DMX is almost here!

Originally posted by Slinkard Hey, what is the benefit of running DMX? I am trying to see if there is a reason for me to run it? Currently I am doing just d-light boards and it seems to be okay. what are the added benefits to the DMX aspect and how does it relate too Christmas Lighting? Sorry not a newb to lighting but am to DMX.

how about ... this?

That and the cost of them and then the recharges BUT Def. cool!

So will that type "Stage" equipment only work with DMX?

I have some snow blowers that have DMX inputs but I just hook them up to a kit74 relay board that I activate via a channel on my D-light board. reason for this is the pull damn near 15 amps by themselves.

Slink

I'd say the best comparison of the Express is the ACx16 - they have differences, but when it's all said and done, they're both 16-channel dimmers.

I think the Freestyle can drive your $/channel down even more, but there's more to the decision.  First the SSRs are not on board - they are separate (which could mean separate enclosures depending on where you locate them).  You do have to run cat5 and power to each SSR to control its 4 channels. 

This could be good if you have a pile of channels that are physically far apart.  You could really see some savings in extension cords by using the Freestyle (remember not just $$ savings, but also storage savings).   Group the channels in groups of 4, run cat5 and power to the SSR, then a short extension cord to each of the 4 channels from the SSR board.

I've never bothered to try to do the math - finding out how much I'd save with a FS vs 4 LEs.  You'd also have to consider extra vampire plugs and cat5 costs... And I've always been a bit turned off by the thought of having to manage/deal with that many more enclosures.    I may have a use for one this year... we'll see. 

Originally posted by LightsOnLogan Most of the differences are "under the hood" so to speak.  For Christmas lighting, the D-Light and LOR protocols are actually better suited for the purpose and less CPU intensive than DMX (because the controller hardware does the FX rendering, whereas DMX only knows one command: intensity... everything else has to be software rendered), but DMX does have some rather nifty toys to play with as well as some rather inexpensive controller kits out there.

So many promises in this thread ($54 Ethernet/DMX adapter, hardware utility for D-Light within Aurora, etc.)  And so many opinions that are polar opposites of today, like above.  So much for supporting the loyal long-term D-Light/Aurora users who contributed to this thread.  I suspect that most would have been happy if they could just have had their shows run reliably.  Are new software sales to power users participating in the RGB pixel fad really expected to eclipse those who merely desired a robust and easy-to-use sequencing program?

One thing about fads... they pass.

Originally posted by ChrisL1976 Newbie like the idea of RGB and will require it before a software pourchase, many of the user like the idea of using RGB, there is no choice but to support it.

I would prefer that this be in addition to, not in lieu of, existing customers.