ProSoundWeb Community

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

Pages: [1] 2  All   Go Down

Author Topic: DMX versus "slave" mode  (Read 11541 times)

Dave Potter

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 67
DMX versus "slave" mode
« on: January 14, 2013, 08:29:01 AM »

These a bunch of questions I could ask at this point but I will be self restricting to just 1.
I bought a couple of Chauvet slim par 56s. I don't own a controller yet.  I can link the 2 together in slave mode successfully. 
I also own a LED bar called a "Stagelight pro" (possably made by Zoom or LED Technologies, but I digress).  I can not link to the LED bar successfully in slave mode. Half of it works the othe half is dark.  The half that works is crazy.  Does this mean that there is a DMX setting that I need to change or is slave mode a company specific function?
Logged

Josh Daws

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 335
Re: DMX versus "slave" mode
« Reply #1 on: January 14, 2013, 09:39:22 AM »

These a bunch of questions I could ask at this point but I will be self restricting to just 1.
I bought a couple of Chauvet slim par 56s. I don't own a controller yet.  I can link the 2 together in slave mode successfully. 
I also own a LED bar called a "Stagelight pro" (possably made by Zoom or LED Technologies, but I digress).  I can not link to the LED bar successfully in slave mode. Half of it works the othe half is dark.  The half that works is crazy.  Does this mean that there is a DMX setting that I need to change or is slave mode a company specific function?

you cannot master/slave multiple fixture types...it must be groupings of the same fixture.
Logged

Bob Charest

  • Lab Lounge
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 830
  • Westbrook ME, USA
    • Bob Charest Band
Re: DMX versus "slave" mode
« Reply #2 on: January 14, 2013, 10:25:37 AM »

These a bunch of questions I could ask at this point but I will be self restricting to just 1.
I bought a couple of Chauvet slim par 56s. I don't own a controller yet.  I can link the 2 together in slave mode successfully. 
I also own a LED bar called a "Stagelight pro" (possably made by Zoom or LED Technologies, but I digress).  I can not link to the LED bar successfully in slave mode. Half of it works the othe half is dark.  The half that works is crazy.  Does this mean that there is a DMX setting that I need to change or is slave mode a company specific function?
Hi Dave, The DMX implementation chart for the fixtures will tell you what the various values on each channels do. Sometimes, the implementation matches, sometimes not - sounds like the two types of fixtures you mention don't match up.
Best regards,
Bob Charest
Logged

Lee Douglas

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 685
  • 47.662615, -116.756954
Re: DMX versus "slave" mode
« Reply #3 on: January 14, 2013, 01:05:44 PM »

I've got a related question.  When grouping multiple types of the same fixture is it better to address the first fixture with a DMX address and slave the rest or address all of the fixtures that you want to have the same actions with a common DMX address?  What is the advantage of either scenario?




Edited for spelling; apparently I can't spell DMX.
« Last Edit: January 14, 2013, 10:15:24 PM by Lee Douglas »
Logged
This space for rent

Bob Charest

  • Lab Lounge
  • Hero Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 830
  • Westbrook ME, USA
    • Bob Charest Band
Re: DMX versus "slave" mode
« Reply #4 on: January 14, 2013, 02:40:14 PM »

I've got a related question.  When grouping multiple types of the same fixture is it better to address the first fixture with a DMC address and slave the rest or address all of the fixtures that you want to have the same actions with a common DMX address?  What is the advantage of either scenario?
the advantage of individual addresses is flexibility for what you might want to use later. Send the same DMX commands to all the different addresses to have them all the same. If you don't intend to ever have different fixtures doing different things, then slave them all.
I had a setup at one time where the back uplight bars were slaved to fixture 001. Due to the nature of the DMX programming that setup was very effective. Now the ba k up lighting bars are individually addressed for greater flexibility. Typing on my phone, so pardon any typos.
Logged

Rob Gow

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 426
Re: DMX versus "slave" mode
« Reply #5 on: January 15, 2013, 09:31:46 AM »

the advantage of individual addresses is flexibility for what you might want to use later. Send the same DMX commands to all the different addresses to have them all the same. If you don't intend to ever have different fixtures doing different things, then slave them all.
I had a setup at one time where the back uplight bars were slaved to fixture 001. Due to the nature of the DMX programming that setup was very effective. Now the ba k up lighting bars are individually addressed for greater flexibility. Typing on my phone, so pardon any typos.

This.

I have 8 blizzard 3NX's. They were all grouped together at first for ease of programming. In this video, you can see they all do the same thing.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cr0EzbtifCs

After, I split them up into pairs, startin from each side and working in:

A B C D D C B A

Gives me more variety as in this video...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fgX59L4-qaQ

I could go individual, but I like them in pairs.
Logged

Scott Wagner

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1020
  • Richmond, VA
Re: DMX versus "slave" mode
« Reply #6 on: January 15, 2013, 10:03:57 AM »

This.

I have 8 blizzard 3NX's. They were all grouped together at first for ease of programming. In this video, you can see they all do the same thing.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cr0EzbtifCs

After, I split them up into pairs, startin from each side and working in:

A B C D D C B A

Gives me more variety as in this video...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fgX59L4-qaQ

I could go individual, but I like them in pairs.
I think the OP is interested in your methodology.  Are the pairs configured as a Master/Slave, or are each pair sharing a DMX address?  Personally, I solve this problem through addressing.
Logged
Scott Wagner
Big Nickel Audio

Rob Gow

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 426
Re: DMX versus "slave" mode
« Reply #7 on: January 15, 2013, 10:46:19 AM »

I think the OP is interested in your methodology.  Are the pairs configured as a Master/Slave, or are each pair sharing a DMX address?  Personally, I solve this problem through addressing.

Ah yes. I did it through addressing.

In the first instance all the 3NX fixtures were set to DMX Address 1. With everything set to address 1, you don't have to worry that the master is always first in line. With them all set to address one, they will all react the same, no matter what order they are in. (talking about identical fixtures)

In the second instance:

Both "A" fixtures were address 65
Both "B" fixtures were 71
Both "C" fixtures 81
Both "D" fixtures were 87

I set them both instead of trying to slave anything.
« Last Edit: January 15, 2013, 10:48:24 AM by Rob Gow »
Logged

Jano Svitok

  • SR Forums
  • Full Member
  • *
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 103
  • Bratislava, Slovakia
    • zvukari.sk
Re: DMX versus "slave" mode
« Reply #8 on: January 16, 2013, 09:27:44 AM »

I've got a related question.  When grouping multiple types of the same fixture is it better to address the first fixture with a DMX address and slave the rest or address all of the fixtures that you want to have the same actions with a common DMX address?  What is the advantage of either scenario?

Once you control the fixtures from external device (console), there's no sense in making some of them slave:
1. you can have only one group
2. all the slaves listen on one specific address (usually 001)
3. if you set multiple fixtures to same address, most probably you get the same behavior.

Only reason I can think of is when the slaved units have slightly modified behavior than the master unit (e.g. some offset). But again, you'll be limited to one group per universe.
Logged

James Feenstra

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 731
Re: DMX versus "slave" mode
« Reply #9 on: January 16, 2013, 11:37:48 PM »

I'm a fan of individual addresses for everything....you can always program them to act the same

with ganged addresses or m/s, you can't turn down specific lights if the artist/client/whoever asks
Logged
Elevation Audiovisual
www.elevationav.com
Taking your events to the next level

ProSoundWeb Community

Re: DMX versus "slave" mode
« Reply #9 on: January 16, 2013, 11:37:48 PM »


Pages: [1] 2  All   Go Up
 



Site Hosted By Ashdown Technologies, Inc.

Page created in 0.039 seconds with 24 queries.