eldoradoboy Posted November 14, 2009 Share Posted November 14, 2009 im sitting here busily sequencing away on one of my techno tracks and ive taken it down to 16 times the beat.. and wonder if I have out run the LOR network by doing so? some of the time divisions are less than .05I have never sequenced that intricately before now but this some is tough to nail... so i just want to make sure im not shooting myself in the foot and going to see lag because of network traffic..-Christopher Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest wbottomley Posted November 14, 2009 Share Posted November 14, 2009 Nope.But, keep this in mind, 99.99% of people wouldn't know if you missed a beat or not. They see things in a whole.You can split hairs but viewers do not really see that.Sequencing is not one of my things because it's a waste of time getting down to the nitty-gritty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eldoradoboy Posted November 15, 2009 Author Share Posted November 15, 2009 good to know that i surely wont run out of speed.. I was thinking that eventually i would overload the network with traffic.. I dont know the LOR protocol to know if it is light or heavy weight..as for the sequences.. i dont sit and take them purposely down to the .03 second level to make sure the beat is dead on.. I do it for spin and chase routines that I want fast...ie: spinning the mega tree or the mini trees...I agree that most people have no idea what is synced and what is not.. being that I used to be a club DJ and did the lights too I was long interested in "sequencing" before I knew what LOR was...that said, the most packed dance floors were the ones where the lights were best matched to the music.... back then we used to sequence the lights Live and manually.. a converted music keyboard worked wonderfully...-Christopher Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eldoradoboy Posted November 16, 2009 Author Share Posted November 16, 2009 looks like ill be fine.. I did some testing last night where sequence of a 125 BPM techno song divided into 16 timings per beat and the network kept up flawlessly!... found a couple places where LOR was dead on but I was off in the sequencing but thats normal..176 channels seems very large to me but in the scheme of things its really a small setup compared to some on here...-Christopher Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest wbottomley Posted November 16, 2009 Share Posted November 16, 2009 eldoradoboy wrote: 176 channels seems very large to me but in the scheme of things its really a small setup compared to some on here...-ChristopherYou got that right, LOL! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuckd Posted November 18, 2009 Share Posted November 18, 2009 Last year, I ran around 500 channels or so on one network, and DEFINITELY slowed everything down. Parts of songs simply could not keep up, and most of my timing is around the .04 range. Then again, dramatically spin-fading two 192 channel mega trees (plus everything else going on) is fairly network intense.This year, I'm running 4 different networks, and the same songs are very, very noticeably 'on beat'.There's a huge difference between a single network running at it's limits, and multiples dividing the load. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rstately Posted November 18, 2009 Share Posted November 18, 2009 So at how many channels would you say you might start having problems? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuckd Posted November 18, 2009 Share Posted November 18, 2009 That depends on what you're doing with those channels. You could do 1000 channels on one network if you don't do much, but I've been able to slow down under 200 channels with a complex sequence of events.I try to sequence everything 'on time', so it's pretty noticeable when the network slows down.I had some input awhile back about actual network speed, but how that translates into the commands sent was quite vague.Now if they'd only add 'max time lag' into the LOR verifier....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eldoradoboy Posted November 18, 2009 Author Share Posted November 18, 2009 I only got concerned as at times in my sequence I have my 30 channels of roof lights acting like "peak hold meters".. the mega tree spinning away.. mini trees on rotation.. snowflakes spinning, all at once.. but the more i look at it.. a lot of my effects are done by fades.. the fades all may start at the same time but are of varying lengths.. so im guessing its one batch of commands sent through the network and then the controller handles the fade by itself....only one way to fin out.. when i fire up the complete show next week or this weekend for a test run...-Christopher Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Noe Posted November 23, 2009 Share Posted November 23, 2009 I've got one really busy section of a song that has noticible network lag. Versus setting up multiple networks could one change the network preferences to the "Fastest Speed" or would that hork something up? Not going to risk the whole show over a 15 second section two days from showtime, but it looks really cool on the animation window, just not quite as cool in real life with the lag.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Max-Paul Posted November 24, 2009 Share Posted November 24, 2009 Joe, when you are running your lights. Are you doing this through a show or through the sequence editor? If through the sequence editor. Do you have under the play menu the only check mark you want showing is the "Control lights".All of the other check marks will hog some of your resources. If you havent tried this yet, give it a try and let us know if this helped. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Joe Noe Posted November 24, 2009 Share Posted November 24, 2009 That is a good point. When I filmed the show I did use the sequence editor. I'll have to try what you suggested and see if it makes a difference. I may give that a shot tonight. However, does it hurt anything to change the network speed? Do you have to make that change in every sequence since it's set in the sequence editor?Thanks for the reply. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuckd Posted November 24, 2009 Share Posted November 24, 2009 Just throwing in my two cents here.... I'm a huge fan of multiple networks. I didn't realize how many slowdowns I had last year with just one network until I implemented four this year. Same songs look infinitely more 'peppy'. They're exactly as I sequenced them.Nothing I did last year ever got the songs in synch, however.My two mega trees are on individual networks by themselves. Very nice! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eldoradoboy Posted November 24, 2009 Author Share Posted November 24, 2009 how many channels are you running total when things slowed down and are your sequences Busy?not that I can do multi networks this year anyway as ill nerver get another USB converter in time now... -Christopher Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuckd Posted November 25, 2009 Share Posted November 25, 2009 My mega trees are 192 apiece, arches total 176, and the fountains are 128. Just doing effects on those takes quite a bit of bandwidth. When you want to spin a 192 channels mega tree once per beat with fading, it takes a few commands for sure. All of my timing is around .04, so it's definitely pretty fast.Sadly enough, the only way you're going to know is by watching it live. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts