Support Forum

I was wondering.

I have heard this two names:

Light to sound
Sound to light

what is the correct term? my gues is light to sound, beacuse the functions makes the light effect synchronize to the sound

In over 20 years in this industry I have never heard of 'Light 2 Sound'. This makes me think that the lighting is being converted into sound!

It is without doubt 'Sound to Light' meaning the sound is controlling or triggering the lights in some way.
This is the ONLY term I would use.

dmxlighting wrote: It is without doubt 'Sound to Light' meaning the sound is controlling or triggering the lights in some way.

that make sense. the sound output is input to the light.

I Googled "light to sound" and found A simple light to sound converter (like dmxlighting said)

i think i must admit i was wrong. i think it was the danish grammar and language which caused it

dmxlighting wrote:In over 20 years in this industry I have never heard of 'Light 2 Sound'. This makes me think that the lighting is being converted into sound!

It is without doubt 'Sound to Light' meaning the sound is controlling or triggering the lights in some way.
This is the ONLY term I would use.

I agree on that. Never heard of "light to sound" before.

It is "sound to light": First there was sound, then there was light. So: Sound to light.

Lets take it the wrong way:
Say there's a band playing on stage. Normally the drummer gives the rythm, sometimes supported by in-ear metronome, controlled by himself or another member of the band (like keyboards).
But when "Light to Sound" is enabled, the lightjockey (or his hardware/software) gives the rythm for the whole band.
Then the lights become the metronome for the band. Thats what you could call "light to sound". But hey, I've never seen nor heard about something like this.

It seems like it was a really stupid question i asked

I discussed it with another amateur light technician, and again, i think it is the translation which went wrong,, if you translate" sound to light" directly to danish it sounds like "sound for light" where I'm thinking its more like "light for sound" which is translated to light to sound in English. do you get what i mean?

but yes,,, it is the sound which is adapted to the light

LJ_krede.dk wrote: It seems like it was a really stupid question i asked

Now I would love to tell you the story were they say that stupid questions don't exist...

Not going to, because they do exist.
My definition of a stupid question is:
If someone did'nt think about the question himself, or asked himself the question before asking someone else, THEN its a stupid question.

Obviously you did think about it before, so its not a stupid question.
And yes, I understand wat you mean about the "Language Barrier".

Light to sound is when you put your hand under one of those light beams at a museuem or something and it produces a sound....I guess!and moving up and down in the light makes different tones..