Trying to squeeze blood from a stone: S4 LED

[Doug Lowthian]

So S4 LED are @$2500. Colorsource @$1300.

What if I purchased a used S4 incandescent (@$300) and a new Source 4WRD retro fit at @$600.

So now I have an LED Source 4 with a brand new light engine for $900.

Crazy idea?

 

[sk8rsdad]

IMHO, the only compelling case for a Source 4WRD is a grant-funded energy retrofit. In any other instance you're better off spending extra for the Colorsource. There's no advantage to a white LED source over an existing incandescent except for maybe some lamp replacement cost and maintenance, and it could be a long time before breaking even on the initial investment.

 

[JohnD]

You have to consider that you aren't really comparing apples to apples. The 4wrd is white lite only.

 

[BillConnerFASTC]

And I'm not sure your quotations are quite right. I think a S4 LED at $2500 compares with a CS profile at $1800 - all things being equal. I could be off a little, but I think not as far apart as you suggest.

Yes, the S4WRD is a bargain at $695 - at least at that introductory price. At whitb or near white, I think it beats a CS. I'm using 4 in an architectural application.

And you should look at others, imho.

 

[theatricalmatt]

Source Four Lustrs and ColorSource profiles have different engines; one uses seven different colored emitters, the other only four. The Lustrs are generally brighter and have better color-mixing. I still find the CS profiles adequate in many uses.

The 4wrd is great for architectural purposes, when you're putting a light in a place you wouldn't be able to reach without a scissor lift or other access. I could possibly see some schools using it for front light for auditoriums that double as theaters, but it's, again, a really different animal. IIRC, ETC was for some time offering a 4wrd + Source Four body package, at a lower cost than purchasing a new instrument and retrofitting it.

 

[Doug Lowthian]

All good points. We bought a couple of Colorsource Zoom LED spots last year and love them.
My numbers are based on just web searching, But you are right the dollar spread betwen the CS LED and my hodge podge (setting aside the color vs white) may not be worth it. Just trying to think outside the box!
I know the 4wrd is white only, but then so are the ancient Colortrans!

IMG_3871

• Doug Lowthian
• Dec 25, 2016

 

[danTt]

Source Four Lustrs and ColorSource profiles have different engines; one uses seven different colored emitters, the other only four. The Lustrs are generally brighter and have better color-mixing. I still find the CS profiles adequate in many uses.

The 4wrd is great for architectural purposes, when you're putting a light in a place you wouldn't be able to reach without a scissor lift or other access. I could possibly see some schools using it for front light for auditoriums that double as theaters, but it's, again, a really different animal. IIRC, ETC was for some time offering a 4wrd + Source Four body package, at a lower cost than purchasing a new instrument and retrofitting it.

In my experience the CS spot is noticeably brighter than the lustr2, it just doesn't hit the color range (though it comes close).

 

[Pie4Weebl]

I think at that point a Chauvet Ovation 160 would be a better move.

 

[BobHealey]

Source Four Lustrs and ColorSource profiles have different engines; one uses seven different colored emitters, the other only four. The Lustrs are generally brighter and have better color-mixing. I still find the CS profiles adequate in many uses.

The 4wrd is great for architectural purposes, when you're putting a light in a place you wouldn't be able to reach without a scissor lift or other access. I could possibly see some schools using it for front light for auditoriums that double as theaters, but it's, again, a really different animal. IIRC, ETC was for some time offering a 4wrd + Source Four body package, at a lower cost than purchasing a new instrument and retrofitting it.

I've been eyeing some of the white only solutions for use with full color gobos, since Apollo has an LED fixture only line of full color gobos that is significantly cheaper than the CMKY glass process.

Edit: Clarified what Apollo product was being referenced.

 

[Doug Lowthian]

Great ideas. Knew I could count on this group for a wide range of ideas. Learn a lot on this forum!

 

[MikeJ]

I think at that point a Chauvet Ovation 160 would be a better move.

With the low cost and high quality of the OVATION line, I see little reason for anyone be buying the 4wrd.

 

[danTt]

With the low cost and high quality of the OVATION line, I see little reason for anyone be buying the 4wrd.

Given that a LED retrofit for a source4 is probably going to be a long term investment, I don't know that I'd want to risk Chauvet. They've certainly gotten better, but ETC has the reputation they do in this industry for a reason.

 

[MikeJ]

Given that a LED retrofit for a source4 is probably going to be a long term investment, I don't know that I'd want to risk Chauvet. They've certainly gotten better, but ETC has the reputation they do in this industry for a reason.

Meh..The 4wrd, had poor CRI, RJ45 connectors instead of 5-pin, and can only run on 120v. Yes it does have its applications, but its not really a good product for anything but retrofiring existing architectural systems. Also you are still left with the crappy old original lens, and reflector. I would be willing to bet that in a large retrofit, you will find at least a few broken reflectors too.

To me its kind of like spending $15 grand on a new engine for a 1984 K-car, when you $2k more you could get something brand new and way better.

 

[techieman33]

Given that a LED retrofit for a source4 is probably going to be a long term investment, I don't know that I'd want to risk Chauvet. They've certainly gotten better, but ETC has the reputation they do in this industry for a reason.

Meh..The 4wrd, had poor CRI, RJ45 connectors instead of 5-pin, and can only run on 120v. Yes it does have its applications, but its not really a good product for anything but retrofiring existing architectural systems. Also you are still left with the crappy old original lens, and reflector. I would be willing to bet that in a large retrofit, you will find at least a few broken reflectors too.

To me its kind of like spending $15 grand on a new engine for a 1984 K-car, when you $2k more you could get something brand new and way better.

I think the quality of the 4wrd is still questionable at best, their first try was plagued with problems, and we don't really know if they've solved them yet. And with the terrible CRI i'm not sure that it's even fit for a lot of architectural situations. It feels like a product that was produced because so many people were asking for it, but I don't know that it will really make anyone happy to have it. I think that what will happen is a bunch of schools will get stuck with them and then have to live with all of their drawbacks while the rest of the market ignores them.

 

[rsmentele]

As we all know, CRI is a negligible measurement and can be easily manipulated to receive better results. IF you desire a higher CRI, ETC does have a Gallery version of the S4WRD to achieve that. ETC released this product mainly as an architectural/HOW/installation replacement, it's not really for theatrical applications, but works well in it. At it's price, it is still the cheapest option for current Source 4 users to go LED. Again, for it's application, its the best option out there. In a theatrical application, you money is usually best spent on the Color Source as it allows for more flexibility. But in reality, if you are looking to go LED just for energy savings, your ROI is going to be years and years. When replacing fixtures only, incandescent is still the cheapest over the long run. Obviously LED gives you flexibility in color choice, but in a cost saving application, they are still very expensive.

Keep in mind that this is not the case in new construction or full renovation as the power systems cost difference makes up for the higher fixture costs of LED, making the ROI much less.

 

[BillConnerFASTC]

Can Chauvet's touch the $695 retrofit cost, and ease of retrofit? This is aimed at a HS market after all, with pretty good mains dimming.

 

[Jay Ashworth]

Well, there's an excellent question: how does the 4WRD handle mains dimming? Or does it?

 

[SteveB]

Well, there's an excellent question: how does the 4WRD handle mains dimming? Or does it?

From the current ETC documents:

"Source 4WRD LED is capable of being both DMX or line dimmedby a conventional SCR dimmer. In AC dimming mode, performance can vary based on the dimmer used
and its control settings. For this reason, AC dimming is best suited for level setting or traditional LED quality dimming situations. When high-performance dimming is required,
DMX mode should be used. We recommend testing Source 4WRD LED on existing dimmers you may wish to use."

In other words, sometimes, maybe most of the time.

 

[BillConnerFASTC]

Demos I've seen of mains dimming is at least as good as anyone's mains dimming, not that I'd ever recommend planning for it.

If it keeps people off a ladder changing lamps in a high school where there is no one with tech training, it's a good thing.

 

[rsmentele]

Mains dimming is perfect for the markets that this was designed for. Small school, installed HOW, architectural, exc. It's not bad for theater either, but ETC holds itself to a high standard for dimming, so they are a little harder on it than other manufacturers.

I don't know if LED's will ever get to the point that they match the dimming capability of incandescent on mains dimming. Our dimmers are not designed for electronic loads, and LED drivers are just that.