About to give up on LSP Pro...

Have you tried the output hardware tester in LSP or are you just trying to run a sequence. Make sure you put a timing mark at the beginning of your sequence and then do an optimize, that has worked for others in the past
 
I just ran the output tester in LSP on the two controllers I have configured (both 100 pixel strings). The banks light up and change colour correctly when "told" to from the software. They even "chase" in the limited fashion that the hardware tester allows. Communication from software to strings appears OK. Placing a timing mark and optimizing (manually) does not have any effect. I seem to recall that the software would always carry out an optimization of the sequence before running. It does not do that now. The packet light on the J1Sys board glows steadily when the output button is clicked too, that does not seem normal. Still no light sequencing happening :)
 
This maybe a silly suggestion but have you confirmed that the ACT box is ticked next to each universe on the configuration output settings in LSP. I have found ( and I don't know the reason for it) that sometimes on my machine it loses the ticks and therefore won't output. The other night it dropped ALL of the output settings (universes, the lot!) for some bizarre reason and I had to put them back in.
Just a suggestion.
 
Not a silly suggestion but even simple things like that have been checked. I've been caught before by little details like that one. I had a "glimmer" of hope once the hardware test started working but sequencing still a no go. I notice a lot of small "buggy" behaviours being reported here and privately about LSP. Frankly, I have to say that it's had to see the value in something that gives this much aggravation. I normally work in a Unix/Linux world and if there was an application in that space for Christmas lights that was up to speed right now, I would not have considered a Windows application in a fit. My opinion f Windows software has only been reinforced by this experience and unfortunately that is not a favourable opinion. It is obvious to me that xLights (even on Windows) does its job and is stable. It has one or two small bugs but also a developer who is fixing them as they arise. LSP is currently not (apparent to me anyway) a turnkey application with sufficient robustness to be foisted on the public for money. At least in the xLights domain the source code is out there for anyone to look through and even fix up to suit themselves. That does not appeal to everyone, I know, but if I even wanted to hire someone to fix LSP I couldn't because it's intellectual property with enforced restrictions.

So, for this year, it seems like xLights on Win 7 which does its job, at least. Maybe not so many bells and whistles, but getting better all the time. Maybe I'll take a look at Vixen as well. The Open Source community does move a bit faster than commercial software.

If anyone at LightShowPro works this one out they can launch an email in my direction. I'm always willing to listen, but right now the Christmas schedule is pressing and I need a tool that will do the job. Pity about all that money wasted though.
 
I know it's awfully late, but you might try HLS. Once you spend a day getting it going and figuring out where everything is, it is very powerful and stable. I've come from LOR and HLS has everything that LOR has and so much more. Just a suggestion from a very happy HLS user.
John
 
I second HLS......1st year sequencing and using HLS. Glad I did, it has proven itself very stable and especially good at facial animations. Joe is constantly improving it as he adds more and more to it.
 
Thanks. I'll have a good look at that if I can squeeze it in. If nothing else it pays to know what's out there.
 
I had heaps of trouble trying to get LSP to work on my system. I have a P12R and a DR4 which was a nightmare to get them both running. I set them up as one zone in the end.

I've posted a screen shot of how I got my boards running. I went to the extreme and just set the universes 1000 channels apart so it didn't get confused. You just have to make sure you set you sequence up the same or it doesn't work. I have an a sequence I can send you if you want to test it out to make sure it works okay. Just let me know an email address I can send it too as it's too big to post here

The first screen shot is the p12r setup the second one is how I got my DR4 to work on the same zone.

hope it helps
 
Working backwards:
- the controllers work with other software, controllers are properly set up
- the controllers work with hardware test facility, communication with controllers works
- just don't work with sequences, just not getting sequence output

Is there any config that the hardware test doesn't share with the sequencing setup?

Is it possible that just the bit that does sequencing can be kicked in the head/reinstalled?

Just trying to think this through.....

It's gotta be subtle.....

Cheers!
 
There seems to be a problem with the scheduler, I cannot output through the 2.8 version of the scheduler but have no problems with 2.5 scheduler, I would try 2.5 scheduler instead
 
All very useful suggestions from the community and I will diligently try every one of them and few more besides. I return (whinge whinge) to my point about this being "paid for" software and the "bugginess" does not seem to be ironed out at all. The writer of the software seems to have it in Beta test with the world wide lighting community and enthusiasts like you and me are still debugging it. Anyway, I'm off to try these suggestions as and when I can fit them into the time I have available getting something productive done with other software, that is. Good luck you guys.
 
garyjac1 said:
All very useful suggestions from the community and I will diligently try every one of them and few more besides. I return (whinge whinge) to my point about this being "paid for" software and the "bugginess" does not seem to be ironed out at all. The writer of the software seems to have it in Beta test with the world wide lighting community and enthusiasts like you and me are still debugging it. Anyway, I'm off to try these suggestions as and when I can fit them into the time I have available getting something productive done with other software, that is.
Click to expand...
One thing to keep in mind is that we're not talking about a software package that has tens of thousands of customers. It's a pretty niche market, with a few options to choose from within this market, so their development budget is always going to be restricted.
 
If you compare LSP to say a program like Autocad, which I use everyday. A license is $4200. This is a wide spread program that is common. We add on a 3d piping program CADWORX which is more niche, which sets us back $8500 which it's buggy and crashs. Then another program for 3d laser scanning which is another $30,000. I prob get 1 fatal error a day from this one. LSP seems pretty cheap to me.
 
LSP is pretty cheap. What you relate about AutoCAD I can well believe. We had better not spam too much on the short comings of Windows software and the general instabilities it presents. I don't see either case (relatively cheap or relatively expensive) as an excuse for software that wastes time, and that would apply in particular to AutoCAD if it's that bad. Bill Gates once opined that people would have to pay for quality software. Indeed, they pay! Quality is another issue. I don't think any of us would tolerate the fault rate that we see in software in our cars, planes or televisions. At the moment it's obviously xLights for me :)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top