PixelNet and LOR

[ponddude]

Hi all.  I was wondering if anyone from the xLights team could share on how they plan on implementing PixelNet with LOR.  I thought I was all set but than realized that LOR only supports up to 512 channels per device.  I contacted their lead software designer as well as Dan and they both said they are not going over 512 channels.  That puts a damper on how I plan on using PixelNet. 

Is there any chance you could share any information about how the team plans on implementing it?  Just wondering.

Greg

[taybrynn]

I think it doesn't matter what LOR supports if your using xlights.  There are risks, because LOR could change the file format and/or xlights might not add support for pixelnet networks, etc.

I can't speak on how the xlights team will be implementing it ... but basically xlights reads a LOR or Vixen sequence ... and then plays it for you, outputting to the Network(s) you have mapped out.  So you can have multiple Networks if you want.  [ i.e. LOR + DMX-Entec Pro/Lynx, or LOR + Pixelnet Lynx ]

It replaces the LOR scheduler and show editor ... as you would use xlights as the scheduler and show player ... in the the LOR scheduler.  You would loose show on demand capabilities.

You instead build xlight playlists (like LOR show builder) and assign them to a calendar (like LOR scheduler) ... but its all built into the xlights "scheduler" tab currently.

You would include all the sequences into an xlights playlist (or lists if you vary your show) ... and then assign the playlists to times and dates on the calendar.  Then xlights runs your show for you.

When you map out your xlights channels ... you just map out the "Network(s)" you are using and it'll play them that way.

So say you had 32 channels of LOR, then added another 512 channels for DMX (via. pixelnet, from hub say) ... and then added another 60 RGB channels to control 20 SS modules via. a Pixelnet flashed Lynx Dongle -> SS Hub -> SSC.

So hooked up to your show computer would be the LOR USB interface (on one COM port) and the Lynx Pixelnet Dongle USB interface on another COM port.

[ ok, yes you have up to 4096 per pixelnet universe, but lets just say your using just 512+60=572 channels total, for this example ... say 1=512 are for DMX via. the SS Hub out, and 513->572 are for the SS modules on SSC#1 ]

Then you would map out a LOR network for the first 32 channels in xlights.  Then map out the next 572 channels to a Pixelnet network for the rest of the channels .... in xlights.   

My guess is xlights might add Pixelnet and E1.31 as new "network types" ... where currently it supports only DMX-Entec Pro/Lynx, LOR, D-Light or Renard as valid network types.

So in reality, you would set it all up as a bunch of LOR channels, so I think in say LOR S3 it might be 2 LOR 16ch controllers (first 32 channels) and then say (600/3) 200 RGB channels after that.  xlights doesn't care what the hardware is, but you tell it whats what. 

ch 1-32  LOR Network, ending channel: 32
ch 33-633  Pixelnet Network, ending channel: 604

So really the first 32 channels in your LOR sequence would be output to the LOR network, and the next 572 channels would be output to the Pixelnet network.

Again, not sure how they'll do it ... but hopefully this shows how it might be done.

So from a sequencing standpoint ... your just sequencing in LOR (or Vixen) ... whatever you want.

The other option is to go with LSP with supports this already, but is awaiting version 2.x still.

[ponddude]

See, now all of that makes sense to me.  I have been playing around with xLights and it works just fine for things like that, but when I think of PixelNet, that is when things get interesting...at least in the LOR world.  Here is why:

I have 176 LOR channels.  48 DMX (LE) channels and I want to add 690 SS pixels (2070 individual channels).  Now, in my LOR sequence I can set everything up as I should except when I get to the PixelNet stuff.  If I add 690 RGB channels, that works just fine.  However, the issue arrises when I have to assign them a channel #.  Why?  Well I can only get up to the 512 channels that LOR is only going to support.  That is 170 RGB channels with 2 left over.  Than what do I do?  Does it matter what controller is used for xLights? 

Here would be my thinking if I was designing xLights...which I clearly am not and have no knowledge of programming language!   

Network A = LOR Controllers
Network B = DMX Controllers
Network C = PixelNet

In network C I can create a virtually unlimited amount of controllers/channel combinatiions but will xLights read/understand that.  If I take what you are saying it wouldn't matter because it is on the same network. 

I just am not sure and would hate to sequence this whole show and end up with the wrong stuff!

[csf]

I am not sure how Matt plans to implement PixelNet. I spoke to him recently and he stile want's to add support.

Stuff has moved along with my sequencer ideas, I doubt I will have something usable for this upcoming season, but I hope in a few months I can have something worth playing with.

[taybrynn]

You can assign different universes in LOR sequences, so you might you want to start with inverse A 1-512 and then go to B 1-512, etc. 

I think all that might change with S3, since it's got better RGB (I hear) ... so should handle the bigger channel counts.

[dmoore]

Even if Mr Brown doesn't come through with the pixelnet update for xlights, you can still just import your LOR sequence into LSP and play it through there.  With LSP you'd be able to run your LOR and pixelnet networks seperately.  And yes, LSP 2.0 will work fine with pixelnet once it's released.  So you have options.

[ponddude]

Yeah I have just heard way to many horror stories with LSP.  I won't be using that unfortunately. 

[tbone321]

I have heard the same stories and for the price, I wouldn't touch LPS Ver 1.X with a 10 foot pole.  On the positive side, I have heard better about the upcoming Ver 2.0 and once it's released, I will give it a serious look at.  I just hope that this time they concentrate their efforts on stability and valid improvements and back off on the gimicks.

[taybrynn]

I think thats what LSP is doing, thankfully.

I find it ironic ... because I was all worried about the SS hardware and all the soldering/building ... but its actually
to the point now where the sequencing software (all of them, IMHO) needs to catch up with this bleeding edge RGB and pixelnet hardware ...
and its not going to happen a day too soon.  For me, I knew the entire SS venture might result in nothing in 2011 worst case.
Best case, could be amazing.  It was worth the risk to me, so I took it.  But at the end of the day, there will still be a show in 2011 ...
its just that the game plan isn't know ... so gotta be prepared for a lot of backup plans just in case.

xlights is just the easiest backup plan to envision right now, because it plays both vixen and LOR sequences.  LSP could happen, but
it has a cost.  LOR S3 looks promising, but doesn't obviously lead to the land of pixelnet, howoever, except via. xlights maybe.

The best advise is to sequence what you can now, and scramble to get the rest of it working when the software is ready.

[tng5737]

The way I look at it I can always use the pixel strings as super-strings - only with a lot more colors.    Not sure it all works yet though!

[dowdybrown]

Excellent discussion. I will be doing some investigation on how best to do the channel mapping for pixelnet and post my findings back here for comment.

Matt

[ponddude]

This is great!  Thanks for the update Matt.  I have my idea on how I would think you should do this but I will see what you come up with first.  If you need anything from me, please feel free to contact me.  I am all setup with PixelNet, DMX and LOR, so I can do any sort of testing you need.

Greg

[ratroder]

I am also a lor user and would like to stay that way as well.

Had an idea on the channel issue. What if one was to use a lynx combiner? The combiner takes 4 pixelnet dongle inputs of 512 channels (the max on an lor network) and then outputs it as pixelnet. Just an iterating idea that could work, if xlights gains support.

Possible setup:

Xlights outputting to:
-Lor network (lor controllers) lor network a
-dmx network (lynx controllers) lor network b
- pixelnet dongle 1 connected to combiner (512 channels) lor network c
-pixelnet dongle 2 connected to combiner (512 channels) lor network d

[tng5737]

I think that all the combiner does is take the singals off of pins 1 & 2 on each of the four inputs then re-routes each of these onto a different pair of wires so that they can all be carried on one cat5 cable.  On the other end it does the reverse - taking each of the 4 pairs and splits it out onto pins  1 & 2 on each connector.  It doesn't "combine" the universes in any active way!

[ratroder]

Makes sense. I had forgot while thinking of this idea that the dongle supports up 4096 channels.