Automated Fixtures Entry level LED profiles

[Wood4321]

Nobody said it was slapped together on the fly.

It was copied from the original, The chinese manufacturer has a vested interest in making it as close to the original as possible.
Some console manufacturers are even starting to discuss not writing libraries for fixtures from this and other chinese knock-off manufacturers. So the MS lighting must make the fixtures as close as possible to the "real" version, or they may be left out in the cold when nobody will write a profile for them.

And as for your "drive through window" If you buy from a reputable source, they will be more than happy to help you with any problems you may encounter. And even repair units under the standard factory warranty.
I don't think you will have any luck getting warranty service from MS Lighting, much less parts.

On a side note, Lets speak hypothetically here.
Say somehow this fixture starts a fire that causes property damage.
When the fire marshal figures out that this fixture caused the fire, and it is not UL or CE listed, YOU are going to be the one responsible for the damages.

 

[derekleffew]

...When the fire marshal figures out that this fixture caused the fire, and it is not UL or CE listed, YOU are going to be the one responsible for the damages.

No such thing as a "CE listing." The MS Lighting fixture DOES have a CE mark,


http://www.flylowandfast.com/Lighting/images/MH LED 60D/MH LED 60D 20.JPG
but that means close to nothing apparently.
I (as well as my AHJ) would demand a UL listed, ETL, or other Listed, by NRTL, listing.

 

[jfetter]

On a side note, Lets speak hypothetically here.
Say somehow this fixture starts a fire that causes property damage.
When the fire marshal figures out that this fixture caused the fire, and it is not UL or CE listed, YOU are going to be the one responsible for the damages.

Why do you assume it's not UL listed?

Certificates: CE standard, UL standard & GB7000.

 

[shiben]

I don't "want it to", it's simply logical. I do not agree they are blatant rip-off's just yet. I still say making a product look LIKE another is one thing but making it exactly the same is not logical at all. In fact, it raises their cost to do so, a blatant rip-off (IMO) would be similar on the outside only. Likewise, if you were trying to sell based on the "look", you would assume a fly-by-night vendor, not one who actually builds a good product. I'm sorry but in what world is building a GOOD or equally functioning copy of the original and then selling it at 40% MSRP profitable, even in China? Nothing with China is as simple as we want to make it, of this I know first hand, all the pieces aren't in this puzzle yet IMO...

Jack

Its really easy to sell a product at a profit if you didnt have to design it. I would imagine that about half of all the cost of a product is R&D and testing and certification, all things you dont need to do if your ripping off a product. Generally speaking, building things is easy and inexpensive.

 

[shiben]

Why do you assume it's not UL listed?

Certificates: CE standard, UL standard & GB7000.

I can print that on anything I slap together. Check the UL listings to find out if that product actually is.

 

[jfetter]

No such thing as a "CE listing." The MS Lighting fixture DOES have a CE mark...

If WIKI doesn't know about it, it must be so... :-\

1. CE Marking on a product is a manufacturer's declaration that the product complies with the essential requirements of the relevant European health, safety and environmental protection legislation, in practice by many of the so-called Product Directives.* *Product Directives contains the "essential requirements" and/or "performance levels" and "Harmonized Standards" to which the products must conform. Harmonized Standards are the technical specifications (European Standards or Harmonization Documents) which are established by several European standards agencies (CEN, CENELEC, etc).CEN stands for European Committee for Standardization.
   CENELEC stands for European Committee for Electrotechnical Standardization.

1. CE Marking on a product indicates to governmental officials that the product may be legally placed on the market in their country.
2. CE Marking on a product ensures the free movement of the product within the EFTA & European Union (EU) single market (total 28 countries), and
3. CE Marking on a product permits the withdrawal of the non-conforming products by customs and enforcement/vigilance authorities.

 

[jfetter]

I can print that on anything I slap together. Check the UL listings to find out if that product actually is.

My Philips toaster has no UL listing mark.
My GE Microwave has no UL listing mark.

Guess what...
My Chauvet MINspot has no UL listing mark...

:-O

 

[jfetter]

Not taking a shot @ Chauvet BTW, MINSpot is an excellent product! Just illustrating a point...

Jack

 

[shiben]

My Philips toaster has no UL listing mark.
My GE Microwave has no UL listing mark.

Guess what...
My Chauvet MINspot has no UL listing mark...

:-O

Ok, but is it actually UL Listed? The point remains, I can put CE or whatever on pretty much anything I cobble together with my welding gear, and I can even include a piece of paper that says its UL listed and CE certified or what have you, Or say just about anything else I want about it. None of that makes it true/worthwhile.

 

[Wood4321]

Ok, So the chauvet fixture doesn't bear a CE mark, or UL, but it does bear a ETL mark.
This link explains that this testing encompasses several different standards including UL.

I guess I should have spoken more clearly, Even if they marked it as CE or ETL, I am very sure they have not gone through any testing. This lack of testing also saves them money, as ETL or UL testing costs a fair amount of money.
Especially when the testing agency makes you go back to the drawing board to rework something to make it acceptable.

I guess it looks like there is no way we are going to convince you, since the actual manufacturer came on this thread and told you it was fake....
If you won't believe them, I am not sure who you would believe.

As for the toaster and microwave, I would hold them to a different level, as they are not intended to be used in a public performance space.

 

[jfetter]

I had a long reply but why bother, I think it's safe to say the argument is dead. There is little point in continuing as a head-to-head comparison doesn't seem to mean anything. Sadly, proving intellectual property (something I DO respect and searched both filed and issued patents to no avail) is hard to show. Either way, this argument seems to be drawing anger so let's just let it die...

Jack

 

[Wood4321]

I agree, very dead, since convincing you seems to be impossible.
I would make one final point however, If somebody stole my lighting design, and recreated it in every way shape and form, I would be pretty pissed off. And in my opinion, rightfully so.
Even though I don't have a patent for my design. (I know patents are not issued for lighting design but it is a hypothetical to make a point)
The fact that the fixture looks like the other is enough to tell us that they at the very least trying to steal market share from the chauvet fixture.

 

[Jeffhtg]

I don't "want it to", it's simply logical. I do not agree they are blatant rip-off's just yet. I still say making a product look LIKE another is one thing but making it exactly the same is not logical at all. In fact, it raises their cost to do so, a blatant rip-off (IMO) would be similar on the outside only. Likewise, if you were trying to sell based on the "look", you would assume a fly-by-night vendor, not one who actually builds a good product. I'm sorry but in what world is building a GOOD or equally functioning copy of the original and then selling it at 40% MSRP profitable, even in China? Nothing with China is as simple as we want to make it, of this I know first hand, all the pieces aren't in this puzzle yet IMO...

Jack

Wow. Way to get off OP topic

Anyways since I posted this I have picked up some prototype fixtures from a US company that is bringing in a product like this. It is interesting how the process works.. because basically companies like chauvet, elation, adj, and others buy a pre made product.. some have it modified to be cheaper or better.. but molds cost alot of money. So body styles are the same BECAUSE they don't wanna drop 20g extra for their own mold.

Either way.. The lighting world is about to get a whole new group of fixtures that are starting to get into PRO level performance for 1/4 the price. I met a guy just this week that brings in containers of lights for private commercial use.... he gets many that dont work out of the box - but they become spare parts and everything works out in the long run for him.

I'm not saying its right. I'm just saying things are changing. I've got my bowl of popcorn

 

[jfetter]

..It is interesting how the process works.. because basically companies like chauvet, elation, adj, and others buy a pre made product.. some have it modified to be cheaper or better..

Yes, this point was missed by many. Some don't want to believe a company could find an existing product from a reputable Chinese company that does OEM/ODM on a regular basis, tweak it with perhaps a quick change gobo wheel and easy access door and then re-sell it in another market (i.e. country) but this happens every day. In fact, this has been going on for decades across thousands of products.

The emotional aspect is where the argument occurs, perhaps the price differential or superior mentality (or other factor) forces human logic to simply refuse to believe the products could ever be similar, yet alone virtualy identical. The ethics issue, well that means the Chinese company should not re-sell the modified version (in an ODM situation absolutely) because that version is absolutely an original, owned by the company that paid to have it designed and/or manufacturered.

So the Chinese company still sells (legally and morally) the base product (they designed!) to many other companies, perhaps eventually being sold along side the "sister" product. Surprised, you shouldn't be, you see it every day in Best Buy, Target and Wallmart and you name it. So without the legal/moral issue, you still do have differences, the question is how different and does it affect performance/reliabilty/durability/service etc and if so, how much and is your situation one in which this is or is not acceptable, this is where the discussion should go IMO...

Jack

 

[Wood4321]

Jack,
The Senior Product Manager from Chauvet came on this board and told you that you are wrong. I assume you must think he is lying.

I agree that companies buy fixtures from other companies on a regular basis. However those deals always include a provision that prevents them from selling them in the same market, under the threat of heavy monetary penalty. Plus obviously losing that business partner.

I am sure that chauvet has sold many more of that fixture than MS lighting has. If Chauvet caught an OEM selling one of their fixtures rebranded, there is 0% chance they ever would use them again for another fixture. That is a much larger loss of sales than they ever could bring in selling the same fixture on the side.

There would be no benefit for any OEM manufacturer selling the same product for cheaper in the same market as the company buying the OEM product.

Once again, IT MAKES NO SENSE for a OEM to sell to the same market that their client is selling to.

You are blatantly wrong and made an poor ethical choice and are now trying justify it.
Good luck with that and your knock off fixtures.

 

[bishopthomas]

I have knock off fixtures. I don't really give a **** what you or others think. They make me money. They look good and my clients are happy. For me, that's the only thing that matters. I'm getting a good deal and am able to pass that along to my clients. The ones that need higher end fixtures I bring those and charge accordingly.

 

[Pie4Weebl]

I have knock off fixtures. I don't really give a **** what you or others think. They make me money. They look good and my clients are happy. For me, that's the only thing that matters. I'm getting a good deal and am able to pass that along to my clients. The ones that need higher end fixtures I bring those and charge accordingly.

congrats, you're now on the same level as the guy on the corner selling burned copies of DVDs for $5.

 

[jfetter]

Jack,
The Senior Product Manager from Chauvet came on this board and told you that you are wrong. I assume you must think he is lying.

I agree that companies buy fixtures from other companies on a regular basis. However those deals always include a provision that prevents them from selling them in the same market, under the threat of heavy monetary penalty. Plus obviously losing that business partner.

I am sure that chauvet has sold many more of that fixture than MS lighting has. If Chauvet caught an OEM selling one of their fixtures rebranded, there is 0% chance they ever would use them again for another fixture. That is a much larger loss of sales than they ever could bring in selling the same fixture on the side.

There would be no benefit for any OEM manufacturer selling the same product for cheaper in the same market as the company buying the OEM product.

Once again, IT MAKES NO SENSE for a OEM to sell to the same market that their client is selling to.

You are blatantly wrong and made an poor ethical choice and are now trying justify it.
Good luck with that and your knock off fixtures.

Joshua,

I don't know what you do for a living but in my field I have a professional resume I'd put up against any. The one thing I've learned in my long career is to learn to communicate, not insult as that immediately leads to escalation and the ears just close. I haven't said anything rude so it would be nice to see you do the same.

Two points; first, what the Chauvet PM said was the only thing he could say, think about it. Second, if you read carefully you would have seen the speculation on my part is that this is the root fixture, a very similar fixture in almost every way that I then presumed was what they started with and entered an OEM or ODM (likely an ODM deal) to have it produced.

This is no way makes the original Chinese fixture illegal, unethical or immoral to purchase and use. You need to separate out emotion IMO and go on facts. Now if Chauvet says they designed it from the ground up and anything and everything that looks and functions like it are in fact IP, then I absolutely agree with you!

Jack

 

[DuckJordan]

Joshua,

I don't know what you do for a living but in my field I have a professional resume I'd put up against any. The one thing I've learned in my long career is to learn to communicate, not insult as that immediately leads to escalation and the ears just close. I haven't said anything rude so it would be nice to see you do the same.

Two points; first, what the Chauvet PM said was the only thing he could say, think about it. Second, if you read carefully you would have seen the speculation on my part is that this is the root fixture, a very similar fixture in almost every way that I then presumed was what they started with and entered an OEM or ODM (likely an ODM deal) to have it produced.

This is no way makes the original Chinese fixture illegal, unethical or immoral to purchase and use. You need to separate out emotion IMO and go on facts. Now if Chauvet says they designed it from the ground up and anything and everything that looks and functions like it are in fact IP, then I absolutely agree with you!

Jack

I don't understand why you bring up emotion, and only respond to the arguments that didn't give you facts. It proves our point that instead of being a discussion its turned into a one way speech. I'm not sure about anyone else, but I have read your points, and understand why you feel the way you do. Do I believe you're correct? No, I don't but at least I include the discussion into my post. You speak of closed ears but I find your ears just as closed as many of the other viewers of this thread.

 

[jfetter]

I don't understand why you bring up emotion, and only respond to the arguments that didn't give you facts. It proves our point that instead of being a discussion its turned into a one way speech. I'm not sure about anyone else, but I have read your points, and understand why you feel the way you do. Do I believe you're correct? No, I don't but at least I include the discussion into my post. You speak of closed ears but I find your ears just as closed as many of the other viewers of this thread.

I didn't accuse him of anything except being rude? Tell me then, what facts do you bring (or consider) that I am missing or ignoring?

Two of the "facts" you cited in your post are complete assumptions on your part, one of them is opinion and the other no one is arguing?

Jack