Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 17 of 17

Thread: QM2000.Net... obsolete or not?

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Cleveland Ohio
    Posts
    1,426

    Default

    You would have to kill me to make me get rid of my qm2000. I love it.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    The West
    Posts
    1,155

    Default

    The QM2000.net system requires manual IP configuration, whereas the FB4 is automatically configured/ plug n play.
    RGB laser projectors
    Pangolin Beyond .NET
    APC40 Midi controllers
    Pangolin FB3 controllers
    DZ splitter
    LS MegaWatt Green Machine

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Charleston, SC
    Posts
    2,147,488,122

    Default

    The manual IP address configuration is really pretty simple though, and it only needs to be done once. Note that this is only for the .net enclosure. If you plan to stick the QM-2000 in a PCI slot inside a PC, then none of this applies.

    Also, I should point out that even if you do use the .net box, this does not eliminate the ILDA cable. It just allows you to use ethernet to connect your control computer to the .net box so the .net box can be located close to the projector (or at least on the stage somewhere) meaning you only have a short run of ILDA cable from the .net box to the projector itself. (As opposed to putting the QM-2000 card in a PCI slot in your computer, which means you then have to run ILDA cable all the way to the projector, which could be on stage while your PC is sitting in a lighting booth at front-of-house.)

    Adam

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Cleveland Ohio
    Posts
    1,426

    Default

    Wonder why no one has tried LiFi. For wireless. Line of sight optical is very robust. It would be easy to multiplex ilda. Very low bandwidth.

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Rotorua New Zealand
    Posts
    528

    Default

    Hi
    I use up to f ive QMs with a number of FB4s .all on network.. all good in the main.
    Did have a few issues at the start but later software updates seems to have got rid of those.
    I use the .net boxes and have made up little cases for the FB4s .. thus each projector can have a box right at the rojector with a one meter ILDA lead.
    Only pain with a QM is the pallette process if you swap things around.
    Its a bit of a pain to have to run up LD first and do all the pallette and settings in LD2000 so Beyond can use them.
    If you are a starter with QM there is a bit of a learning curve.
    The QM is a really solid system in my book.
    Hi Adam 😊

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Charleston, SC
    Posts
    2,147,488,122

    Default

    Hi Ray! Long time no chat!

    I agree that training the color palette is rather time-consuming, but I think you get better color results from the QM-2000 color wizard than you do from adjusting the color response curves on an FB3 using Beyond.

    Also, I have several different color palettes saved on my hard drive. Each one matches up with a given projector or set of projectors so I can easily load up the proper palette for whatever I have connected.

    I love the QM's, and won't be getting rid of mine anytime soon.

    Adam

  7. #17
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    Miami, FL
    Posts
    3,573

    Default

    the QM2k is still ok if you have a machine with PCI slots... but the .NET box sucks in beyond... if anything happens it drops out and requires you to restart beyond, and the actual laser output is jerky

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •