I love this post!!!! Heck, I still use 2.0.9 .... hey, it works.
Looks like I will stick wtih 2.5
- Thread starter Santacarl
- Start date
I love this post!!!! Heck, I still use 2.0.9 .... hey, it works.
I'm new to Vixen, but will probably start off with 3.x and learn to use it.
"Professional grade" software is not always easy to use or intuitive, but it is extremely powerful. At work, the masses use Microsoft Publisher to make flyers and pamphlets because it is intuitive and easy to use. But the "experts" at work use QuarkXpress to do the heavy duty desktop publishing. QuarkXpress is neither easy to use or intuitive, but it is very powerful software.
While I don't have 5000 channels to control now, you never know what the future may bring......
"Professional grade" software is not always easy to use or intuitive, but it is extremely powerful. At work, the masses use Microsoft Publisher to make flyers and pamphlets because it is intuitive and easy to use. But the "experts" at work use QuarkXpress to do the heavy duty desktop publishing. QuarkXpress is neither easy to use or intuitive, but it is very powerful software.
While I don't have 5000 channels to control now, you never know what the future may bring......
griffixdc
New member
so here is another question...i am looking at adding vixen 3.0 to my skills...what happens to all my 2.1 vixen stuff....i do not want to get rid of them or have to re-sequence them in 3.0....i just want 3.0 to create new songs or modify more complex parts from older songs. is this possible? otherwise my time availability will have to stay with 2.1 and only add a song or 2...i am also adding about 75 channels to my old songs ...i think it will be simple enough but a mega tree is one of them.
dirknerkle
Supporting Member
In earlier Vixen 3.0 posts, I believe it was stated that there probably would not be a converter from 2.1 or 2.5 to 3.0 because the concepts of the two operating mechanisms are so diverse. This may change, or someone with an IQ above 6000 may devise a method to convert them, but that's what I recall.
ebrady
New member
This is one of the items that is holding me back at the moment also. I agree that converting 2.x sequences to 3.0 would be difficult. An alternate suggestion that I and some other members made was to allow a 3.0 sequence to be converted back to the 2.x format. If this were possible, then it would be possible to sequence all of NEW songs in 3.0, and then export them back to 2.x to be played along with older sequences.
Users who have a large investment would initially use 3.0 only for building the sequence and 2.x for playback. Overtime they would slowly transition to 3.0 as more new sequences were made and older ones were converted.
Users who have a large investment would initially use 3.0 only for building the sequence and 2.x for playback. Overtime they would slowly transition to 3.0 as more new sequences were made and older ones were converted.
Vixen is not open source and you have not been abandoned there - so why think it might happen to HLS?
Joe
smeighan
New member
Joe, i am new to this like you. I just started feb of this year. I did look at old posts and there were sequencers started for about a year and then the developer stopped, bug fixes stopped. Sometimes the developer just stopped responding to pm's and such.
I saw these programs that started, lots of excitement and jazz and then dissapeared
Prancer
Olive Studio
I think there were others.
LSP and LOR are commercial
Vixen has been around for 5 years but doesn't look to be released thru open source.
xlights is on sourceforge and is opensource.
I will be releasing Nutcracker fully on sourceforge by the end of the summer.
Learning a new sequencer is alot of investment for this group of hobbists. I am aware that the nutcracker is yet another prohgram that people would have to learn, invest in and hopefully find useful.. I think the big concern , when we are 201 days from Christmas 2012 is the amount of time they put into a sequencer will yield a show.
There is lots of angst about LSP 2 vs LSP 3 , when will 3 be released?
Vixen 2.1 vs Vixen 3.0. Things will need to be relearned.
To all of you, we do understand the concern. For myself, I built Nutcracker so i could make my first christmas show with something other than a Home Depot Mr Christmas 6 channel controller. I still plan on having my show for my megatree be built by Nutcracker. I have stated that Nutcracker will always be free. After it is fully posted and supported thru sourceforge, you will know that more people than just myself can use it and it will remain free.
I think Joe's program is different in concept but is just as easy to learn for a newbie like me than some of the others. LSP seems to have the most whistle and bells. It is like a European sports car (with sometimes the same reliability issues), i think i just need a reliable car to get my job done. I think Nutcracker has numerous issues. I dont like that i cant have a mouse to drag and drop, you dont get immediate feedback, as if it were built into a sequencer. .etc, .etc. It currently is filling a gap in the sequencer world. I think in a year or two the sequencers will have the effects i have and more built in. Why would you need Nutcracker then? So , my product probably has a shelf life of a few years.
i built it for myself, it will probably help some of you this year.
Joe, the only thing stopping me from using HLS is that i need it to drive the E1.31 RJ controller with his pixelnet protocol. RJ is on the road to texas for the june 16 Academy. I know in Jul or Aug the two of you will probably talk and you will then support his etherdongle. I know David of LSP fame built a driver for it in like 1 day. Xlights has a driver for it. RJ has published his protocol on his webpage (http://diylightanimation.com/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=3554.0;attach=4452)
I am , as of today, probably going to use Vixen 2.1 and xlights. I will wait and see if my hardware can be supported in HLS. I would then move. You and i do Rapid application development. I am at over 100 releases of Nutcracker since i started in feb. I believe you have released more. I think most people will notice that when an issue is raised or an enhancement requested our turn around time is measured in hours or days.
I think it would be worth a few hours of everybodys time to try HLS. If it supports your hardware and you have vixen, i think you are pretty set. HLS can read the vix file.
I may later this year make an uber converter. Select any two from this list:
LSP 1.8, LSP 2, LSP 3, LOR S2, LOR S3, Vixen 2.1, Vixen 2.5, Vixen 3.0 and HLS. Convert sequences between any in the list. This would remove the barriers for trying new sequencers. We will see what the fall brings.
Last edited:
I have to agree .
2011 saw me moving to dumb RGB I spent a year cutting soldering and sequencing. At 30 - 40 hours solid using vixen 2.1.0.0. sequencing was time consuming. Im a bit of a stickler for things known . From November 2011 I started planning for 2012 looking at options and really wanting to move into pixels while still using Vixen 2.1.0.0. I hand drew a 3024 channel preview in Vixen and then began to create effects using a light box and a grid printed out on paper.
Then Sean came along with Nutcracker and all of a sudden I could create awesome effects for melodies etc but it lacked a little in the basic (You know I love your efforts Sean so dont take offence) beat type effects fades left to right up, down etc.
I started to play with LSP, LOR Vixen 3.0, Pixel Toy and any other sequencing software I could find . Nothing seemed to fit the bill.
Sequencing came to a stand still as I started to bring my pixel tree to life. With over 2 months of research and another 6 weeks to build the last thing on my mind was what software to use.
I still kept an eye on the forums watching reading and occasionally playing with software.
Once my tree was built I hit Nutcracker hard and using Vixen 2.1.0.0 I created some great results, a few effects were buggy but still way beyond what I could hope to create 1 pixel at a time.
Somewhere in there some guy called Joe sent me a message asking me to have a look at a new sequencer called HLS. What the hey its a quick download. My initial thoughts were WOW this is awesome but then after a little bit of a play I found it lacking what I wanted from my 2012 software.
I posted a message here pointing out what I believed were HLS's shortfalls (mainly the inability to create or modify pixel effects ) and within 24 hours Joe had added the ability to do just that.
HLS has all the advantages of Vixen 2.X.X.X and more. RGB is moved to 1 channel rather than 3 , You can convert your vixen sequences to HLS with ease , The ability to expand or decrease effect timing with 1 click makes sequencing easy, Nutcracker effects support, and to top it all the ability to create your own rgb pixel effects for any size pixel tree. Plus the advantage of not having to upgrade to a 6 core 16 gig ram show computer.
If you haven't tried HLS yet , you haven't tried full stop....................................................
Disclaimer I have no affiliation with any software, hardware or retail distributer I just call it as I see it.
I am glad I ran across this thread now...
Im running behind on my Halloween setup and was trying to determine if I should upgrade to 3. From my standpoint, I dont need all of the advanced features of 3. I run a simple setup of about 45 DMX channels (salvaged theater equipment) in a small front yard (50 sqft usable space) powered by an old IBM PII running XP (until it pooped out on me when I booted to start setting up today).
While I am a sucker for awesome powerful software, I simply don't have the time (especially with my late start on setting up for Halloween) to port my 15 sequences from 2.x to 3.
As a truck mechanic, Im from the school of thought of "If it aint broke, dont fix it." 2 worked great for me last year and my display doesn't necessitate monster software.
Now that I have my software predicament sorted out, I need to get my hardware fixed and start plugging everything in.
(if there is anyone in the Chicago area with an old working computer to donate, I will gladly accept)
Cheers!
Im running behind on my Halloween setup and was trying to determine if I should upgrade to 3. From my standpoint, I dont need all of the advanced features of 3. I run a simple setup of about 45 DMX channels (salvaged theater equipment) in a small front yard (50 sqft usable space) powered by an old IBM PII running XP (until it pooped out on me when I booted to start setting up today).
While I am a sucker for awesome powerful software, I simply don't have the time (especially with my late start on setting up for Halloween) to port my 15 sequences from 2.x to 3.
As a truck mechanic, Im from the school of thought of "If it aint broke, dont fix it." 2 worked great for me last year and my display doesn't necessitate monster software.
Now that I have my software predicament sorted out, I need to get my hardware fixed and start plugging everything in.
(if there is anyone in the Chicago area with an old working computer to donate, I will gladly accept)
Cheers!
jchuchla
Supporting Member
I just wanted to point out that you're responding to a thread that has been idle for over 2 years. The vixen 3.1 that is out there today is a very different beast than it was when the other comments were posted in this thread back in 2012. In my opinion it's now probably the fastest and easiest sequencer to use. There is a bit of relearning involved if you're used to the older sequencers. But if you approach it as a new program with a new paradigm, and not as an upgrade to an older system, you'll be just fine.
You do have a member of the vixen 3 team right here in the Chicago area. Don't hesitate to contact me if you need help.
--Jon Chuchla--
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
You do have a member of the vixen 3 team right here in the Chicago area. Don't hesitate to contact me if you need help.
--Jon Chuchla--
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk