually is the DHCP server for the LAN. You don't need DHCP if every device is configured with a static IP.

Another use of a (properly located) Switch is a repeater that allows you to turn a too long (>100M)run into 2 segments . In the OP's case, This is not an issue.

[Jeremiah Ackermann]

1 hour ago, TheDucks said:

You don't need DHCP if every device is configured with a static IP.

You’re right, but that’s a big if. That is why I mentioned the router. The PC, especially if a laptop, likely is not setup with a static IP. Basically it’s just easier to put in a router and go without having to adjust settings on anything. Especially if the PC is a laptop that may want to jump into different networks and then have IP address conflicts.

 

As far as distance, nothing is over 100m based on the drawing. So the OP could just get a single router and run multiple lines just from a single router instead of multiple switches. But if there are more pixies further down the line not shown in the drawing, adding a switch somewhere in the middle would be needed.

 

 

[randyf]

A couple of things to add:

The Pixielink only runs the LOR Enhanced network, so will not work with older AC controllers (non-Gen3)  which don't support enhanced network.  In this case you will need to continue to use the RS485 adapters to these controllers (if unsure, assume they are not supported and save yourself the headache of troubleshooting this connection).

The Pixielink also has 6 outputs; if possible try to use each output rather than daisy-chaining controllers.  At this point, it is RS485, so distance probably won't be an issue, but not having all that pixel data traversing a single output will have latency benefits (with a small exception, this is also what I do - in those exception, I have a couple of pixie4's - while it will likely change over time, I only have 4800 pixels running off the Pixielinks, so constraining a 16 string controller to a single channel on the Pixielink is fairly easy; but as that grows, there is an increasing likelihood of other e1.31 controllers or more Pixielinks).

I run my show devices from a dedicated GB switch.  This way you are not calculating ethernet distance from a router to the Pixielink, but distance to the switch, which can also be put in an optimum location for the show devices.  And while e1.31 is 100mb, any decent GB switch will auto-sense and configure the link for 100mb; and you at least get the potential for better bandwidth from the PC to that switch.

If there is no way to *not* connect each controller individually (e.g. more controllers than available links), calculate the number of pixels that will be on a channel, and try to balance as best as possible.  It may also be practical to run RS485 to a set of pixel controllers so as to add more channels.  I've also done this as my setup runs from my garage, and two of the pixie4 controllers run pixels that are directly associated with the garage and garage doors.  Since I had dongles from before the Pixielink, it was a practical way to "save a channel", so to speak.

Also, on DHCP: my show devices are all fixed IP.  Given the complexity of my network and setup (the show computer is separate from the sequencing computer; sequences are stored separately from both; some things run in a VM), it is slightly easier for me to know where the devices are rather than to search for them and/or not have them collide with other devices on the network.

Just some extra things to consider when setting up your connection; YMMV

[sodajosh]

@randyf That is an amazing post! I appreciate all the food for thought and will take some time to digest this info!!