The EK-DZ Advanced Laser Router!

[ekeefe]

Hello,

Thank you for all the interest!

I would also like to thank everyone for there input.

Regarding 3-pin vs. 5-pin DMX connectors, the Advanced Laser Router's PCB has footprints for either. The type of connector will be an option that can be specified when ordering.

I am going to modify the front panel PCB so that it supports either full potentiometers with knobs or recessed trimmers. Once again this will be an option specified when ordering.

@luxilid: Thank you for your input regarding the ordering of parameters. The more I look at it, the more I agree with you.

This is something I can update in the code, so making the change is no problem.

I am curious what everyone else thinks, do you agree with the reordering of the parameters?

I welcome all suggestions.

For those who have been waiting a bit for Advanced Laser Router, these changes will not alter the release date.

Thanks guys!

ED

[Laser Wizardry]

" 15 characters"

[luxilid]

I think having this unit with only DMX in is actually better. I have seen an entire DMX chain go wonky with just one bad lighting fixture in-line. You can get ground loops and data reflections that can cause all kinds of crazy unintended activity. With a single-ended device like this you need a dedicated DMX line from the console or opto splitter and it is much safer by not having anything else on that chain to potentially cause DMX problems.
You can tell the lighting guys you need a dedicated DMX line and 99% of the time they will respect that request and give it to you so I think that is safer in the long run.

[Laser Wizardry]

" 15 characters"

[absolom7691]

This, in conjunction with a Z-5, would net you planetarium style abstracts, so long as you have 4 aligned projectors to pull it off. I love this!

DZ: I would like to request a video of this router, fed by a Z-5 console, outputting to your dual head ion rig.

[luxilid]

Mandatory DMX passthrough is not part of the USITT DMX512A spec. The spec describes that daisy chaining the signal is allowed and the practical electrical limits of such a chain, but not that every fixture/device must have means to pass the signal along. A DMX Out passthrough is merely a convince put in by most manufacturers.

Data corruption over signal lines due to poor grounding, bad cabling, bad fixture is a very real problem, I have done DMX frame capture logs to prove it on several occasions. You absolutely can have DMX values jump all over the place in these circumstances. It is much more prudent to be safe rather than have the convenience of putting this router in a chain of other fixtures where you have potential for unknowns.
Better safe than lazy, especially with this box.

Also there's no room for anther XLR jack back there. It's pretty tight as it is.

[DZ]

From a laser safety standpoint, I pretty much agree with what you are saying, however-


let me first say that I've had not one but two LD's take a look at this product on DZ's website and let me know what they thought. Care to guess what the very first thing they both noticed was? no through/ out on the DMX. --------------------
Thats my two cents, as well as a few pesos from some lighting guys I work with.

Thanks for the input Laser Wizardry! The reason for not having a DMX out or thru connection is that there was just no room for one. It's ultimately my fault for this, I was adamant about keeping the form factor at 1U. Had we gone with 2U there certainly would have been plenty of room to accommodate. I based my decision on the fact that DMX Y cables are available and if this wasn't appropriate that DMX splitters are also available. I simply did not want the Router to end up being a 2U device so I take the blame for this one guys!

DZ: I would like to request a video of this router, fed by a Z-5 console, outputting to your dual head ion rig.

Yeah, that'd be cute, absolom, but why not just have 2 Z-5's?!?!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_uCCZzwjv0A

[absolom7691]

Yeah, that'd be cute, absolom, but why not just have 2 Z-5's?!?!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_uCCZzwjv0A

NICE! So much win. I am curious why that video is not posted to the Eye-melty thread! Two Z-5s.... not so easy for those of us who AREN'T Brad!

[Laserhobbit]

Great work guys I guess my only question is any idea about pricing yet? I am almost embarrassed to ask, as whatever it is will be worth the extra, as it adds so much more to the now typical configuration of main Pj and satellites. Also on the single DMX subject I do think this might cause an issue or slight inconvenience when rigging, as this box is likely to be stage side and therefore not at the FOH end of the chain, plus it will more then likely be at stage level and therefore not at the rig end of the chain, unless you want to rig a return DMX cable from the last truss fixture, which would also concern me from a noise standpoint. Luxlid, I know what you mean about seeing some very noisy DMX chains, but I normally only see this either when the truss cabling is bad (mains curled around trilite etc.) or badly routed or when someone has felt a DMX terminator to be "optional". But I can see the point about making the unit 1U, this is the definitely the way to go, particularly stage side where every U of rackspace needs to be put somewhere out of the way.Also when I consider the fact the unit will be stage side I agree with the idea of having a more robust hidden set of trim pots. I know at least of a couple of sound guys who would think it is funny to get their own back on a Lampy for twiddling knobs on an EQ rack Thinking about ways around this, as trim pots are also a little less robust, could the pots be "locked" or made unchangeable in software? So you could "lock" the parameters by a small switch on the back panel or even, from a safety point of view, a small keyswitch. I know this is yet more panel real estate so may not be easy. Maybe if you set a couple of DMX channel values to a fixed combination at startup this could also be accomplished? or one of the config screens?. This for me, would work best.

Thanks for the inspiring great work.

[SaltyRobot]

Just throwing out ideas. Maybe there would be a way to lock the pots by using a password on the front panel interface. Basically in code say ignore the analog inputs that the pots are connected to until the correct 4 digit password is entered. Once the password is entered the analog inputs are re-enabled and changes can be made. Once done with the changes re-enter the password to lockout the analog inputs again. Just trying to think of software changes rather than hardware changes to do the same thing. Arrow keys can be used to change the numbers so no 10 key pad is needed.