Control/Dimming 1984 won't be like 1984. (Kliegl Performer)

[derekleffew]

Advertisement appearing in Summer 1984 issue of Theatre Design & Technology.


Did anyone ever use one of those Texas Instrument-cased RFUs?

 

[STEVETERRY]

That ad is like a replay of my often spirited dialogue with Gordon Pearlman:

--Give us tracking (Record and Track)
--Give us remainder dim
--Give us Halt/Back

Ever hear of those features? Light Pallette? Yup!

Those were the days when we were trying to compete with Light Palette because we couldn't buy it. If you were in New York and in the rental business, Four Star was the only company that had access to Light Palette. Frank DeVerna engineered that situation, but once Mini LightPalette came out, Sonny Sonnenfeld made sure we could buy it. Thank you, Sonny--it was a big success at Production Arts.

As for the TI remote, it was never used outside permanent installations.

BTW, that "software update" in the ad was plugging in new 28-pin EPROMs! No Internet, no flash memory, remember? And not even email to check up on how the update was going!

ST

 

[derekleffew]

What is the purpose of the matrix in the lower left corner?

http://www.pbase.com/paulpelletier/image/64492007

Notes:
The red version shown above is a Performer (I). 96 analog outputs.
Performer II was a 125 channel analog-only output.
Performer III was K96 output.
Performer IV had an entirely new case design, resembling an Apple II, with a separate monitor.

http://www.pbase.com/paulpelletier/lightingconsol&page=2

 

[starksk]

QotD? Or is this meant to be answered sooner?

 

[derekleffew]

You (or anyone) can answer now if you wish. I think it's too esoteric a question to be a QotD.

The only thing I can figure is for assigning dimmers to the ten submasters. This would indicate that the console didn't have softpatch. It would also mean a [-]channel[/-] dimmer couldn't be assigned to more than one submaster (overlapping submasters), which the II/III did not have either.

To view this content we will need your consent to set third party cookies.
For more detailed information, see our cookies page.

Accept third party cookies

Wow! $24,000 for that POS! How many Elements would that buy? /rhetorical

 

[Footer]

Mrs Footer still has one in her lighting graveyard. Might have to add it to my collection at some point. I think they have the remote as well.

 

[MNicolai]

On the back end of the Performer, the matrices are used for in another style of prehistoric patching (says the 19-year old who's only a few times been blessed with the "opportunity" to use a dying Electro Controls slide-patch system). There are 32 handles, 8 in each matrix, which would correspond to dimmers. Then there are 10 positions for each handle, corresponding to the faders on the front panel.

 

[starksk]

Not too sure about the entirety of this document, but this may help:

An interesting feature of this board was the inclusion of a backup feature at the left-hand side of the keyboard. The on off switch can be seen at the far left. DIP switches were used to assign one or more channels to each of the sliders. This same type of switch is still used today to address some types of digital equipment. By carefully assigning channels into useful groups, and then manipulating them manually, the operator could run a show even if the computer crashed.

Source:LIGHTING CONTROL HISTORY AND MODERN PROGRAMMING STRATAGIES Page 6
http://www.uky.edu/~jholl2/technology_pdfs/LightingControlHistory.pdf

 

[JChenault]

My memory of the matrix is that it was intended to let you set up some submasters in the event your main console failed. One interesting side effect of the design ( as a friend of mine said) was that "Every elephant must have a home'. IE every channel needed to be assigned to a slider.

 

[derekleffew]

Thanks Kirk and John. I ran a Performer II for four years, but never paid attention to that "feature." I don't think we could have run the show on ten handles. Well, we could have, but it wouldn't have been pretty.

From the Performer II/II Manual at Kliegl Bros. Universal Electric Stage Lighting Company

 

[STEVETERRY]

Notes:
The red version shown above is a Performer (I). 96 analog outputs.
Performer II was a 125 channel analog-only output.
Performer III was K96 output.
Performer IV had an entirely new case design, resembling an Apple II, with a separate monitor.

The Lighting Console Gallery Photo Gallery by Paul Pelletier at pbase.com

The Performer I was truly an awful console. Gordon Pearlman and Steve Carlson did the design, but the PC layout was done by Kliegl's subcontractor Precision Controls. That resulted in a stacked pair of PCB's with multiple connectors between them. It would not stay working for very long due to interconnect problems.

The Performer II/III came about a year later, and the new PCB layout was done by Gordon and Steve in Portland. Much better! A series of modfications at Production Arts kept the units in rental for quite a long time:

--An output card for Micro II protocol to talk to LMI touring racks
--An output card for DMX512 in 1986
--A new static memory board backed up by a supercap instead of the original dynamic memory backed up by Nicad D cells.
--Externally accessible video adjustment pots for the monitor


ST

 

[Zebulon1880]

The Kliegl Performer was the first computerized light board (desk) that I had the opportunity to use. I was studying lighting design at University of Alaska, Fairbanks 1981-1986. It seems that its operating system was the grandfather of most computerized light desks to follow. In the early 1980's, to have and use technology this advanced was like magic. What I still like about it is its simplicity and ease of use. What we loved most about the Performer was we could set it up in the house, thus eliminating the Clearcom squabble that made set cues prone to errors at times. The next innovative addition to this type of light desk was tracking options. As I remember, the original Kliegl Performer cost around $25,000.