trivia question of the day

As a postscript I've used the M24 (it's grandson or great grandson) as recently as Ocober this year. Still works although it's a bit creaky.
 
Cheating is when actors in a conversation really face out a little toward the audience, sort of making a V facing downstage, instead of being parallel ll.

Blocking isdeciding where on the stage something happens. Could be when they are acting, or singing, or dancing.

Don't know if this is outstandingly easy, (probably is...no, I'm sure it is...I'll ask anyways...) but who was the first to use a "memory" or computer lighting board, what was that board, and for what play. =P
I'm removing myself from this question 'cause he's design the next production on our stage:mrgreen: That is if you are refering to the first "computerized " memory board. The first "Memory" boards were mechanical and had some big 'ole lock bolts on them where you could set a "level" you also had a Master handle that locked onto the individual handles and you might have had to push or pull 10 handles at once it was tough work. if you every get a chance to look at a real "piano Board" it's something else. There is one in Oklahoma city in the Scottish Rite Temple the is still used and in perfect " Showroom" condition.
 
I probably didn't phrase that as best as I could....

By memory board, I mean a computer that sends a message to a dimmer rack via DMX, and all that good stuff. The kind with a screen and buttons. (1st to have a memory, and store cues...)
And, by first ever, I meant in Broadway...
I don't know who actually first ran it on Broadway, but the designer was the first to ask for one on their show.


I have only seen pictures of the really old kinds, and wow, I am glad I don't have to run something like that nowadays... It would be awesome to see one in real life though...especially in such good condition... Iv'e never been able to see much historic equipment besides that in the dusty corners of our storage piles...(I'm just a high school tech, and haven't gone to too many other theaters. I have never actually seen a play outside of school. I've tried, but didn't have enough money, or just missed them entirely...)
 
I dont know whether this is right, but was the EDI LS-8 the first memory console on broadway... It was a memory console used in the broadway musical 'A chorus line'. When the show transferred to Broadway, the Lighting Designer Tharon Musser was allowed anything she wanted and so she asked for a memory console, the Strand version wasn't ready, but the LS-8 made by EDI (Electronics Diversified) was almost ready. However to run it the operating system had to be loaded from paper tape, but the memory was non-volatile and so the cues once saved would stay there. However you did say that the question was one reffering to a desk with DMX capabilities, but the DMX standard wasn't introduced until 1986, about 11 years after the first memory console on broadway (1975).

Hmmm... good question and good thread!!:grin:

Diarmuid
 
I probably didn't phrase that as best as I could....

By memory board, I mean a computer that sends a message to a dimmer rack via DMX, and all that good stuff. The kind with a screen and buttons. (1st to have a memory, and store cues...)
And, by first ever, I meant in Broadway...
I don't know who actually first ran it on Broadway, but the designer was the first to ask for one on their show.


I have only seen pictures of the really old kinds, and wow, I am glad I don't have to run something like that nowadays... It would be awesome to see one in real life though...especially in such good condition... Iv'e never been able to see much historic equipment besides that in the dusty corners of our storage piles...(I'm just a high school tech, and haven't gone to too many other theaters. I have never actually seen a play outside of school. I've tried, but didn't have enough money, or just missed them entirely...)

It did not utilize DMX but it was a "computer memory" console.


I dont know whether this is right, but was the EDI LS-8 the first memory console on broadway... It was a memory console used in the broadway musical 'A chorus line'. When the show transferred to Broadway, the Lighting Designer Tharon Musser was allowed anything she wanted and so she asked for a memory console, the Strand version wasn't ready, but the LS-8 made by EDI (Electronics Diversified) was almost ready. However to run it the operating system had to be loaded from paper tape, but the memory was non-volatile and so the cues once saved would stay there. However you did say that the question was one reffering to a desk with DMX capabilities, but the DMX standard wasn't introduced until 1986, about 11 years after the first memory console on broadway (1975).

Hmmm... good question and good thread!!:grin:

Diarmuid


The Lighting designer was Tharon Musser. The designer of the Board was Gordan Pearlman. He also invented the worlds first "digital" dimmer, was instrumental in the design of the original SCRIMMER dimmer and later founded E.T.which produces IPS and the Horizon system.
He's currently Desinging our next Mainstage production " Vanya " an adaptation of the Chekoff originally produced at the Citadel and having it's premier in the States here at A.R.T. Oh and Starring Our own Artistic Director Allen Nause, and Oscar winner, < and freind of ART> William Hurt.:twisted: < God I love shameless name dropping, it's the best thing about this bussiness>

P.S. tickets availible today at www.Artistsrep.org
 
DMX came much later.Most of the early advanced dimmers use an analog signal typically 0-10 volts, the dimmer in essence took this voltave signal and used it as the percentate of the power to pass along to the output. and there was a direct connection of the signal to each channel of the dimmer the old Cinch Jones analog connectors were typical for this type of system. Then things moved along to a analog signal that the all the dimmers on the connection looked at, and determined if the signal was for that dimmer or not, Strands AMX and NSI MPX works like this. It was only with DMX that you had a digital signal, and now with ethernet based systems it is getting even more advanced since a dimmer is really a network device that is addressable, and able to accept a data packet with information for it it use for control

Sharyn
 
..well while we're talking about DMX, and ACN...

Does anybody know if in the far future they might make a system that works with USB, or maybe Firewire? Wouldn't that be a lor faster, or would it not be worth it?
...just random wonderings...
 
Both of those have maximum lengths without using repeaters that are fairly lower than DMX. USB is 16 feet and Firewire is 164 feet I believe.
 
Not just the comment about repeaters and cable lengths that Footer made, but would there actually be any real benefit to doing so? It is not like there is a huge amount of data being transferred...
 
the likely hood is that it will be a straight ethernet connection, and that the dimmer will simply look like a node on the network, and have an ip address etc, and run over 10base t or 100base t and simply eliminate the need for a conversion to dmx, the console will simply send an ip packet and the dimmer will simply receive it and decode it
Sharyn

Actually there is an ET system in place that uses a similar technology Their Vista architectual systems have multiple hosts implanted on individual relays and modules in the rack and can be addressed individually. Personally I never really saw the need. I'm quite happy with DMX as a control protocol. I can see some reasons, say certain automated fixtures, that you might want to go to a TCP/IP protocol. but for the stability that dmx offers over ethernet, I dont really see the advantages at this state. Oh yeah just my $.02:mrgreen:
 
Putting in my .02 I can agree with you and also disagree :)

The big thing that the whole cat5 10baset stuff gives you is a much cheaper cable spec, and all the ic's to do the interface are standard, available and much cheaper. Dmx is really picky about termination first, cable length and spec second and also drivers and a lot of that goes away or becomes less problematic if you move to ethernet.

The other big thing is ethernet allows for better error detection, correction retransmission, switching etc etc, so based on addressing you have a lot more flexibility on how to wire things up, you don't need daisy chaining, etc

It really is down at the lower physical levels that the move away from the traditional dmx probably makes more sense
Sharyn
 
Actually I believe the point of ACN is to move everything above the hardware level when it comes to data transmission.

Ethernet is actually (IIRC) 7 levels of hardware/software. ACN sits at the 2nd layer and will send DMX (or RDM, or anything else people invent) (an 1st layer doobry) along the 'network' (which could be made of wet string, or be the internet) independant of the hardware setup.

To get even more OT, ACN is really about moving DMX away from the hardware in the same way Windows moved everything above a hardware abstraction level.

Only problem so far is existing solutions use things like broadcast packets. Which tend to make the IT guys come shout at you. :D


What was the question again?
 
(which could be made of wet string, or be the internet)

What was the question again?

Wet string......... Ok I'm LOL .

I think your'e right it is the dry english humor :mrgreen:
 
Actually I believe the point of ACN is to move everything above the hardware level when it comes to data transmission.
Ethernet is actually (IIRC) 7 levels of hardware/software. ACN sits at the 2nd layer and will send DMX (or RDM, or anything else people invent) (an 1st layer doobry) along the 'network' (which could be made of wet string, or be the internet) independant of the hardware setup.
To get even more OT, ACN is really about moving DMX away from the hardware in the same way Windows moved everything above a hardware abstraction level.
Only problem so far is existing solutions use things like broadcast packets. Which tend to make the IT guys come shout at you. :D
What was the question again?

You are correct but I think misinterpreted what I was saying. Basically the move to ethernet will see the greatest changes at the physical layer, because it moves DMX up in the ISO model, allowing for the use of
cat5 and above, switches, etc
Sharyn
 
OOO, ditto!

The point I was trying to make is that ACN will make DMX a purely software issue. So yes we will be replacing some (and eventually all) of our DMX cabling with networking type stuff. But the bigger change is that we will never need to do it again.
No change in cabling for any protocol ever again. Thats the goal.
 
Just a little point CAT5 has already been cleared to carry DMX512 signals over without needing to convert it to ethernet.

If I was doing a new installation I would wire in ethernet connections but until my budget could afford it I would just use them for DMX512.

SharynF has made the comment about reliability of ethernet components. I still think that any time you add another powered device in your control chain it's another device that can fail.

In DMX512 without using ethernet you have only two main sources of problems - the cable / connector and the signal souce /dmx splitter.

Except for integrating multimedia into a production I can't see a major need for it in High Schools.

If someone does have an ethernet DMX system in their venue could they plaese tell me what it is used for. Also what actual difference it has made compared to a purely physical DMX system.

I do believe there is a place for it but at what level of venue I don't know.
 
Here are the main differences

One if you run more than 32 devices on a channel you should get a repeater/splitter for DMX and you should have an opto isolator, so IMO you wind up with additional powered devices anyway

You have the ability to run far more cable before you run into problems

You can have star type configurations much more easily.

If all you are doing is running a dmx line to a dimmer rack, then it probably does not matter, but once you start to put movers, and other dmx devices around it is a big help

DMX cable is not cheap, cat5 is dirt cheap, I agree you can use cat5 cable, a lot of people keep saying you can BUT...

It really comes down to wiring infrastructure, and the ability to expand and be flexible. In construction, people are much more used to running cat5 these days than pulling dmx cable


In theory if the move is to a true ethernet based system, then you gain all the advantages of error detection, correction, retransmission, and addressing each device individually vs each device in essence counting the transmission to determine if it is for that device.

Sharyn
 
Don't know what others think, but I do wonder whether the statement along the lines of never having to replace the cabling again will actually hold true. I mean networking started with what 50 ohm coax, then went to Cat5, then Cat5E, now Cat 6. I have to wonder whether there will be a newer and better cable at some point in the not too distant future. I guess if you installed fibre the you would have a better chance of future proofing but I do have to wonder...
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back