DMX Channels - are gaps OK

[OzAz]

Would there be any issues to have 'gaps' in channel numbers for DMX devices?
Apart from a minor (?) overhead in xml file for channels not used, is there any other issue I should be aware of?

example:
device 1 = ch 1-8
device 2 = ch 9-16
device 3 = ch 17-25
device 4 = ch 26-32
device 5 = ch 37-44
device 6 = ch 45-52
etc etc

gap 33-36 reserved for use by different props (between halloween and christmas)

I now have a range of dmx devices, some used for both christmas and halloween; some used on either christmas or halloween. Rather than change dmx channels between uses, is it ok to set all devices to a set dmx address, then if not used it's not even set up in layout?

 

[djgra79]

I don't see any issue with that. I have a few channel gaps with pixels to make things a little easier to track.

 

[AAH]

There's no issues with gaps especially when it's mostly filled universes. The sequencer and/or FPP sends out complete universes at a time so the gaps make no difference at all. Where it does make a significant difference is when you're using pixels and instead of filling universes a fair bit you use only small parts of them. For instance you may use 20 pixels on universe 1 for an arch or something like that, universe 2 is your 16 channels of LOR AC, universe 3 is 60 pixels for the left window, universe 4 is 60 pixels for the right window. With 170 pixels possible per universe the previous example could have had the pixels all on 1 universe and 1/3 of the data sent and also 1/3 of the .fseq file size if using xlights or FPP.