lor s 3

[Al in Raleigh]

I see what Denny is getting at. Some new e1.31 to pixel net decoders that I looked out had the pixel node driver as a combination of hardware and software. The software selected a certain member of a series and hardware was capable of driving a range of pixels. I won't go into details. That is a good question Denny.

[John]

I am assuming that a good E1.31 adapter will have multiple DMX Universes on the far end (in the yard) .. So then it would boil down to whether LOR would support protocols for the various pixel-string controller chips out there (such as the three you listed).

A good E1.31 device that you supply would have multiple DMX Universes on the far end. So then you supply your third-party controller of choice, plugged into a DMX input, that has the protocol output for the matching pixel string. This could be the E16, E680 or ECG-PIXAD8 for example. LOR (nor any other software package is going to provide native output for the ic chips that are built into the pixels. That is the job of the third party controller that you supply.


I haven't seen LSP outputting any protocol for the 180x, 2801, 6803 pixel strings.

I am quite interested in updating to LOR S3. But I fear that LOR may only support one of them (or worse, only their own offering). In that case it would seem better off to go with Light Show Pro (LSP) since they seem to be very aggressively supporting a large and growing list of compatible controllers.

DMX or E1.31 output from LOR S3 software, is the same as E1.31 or DMX output from LSP software.

Just like LOR, they output DMX protocol. You supply the third party controller to take this DMX signal from the software and your third party controller converts it to what ever protocol your pixel strings reguire.


I'd like to build a small mega-tree next year from pixel strings (if possible. But my budget will be a lot happier if I can direct-buy the strings, rather than paying a retail middle man.

You can today. Buy your third party controller, buy pixel strings from China, take the LOR S3 DMX output and twinkle away.

What do you think LOR will do ? I am leaning LOR S3 so I can help more local folks with their software.

But LSP looks more attractive on paper ..

Huh? I didn't see LSP support specifically listed for the E680 or the ECG-PIXAD8 controllers. Because the controllers don't care which software package they get the DMX signal from - LSP, LOR, Vixen, Prancer or xlights, etc.

Just remember, LOR is a commercial software and hardware company.

I think it is wonderful that they now provide native DMX output which allows us to go out and buy any third party pixel protocol contoller that we want, and also to buy from anywhere any pixel-strings that we want and that LOR S3 software will still control them.

This is my opinion, and of course you are free to use any software package that you desire.

[John]

I see what Denny is getting at. Some new e1.31 to pixel net decoders that I looked out had the pixel node driver as a combination of hardware and software. The software selected a certain member of a series and hardware was capable of driving a range of pixels. I won't go into details. That is a good question Denny.

I have seen some E1.31 pixel controllers that can be configured to output, say a channel of 2801 and a channel of 6803 (or multiples thereof). But, don't they still require a DMX or E1.31 from a sequence software package, Vixen, LSP or LOR?

[mschell]

There are several different pixel controllers out there, including some very small ones from China that take in DMX and output pixels for the various pixel protocols.

There are several commercial and DIY pixel controllers. Almost all of them (all that I know about) take in DMX - either via RS485 (a DMX dongle) or via Ethernet (E1.31), and output to pixel strings.

Some, like the E680/681, do allow different outputs to handle different pixel chip protocols. So you can mix 2801 and 6803 or M3001 or others on the same pixel controller, but on different "channels" or outputs.

So if LOR S3 will output via Enttec, which does DMX over RS485, you would need a pixel controller that takes in DMX over RS485, like a TP3244 from the Aussies.

Once S3 can output E1.31 (DMX over Ethernet), you could use an E680 to output up to 16 pixel outputs via an Ethernet connection or something like Ed's PIXAD8.

Note that there are several controllers that will take in E1.31 and output to DMX on RS485 or Renard on RS485. I've shown one of those that's mostly built called the ECG-DMXRen8, and a fully built one called the ECG-DR4.

I think my LOR S2 license is more than a year old, but may just buy an upgrade to keep it current...

[kidcole]

I appreciate all the details (John and Mark) ..

It would be nice if the TASL group comes up with a good combination of specific brand hardware and pixel strings (this is also economical) .. Safety in numbers. If a bunch of us implement the same (or similar) setup, then we can help each other with configuring (and any pitfalls to be overcome) .. I do like the simplicity of using a single E1.31 to drive a small mega-tree. Maybe 8 pixel strings divided in half for a 16 slice mini-mega-tree?

I remember seeing all the comments about the pixel strings not being very durable (wires pulling out) when used mega-tree style. Might need to be strung (each bulb tied) with some thin stainless wire, or something more weather resistant.

[kidcole]

John, if I move up to LOR S3 but want to share my sequences with people running S2, will my files be compatible (or is there a way to save them to make them compatible) ?

[John]

John, if I move up to LOR S3 but want to share my sequences with people running S2, will my files be compatible (or is there a way to save them to make them compatible) ?

Denny, it will depend. Many of the new features were not available in S2. Groups, dimming curves, visualizer, channel lock, Raw DMX, etc among many others.

This has been discussed in depth on the LOR forums.

Bob, lead programmer for S3 had this to say:

Any earlier version of LOR will make an attempt at loading a save file written by a newer version.

If the earlier version is LOR 1, the attempt will fail miserably.

If the early version is LOR 2, then depending upon exactly what the old version is, what the new version is, and what features were used in the save file, it may or may not successfully load at all, and even if it loads it may not support all of the functionality from the sequence, and could possibly think that it understands something that it actually misunderstands.


In this case, using an S3 file with the latest version of S2:
It definitely will not work if the sequence uses any channel groups (with the possible exception of RGB channels) - won't even load successfully.

If the sequence uses channel locking, S2 will not support that feature, but I don't think it will cause it to be unable to load the sequence.

[kidcole]

Excellent answer. I appreciate the details !

[Kildaire]

Ok Denny, after our talk yesterday I am going to upgrade to S3 from 2.94 Hopefully my last year song should all up load.

[kidcole]

Ok Denny, after our talk yesterday I am going to upgrade to S3 from 2.94 Hopefully my last year song should all up load.

I have not tried the upgrade myself yet but thinking about doing it next week. From what I saw at Rob's, the new S3 features will save some time and make sequencing a little easier. John has been a big help with us, to understand the finer details of making the change.

On the minus side of the upgrade, I worry about LOR running into a bunch of software problems and putting everyone through a lot of updates or new controller flash (or both) during the holidays. I believe that new controller flash is already required once you move to S3. So be sure to check into that. Your old programs will work fine with S3.

[robb3369]

Denny, I did not flash my controllers in order for them to work with S3.

[John]

On the minus side of the upgrade, I worry about LOR running into a bunch of software problems and putting everyone through a lot of updates or new controller flash (or both) during the holidays. I believe that new controller flash is already required once you move to S3. So be sure to check into that. Your old programs will work fine with S3.

Minus ?

All of your S2 sequences will work just fine in LOR S3. We started Beta testing the S3 software on July 21. No major changes were made to the Sequencing Editor - except Channel Groups (my favorite new feature, I don't even use tracks anymore), DMX native mode, Channel Lock, Dimming Curves and Channel Button Colors (I also love) were the main enhancements.

The familiar S2 Annimation screen is still there and can be used in S3. The NEW Visualizer is 'Object'-centric and vector based. When using it you should be thinking more along the lines of creating fixtures and props rather than sticking a pixel at a particular place (like the animator).

Generation 2 controllers do NOT require a firmware upgrade to work with S3 software. However a new firmware upgrade for the Gen 2 controllers is in the works, that will allow you to take advantage of the S3 LED Dimming Curves. You do not have to download or upgrade the firmware unless you want to.

The next release version on the S3 software will mainly be
- adding true support for the Entec Pro DMX. Allowing the DMX adapter to off load from the computer a lot of the DMX command processing.
- more Enhancements to the Visualizer program.
- A bunch of bug fixes and enhancements to the Super Star module. We did not have a chance to really Beta test it before S3 was released. Should be lots of improvement to the Instant Sequence portion when using regular light strings, (Non CCR or RGB, just regular lights)

[kidcole]

Good info. LOR must be off to a better start with S3 than it was with S2. When I joined in 2009 I had to make several software updates along with controller flashing, just in my first year. Then last year there were several also .. but the firmware was finally stable. I was expecting similar with S3. It would be nice if S3 does better. Looking forward to it ..

[Al in Raleigh]

After speaking to many people about the upgrade to s3, some had problems learning the new features. If I were trying to work through getting my display up and running, I would not be changing my tools just before I put out the display. Once you go S3 there is no going back to S2 due to the data files being stored in a manner that is incompatible with S2. I am not saying to not upgrade, quite the contrary, if I had a display this year I would have waited until after the display was finished before I updated.

[John]

After speaking to many people about the upgrade to s3, some had problems learning the new features.

S3 can be used just the same as S2. You don't have to use any of the new features, but gosh, they are sooo nice.

If I were trying to work through getting my display up and running, I would not be changing my tools just before I put out the display.

Once you go S3 there is no going back to S2 due to the data files being stored in a manner that is incompatible with S2.

This is NOT true. S3 uses exactly the same data file format as S2 did. Any sequence created in S3 that only used the features that were in S2 are compatiable. See post #22 above.

I am not saying to not upgrade, quite the contrary, if I had a display this year I would have waited until after the display was finished before I updated.

Just keeping to the facts