Looking for the protocol to the Lynx dongle

[JHinkle]

Can someone point me to the documentation on the protocol.

I'm attempting to have my software interface with it.

Thanks in advance for any reply.

Joe

[rmp2917]

I don't believe there is any documentation on the website. They try not to post technical information.

The protocol is supposed to be the same or similar to the Enttec DMX USB Pro.

I know that other members who have written software have offered to share programming information, but you may have to talk to them directly. Check out the link below.

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

Rick

[JHinkle]

Thanks - I'm on the DIY site already.

I already do Entec PRO - but people are saying their Lynx dongle does not work - so there is some difference.

Joe

[RJ]

It uses the enttec protocol but only works with the virtual comm port not the direct driver.

 sorry you have not got a reply but I do not see a pm. If you emailed I would likely not get it do to aggressive spam filtering 

I am on my phone  at the academy so I am unable to do anything with your user name.





Sent from my Charge by Tapatalk

RJ

[JHinkle]

Thanks RJ.

I will look into the VC interface.

I wanted to PM you directly a couple of weeks ago but the user name RJ doesn't take PM's - so I did site Admin.

Thank you very much for getting back to me - there will be many pleased individuals when I verify the VC interface.

Thanks again.

Joe
 

[RJ]

Try again i do get pms

Sent from my Charge by Tapatalk

RJ

[JHinkle]

RJ:

The Entec PRO has a header prior to the actual DMX data.

Does the Lynx require the same header sent over VC?

Thanks in advance for your reply.

Joe

[n1ist]

I believe it does need the header.  I think it only responds to label=6 messages (Output Only Send DMX Packet Request).  I can't recall if RJ's dongle accepts DMX packets of fewer than 512 channels; the Enttec PRO does, and RPM's doesn't. 
/mike

[rrowan]

It needs the standard DMX header and then the data. It assumes the 512 but if it gets a another header it of course starts over. Its one way communication to the dongle (no feedback to the computer)

Rick R.

[JHinkle]

Thanks.

I have it implemented - the pack size varies with the data - so if it turns out that the data size must always be 512 - I'll have to make a change.

I've also put the Entec single byte trailer in.  Required?  Issues if there?

Any one using HLS that would like to try it - please use version 4S oe later.

If you try it - please report back results.

Thanks.

If you are interested in HLS - the software can be acquired from www dot joehinkle  dot com/HLS

I have 8 or more training videos on YouTube

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

I'll have my own web page in a month or two.

Joe

[lortiz]

Hi,

I wrote about this matter a while ago. Please follow this link to my post:

You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login

By the way the Lynx dongle does work with the FTDI direct drivers as I have written some programs using this mode.

Hope it helps.

Leo

[JHinkle]

lortiz:

Thanks - that is what I implemented.

I prefer the dll direct api verses the virtual com - but Lynx only works with the virtual com - which was the end intent of this post to confirm that. (I have the Entec series using the dll direct - not virtual com - its faster).

I now only wait a reply that someone has tested it.

Thanks again.

Joe

[charles59]

It works with the D2XXX drivers.  That is the only way I interface to it on my Mac Software.  It is just a basic FTDI chip (DLP Module), so it will work with any of the FTDI Drivers.

[JHinkle]

Just to clarify.

Yes it works with the FTDI driver / dll.

The dll provides two different APIs - one is a direct interface with the dll - the other is a virtual com interface which gets the OS involved  - it has less capability and slower.  From a programming perspective - the virtual com interface is what most use because it maps into similar OS calls.

My software uses the direct dll interface for Entec type dongles.  In order to talk to the Lynx - I had to use the virtual com interface.  This thread was meant to clarify that the protocol was the same - juse VC instead of direct DLL.

Joe

[charles59]

ok, just unclear why you had to use the virtual diver for the lynx, if you use the D2XXX for the pro.  But I will take it offline.