Which encoder do you use? and the main reason why

[Hoagie_one]

I went with price as my first mainreadon.  The overseas shipping on an ipac was too high for me and i wasnt buying any other items from ultimarc, so I went with a keywiz...which works great BTW.

[fatbasta]

IPAC - my only other encoder was a keyboard hack, IPAC is mucho easier than keyboard hack.

[Tiger-Heli]

KeyWiz - Main reasons are the 32-inputs (the VE wasn't available when I decided), and the more flexible shift function meant it really supported more like 38-40 inputs.  (Of course by the time I build something that could utilize 40-inputs there'll be newer options available). . .

[Apollo]

IPAC2, easy to use, great support, most recommended encoder when I started this hobby, good value, I was using ArcadeVGA as well so saved on shipping. I wouldn't use anything else now.

[RayB]

JPAC because at the time I thought Ipac and Jpac were the only options. I opted for the J because I am using a JAMMA cabinet and I like the fact that there is a video limiter built in.

[MoonDog]

MiniPac without harness
(I voted IPac but it seems like MiniPac should be a different option)

My reason was price and features.  I enjoy wiring and I was already ordering a couple T-Stiks so it was a good fit.  The other big motivator was that it has on-board spinner and trackball support.  Hacking a mouse is pretty easy though so it's not as big a plus as I thought, but the auto switching might come in handy.  I also liked that it has USB and PS/2 support and that the PS/2 pass-through doesn't need a switch, but neither of those features have a whole lot of sway for me.  I have yet to even use the programming feature.

[maraxle]

KeyWiz - more inputs than Ipac2, less expensive, and better shift function

[DarkKobold]

My own personal encoder -
It is cheap as in (mostly) free, and it does what I want it to.

[Pieman2004]

I use the keywiz because the price seemed great for the product. And a lot less shipping for me to pay.

[microwrx]

For this cab I went J-PAC (for obvious reasons) with a Mini-PAC for players 3&4.  There's no other JAMMA capable encoder I know of that works as well as a J-PAC.

In my last cab I had an I-PAC2 and went this way because of the reviews I had read and the fact I was also buying sticks and buttons (actually I got the sticks and buttons from Andy because I was getting the I-PAC).

[Madman]

I-PAC... 2 reasons

1. It works
2. Support

That Simple.

[GGKoul]

IPAC4 - easy to use and Andy provides great support!

[whammoed]

IPAC4...lots of inputs plus it remembers settings...I hate the default MAME inputs.  Shift, Alt, and Ctrl can have some negative side effects.
What's better than an ipac4 for a 4 player mame cab?...nothing

[theziggens]

I just ordered an Ipac 5 minutes ago for my first cab, cause...  Ultimarc is rumored to have good support, and it seemed like the best product to do the job.

z

[Lilwolf]

No rumor about ipacs customer service.  Its amazing.  Statistics aren't rumors... and you normally see more posts from people bitching then people who love their products... And I only see good posts..


I went with a MK64 myself.  Mainly because at the time it was the only encoder that handled a 4player control panel (that was local) and he game a donation to BYOAC for everyone sold.  

Great product.

Too bad it was discontinued...  

[Mameotron]

Keyboard hack.  It was free, and fun to build.  Had to do some research to dispel myths about ghosting and key blocking, though.  Best source of info is the articles right here on BYOAC.

[brained]

I'm going with the keyboard hack. It was fun to build, if I get tired someday. I'll buy  a keywiz

[Minwah]

IPAC - Easy to use, works great, good support and it's from England (where I live) - I've no need to look elsewhere  

[Bloinkxp]

Keywiz.
RandyT provides awesome support to newbs in need.
I have the "older" 1.0 KW Standard.
The programing interface is great, I can switch profiles on the fly...what more do can I say.

-d

[SirPeale]

I voted J-PAC because it's a really easy solution for JAMMA cabs.  However, I wish I could vote more than once, because I've used different solutions for different cabs.

Two J-PACs for two seperate JAMMA cabinets.

One KeyWiz (which I might sell, not because I don't like it, but a keyboard hack in the cab it's in makes more sense) in a Moon Patrol conversion.  One player interface.

One keyboard hack for a Galaxian conversion.  Plays only games which that style controls.

One keyboard hack for an upcoming Taito multigame.  It'll run Jungle King/Hunt, Elevator action...not sure what else, exactly, haven't gone thru the rest of the really classic Taito games.

I've been toying with the idea of a *mouse hack* cabinet.  Make it a Centipede/Arkanoid cab.  No keyboard whatsoever.  Trackball controls the player, three buttons (one for start, one for fire and one for credits).  Tried it in theory and it works.

[Hoagie_one]

One KeyWiz (which I might sell, not because I don't like it, but a keyboard hack in the cab it's in makes more sense) in a Moon Patrol conversion.  One player interface.

Which version and how much you want for it?

[SirPeale]

One KeyWiz (which I might sell, not because I don't like it, but a keyboard hack in the cab it's in makes more sense) in a Moon Patrol conversion.  One player interface.

Which version and how much you want for it?

It's the KeyWiz Standard.  I'm still tossing the idea around.  If I do decide to sell, I'll post in the FS forum.

[Shifty]

I voted OTHER -- combination keyboard hack with my own gameport mod.

The gameport mod I made using 8 resistors and 4 microchip relays. No drivers required, it is the default 2-joystick configuration in Windows, which is two 8-way joysticks plus 2 buttons each joystick. I use the keyboard hack to round out the other 4 buttons each per player, and other misc buttons like P1, P2, etc. Total cost <$10, mostly for the relays.

I'll post a pic from my cab once I get them ready, it works great and you don't have to worry about any ghosting issues from the keyboard hack. it DID take awhile to get working though!  

[Tilzs]

IPAC4. Great support, enough inputs, saves the custom config files, no problems with linux.

[Chris]

Keyboard hack.  At the time, I was trying to do the cabinet as cheap as possible, and I had an old keyboard with a 2" trackball, so I hacked both the KB and trackball.  The keyboard, however, was an older style with actual switches rather than a small encoder board attached to a membrane, so I was soldering to the backs of the switches on the motherboard.  I cut a hole in the keyboard case to run the wires out of and stuck the whole keyboard in my cabinet... it became both my encoder and my maintenance keyboard.    My more recent keyboard hack is more standard, and I use a USB keyboard for maintenance.

I'm thinking of building a cocktail cabinet now; if I do, I'll move the KB hack to it and put an IPac in the main cabinet.

--Chris

[Darkstalker]

Hagstrom KE-72.  72 seperate inputs, no ghosting concerns.  I still haven't ruled out swappable CPs, so I wanted the extra inputs.

[Dartful Dodger]

Hagstrom KE-72.  72 seperate inputs, no ghosting concerns.  I still haven't ruled out swappable CPs, so I wanted the extra inputs.

Same.

I'm not going with as many controls as I first believed, but I like knowing the extra inputs are ther if I need them.

[MinerAl]

Went with the IPAC2 because it was the only USB alternative, and I wanted T-Sticks anyway.   Works with my Macs and PC.

I have since bought an Opti-PAC, some T-Stick Plusses, and an IPAC VE.  Andy's service is second to none (except maybe OSCAR's).

To be honest, my need for USB has kept me from trying anything else, so I can't say there's anything good or bad about the others.  They simply don't offer the product I need.

Al

[NoOne=NBA=]

I would echo alot of what MinerAl just said.
My current cab is Mac-based, so I opted for the Ipac-4.
I was originally planning a frankenpanel, but opted for swappable, then moved to modular, to keep a more classic look to my cab.
The Ipac-4 has alot more inputs than I currently need, but they are there if I need them in the future for another project.

My ONLY complaint about the KeyWiz is that it doesn't support USB.
RandyT was tossing around the idea of a "mini" USB KeyWiz awhile back.
He was planning to have 15 inputs + Shift functions, IIRC.
I don't know where he is with that idea, but it would be a great alternative for a 1-P/7-button, or 2-P/3-button cab.

[Crazy Cooter]

ipac.

Got it a few years ago.  What will I use next time?  ipac.

[Stingray]

iPac because it works with Macintosh, which is what powers my cab.

-S

[Grasshopper]

I've tried a keyboard hack. It worked fine and was easier to do than I expected but still not really worth the hassle.

I also bought an Ipac a couple of years ago. I prefer it to the Keywiz because unlike the Keywiz it keeps its setting on power off and supports ps/2 and USB connections.

The advantages of the Keywiz (4 extra inputs and allegedly more versatile shift key function) don't make up for those deficiencies IMHO.

However one thing I don't like about the Ipac is that some button inputs are shared with the keyboard LEDs. This apparently causes the shared buttons to become unreliable if the buttons are connected over a long cable. There is no mention of this problem on Ultimarc's site which is a bit disappointing. I've got round it by simply avoiding the 3 shared buttons. Unfortunately, this only leaves me 25 inputs which is barely enough.

Newer Ipacs apparently don't have this problem, but instead you see the LEDs flash briefly when the shared buttons are pressed. A minor issue perhaps but I'm a perfectionist.

Next time I'll definitely buy a Minipac unless something better has come along by then. Hopefully the 36 input version if Andy ever gets round to producing it.

I can't understand why anyone would buy a standard Ipac instead of the Minipac. The minipac is cheaper and has more functionality (either more inputs, or spinner/trackball support). OK it uses header pins instead of screw connectors but hacking an old IDE cable isn't a big deal IMHO.

[Tiger-Heli]

Ok, this wasn't supposed to be a general discussion, but I would like to point out a few items:

I also bought an Ipac a couple of years ago. I prefer it to the Keywiz because unlike the Keywiz it keeps its setting on power off and supports ps/2 and USB connections.

Agree on USB being a nice feature, however, the default codeset of both encoders is very good for MAME use and the default KeyWiz set is available after power-off, so it's not that big of a drawback, although it is a bit inconvenient.

However one thing I don't like about the Ipac is that some button inputs are shared with the keyboard LEDs. This apparently causes the shared buttons to become unreliable if the buttons are connected over a long cable. There is no mention of this problem on Ultimarc's site which is a bit disappointing. I've got round it by simply avoiding the 3 shared buttons. Unfortunately, this only leaves me 25 inputs which is barely enough.

Newer Ipacs apparently don't have this problem, but instead you see the LEDs flash briefly when the shared buttons are pressed. A minor issue perhaps but I'm a perfectionist.

I have heard scattered reports of this also.  One point, I am pretty sure the LEDs flashed briefly when the shared buttons are pressed even on the original boards, so I wouldn't count on newer I-PACs not having the problem you mentioned.  (And this is true of all the I-PAC boards: mini-pac, VE, /4, etc.)

I can't understand why anyone would buy a standard Ipac instead of the Minipac. The minipac is cheaper and has more functionality (either more inputs, or spinner/trackball support). OK it uses header pins instead of screw connectors but hacking an old IDE cable isn't a big deal IMHO.

Two reasons - First, the current Minipac can't use the new WinIpac IPD software.
Also, the current Minipac doesn't have more inputs.  I agree hacking an IDE cable isn't a big deal, but here's an example where the I-PAC is a better choice than the Minipac -
Let's say you hook your panel up as
1 2 3
4 5 6
After it's built, you decide it would work better as
4 5 6
1 2 3
With the I-PAC, you could just re-wire the inputs and use a couple of longer wires if necessary.  With the mini-pac, you really can't shift the wire locations on the IDE header end, so you would end up adding jumper wires to the buttons and possibly re-wiring the whole panel.

Okay, it's not that likely or serious, but still. . .

[spidermonkey]

http://www.3tronics.com/MAMI2401_Info.htm

Just curious,is anyone running one of these ? They seem comprable to i-pac,keywiz,hagstrom...
Any reviews ?

[Wizard of DelRay]

You've piqued my interest spidermonkey.  I had planned on getting an IPAC/4 but it looks like the MAMI4801P could be perfect since it has enough inputs for the following setup:

P1: Joystick + 6 buttons = 10 inputs
P2: Joystick + 6 buttons = 10 inputs
P3: Joystick + 4 buttons = 8 inputs
P4: Joystick + 4 buttons = 8 inputs

That's 36 inputs so far plus another 8 for Start/Coin Insert and maybe 2 or 3 admin buttons.  So about 46-47 inputs.  More than enough.

Hope somebody with one posts some info.

[SOAPboy]

ipac..

id of used the keyboard hack, but im lazy and hate soldering..

 

[Tiger-Heli]

http://www.3tronics.com/MAMI2401_Info.htm

Just curious,is anyone running one of these ? They seem comprable to i-pac,keywiz,hagstrom...
Any reviews ?

I cover it in my comparison:  http://www.mameworld.net/tigerheli/encoder/ Stuff I can say here without posting it in my comparison -

You are talking about a 24-input non-programmable encoder with screw terminals and PS/2 only for $44.95.

Compare this to the 32-input programmable KeyWiz Max 1.5 in PS/2 for $34.95 or the 32-input programmable I-PAC VE in USB for $35 or the standard I-PAC/2 with 28 programmable inputs and USB or PS/2 for $43.

Also, all the non-MAMI encoders above support shift functions, making the real number of inputs much greater.

To Wizard of DelRay - Again, the MAMI48 has 48 non-programmable inputs in PS/2 only for $70.  The I-PAC/4 has 56 programmable inputs in USB or PS/2 for $69, a large user base, 54 shifted inputs, etc.  Even if shipping made it $10 more, the I-PAC/4 would be a better buy b/c of additional functionality, IMHO.

[captainpotato]

Mini-PAC (voted 'other'), as the space under the CP is barely big enough for it, let alone any other one. This, and the fact that getting a pre-wired harness saves so much time

[Wizard of DelRay]

To Wizard of DelRay - Again, the MAMI48 has 48 non-programmable inputs in PS/2 only for $70.  The I-PAC/4 has 56 programmable inputs in USB or PS/2 for $69, a large user base, 54 shifted inputs, etc.  Even if shipping made it $10 more, the I-PAC/4 would be a better buy b/c of additional functionality, IMHO.

I read your comparison and it's a good write-up on the different encoders, but it only goes into deeper details on the KeyWiz, MK64, and IPAC.

I've already purchased an IPAC/2 and a Mini-PAC so there's a good chance I will get an IPAC/4.  I just like different options, plus competition is good for everyone.

[Tiger-Heli]

I read your comparison and it's a good write-up on the different encoders, but it only goes into deeper details on the KeyWiz, MK64, and IPAC.

And the reason for that is that these are (or were) the best encoders for an arcade cabinet.

I just like different options, plus competition is good for everyone.

I'm all for competition and that's why the MAMI encoders are included, but an encoder that is non-programmable and offers less inputs for a higher price isn't very competitive.