Wireless DMX compatability and standards

Not open for further replies.


New Member
So, I was wondering if the various wireless DMX units would 'cross play' and were compatible, and if there were any industry standards in use, either from standards boards, or from vendor arrangements.

If I have a wireless DMX transmitter from one company, can I use wireless receivers from another vendor? (E.g ADJ transmitter, Chauvet receiver, or Blizzard transmitter and Steve L. receiver?)

Secondly, if they aren't directly compatible, can two or 'n' systems work simultaneously without messing up each other? (or do they share frequencies or protocols?)

Seems for this wireless DMX thing to work long term, there needs to be a standard for the RF protocol portion of this, especially if the wireless receiver part will soon be built in to fixtures. The transmitter should be built into the controller or dongle, and the receivers should (and likely will) be built into the fixtures, possibly as a default.

Also, if these are in the 2.4G area, how do we know the increasing amount of usage there won't be an issue? Will we have to do frequency coordination similar to wireless mics, or ???. This whole idea that stuff won't step on other things in that range w/o dynamic frequency allocation or reserved frequencies seems far fetched to me.

Sure would be great if the folks to who set up DMX would develop up a standard for this, or the vendors would form some form of coalition, if they haven't. They vendors could support standard features for generic use, and have additional features only present in a single-vendor setup to encourage folks staying with one brand.



Gear and Equipment Moderator
Having a set of ISO standards for DMX would be a great thing. Unfortunately the standards that are set are only for the actual DMX protocol and the RF signals that are transmitted between boxes. What happens inside each manufacturer's little boxes is a different story. This is their way of sucking you into their little world and getting you to buy more of their DMX gear. Prices for wireless DMX vary from $70 on up to around $4600 depending on how much you want to do with it. Great stuff for extremely large concerts where long runs of DMX cable would be a real PITA with multiple universes but for the average DJ, I'd say pick one and stick with it but don't cheap out. I did and went with the original Chauvet units at $179 each, five of them. The refresh rates are too long so I have to manually transmit a resend to correct lights that have lost their sync. Also line of sight becomes an issue with distances beyond about 50-75 ft although they advertise 300 ft. (note this as it;'s about the same distance as a standard UHF wireless mic)


Always At Your Service
Larry 62: 100% agree with Nicky B (and almost every thing else he posts) however some of the newer transmitters/receivers have multiple selectable channels with universal protocol. Hopefully, one of them will be what you already use, but as Nicky said, no guarantees.

Steve Lynch

Well-Known Member
Mine, Eternal's, and Blizzard's are all the same 7 channels for the most part. The Chauvets don't seem to play with anyone else's. I have tested the D-Fi, and the older chauvet systems with the blizzard, and mine, as well as the lightcaster, and My version of the lightcaster which is the same exact unit, just less expensive. I have found that most of the Chinese stuff uses stock boards from one company, so they all speak the same language.

I use a dmx splitter, and run 3 different wireless systems at one time. though they are on different frequencies, I do have to change my wireless transmitter to make one of the others work. so they are obviously close, but not quite the same.

I am working on a frequency agile transmitter receiver system that will allow you to pick any frequency within the 2.4ghz band. this will allow my systems to work with anything that is not encrypted, and on the 2.4 ghz scale.

If my guys can dial it in so that the frequencies are solid, there may be a truly universal DMX wireless solution on the horizon.
Not open for further replies.