LOR 3.5 vs LSP 2.5

[scuba]

This may turn out to be more of a rant then a discussion, so please keep it informative. I've been using both V2.5 of LSP and the Demo of LOR 3.5 (former 2.0 owner) with mixed results... My perspective: LSP still has Beta like issues, but has a great feature set. LOR 3.5 just allowed us to use E1.31, but the feature set is not obvious to me in the demo mode. Question to the community: both require a considerable time (more valuable then $$) to master the requirement to meet our goals...... Which, in its current state, would you invest your most valuable commodity; time???


My setup: Over 4000 channels of E680 and 48 LOR channels.

 

[AAH]

I'm a LOR user primarily because that's where I started and it does everything i need. That said I also have a copy of LSP but have not yet played with it to any extent as to me time is more valuable than $$$ and it's a pretty steep learning curve for LSP. I think the choice comes down entirely to 1 factor. if you're running thousands of pixels then you have to use LSP as it has the tools to use them. LOR has added E1.31 support but the tools for using pixels is woefully lacking at this point. There are tools to work with pixels with LOR and the Nutcracker tool does some amazing things for pixel trees etc but on the whole LOR needs to do some serious work on pixels.

 

[fasteddy]

This may turn out to be more of a rant then a discussion, so please keep it informative. I've been using both V2.5 of LSP and the Demo of LOR 3.5 (former 2.0 owner) with mixed results... My perspective: LSP still has Beta like issues, but has a great feature set. LOR 3.5 just allowed us to use E1.31, but the feature set is not obvious to me in the demo mode. Question to the community: both require a considerable time (more valuable then $$) to master the requirement to meet our goals...... Which, in its current state, would you invest your most valuable commodity; time???


My setup: Over 4000 channels of E680 and 48 LOR channels.

I have used LSP successfully for 2 years straight doing an RGB display. LSP may still have some minor bugs but these shouldnt detract from the experience. And if one way doesnt work then LSP is so rich that there is usaully more than one way to achieve the same results.
This year i will start my sequencing later and have 2 songs instead of one as i feel confident that LSP is easier with its rich set of RGB tools and it also performs better than the past

 

[scuba]

I've had 2 years of LSP and about 4 years on LOR 1/2. I can work easily in either package. Last year I had 1484 channels. LSP was the easiest way to go, with 14 sequences in my show. LSP v2.5 was just released, many folks are delighted with the improvements. Alas, for some unknown reason, I can't get V2.0 sequences to run properly in V2.5. I'm getting lots of support from the community to resolve the issues, but this year I'm jumping up to over 4000 channels, and I'm pressed for time. I thought I might be missing something with the new versions that would drive me one way or the other.