Originally Posted By jaycub I will absolutely admit that I was wrong. You did not in fact dispute anything about how the system used to create the magic works. That was both me not reading all that you said, and my jumping to a conclusion without fully reading what you said. For that, I apologize. I do still feel that you are wrong for arguing with Hydra about how recievers and transmitters interfere with pyrotechnics. This is not because I doubt your information, nor does it sound like Hydra is disputing you as well. Like Hydra, I admit that I don't know how wireless technology works. Hydra just reported what was said by the tech guys, and you seem to be attacking what was said. Hydra said that he wasn't interested in arguing with you about it, but if you would like to contact someone about tech support, he would be willing to put you in contact with them. It appears that you aren't interested in discussing it with someone from tech support, rather you are insistent with debating it with a message board filled with people who don't have the knowledge that you do. Granted, I don't believe that you meant for this to explode into the debate that it has, but you should be aware that this is ho wit was recieved.
Originally Posted By Roger55 If my detailed explanation on how wireless/RF technolgy works is perceived as an attack, so be it. I myself went back and read #61 and don't see at all how it is an "attack". When does discussion become an attack? Wireless signals are everywhere. A non-specific statment saying wireless signals would set off the pyros without specifically qualifying what type of signals, what power levels, and within what proximity is not a reason in itself to dismiss wireless character heads as a POSSIBLE implementation as Hydra did. That was what I am disputing. What is the fault in clarify with specific science why a blanket/non-specific statment is flawed? To me, it was the "go seek some counseling" comment that was out of line. And if you read other prior posts by Hydra, you will find some not so nice remarks directed at other people too. I know what I wrote is a lot to digest, but what is wrong with explaining why what the techs told Hydra is incorrect as stated by Hydra("Wireless signals would set off the pyro for the show and be VERY unsafe")? They very well may have said certain types of wireless transmitters in close proximity pose a safety concern. If that was the case, all that would come of a conversation with them is we would agree. I can only comment on what was posted here. Does anyone think Disney would discuss with me the safety concerns they have with their pyrotechnic control system? As far as not being interested, that is not true. I would love to hear all about the technology being used in the character heads. I would also be interested in hearing specifically what problems Disney has with their pyro control electronics that make it suseptable to RF inteference and create a safety concern. Hydra, please provide me with a contact name and method for the tech department. I will share with you all whatever information I am able to find out from the tech department regarding both the character heads and pyro system safty concerns.
Originally Posted By HydraLing Please note, as I have stated here and elsewhere, that all performances of "Dream Along..." are live and unique. There would be no other way to respond to unexpected situations. Nothing can be preprogramed for that reason. If you'll watch the video on YouTube where Donald loses his hat, both he and Minnie respond to it in real time. She flinches away and he laughs at the situation. My main "arguement" about wireless technology is that there would have to be both recievers AND transmitters in order to allow the performers to respond to such unique situations. Without revealing the truth behind how everything is done (which I am legally not allowed to do), I am telling you that all of the characters are fully performing everything you see all by themselves.
Originally Posted By HydraLing Roger55: My comment about seeking counciling was specifically directed at your apparent need to be "right." And please, point out where I have directed "some not so nice remarks directed at other people." That's never my intention, unless provoked. And I don't know what you mean by "method" in your following statement: "please provide me with a contact name and method for the tech department." Please clarify. Please know that I won't be at the stage for nearly two weeks, so any information that I have for you will be delayed. Also, please know that I will leave the final decision to be contacted up to the techs, themselves. If they do not wish to have a dialogue with you, I can no be blamed, however, I will tell you what they decide.
Originally Posted By Labuda "And I don't know what you mean by "method" in your following statement: "please provide me with a contact name and method for the tech department." Please clarify." He's asking for a name and eityher a phone #, email address, or snail mail address. A method by which he can contact the person who you're going to refer him to.
Originally Posted By Roger55 <<My main "arguement" about wireless technology is that there would have to be both recievers AND transmitters in order to allow the performers to respond to such unique situations.>> OK, this is now back to a discussion we can do resonably. If I were to speculate, transmitters would be needed to allow the characters to communicate back with show controllers. Receivers may be only needed to control the heads, but if two way voice communication is required, I can see a need for including voice transmitters. I can also see how transmitters could pose a problem to the on stage pyros. I am assuming that two way communication would only be needed to allow for "unique" and responsive actions of the characters, not the scripted or pre-programmed actions. Is my speculation correct that voice transmitters are the concern? I surmize that current character heads do not allow for two way communication. My next question would be, don't some of the face characters, or for other shows singers or narrators, use wireless microphones on stage near pyrotechnics? I am pretty sure I have seen this at all Disney parks I have visited. I would think wireless microphones (which do use trnasmitters) are the same whether they are sending a signal to the PA system or to a receiver to a headset of a show controller off stage? <<Without revealing the truth behind how everything is done (which I am legally not allowed to do), I am telling you that all of the characters are fully performing everything you see all by themselves.>> And just to be absolutely clear, I do not dispute this statement one bit!
Originally Posted By Labuda "My next question would be, don't some of the face characters, or for other shows singers or narrators, use wireless microphones on stage near pyrotechnics? I am pretty sure I have seen this at all Disney parks I have visited. I would think wireless microphones (which do use trnasmitters) are the same whether they are sending a signal to the PA system or to a receiver to a headset of a show controller off stage?" The Fairy Godmother in one of the recent castle shows - maybe Cinderella's Surprise Celebration? - used a wireless mic to speak live, yes. And she was indeed onstage very near to where little bits of pyo happened at the end of the show.
Originally Posted By HydraLing I do not know the actual CONCERN of the techs. I just know that they have told me that wireless poses some sort of risk, from their point of view. MOST of what you hear from our stage (RE: the human performers) is canned. They don't wear wireless packs. I can't speak for former shows, as this is my first time at the Castle show. I don't know if Cinderellabration used pyro, so I don't know what concerns they've had in the past. I only saw the show twice and don't honestly remember pyro. Again, I'm only trying to address the speculation about THIS current show.
Originally Posted By Roger55 Looking forward to receiving the contact information for the Disney techs. I think hearing from them their specific concerns regarding wireless technology will shed a lot of light on this discussion. I'm also curious to see how they will respond to my wireless head concept. It sure would lesson the work load put on the performing characters. I'll have to put some more thought though on how to make the performance more dynamic and responsive as opposed to being "canned" like the audio. Keeping "canned" audio synchronized with dynamic and unique performaces is a challenging problem to solve. If it turned out to be a good concept, it could be used for the characters that walked around the park too! Unfortunately, I know Disney's reluctance to listen to any outside ideas, so I'm not holding my breath.
Originally Posted By jaycub <<To me, it was the "go seek some counseling" comment that was out of line. And if you read other prior posts by Hydra, you will find some not so nice remarks directed at other people too.>> I do agree with you here Roger55, though in light that previous comments did come off as an attack, I would imagine that this was a defensive reaction. Sorry that your discussions got heated, especially since it appears that you didn't intend for them to. I also would like to apologize for adding fuel to the fire. I will be interested in hearing what you find out from the tech department, especially since I will finally get to see this show this week!
Originally Posted By Labuda "MOST of what you hear from our stage (RE: the human performers) is canned. They don't wear wireless packs. I can't speak for former shows, as this is my first time at the Castle show." Well, my only firm knowledge of this is the Fairy Godmother 2 shows backs. My tour group on the Keys to the Kingdom tour ran into her backstage during our tour and had a little chat, and I noticed her wireless mic, so asked an was told that yes, her speechs were live.
Originally Posted By TDLFAN >>TDL...as your name implies, you seem to be a fan of the Japanese parks.<< Hydra, I am a fan of ALL Disney parks around the World, not just Tokyo. Get that in your head right away. >>First, please note that they are NOT actually run by Disney. They are licensed and thus don't have to spread a budget among SIX U.S. parks. << tell me something I don't know... and you have stated in that remark why TDR is better than the rest. >>Second, since you seem to NOT like any other park, why bother particating in here? << Because I always seem to get the attention of those of you who are in management and that pleases me a lot. That is why. >>I'm not embarassed in ANY way to be a part of this incredibly talented and dedicated cast. << And you should not be. I am not passing judgement on the cast, just the production values of shows at WDW which leaves a lot to be desired. You see? I don't go to the parks to do rides... my main interest is the live performances and parades.... which TDR does best and I would hope for WDW to do the same.. but we get small entertainment for small minds it seems. >>The cast has no say or choice in the shows they perform. And why do you feel that the more props the better? The show, as is, is concise and to the point. It's honest and loving and true to all that Disney stands for.<< Your opinion. Here's mine: the show is cute but visually BLAND. >>Yes, it's a combined and condensed version of former TDL shows, but so what? It's STILL the best thing that stage has seen in nearly a DECADE.<< YOu can say that again. Lucky for us, we don't have to wait that long to see much better productions at other Disney resorts. I think it's shameful even you admit the lack of progress in that dept. >>I don't know if Cinderellabration used pyro, so I don't know what concerns they've had in the past. I only saw the show twice and don't honestly remember pyro.<< First you say you have been working there for 15 yrs and you don't even know if Cinderellabration had Pyro?? (yes, it did, during the finale) If you are a true fan of the brand, you would know that.
Originally Posted By HydraLing TDL...wow. That stick up there must be a pretty long one. First, I'm not in management. Don't make assumptions. Second, you ASKED me if I was ashamed. Don't be a jerk if I address you in response. Third, it's a common enough phrase in Entertainment that "Tokyo does Disney better than Disney does," but you know what? I live and work HERE. I support my friends HERE. I praise their hard work and commitment HERE. It seems to me that it's always easiest for outsiders to rip things apart. Why be so negative? And yes, I've worked here for 15 years. Cinderellabration was NOT here for those 15 years. You realize that there is more than just one park here, right? It's possible to work in other parks and not be exposed to shows in OTHER parks and thus not know much about them. Honestly, I only saw the show twice and didn't find it that interesting. Really...why WOULD I remember if it had pyro? And finally...there is a difference between being a fan and being obsessive. I leave it to you to examine yourself and discover which you are.
Originally Posted By NikkiLOVESMickey Wow, who knew a post about animated park characters could turn so violatile?
Originally Posted By ssWEDguy >> I don't know for certain, but I've heard the movements are pre-programmed. They're not controlled live. << I'd be willing to bet this. The technology is already sophisticated. Pre-programming would be a step that they've incorporated in the past. I'm basing my guess on watching the eye blinks. Mouth movements can be done via the performing CM, yes. But eyeblinks happening at a particular point in a spoken statement? More likely recorded in advance.
Originally Posted By ssWEDguy >> And as long as I get my picture with Jack Sparrow << I've been seeing the pictures of Captain Jack and the guests from the Pirates and Princesses events. They are just killer. I think getting your picture taken with Captain Jack in the treasure room set can be worth the price of the hard ticket admission alone.
Originally Posted By ssWEDguy >> Trained monkeys would be cheaper. << I'm not so sure. The trained monkeys are union.
Originally Posted By ssWEDguy >> Why be so negative? << And yet another LPer bumps into TDL online for the first time.... TDL is a good guy to get to know. He's not the all-consumed grinch that some responders might think him to be. He really does care.
Originally Posted By ssWEDguy >> He really does care. << Now he'll be mad at me for blowing his cover.
Originally Posted By TDLFAN >>TDL...wow. That stick up there must be a pretty long one.<< Yes, and I love every inch of it. You are just jealous.
