$38 - DMX USB PRO compatible....
Hippy
Jannis Achstetter
> http://www.ebay.com.au/itm/DMX512-USB-DMX-Interface-Adapter-Computer-Software-Satge-Lighting-Controller-/120981628314?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_15&hash=item1c2b11259a
>
>
> Anyone got/tried one?
Looks like an Anyma uDMX-clone to me (look the the DLL's name in their
eBay-description).
Furthermore they copied the text one-by-one ("Artnet is a network
protocol to transfer DMX data over the ip network" ...) from this page:
http://www.illutzmination.de/udmx-artnet.html?&L=1
Not as cheap as DIY but pretty cheap for a ready-to-use device!
Should work flawlessly with OLA, however I guess they are using
identical serial numbers for all their devices so more than one per PC
should be a problem. One can try to reflash another firmware if you feel
like ...
Jason Kyle
Not USB Pro compatible….
From: open-l...@googlegroups.com [mailto:open-l...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Hippy
Sent: Thursday, 4 October 2012 18:40
To: open-l...@googlegroups.com
Subject: [open-lighting] $38 - DMX USB PRO compatible....
Anyone got/tried one?
--
Jason Kyle
However this one is
$49.99USD
Anyone tried one of these? How about in receive mode?
--
dmx...@gmail.com
Sent from Samsung Mobile
Jason Kyle wrote:
ewan colsell
This was just waiting to happen, when the enttec USB pro was first released, you needed at least 3 separate chips to make a decent USB dmx interface.
USB/serial converter.
microcontroler.
Rs485 transceiver.
The USB serial converter was the most expensive part. But these days you can buy microcontrollers with built in USB interfaces for less the 5€. And the rs485 tranceiver costs hardly anything in smd packages.
I think the time has come for a new DIY usb dmx interface. I'm sure that a single sided smd board that can fit into an xlr is just an afternoons work. I'm still using through hole components but as soon as I tool up for smd this will be my first project.
But I'm not calling dibs! Feel free to beat me to it!
Ewan.
Jason Kyle
Having debated this one several times over many years I concluded that an interface cost of $40-$100 is now insignificant compared to the cost of your lighting rig and interconnection leads. IMO there’s little point being much cheaper than the current batch of interfaces. Perhaps when LED PAR cans cost $10 it might be worth the effort but you get what you pay for and cheap LED stuff is currently 4x that price and probably headed for a landfill near you after a short while….
You still can’t make something truly usb pro compatible without using an FTDI FT245R device (okay so you could but it would violate FTDI IP and driver license terms since you’d be cloning their hardware functionality) so it’s still 3 chips. The only 2 chip solutions are usb open FT232R based devices and non usb pro compatible using a USB micro.
The ultraDMX Micro has 3 chips and 2 are QFN32’s to keep size minimal. Serious consideration was given to deleting the FT245RQ but honestly the numbers don’t add up, just spend a couple of dollars and do it right. You’ll spend more time (=money) messing with drivers than the FTDI chips are actually worth. Perhaps if you were making 10,000’s of units (Arduino board case in point, it switched from FTDI to USB AVR) it would be worth the effort. One important note is the FT245 works in 2 modes, VCP and direct, but not all software supports both. All the good commercial software uses Direct mode as there are performance issues with VCP. Arduino only used VCP mode so the switch was easy.
Any DIY folks out there are welcome to contact me and introduce your non-commercial projects – we’re quite supportive J
Oh and here’s an SMD tip: Don’t go trying to hand solder QFN’s!
Best Regards,
Jason Kyle
DMXking.com / JPK Systems Limited
From: open-l...@googlegroups.com [mailto:open-l...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of ewan colsell
Sent: Friday, 5 October 2012 01:10
To: open-l...@googlegroups.com
Subject: RE: [open-lighting] $38 - DMX USB PRO compatible....
This was just waiting to happen, when the enttec USB pro was first released, you needed at least 3 separate chips to make a decent USB dmx interface.
--
Peter Stuge
chip and has the same functionality, and as long as it is software
compatible then even reusing the vidpid is not really problematic.
But cloning isn't really interesting IMO. Stop messing with Windows
kernel drivers. It's possible, even pretty easy, to create a
driverless device for Windows 8. It will also be driverless on Vista
and up after a one-time (regardless of the number of different
devices) driver installation which can happen before or after the
device has been plugged. In the libusb community we nurture some hope
that Microsoft will roll out that install as part of Windows Upgrade
sometime.
And needless to say, on every other operating system things just work<tm>.
Don't get me started on Arduino.
It is certainly possible to create well-functioning, easy-to-use,
no-hassle USB devices. But it does require knowing some about how
USB works, and it requires not mistaking mainstream toys for
development tools. It also requires, and here's where most fall
short, writing firmware.
Finally QFN, well, how easy it is depends on tools and dexterity.
With the right tools and a steady hand it's not too problematic.
//Peter
Jason Kyle
a valid case since there's IP involved. When it was first released the
options for making USB enabled hardware were somewhat limited and painful.
If you want built in drivers just use HID. The throughput is high enough for
DMX applications and is what the MagicDMX device uses.
My Arduino reference was purely for an example of where an FTDI chip had
been replaced by a USB microcontroller. Perhaps some extend the platform
well beyond the learner sphere but I view Arduino as training wheels - take
them off when you're ready to ride.
QFN: The advice was for someone inexperienced in SMD assembly. Nothing is
hard with the right tools and experience.