Lsp channel setup

[ratroder]

I downloaded the trial version of lsp v2 the other day so I could play around with it and see if it is something that I would be interested in buying. I am a former lor user. So I imported on of my lor sequences that is not finished yet to see what it is like to sequence in lsp. Now the way that I have all my channels configured is not in numerical order of the controllers I am using. For example the snow flakes that I have on my roof use 1 ssr4 (unit id 07 56-59 (idmx)), three channels on one lor controller and two on another. When I imported the lor sequence all the channels go grouped by the controller in order of unit ids and channels.

So is it possible to move the sequence items around in lap so they can be grouped together?

On another note; during the import to lsp I seem to have lost all of my channels that are just dedicated to the sequence (no hardware attached). For things like specific beats and timings. In lor they can be labeled as sequence channels.

Thanks,
Ratroder

[taybrynn]

I'm also having problems with loosing LOR metadata after importing into LSP.  I mean, the entire song comes in and its playable and all.

I organized (in LOR) track#1 channels into a certain logical order, similar to how Holdman did it.  First organized by color, then organized by display items under each color.   And those display iteams are organized into logical group (megatree, tree line, snowflake wall, etc.) ... which is often very different from how they are physically connected to the controllers.

I also added some organization via. LOR tracks ... in some sequences.  BUt the problem is ... after importing ... you loose all of that, and your left just looking at channels per controller ... so a LSP controller-centric view of the channels ... with no organization, unless you happened to have organized them by controller previously. 

Now you CAN use layers and virtual controllers to add significant organization to all this ... but I haven't found a way to make that organization "re-usable" yet ... so I've mentioned that the LSP as a highly desirable item for the wish list.

I'm thinking you almost need to re-organize in LOR first before importing into LSP.

The controller-centric view in LSP is difficult, esp. if you arranged your hardware based more on layout, extension cord and/or load balancing.

But you can add organization around that using "layers".   Add a layer, then highlight a range of channels, right-click and 'add to layer' and select the layer.

There is also something called a virtual controller, which can be added, then you add channels to it the same as adding to a layer.  You can then re-order the items in the virtual controller.

When you click on the layer or layers you want to see ... it then only shows those channels and controllers related to that layer.

But you nailed the problem I"m having ... LSP doesn't have a true concept of 'show configuration' ... which you can add to a sequence after importing it.

That means you stuck in tons of busy work per sequence, trying to get these organization things done manually for each sequence.

[ratroder]

I see. So I am not the only one with this problem. Makes me think if I want to use lsp then. I do like the way that the software is implemented and does most of the work for you. But that show configuration in the sequences is just as important.

[taybrynn]

The other thing is that you can set up channels with quite a bit of disregard to the underlying controllers, and that can also give  flexibility and grouping.  So take a 4096 pixelnet universe served up on a single SS Hub and Pixelnet flashed Dongle.

Say I wanted to set up a SS Flex strip (as a leaping arch) on 360 channels (120 rgb channels) of pixelnet ... you can add that as "a controller" and call it arch1.  Then you can do the same for different channels ranges, and call those arch2, arch3, arch4, etc.  They would have different pixelnet channel ranges, but would basically be served off the same SS HUB ... but if you set them up as controllers/ display items in LSP, then you can collapse the controller called "arch1", and then program a chase on it (collapsed) and it'll chase that arch very easily for you.

You could create a layer called "arches" and put all the channels from arch1 -> arch4 in it ... and then when you select the arches layer ... you will see just arch1 -> arch4 ... and you can collapse and them program a chase across all, or a chase across all at the same time, etc.   

Again, you set up the channels as display items ... as a controller ... then its pretty easy to program it as a group and collapsing the controller gives you some power as well. 

Plus you can use the object oriented programming to program the layer and it'll map the colors into the correct locations depending on the spatial locations of those items in your display.

My main concern is making this all re-usable, instead of just setup per sequence.

[dmoore]

The controller-centric view in LSP is difficult, esp. if you arranged your hardware based more on layout, extension cord and/or load balancing.

When I moved to LSP last year, I had some really good, tight sequences that I determined that it wasn't worth bringing over - not only because of the loss of fidelity but also because pixels and RGB so change your display that previous sequences just didn't go it justice.

I'll agree that LSP is "controller centric" but only as it applies to the LOR protocol (it doesn't allow you to put down "half" of a 16 channel controller.)  With DMX, which LOR controllers run just fine, you can order controllers in any way you want.  Don' want controllers and you'd rather do them in "elements" - no problem.

I can understand the concern when moving from an LOR platform to an open one that there will be some pain and loss but in the end the gain will be worth it, not only from a financial end but from a flexibility end. 

[taybrynn]

Great points as usual.  Your right, I might need to consider running the LOR controllers on DMX and just re-arranging everything in DMX.  I'm still a little disconnected as to why I need to do that, but starting to see that adding things as display elements (per controller) is where I want to go.