HELP!! Hardware utility cant find my pixies

[xtremeone]

Frustrated!! I have been using LOLR since 2014. I I had the show tested and ready to launch. Everything working. I went out yesterday to do a final test and lost all pixies on Auxiliary A. I assumed it was the first of 2 pixies that were not working. I tried everything...new ethernet cord. Comp restart ..you name it. So I disconnected the first board and connected my Alphapix to bypass the pixie and just use the network. I spent all afternoon disconnecting and reconnecting the props to the Alphapix...and updating the preview. I went out today to just connect to the Pixie 8 the only other pixie I had in the show. Now the second pixie controller can not be found in the hardware utility!! I tried connecting it directly and it will not find it! I tried again different  ethernet cords...different coms..  EVERYTHING! What is odd is that it finds my NON rgb controllers down line from the pixie as well as the before the pixie 8. I need help before I disconnect the pixie 8 and throw on another Alphapix. I don't see 2 board failures the reason...but maybe?? OPEN TO ANY HELP!

[dibblejr]

The Apix is a stand a lone controller, you are not trying to connect that with your pixies are you? If you connected the aplphapix to your ethernet port and your controllers into the alphapix you may have fried the comm chips.

Are the unit IDs correct? If you have repetitive unit IDs you will only find the fist unit ID

Since you have multiple networs have you switched adapters just to ensure the adapter is not the problem.

If you press the test button on the pixies do the pixels attached work?

Thats just a start

J.R.

[xtremeone]

No...I know how the alophapix works...I had EVERYTHING working...I went out to test and both pixies could not be found no matter what did. I replaced the FIRST pixie with the alphapix to get the that part of the show going. I am 100% careful not to mix the ethernet cables up. I know how that works with the magic smoke!

[dibblejr]

2 hours ago, xtremeone said:

No...I know how the alophapix works...I had EVERYTHING working...I went out to test and both pixies could not be found no matter what did. I replaced the FIRST pixie with the alphapix to get the that part of the show going. I am 100% careful not to mix the ethernet cables up. I know how that works with the magic smoke!

Assuming the "no" is the pixels do not light when you press the test button.

If that is correct you more than likely have 2 down comm chips "more than likely but not guaranteed" without being able to test.

I have seen more than once when helping people that are running multiple networks along with e1.31 devices when they get in a hurry they mistakenly connect the pixie controller to the e1.31 controller or the pixie controller to the ethernet port or other without the RS485 adapter, thus damaging the comm chip.

You have 2 controllers doing the same thing. We have to start from some point. That being the comm chips. Im going to send you a PM.

J.R.

[Mr. P]

What gets me is where you stated " I replaced the first Pixie with the alphapix." These two controllers are not interchangeable as they work on totally separate networks.

[xtremeone]

I already had an alphapix already in the show. I took the first pixie out and replaced it with another alphapix 16 … making sure I connected the alphapix to my router and not the lor usb.

[randyf]

It might help a little to know how you connect all the parts.

The APix is (hopefully) connected to the network, and should always be visible as such.  Unless you are trying to connect the pixie's to the DMX port on the APix, it's presence in this conversation is probably noise.  And if you are connecting as DMX, the pixies aren't likely directly visible in the HU.

It is also *very* useful to describe the cables attaching devices as CAT5/CAT5e/CAT6/etc. instead of "ethernet".  When I see "ethernet" in this discussion, I think that you have actually connected a device to a network router and it's using an ethernet protocol; as suggested, this won't work with the pixies, and has been mentioned, could possibly damage the communication device.  Advice here is to use a specific color of cable for all "ethernet" connections so that it doesn't get confused.

For the RS485 connection, how many RS485 links do you have, and how many devices are chained on the link?  Also worthwhile to describe the order of devices (might also trigger a realization in your brain)?

 

While you might have done the following, it might also be good for future "troubleshooting" for others...

Take a working device (suggesting there are AC controllers that are seen)closer to the computer/dongle connected with a short CAT5 cable (disconnect all other dongles) and make it is seen with the HU and verify the COM port.  Using that same device, add all the other dongles, and do it again; make sure to record all COM ports (unfortunately, these can all change in very funny ways).

Once you've verified the COM ports, take the pixie, and put it in the *FRONT" of the chain with the "working" controller chained to it (being first might help verify if the pixie is damaged).  Verify you can see both devices, and verify their unit addresses.  Do this with other pixies one at a time to verify the unit address (if two devices have the same unit address on the same network, one or both will not function properly).

Once you've verified each pixie separately and that they have different unit id's, chain them all together with the known working device last and verify you can see all of them.

At this point, you will know the COM port and unit address of each dongle and device; compare this with what you expect in the show and network settings.  Note this somewhere, as well as the specific USB ports the dongles are connected.

Put them back in the show, ensuring the appropriate pixie is connected to the appropriate COM port.  Then search each COM port for devices.  If not found, suspect cables.

 

Some additional notes:

Older AC controllers do not support enhanced network, and pixies really want to be on an enhanced network at a higher speed than older AC controllers can handle.  It would be better to have a different network for pixies and AC controllers.

Older pixel controllers might not support enhanced either, but IIRC, there are firmware updates for all to support the enhanced network (though, not higher network speeds).

Try to distribute your network by number of pixels and different network speed.  While it may be a bit harder as it might also require more data cable, you will get a better response to your pixels.

[dibblejr]

2 hours ago, randyf said:

It might help a little to know how you connect all the parts.

The APix is (hopefully) connected to the network, and should always be visible as such.  Unless you are trying to connect the pixie's to the DMX port on the APix, it's presence in this conversation is probably noise.  And if you are connecting as DMX, the pixies aren't likely directly visible in the HU.

 

 Pixie controllers other than the very rare pixie4IDMX are NON DMX controller. period!

All other thoughts have already been discussed with the thread.

Needed to clear that first thought of your up before someone searches and finds it.

J.R.

[randyf]

On 10/5/2023 at 1:58 PM, dibblejr said:

 Pixie controllers other than the very rare pixie4IDMX are NON DMX controller. period!

All other thoughts have already been discussed with the thread.

Needed to clear that first thought of your up before someone searches and finds it.

J.R.

Seemed a bit of a strong response, but according to the LOR docs, the Pixie2D and Pixie4D support DMX.  While I haven't personally tried this and I would strongly argue against this for anyone trying, it seems theoretically possible.  But I still stand to that thought:
    "Unless you are trying to connect the pixie's to the DMX port on the APix, it's presence in this conversation is probably noise."

The use of CATx terminology vs. "ethernet" will reduce confusion in a conversation where there is a mix of ethernet, DMX, and/or RS485 devices in a setup; not sure I saw that specifically, but terminology showed some confusion by posters.

Much of the rest of the message was about verifying the RS485 (a.k.a LOR) connections.  While that might have been discussed in the PM, it wasn't discussed in the thread.

Something I didn't mention, though, is that Windows is (or at least was) notorious for choosing a different COM device just by plugging the RS485 adapter into a different USB port.  One of the prime keys for me moving away from RS485, as I need to verify each adapter on the machine before plugging everything in and possibly making adjustments in the network configuration (IMO, putting the Pixielink in my setup has improved this connection for me and kept the Pixies in the game - though, I still have to note which Pixielink output connects to which Pixie).  So the point of moving adapters and devices to the show machine and verifying each adapter with the network link expected in the show is potentially very relevant here, and for anyone finding this thread.

[k6ccc]

2 hours ago, randyf said:

Something I didn't mention, though, is that Windows is (or at least was) notorious for choosing a different COM device just by plugging the RS485 adapter into a different USB port. 

That used to be a major problem in the early days of USB under Windows.  Has not been an issue in many years.  Although I generally do recommend using the same physical ports unless there is a specific reason not to, I have not seen comm ports move in a long time for the same USB device.  That even applies when moving from a port on the computer to a port on a USB hub connected to some other USB port on the computer.

 

[PhilMassey]

Yeah, used to be a nightmare, but not in a long time now.

[Orville]

33 minutes ago, k6ccc said:

That used to be a major problem in the early days of USB under Windows.  Has not been an issue in many years.  Although I generally do recommend using the same physical ports unless there is a specific reason not to, I have not seen comm ports move in a long time for the same USB device.  That even applies when moving from a port on the computer to a port on a USB hub connected to some other USB port on the computer.

 

I have moved my USB RS485 dongles to different USB ports from my old system (Windows 7 Home - currently still in use LOR 4 4.16 PRO) to my new Laptop (Windows 11 LOR 6 version 14 PRO), and I have yet to have their comm ports reassigned.   Even swapped them on different ports on the same system.

They even been moved to and from at least 5 different computer systems, not once did there comm port ever change from one system to another. 

My oldest one, a black RS485B was initially installed in Windows 98 in 2010.  Not once have I ever had to reassign its comm port when plugging into a different computer.

I swap them back and forth all the time when needed.  Never had any issues whatsoever 

Edited October 12, 2023 by Orville