Hi guys,
Which one would you suggest and why? Grandma, Hog iPC, ...
Thanks,
Peter
Printable View
Hi guys,
Which one would you suggest and why? Grandma, Hog iPC, ...
Thanks,
Peter
if you want to use the DMX controller only to control the Catalyst , I suggest you to buy the follows :
1 Mac Pro with ATI xt1900
2 Cinema Display 23"
1 HES dp2000
1 HES programmer wing
1 HES playback wing
1 Microsoft Windows XP SP2
1 HES USB dedicated Wholehog keyboard
1 Hog Pc software .
By buying this you will have the best ever Whole Hog Set up , I use to work with this set up , ( wingless actually ) and it's a way much faster then the consolle it self . Mouse And Keyboard it's much easy to control then the physical consolle it self .
Why a Mac ? It's the perfect spare for your catalyst server .
Costs ?
15 .000 euros maybe less if you go for USB super widget instead of Dp2000 .
May be you want touch screens instead of cinema display .... well you can having as much as you want ( using TH2G ) .
this is what I suggest .
If you don't want to do this ....
If you need to control only the catalyst server I'll say whole hog iPc .
In my opinion it's better don't don't buy a Hog 3 my personal opinion it's that it will be discontinued .
Why I'm telling you this ?
Hog3 it's based on linux , iPc , Pc and Road are based on Windows .
Think how difficult it's for the HES team to make two different version of the software, I'm not a software programmer but it's logical to think that it's easier working on one platform then 2 .
The Hog software , I mean the software you get from Hog3 , iPc , Hog Pc , RoadHog , in my experience it's the best ever light controller software around the industry , it's clean easy and intuitive , there is nothing more you could ask .
I might be wrong saying that Hog3 will not survive as much the windows based product will do , but this is what I think .
Hog 3 it's the best software ever for controlling lights , does not metter if it run on a Pc iPc or what ever for my experience to answer your question directly buy a Hog iPc .
I have to support quite a few of the statements that Emil has made.
In USD, a Hog3 is about $25k compared to the MA which is almost twice that.
Many of the large companies who hire me have GrandMA desks so learn it. I however will always spec a Hog3 given the choice.
I love the speed at which I can program a Hog3 and yes it exceeds an MA. I would however say the MA is a better desk. It is better for running a big show if the team is concerned about having multiple interfaces and better multi-interface reliability.
If you're simply a user who has need to only program media servers, then hands down, Hog3 is better and for many of the reasons Emil mentioned.
One thing I will mention to reinforce what Emil said is to use Hog PC instead of the desk itself.
The DP2000 is literally a DMX processor. That little blue node is the heart and the critical part of the system but any computer can run it just as well as the SUSE based Wholehog Controller.
I implore you. It is worth the price to buy a DP2000 for a little less than twice the price of a superwidget.
Oh and, there was a fantastic gentleman from California who created keyboard button labels that show the Hog key configuration. Just check out the High End website and you'll find the link to download them.
Except for the lack of encoder wheels. I can program just as fast now using a regular keyboard as opposed to using a programming wing. Of course I've also had practice.
Oh and not to knock the Linux based Kernel but the average laptop or desktop computer is actually faster and more reliable than the Wholehog3 Controller simply because the motherboard in the Hog is more than a half decade old.
Now for specific reasons why a hog is better for media servers...
I have programmed literally a hundred Catalyst shows on a hog3. I have been very smart though. I started by creating programming templates for each of the different configurations I used the Catalyst.
Now when I show up on show site, 90% of the show is programmed already and all I have to do is use the magic little update button. Needless to say, this has virtually eliminated the need for having the programming wing interface.
So now when I do a Catalyst show, I get on the plane with one carry-on which has my clothes and tablet PC and I check one road case that weights less than 50lbs which has:
1 PC laptop
1 DP2000
1 Playback Wing
2 DMX Ethergates
1 8-port switch
3 Macbook Pros w Catalyst
3 Firewire 800 External Enclosures with Mtron Disks
The alternative with the smallest GrandMA is two roadcases and weight penalties.
Well, I guess I have to chime in for the GrandMA over the hog. Personally, I MUCH prefer the GrandMA to the Hog 3. I find it to be much faster to program Media Servers, utilizing the Smart Window, which customizes itself to what you are controlling. This coupled with the ease at which you can modify your profile to set up your controls how you feel comfortable from an operational standpoint.
The other console, which doesn't come up often, as you can only get it from PRG is the Virtuoso. The real strong point of this board is the media window on the console, which allows you to have a local copy of your library, and in the media window, you can view thumbnails of all your library, and when you mouse over them, they start to play, so you can preview the clips on the console before you select it. It really is an awesome feature, made possible because that console runs on a mac, so it was an easy add to the console application. Unfortunately, you can't get the console unless you are going through PRG.
Actually I think you can get that console.. I just don't think many people have them.. I know a company here in Orange County, CA has one they rent out...
Thanks, guys. I forgot to say that i work in theatre, so i need a combination of programming lights (mostly conventional) and video. Any views on that?
Where are you from ? Call local dealer and ask for a demo etQuote:
Originally Posted by Peter
I'm demo-ing. But as always it's nice to hear other peoples opninions to get everything in perspective. I'm from Belgium.
Btw sourcechild : mtron in fw800 enclouseres, how do they deal with 1024x768 files photojpeg 50% or apple intermediate codec?
So what's are you think ? Where are you oriented ?Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter
I still dont know because i only had a ADB Mentor to program 2 shows which works ok. Certainly for small shows. But i'm now going to use ma on pc and hog on pc to see how this works with my macbook pro - parallels - windows xp. As i do mainly theatre and events i'm perhaps leaning more towards the ma.
Do i need a DP2000 because if the lighting soft understands artnet and catalyst does i can use an ethernet connection like i do with the mentor and the mac?
I can partially agree. If I had a permanent venue or a tour that I knew had some longevity, I would be picking MA. On a three or four truck tour, the space needed for an MA or two is negligible.Quote:
Originally Posted by jasonrudolph
[quote=jasonrudolph;5925]
...The other console, which doesn't come up often, as you can only get it from PRG is the Virtuoso...quote]
I freaking love the virt except that unlike other desks, the single cuelist thing slows down some of the tricks I use. The masking however is a very cool feature.
Only problem is that not as many people I work with know this desk like I do.
Actually, PRG will long term lease these so even though they are not "owned" the are available in permanent rental inventory.Quote:
Originally Posted by ryanww
1024x768Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter
Inside a MAC pro using a SATA Mtron can get 8 layers AIC or 4 layers PJPG50%.
If using a fw800 on a MAC Pro, 6 layers AIC or 3 PJPG50%.
On a MacBook Pro, 3 layers AIC or 2 layers PJPG50%.
Another thing; Highend very unhelpful with new fixtures for Hog 3. To do DMX Matrix they suggested patching 16 individual fixtures instead of just one, with 16 attributes as the MA does, plus has a built in UPS and doesn't fall over all the time. If you find a problem they fix it quick. Highend just insist you are doing something worng. MA are very helpful and nice people. Highend are just rude. It may cost a little more but it works a whole lot better, especially with large shows.
I don't think I would argue this. To a point, I agree.Quote:
Originally Posted by FinnRoss
A big downfall from Hog to MA is the matrix feature. However, I have dozens of templates for offsets and time values in my hog shows and literally hundreds of hours worth of editor programming already done.Quote:
Originally Posted by FinnRoss
I could perhaps duplicate the templates in MA but the editor on the hog3 is just faster for me.
Actually, Hog3 has a UPS built in as well. Sadly though if the computer locks up in the Hog to the point you need to cold start it, it can be a pain to wait the 2 minutes it takes for the UPS battery to discharge before the hog will shut off to be rebooted.Quote:
Originally Posted by FinnRoss
What do you mean by "fall over?"Quote:
Originally Posted by FinnRoss
If you are referring to crashing then I will tell you that the rate at which I program, I crash both desks just as often.
There is a bit of a difference in the business model and the cost of the desks determine the amount each company is willing to commit to support. Obviously MA support is going to be better in this regard.Quote:
Originally Posted by FinnRoss
This may be related to the specific people supporting. I happen to know some of the tech support people at HighEnd and the ones I'm friends with are pretty easy to deal with.Quote:
Originally Posted by FinnRoss
I've noticed this a few times but I haven't ever had as great a need to bug the MA support staff since I typically spec Hog3s.Quote:
Originally Posted by FinnRoss
The cost is proportionate I believe but there are still things I can do on a Hog that I can't do as fast on an MA.Quote:
Originally Posted by FinnRoss
If you want Hog III libraries written, you need to talk to Hog III librarian. He is usually pretty quick.
I find the Hogs more ergonomic and the syntax is more elegant than the Grand MA. Personally, I still program most of my shows on a Hog 2 OS system - preferably a Hog 2. It's simple to write you're own libraries for it too. There are still a few tricks that only the Hog 2 can do, and if the console has been looked after, it's still the most reliable desk around. It also has good timecode support (that will be the AMS Neve timecode chip then), and a decent MSC implementation. The downsides are that the Hog 2 as only 4 universes (without using overdrive boxes), no hard disk - perhaps one of the reasons that makes it intrinsically more reliable than other desks - however, floppies are becoming scarce. It's a better media server programming platform than the 3 - the fades are predicable, and the DMX does what you program. The Hog III still has rounding issues between real world values and DMX.
Whilst I love the Hog 2, it is getting long in the tooth...
The Grand MA is certainly an interesting desk, and I have no doubts that it would do what I want (and it talks Artnet too). What I find rather irritating is MA's stubborn refusal to implement any TCP/IP type media server features for any other media server than Grand MA Video.
Chamsys' Magic Q looks interesting - it's vaguely Hog like, and the media server support is good too - it supports Catalyst's web server.
Hugh
a bit off topic , but what drive me crazy is that no one design a SHUTTER ( or keystone ) UI . It is ridiculous we still have to rotate a wheel , actually many wheels to control a simple mechanism like Frame Shutter or in the case of Catalyst Keystone.
the Hog II did a giant step actually it create a entire NEW ERA of the lighting control and we now still living in that era . Every Desk mentioned it's son of the Hog but one of them did I big step forward in term of usability .
Yes for sure we went in to the networking days but the programmers are look a lot like the old hog .
Just recently I tough how many waste of time as been spent from zilllions of companies to create desk like maxxyz , vista , compulite and many others witch have a really little market share compared to what Maa and HES does .
I personally think the era of the hardware lighting desk it will be shortly over .
We got a clear example of what a lighting tool can be using common hardware .
Catalyst it's a strong software run on common computers , and it live in a real world eco system , where every year CPU goes faster and cost less .
I don't see why a lighting desk have to cost 40.000 euro ! ( more or less ) when the fastest Pc cost 4.000 .
Indeed why need faders and other " special " input devices that can't be found outside the lighting industry , then why not make only this input devices ? and use the personal computer industry power and growing speed .
Yes I know there are companies that sell this side wings and this is good .
Maa for example , as far I know , don't have any Pc control surface , neither
the HogII like from UK does it , and so all other . Only HES as been so smart to think to 512 channel widget and programer and playback wings and recently they " un lock " the use of dp2000 for the hog3 pc software .
HES and Maa and so ETC and Martin does Pc software witch are not really designed to be a Pc software . What they do they are simulating the real hardware desk but are not truly designed to be operated on a Pc .
( Just to clarify , when I say Pc I don't think to a little 13" laptop )
Indeed working using a Hog III Pc software ( IMO ) it's better then anything else , but I still working in a " SIMULATOR " of the real Hog .
As far I remember when I was a boy I saw big hardware machines to editing videos , monochromatic CTR monitors was display information to control many ( I think the was ) betacam VCRs .
what do we have today ?
best hollywood movies are edited on Mac or Pc certainly not a 13" laptop , but a real workstation filled with all the goods necessary to do what it's need.
So as I said , I might be bit off topic but since we start speaking of lighting desks i like to give my clear and deep opinion .
I use an MA light or my iPC...
iPC - for all of the reasons hugh mentioned - Hog 2's are old - iPC runing H2 software is great and can be easily expanded with DMX widgets to 7 universes. I still use my programer wing and a laptop if im travelling light.
MA is great due to greater number of pallets - and nice colour screens. Just as easy to customise fixture profiles if reqd. Dont ike H3 for catalyst programming due to lack of customizig profile - otherwise, software is gettig better slowly.
I own an iPC - purchased due to its potential longevity - H3 will eventually be stable. HES has pored too much in to it to drop it in the near future.
HOWEVER, my next desk purchase will be an MA light - cheaper, reliable, scalable - although, not as attractive (yet)
S
not true - go look at keystone controls n the mix window - click and drag!!Quote:
Originally Posted by emilianomorgia
Hog was advanced for its time, but AVO, ETC, JANDS compulite all have good range of desks - not all as good as each other for dealing with media servers - but good in their field and unique from the Hog2Quote:
Originally Posted by emilianomorgia
Vista is a great desk - ideally suited for timeline programming....Quote:
Originally Posted by emilianomorgia
NEVER - people like hands on FADERS and KNOBS - mice are a pain! - you can only control one thing at once with a mouse or even touchscreen. Faders and knobs allow programmers to do more than one thing at once.Quote:
Originally Posted by emilianomorgia
Granted - PC systems have their place for offline programming at the airport - or creating custom fixtures, or updating pallet names - but are no substiue when faced with a hard programmig session on big shows.
I will grant one exception to the pc lighting controller however, in use as a midi or MSC slave on an installation.
Well you;ve just contradicted yourself and re-afirmed he need for hardware!Quote:
Originally Posted by emilianomorgia
not true - Hog PC works great!Quote:
Originally Posted by emilianomorgia
technology has moved on! - the microprocessor replaced the valve 40 years ago!Quote:
Originally Posted by emilianomorgia
So im still not clear - are you pro hardware or software lighting desks?Quote:
Originally Posted by emilianomorgia
Lighting desks are here to stay - the ameture user may only be able to afford a PC and offline software - but you'll find that every PRO user and hire company around the worldstill use real desks....
The future of video control is in dedicated video control desks. Take a look at the coolux control surface for pandoras box - is an interesting solution for them. -
(Catalyst is better though)
S
What's a Real Desk ?
I was referring to DMX controllers not to the catalyst it selfQuote:
Originally Posted by Mr_P
Hog was advanced for its time, but AVO, ETC, JANDS compulite all have good range of desks - not all as good as each other for dealing with media servers - but good in their field and unique from the Hog2
You can't say that, Vista it's soo young , and so incompleteQuote:
Originally Posted by Mr_P
Fader it's not the CPU , faders does not cost 40.000 euroQuote:
Originally Posted by Mr_P
Input Device are not the the Desk it self ! Come on ! a desk it's not made of faders ! Yes some need hardware ( fader and wheels ) some does not , ( I don't )Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr_P
Hog Pc is good as I said in my post , but it's SIMULATOR . there is nothing you can say that change the fact that it's simulate the real desk .Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr_P
It's Catalyst an hardware or a software Tool ?Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr_P
well - catalyst is a video software tool that by defenition uses hardware to operate! .... and I think we were discusing lighting desks - not catalyst here though...
Vista is at least 3 years old and has gone through huge continual development (including hardware for PC based systems!)
Hog PC may have started out as a simulator - however, it now forms the core of the iPC
I can't accept that you think a software only version of any lighting desk is a substitute for the real thing. In some cases, it may be a budget alternative for simple installs or learning - but never a real alternative on a live gig.
do you remember the Status Cue ?
What I wish it's a Strong Software and a flexible control surface .
Yes, he will actually turn one out in about 24 hours if you ask.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spam Butterfly
It's only when you add two external touch monitors does it become cumbersome but still easier to single hand program than an MA.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spam Butterfly
I personally have always hated the Hog2 and actually fought against someone providing it on shows I was programming. I would pick a Virt, Spark, Pearl, or Diamond back in the days before Hog3.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spam Butterfly
I even opposed the Hog3 until I discovered the EDITOR.
Honestly, the editor in hog3 is the only reason I love it over any other desk. I believe it is that editor that makes the hog3 far superior to any other desk including and especially hog2.
I design custom automation devices and the only other desks besides hog2 that are fast and reliable for users writing reliable libraries are AVO desks which I don't mind but don't offer the complexity I desire.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spam Butterfly
Being a hog3 expert and knowing all about these little bugs, I will agree with you completely.Quote:
Originally Posted by Spam Butterfly
Quote:
Originally Posted by emilianomorgia
Oh GOD! I freaking hate that old desk. No multipart fades and no FX generator.
Vista is a pain in the ass. I can't begin to tell you how slow it is in comparison to a H3, Maxxyz, Vector, or MA. It's all about shortcuts, key combination, and command lines that speed up programming for me.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr_P
Even though I love the idea of timeline programming, vista is still slower for me to program complex cues and timeline elements very fast. But I just know tricks most users still haven't learned yet
On the contrary. I don't like software only control but there are some things that Sunlite and Light Jockey can do quickly that don't require hardware.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr_P
Check out Nicolaudie and look at Sunlite. It is a relatively fast software based programmer and you can write your own custom libraries. And for under $1,000 USD, it's pretty damned capable.
Sure ! 10 or more years ago !!!!Quote:
Originally Posted by SourceChild
but what was that ? an external CPU with a control surface .
I can only second Hugh´s view on things:
The Hog2 is still a great console for live media server control.
Complex timing is easily programmed and I can change the library as I need it. For example I like to sepearte parameters to Focus and Beam (Xpos, Ypos, Rotation, Scale, Aspectratio are Focus (or Position) parameters for me).
That makes masking the things I need much more easy.
But the Hog2 are loosing their shape on the hardware side. I often find Grandmasters that will no longer output full 100% - and that is a pain in the a.. when your layers get transparent if you don´t want them to. There also is the "stuck choose button" issue that can drive you crazy...
Hog3 is a good replacement for Hog2. The Programmer is more powerful - especially aplying timing is faster than on any other console.
But there are still some bugs with updating a cuelist that is live on stage - so you need to be careful.
The MA is a good console but it is not my way of programming a show. Complex timing gets you selecting single cells in spreadsheets and a lot of wheel turning and clicking...
Remember that on a Hog3, you can split a palette window. I have several shows where I have all four touch monitors up and have two beam palettes open, a group and color on one monitor and still have my editor open and since all 4 are touch screens, this screams through.Quote:
Originally Posted by OlliR
Yes, I agree that HES should create media sever library files that put the position parameters on the position palette but also remember that the reason they put all media server parameters on beam is that beam is a "per function" split palette.
Most uses want to keep position as a "per type" instead of a "per parameter" so that you don't accidentally get x only and miss y.
Of course if there was a way at the root level of the Hog3 that would allow a user to split palette parameter grouping "per fixture type" then this would all be solved. (It was a request I send HES about 2 years ago)