Active crossover conversion
- Thread starter anon_bb
- Start date
- Joined
- Aug 30, 2005
- Messages
- 2,309
- Reaction score
- 0
If you want to go digital, try out the DEQX.
I'd go against the Bryston. It is not as transparent as some might think.
I'd go against the Bryston. It is not as transparent as some might think.
You only need one, the BSS is a stereo unit. It will split a stereo signal in to 3-way stereo if thats what you want. 3 outputs for the left and 3 outputs for the right. It will split it in to even more ways if you want just link more units if you want more.
themadhippy
seen it done it smokin it
Another fan of BSS, used there omnidrives on a fair few job,always with good results.most decent PA companys will have them in there hire stock
3DSonics
away working hard on "it"
Hi,
My experience is that if you get the levels right (and that is the BIG if when mixing Pro & Consumer gear) that doing all the nasty work (X-Over, EQ, Time Delay et al) in the digital domain it tends to match or better really good analogue solution.
I still remember my shock from switching my own discrete design of active X-Over in our PA System (which included mechanical timealignment for the Mid/Treble Cluster boxes, but did not allow to compensate the LF horn length delay and the mechanical arrangement delays) to a fairly early Yamaha Digital X-Over.
One of the key problem with analogue active crossovers and steep slopes is tolerance, even with handselected components and all (I did that for my own unit) you have enough tolerance remaining that the theoretically perfect integration of a 4th order Linkwitz Riley X-Over (which also of course requires coincidental sound sources) goes to meet the M@n@ & Naim owning Scotch Doctor....
I am a pragmatist. If it works it works.
You can see here an earlier incarnation (several) of my home system and also read comments on the one by the site owner on my system including a pro audio digital EQ in the circuit even (especially?) for LP.....
http://www.arduman.com/aa/Sayfalar/thorsten/thorsten.htm
You may find my formal review of that Equaliser of use too:
http://www.enjoythemusic.com/magazine/Equipment/0101/behringer8024.htm
The Behringer DCX2496:
http://www.behringer.com/DCX2496/index.cfm?lang=ENG
It is a stereo 3-Way digital crossover with the option to add individual delays and parametric equalisers to each output and much other trickery.
It is most popular among the DIY crowd for the really low price. If you eliminate the cheap'n'nasty output op-amps and add an external linear supply for the thing you are still in the < £ 500 range and have a killer active X-Over.
Ciao T
brizonbiovizier said:
My experience is that if you get the levels right (and that is the BIG if when mixing Pro & Consumer gear) that doing all the nasty work (X-Over, EQ, Time Delay et al) in the digital domain it tends to match or better really good analogue solution.
I still remember my shock from switching my own discrete design of active X-Over in our PA System (which included mechanical timealignment for the Mid/Treble Cluster boxes, but did not allow to compensate the LF horn length delay and the mechanical arrangement delays) to a fairly early Yamaha Digital X-Over.
One of the key problem with analogue active crossovers and steep slopes is tolerance, even with handselected components and all (I did that for my own unit) you have enough tolerance remaining that the theoretically perfect integration of a 4th order Linkwitz Riley X-Over (which also of course requires coincidental sound sources) goes to meet the M@n@ & Naim owning Scotch Doctor....
brizonbiovizier said:
I am a pragmatist. If it works it works.
You can see here an earlier incarnation (several) of my home system and also read comments on the one by the site owner on my system including a pro audio digital EQ in the circuit even (especially?) for LP.....
http://www.arduman.com/aa/Sayfalar/thorsten/thorsten.htm
You may find my formal review of that Equaliser of use too:
http://www.enjoythemusic.com/magazine/Equipment/0101/behringer8024.htm
brizonbiovizier said:
The Behringer DCX2496:
http://www.behringer.com/DCX2496/index.cfm?lang=ENG
It is a stereo 3-Way digital crossover with the option to add individual delays and parametric equalisers to each output and much other trickery.
It is most popular among the DIY crowd for the really low price. If you eliminate the cheap'n'nasty output op-amps and add an external linear supply for the thing you are still in the < £ 500 range and have a killer active X-Over.
Ciao T
Much like the Scottish Play you must not mention the Scottish Doctor else he will appear and blight us by saying active a*c is the only way forward!
Absolutely if the gains offset the losses it doesnt matter. What opamps does it use?
Absolutely if the gains offset the losses it doesnt matter. What opamps does it use?
- Joined
- Sep 22, 2003
- Messages
- 217
- Reaction score
- 0
having
worked in p.a. and nightclub install i would suggest that the behringer x-over is only used with a barge pole. it is a piece of c*ap.
bss or dbx mentioned will do a far better job.
the bryston x-over is highly regarded as an analogue unit but is beaten by the high end digital units.
some pro units can have different input sensitivities set in the control software so pro or domestic levels can be used.
regards.
worked in p.a. and nightclub install i would suggest that the behringer x-over is only used with a barge pole. it is a piece of c*ap.
bss or dbx mentioned will do a far better job.
the bryston x-over is highly regarded as an analogue unit but is beaten by the high end digital units.
some pro units can have different input sensitivities set in the control software so pro or domestic levels can be used.
regards.
darrylfunk said:
I would have thought to beat the Bryston with an analogue source, the digital units would need some pretty serious ADC and DAC stages (and a lot of them) and considering the price of those units I don't think they do. Obviously the actual filters they use are going to be more accurate and stuff though.
Still it is worth trying, but I would definitely want to compare the digital to a good analogue unit.
3DSonics
away working hard on "it"
Hi,
I find it interresting that the pro-audio scene generally poooh-poooh Behringer. I have used several of their products which are of a similar technological base as the digital crossover (and which where equally dismissed as Cr@p) and I found them to perform more than adequately given the original intended use and reliably so.
What specific problems did you find with the DCX2496 from Behringer? It might help others who use it to look out for potential pitfalls.
Ciao T
darrylfunk said:
I find it interresting that the pro-audio scene generally poooh-poooh Behringer. I have used several of their products which are of a similar technological base as the digital crossover (and which where equally dismissed as Cr@p) and I found them to perform more than adequately given the original intended use and reliably so.
What specific problems did you find with the DCX2496 from Behringer? It might help others who use it to look out for potential pitfalls.
Ciao T
3DSonics
away working hard on "it"
Hi,
Well, the AD & DA stages in all current Digital Pro X-Overs (that is the various BSS units, dBX Driverack, Behringer DCX et al) tend to use the latest AD & DA Chips from AKM or Cirrus, generally the top of the line as well, that is the 115db+ Dynamic range 24Bit/96KHz class.
If you try the Behringer DEQ2496 (which I know you have) in 12dbu full scale setting and you use between CD Player and preamp you may find it largely (but not entierly) transparent, easily tried by engaging the "hard" bypass.
The same quality of converters, supplies and analogue stages is in the Digital crossovers (in case of the Behringer DCX EXACTLY THE SAME as in the DEQ, minus the 12dbu setting.
Ciao T
Tenson said:
Well, the AD & DA stages in all current Digital Pro X-Overs (that is the various BSS units, dBX Driverack, Behringer DCX et al) tend to use the latest AD & DA Chips from AKM or Cirrus, generally the top of the line as well, that is the 115db+ Dynamic range 24Bit/96KHz class.
If you try the Behringer DEQ2496 (which I know you have) in 12dbu full scale setting and you use between CD Player and preamp you may find it largely (but not entierly) transparent, easily tried by engaging the "hard" bypass.
The same quality of converters, supplies and analogue stages is in the Digital crossovers (in case of the Behringer DCX EXACTLY THE SAME as in the DEQ, minus the 12dbu setting.
Ciao T
wadia-miester
Mighty Rearranger
Its ****e without question
3DSonics
away working hard on "it"
Hi,
Did you attemt a bypass of the Unit?
I mean not to use to feed the digital output of the DEQ as ADC into a recording device or to feed CD into the Digital in, but simply to set the EQ functions all to "neutral" and to compare the unit at decent levels against a piece of wire?
I CAN tell it's there, but the difference is not huge. Please try it.
Using the ADC or DAC part as such is a different story, for a number of reasons (we can discuss in detail when we meet up, it's way too much stuff to type out).
Ciao T
Tenson said:
Did you attemt a bypass of the Unit?
I mean not to use to feed the digital output of the DEQ as ADC into a recording device or to feed CD into the Digital in, but simply to set the EQ functions all to "neutral" and to compare the unit at decent levels against a piece of wire?
I CAN tell it's there, but the difference is not huge. Please try it.
Using the ADC or DAC part as such is a different story, for a number of reasons (we can discuss in detail when we meet up, it's way too much stuff to type out).
Ciao T
Well, I know that using the digital in and using the analogue outs with the unit in bypass mode does not sound as good as the Arcam Alpha 9 it replaced.
Using the Alpha 9 analogue outs into the DEQ then the analogue outs also didn't sound as good as the Alpha 9 direct to the amp. Noticeably worse imo. I blamed this mainly on the ADC as using the digital in and the analogue outs of the DEQ doesn't really sound far off the Alpha 9, but it is not good enough to go against top DAC's.
Ciao bella
Using the Alpha 9 analogue outs into the DEQ then the analogue outs also didn't sound as good as the Alpha 9 direct to the amp. Noticeably worse imo. I blamed this mainly on the ADC as using the digital in and the analogue outs of the DEQ doesn't really sound far off the Alpha 9, but it is not good enough to go against top DAC's.
Ciao bella
3DSonics
away working hard on "it"
Hi,
Just to make sure, this was with the 12dbu full scale setting and using the main in & out?
Ciao T
Tenson said:
Just to make sure, this was with the 12dbu full scale setting and using the main in & out?
Ciao T
3DSonics
away working hard on "it"
Hi,
I would not use it unmodified. With the analogue stages stripped out and replaced by transformers and a decent linear supply it plays in much more elevated systems....
Anyway, when you come over we'll do a little DB Bypass test of the 2496, just for fun.... My experience with my (yet unmodified - but mods may happen very soon) own unit told me I had a hard time telling the DEQ was there.
Ciao T
Tenson said:
I would not use it unmodified. With the analogue stages stripped out and replaced by transformers and a decent linear supply it plays in much more elevated systems....
Anyway, when you come over we'll do a little DB Bypass test of the 2496, just for fun.... My experience with my (yet unmodified - but mods may happen very soon) own unit told me I had a hard time telling the DEQ was there.
Ciao T
