Farewell old Strand, hello Genlyte-Strand?

[gareth]

I have been working with them since 1982 and am deeply shocked and probably never buy another Strand piece of equipment again. I never did like it when the septics took over but hey it's a job lets get on with it and do the best we can. There are other equipment manufacturer's out there lets see who is best. R.I.P. Strand

I'm not so sure we should be writing off Strand yet.... We should just wait and see...

So what was it that prompted your complete about-face, in the space of just over 13 hours, from "I'll never buy Strand again - RIP Strand" to "Don't write them off"?!

 

Consistency? What's that, then?! :P

[strand600X]

Hi Gareth

If things stay the way they are then.....

But maybe I was a bit hasty and had time to think about what I had said and maybe we should see if anyhing happens. Lets face it things don't happen overnight.

Baz

:P

[gareth]

Lets face it things don't happen overnight.

Unless it's you having a complete 180-degree change of mind ... :P

[trotboy]

With the danger of courting further controversy, I'll say this:

 

Whilst it's sad to see Strand go, with all it's history, I'm not sad to see their products go.

 

They haven't produced a decent Lantern since the days of the 23, 123, 743 & 243 - with the possible exception of the T spot.

 

They haven't produced a decent dimmer since the Tempus & LD90.

 

And as for desks - don't get me started.

 

Selecon, ETC & ADB and even Zero 88 all have better products, so it's hardly surprising they've struggled.

[sparkyweb]

I would not be surprised to see them rise up, but to concentrate on the controls side of the business. There is not as much profit in luminaires, coupled with the fact that the 500 is an industry leader in its field.

[tanko]

Sorry trott,

 

but I find it hard to believe that you actually think that the frog consoles are better than the industry standard (for theatre) Strand 500.....

 

Fair play about the lanterns a SL doesn't quiet cut the mustard against a source 4, but they still have a use for small scale low budget productions.

 

Tank

[mumbles]

Sorry trott,

 

but I find it hard to believe that you actually think that the frog consoles are better than the industry standard (for theatre) Strand 500.....

No, but the frog is a better version of the 200, etc's offerings are better than the 300 as far as I'm concerned,and the congo seems better than the 500. I agree that the 500 is (was) still the best standard desk on touring riders, but the congo being able to read its shows, coupled with the later design makes it so much more useable, especially with the increased use of movers in theatre. I suppose, that it is unfair to do this comparison with the 500 and congo, as the congo is a new desk while the 500 has been around for a while, but they're still the desks on the market aimed at that area.

 

Saying he was comparing a 500 to a frog is like saying he was comparing a 23 to a source 4. They are different products, designed for different things at different times.

[gareth]

the frog is a better version of the 200

Rubbish. The Strand 200 is far more akin to the Z88 Alcora/Elara (to which it is superior), and not a direct competitor to the Frog range.

the congo seems better than the 500.

Seems better? On what basis? With respect, that sounds like the opinion of someone who hasn't actually sat in front of a Congo and programmed a show on it. FWIW, neither have I - but on that basis I wouldn't presume to know anywhere near enough about the Congo to be able to draw comparisons between it and a Strand 530 (a desk which, unlike Congo, I do know inside-out!).

I agree that the 500 is (was) still the best standard desk on touring riders, but the congo being able to read its shows

Ah, yes, and that turned out to be another waaay-over-hyped 'feature', didn't it? It turns out that the Congo can't actually read Strand showfiles directly, as we were originally allowed to believe - it can only read them after conversion to ASCII, which means that if you've got scrollers, moving lights, etc. you're stuffed.

Saying he was comparing a 500 to a frog is like saying he was comparing a 23 to a source 4. They are different products, designed for different things at different times.

Kinda like the Fat Frog and Strand 200. See above. :P

[mumbles]

the congo seems better than the 500.

Seems better? On what basis?

I agree that the 500 is (was) still the best standard desk on touring riders, but the congo being able to read its shows

Ah, yes, and that turned out to be another waaay-over-hyped 'feature', didn't it? It turns out that the Congo can't actually read Strand showfiles directly, as we were originally allowed to believe - it can only read them after conversion to ASCII, which means that if you've got scrollers, moving lights, etc. you're stuffed.

Well, being a lowly student on a civ eng degree, I haven't had the chance to use a congo, so have had to suffice on info from the manual and advertising brochures and form talking to my local hire company, and as such it would seem that the congo would be a decent competitor to the strand, with greater moving light ability. This also stands for the ability to read strand files. Having reckoned on the material being reliable, I, fairly reasonably I feel, came to the conclusion that the congo would be able to give the 500 a run for its money.

 

the frog is a better version of the 200

Rubbish. The Strand 200 is far more akin to the Z88 Alcora/Elara (to which it is superior), and not a direct competitor to the Frog range.

Well, owning both a 200, and a fat frog, I would argue that a 200 is closer to a frog than a alcora. I used an alcora at school, for 4 years, and to all intents and purposes could only be used as a single (24 way) or 2 (12 way) preset desk. The memory mode on the desk was awful. Never got it to work as a proper cue stack desk, even after spending hours sitting with it and a manual (I may have been spoilt by also learning a etc expression in the run up to my first major show on the alcora). The 200, while not having a cue stack as such, can be set to run a chase of upto 99 scenes, and so for small shows will do, especially with subs for house etc. The main problem with using this chase function is that you can't store fade times, but still have control over up and down fade times. The chase function is also a major advantage over an alcora for busking live music show.

 

Now that I've shown why I feel the 200 can't be compared with an alcora, I'll move onto the frog. As I said, I own a fat frog, but when not using the fixtures area, then it is my standard theatre desk while my dad prefers the logic of the 200. The only 2 things that take the frog beyond the 200, is the cue stack, and the greater number of subs. Assuming those using a 200 will not be looking to use more than the 96 subs available, seeing as how they only have 48 dimmers, then this writes out 1 of the 2 advantages. The other, being the cuestack, can be replaced by the chases on the 200, if you only need 99 steps and not 400. This means that the only advantage of the frog is the up and down fade times on scenes.

 

This would place the 200 closer to the frog than the alcora, obviously not superior to the frog, but would be as I said originally.

[Kazeja]

Here's my bit for what it's worth.

 

With Ed20man back on board, albeit in the states, I believe (and hope) that the Phoenix will rise from the ashes this side of the pond.

 

The regeneration is just taking a bit longer than I would have expected.

 

If Strand don't want to loose the European market, then they have to be approachable and communicable(?) with the Europeans during European working (office) hours as opposed to the 1-2 hour time slot available at present.

 

Strand Phoenix.

 

Wonder if it will catch on? Has Phoenix been used before?

 

Hmmmmm

[MattH]

They haven't produced a decent Lantern since the days of the 23, 123, 743 & 243 - with the possible exception of the T spot.

 

If Trot's benchmark of a good lantern is the T spot then I think we should call the men in white coats, or assume that he has never had to use one in anger...

[tanko]

Saying he was comparing a 500 to a frog is like saying he was comparing a 23 to a source 4. They are different products, designed for different things at different times.

 

I was actually trying to make the point that you can't make a sweeping statement like they all make better products than Strand. They all make similar products but at different levels of competition. I wouldn't spec a 520i for a venue that only has 24 dimmers and no intelligent lighting!! If you read the post further you'll notice I do agree that ETC source 4's are better than Strand SL's.

 

As for the congo debate, slightly off topic but I'm still not sold on the congo, I think it has some really good features but 80% plus of venues have a strand 300 or 500 (in some cases, both) or at the very least have a tech who is a strand op. So if people start touring with congo's, or venues start having them as in house consoles, I just see a whole new kettle of fish being swung around!!

 

Tank

[strand600X]

Here's my tuppence worth...

I love the Strand desks and will use our 500 untill it dies.

I have used the congo and find the logic different. It is a very good desk but it depends what you wanna do with it. I find the 500 much easier to use and understand. I also find the 500 a much easier desk to teach someone on and they usually pick the logic up within minutes.

I think we need to remember that the contender for the congo is the Pallette which is not here yet. The pallette that was at ABTT was the replacement for the 300 and I think maybe when the "big brother" of the Pallette is released over here we will go WOW what a desk much the same as we did when the 430 came out.

I also heard a while ago that the congo is not an ETC desk but is in fact an AVAB desk. ETC needed to get ahead of Strand so got AVAB to do the congo whilst they develop thier own version of the "congo". If this is right then when ETC do develop thier desk we may see the demise of the congo. I don't know if thats true just something someone told me..

Baz

:P

[dgray]

CONGO is the Avab board by ETC, and is anything but a stop gap "to get ahead of Strand". We purchased the AVAB brand as part of our acquisition of transtechnik in 2002 and have been providing new software updates and support to all existing AVAB customers (Pronto, Expert, Jaguar, Viking...) ever since. CONGO is the result of a great collaboration, and is becoming as successful in the US as it is in Europe.

We launched CONGO Junior at ABTT, if you check out our website www.etcconnect.com you will see our flagship console EOS..... who knows what else may be at PLASA.

Hope that clears any confusion

[Ellis]

I agree that the 500 is (was) still the best standard desk on touring riders, but the congo being able to read its shows

Ah, yes, and that turned out to be another waaay-over-hyped 'feature', didn't it? It turns out that the Congo can't actually read Strand showfiles directly, as we were originally allowed to believe - it can only read them after conversion to ASCII, which means that if you've got scrollers, moving lights, etc. you're stuffed.

This is probably due to intellectual property rights - definately a candidate for sale of licences by the administrators (if owned by one the UK companies).