Hey guys, I'm in the process of upgrading my lighting rig. I've owned and used the SlimPar Pro lights before and for the price I like the lights (mainly the housing). My main concern right now is choosing between the Hex and Quad fixtures. I offer full production services but we specialize in audio. When I need to do a larger show I rent additional lighting and hire an LD. I would like to purchase something that is still usable even though any real LD will balk at them, but my primary work is local city, blues jazz festivals. Sometimes we build a goal post in front of the stage and fly the PA and lights from it, or we'll do lights on tripods, or I'll rent Lekos and use the LED's as stage wash. Most of the smaller stages are 16x24. I've attached little bits of info about the two lights in question and I've already talked with a couple people. I'm merely looking for more opinions on these lights and possible suggestions on other lights, but for the money I don't think I can beat the build quality. Quad (RGBA) Beam Angle:16° Field Angle: 31° Illuminance: 5,690 lux @ 2 mHex (RGBAW+UV)Beam Angle:24° Field Angle: 41° Illuminance: 3,218 lux @ 2 mThanks in advance for any info.Mike
Mike -Like you we have small lights and hire a lighting company for anything more than a general stage wash.We had 8 SlimPar Pro RGBA which I liked well enough but we switched to an IP65 Blizzard WW-COB fixture. Rain proof was a big deal to me, and two of our SlimPars were damaged that way.Also the Blizzards do only white but it is a great looking white, unlike the SlimPars. I use the SlimPars now primarily upstage as decor or uplighting for corporate events.The Blizzard lights are also extremely bright and much wider so you can probably get away with using 4 or 6 instead of 8 on a smaller stage.Lastly, arent the SlimPars discontinued? At least that is what I was told. I still found some new on Ebay recently. Jason
I own/use a bunch of SlimParPro RGBA fixtures and like you I have gotten a lot of mileage out of them for the money. I looked at the Colordash quad and hex fixtures which are a little bit upmarket of the SlimParPros, but the same general technology. The Hex is going to have a wider color gamut than the quad, and the W emitter will help make natural whites compared to the RGBA. For smaller stages, the wider beam angle of the Hex may allow you to get enough light with fewer fixtures. The down side is more control channels to use all of those colors, and not all boards can handle color mixing of fixtures like that.For what it's worth, I ended up talking myself into the Colordashes since they were only slightly more expensive than the SlimPar Pros; immediately followed by talking myself into the Rogue R1 moving wash lights which were only slightly more expensive than the static Colordash pars; immediately followed by talking myself into the Rogue R2 moving wash lights which were only slightly more expensive than the Rogue R1 moving wash lights.I'm very happy with them, but they are 3 "slightly's" more expensive than what you're looking at.
This is another one of those "it depends" answers, and I totally understand where you're at with this. I'm also casually in the market for a few dozen of latest-generation LED Pars and it really comes down to what you want out of the lights and what you want to pay. Quantity versus quality! Also, I'm an LD and would definitely not balk at using SlimPars so long as they're used within their given scope of application. They're very hard to beat for the price.So as far as the colors go (Hex versus Quad), you can't deny that the more discrete colors you have, the more mixing options you get. As you point out though - are they the right discrete colors? The UV is really a wildcard. Very neat if your designs call for some more exotic colors but generally a waste if you're just going to mix soft facial light. Now here's where it gets interesting, and this is what I believe your question is getting at... Is it worth getting the SlimPar Pro Hex and having 6 in 1 LEDs, or instead getting RGBW or RGBA fixtures that have a lot more horsepower - something such as the Chauvet Colorado Solo or Elation Fuze Series. That's a tougher question, and one that I still need to answer for my own investment. You can't beat the price for the SlimPars, but at the same time if you don't need the precise color mixing, consistency, and beam control of an ETC Source 4 LED than you'd be paying good money for things you won't use. It's really a balance! I'm hoping to visit the Elation and Chauvet showrooms in the next few months to see side by side a Hex LED Par compared to a higher output COB Par. I get what TJ is saying too about always being able to go "another slight step up". At the same time, if all you're going to do is blast primary colors on a wall while a cover band is struggling to get through a song, you'd be wasting money to get something beyond a basic reliable fixture. Water resistance is another interesting point to consider. I'm on the fence with this too. Technically for outdoor use they should be IP65, but the question comes up as to how necessary that is. For permanent unattended installation - mandatory. However, per this article, apparently these lights are good enough to be used outdoors for American Ninja Warrior. I don't believe any fixtures on that inventory list are IP65. So...I guess it depends on how much you're willing to gamble! Good luck!
Jeff you really hit the nail on the head with this post. Literally everything that you're saying has been a thought in my mind. I've got access to a demo of most of the Chauvet lights so I'll be going next week to check some of those out. I'm hoping that it's a no brainer after switching them on. Since my original post I've heard that the UV section isn't really worth it's weight in the SPP H. When trying to blend the UV with other colors the rest of the colors are over powering. Which reduces the overall output even more than the SPP Q to gain that larger color palette. It's making the quad look much better, but everything could change once I see those lights in person.
Page created in 0.093 seconds with 17 queries.