FLXS24 vers autre console ou Merger

[jb07]

Bonjour,

Je voudrais utiliser la console en complément d'une seconde pour les même jeux de lumière sur les même canaux.

Si j'envoie la FLXs24 sur le DMX-IN de la 2eme console j'ai des coupures et des saccades.

J'ai acheté un merger pour contourner le problème mais pareil.

D'aprés le fabricant du merger, les trame DMX ne serait pas complète ?

avez-vous déjà eu le problème ?

Merci

[kgallen]

How would a merge actually work? FLX sends out a full 512 channel DMX packet. Where does the data from the other ‘master’ fit? If the other master sends channel data to a fixture that FLX thinks it’s controlling surely the fixture is going to jump unless somehow the other master is snooping what FLX is sending and builds some sort of transition from where FLX puts the fixture and the other master wants it, and the merger gives that master control over those channels. One master has to control the parameter of a fixture to get anything sensible out.

If the merger gives alternate frames to the FLX and the other master, then these are two uncorrelated data streams and I can’t see how anything other than mayhem can result.

Both you and your wife shout independent instructions alternately to your son and see if anything useful results! "Get your shoes on" "Go clean your teeth" "Comb your hair" "Pack your school bag"!

-> I dont really understand how this can work sensibly.

Maybe I’m about to learn!

[jb07]

 

The merge compares each dmx channel of each console and the highest wins and it is sent to the output. This mode is called HTP

exemple : Botex DMX Merger DM-2512R

Mine is a Electroconcept recorder v2 with mode merge

[kgallen]

HTP is fine for an intensity channel (e.g. a dimmer) but is likely a disaster for any other parameter (position, colour, beamshape) which would almost always be treated LTP. 
 

Your merger will work if you use one desk at a time (and the unused one outputs 0 on all channels - unlikely if you have ‘intelligent’ fixtures patched). Using both together unless you only have dimmers makes no sense to me.

Think conceptually what you want to achieve and how it would actually work. With anything but dimmers I don’t think a merger is the answer. 
 

There is nothing wrong with your FLX S. 

[jb07]

 

How can you say that there is no problem with the FLX when you don't even know what a merge is !!!

[Edward Z88]

Hello,

39 minutes ago, jb07 said:

 

How can you say that there is no problem with the FLX when you don't even know what a merge is !!!

Kevin does know what a merge is, however is suggesting this may not be the correct tool for the job.

Why do you want 2 consoles to control the same lights?

Edward

[kgallen]

13 minutes ago, Edward- Z88 said:

Why do you want 2 consoles to control the same lights?

..and HOW do you want the 2 consoles to control the same lights? What is the responsibility of each console? How would the DMX universe be "carved up" for each console. We've already covered that an HTP merge is not going to work unless you only have dimmers. It makes no sense to have two active consoles controlling the same "intelligent" light (unless they are a specifically designed active/backup tracking pair).

This merger for example: https://www.elmvideotechnology.com/store/dmx-merger-dmg-2x1?gclid=EAIaIQobChMIwcuSlL705wIVFuDtCh0ftQdiEAAYASAAEgKev_D_BwE claims to have an LTP merge mode. But still how would this work in practice? You have two lighting consoles (who have no knowledge of the commands sent by the other) giving likely conflicting data to one light, which is going to jump about trying to service both sets of unrelated commands, depending on how the merge picks DMX channels from each console. This is my "shouting at the kids" example from earlier.

HTP mergers are often used if the venue has two lighting desks, but where only one is active/powered at a time. Say a very simple desk used by groups "who just want some light" and a more complex console used by "advanced" users.

Tell us what type of fixtures you have in your rig and how you want the overall control surface to work.

[jb07]

 

The FLX console is a concert and theater console.
My old console is a DJ console

For example: my old console is able to flash lights depending on the sound while the FLX does not even have an audio input.

[Edward Z88]

Hello,

15 minutes ago, jb07 said:

my old console is able to flash lights depending on the sound while the FLX does not even have an audio input.

Just to clarify for others reading this thread, the FLX does have an audio input for sound to light, FLX S consoles do not.

The simplest solution if you wish to use 2 lighting consoles to control the same rig at different times, is simply plug in whichever console you wish to use. This could be as simple as physically unplugging a DMX cable from one console and plugging into another, or using a patch bay.

Alternatively as Kevin suggests, you could use a merge, but ensure only one console is on at a time. This means the merge doesn't need to gives priorities to incoming DMX signals, it simply passes on the stream that is active.

Edward

[kgallen]

21 minutes ago, jb07 said:

For example: my old console is able to flash lights depending on the sound

So really you need a merger that can do HTP merge but only on the intensity channels of each fixture. Then FLX can control all of the functions of all of the lights (esp. position, colour beamshape), but the DJ console can "flash" the intensity channel as an HTP override of the intensity that FLX is putting out in the same DMX channel.

This would require a merger with per-channel merge configurability. Does your fancy merger have this?

But still depending on what FLX is doing with the light this might not work. Say FLX has all colour channels at 0, the DJ console setting the intensity to 255 will still result in the light having no output. Then you get into some weird requirement that the merger needs to "force" some channels if the DJ console wants to flash the light. This is not likely in a commercial product, it's such a convoluted requirement. You're into some custom Arduino type project!

[van den abbeele Eric]

Bonjour, 

Je viens un peu tard.

J'utilise un mergeur (DM44 stairville) depuis quelques années. Avant j'avais un mergeur Botex avec lequel je n'avais pas de soucis non plus...

Actuellement j'ai une FLX sur la premiere entrée et une Jester 24/48 sur la seconde entrée du mergeur.

Je ne rencontre pas de problèmes d'utiliser un mergeur. 

 

Ensuite j'utilise la Jester pour le contrôle direct des projecteurs traditionnels en manuel, et la FLX pour tout ce qui est Leds, Automatique, et le traditionnel qui est enregistré.

Ainsi si en effet la FLX envois sur tous les canaux DMX, les intensités reliés au Faders (ainsi que commandes de Couleurs, Positions, Gobos, etc, etc, ), la jester n'envois que les intensités des traditionnels, ainsi je n'ai pas de conflits possibles. Ensuite comme dit plus haut, le mergeur va faire ce que tu désires selon les réglages. Pour ma part j'utilise le mien en HTP.

Une bonne journée.

Eric

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hello,

I come a little late.

I have been using a mergeur (DM44 stairville) for a few years. Before I had a Botex mergers with which I had no worries either ...

Currently I have a FLX on the first entry and a Jester 24/48 on the second entry of the merger.

I have no problem using a mergers.

Then I use the Jester for the direct control of the traditional projectors in manual, and the FLX for all that is Leds, Automatic, and the traditional one which is recorded.

So if indeed the FLX sends on all the DMX channels, the intensities connected to the Faders (as well as controls of Colors, Positions, Gobos, etc, etc,), the jester sends only the intensities of the traditional ones, so I don't have no possible conflicts. Then as said above, the merger will do what you want according to the settings. For my part I use mine in HTP.

A good day.

Eric