I question "radically". You have admitted before that the DCX you used was unmodded and you wanted one of your own to modify, running on the preconception that you could improve it. You didn't give it a fair chance really.
Everything can be improved, it's just are the improvements worth the effort. You (and AndrewT, who refuses to use his until he has modded it - it sits in the box until then...
) think the improvement is worth the time, risk, expense to do. I do not.Be forwarned John. One of these days your precarious world will come tumbling down and all the king's horses and all the king's men
won't be able to put it together again. You'll be in for a whole bunch of discovery & enjoyment of how much you've been missing
What? When I finally embrace Enabl?
I doubt it. I has some experience after all.
I have witnessed self illusion you know - it's an ugly, pitiful thing. I've learned how to bite my tongue in certain situations and just nod my head.
It is fun to see how the same discussion meanders in different ways every time it is put up. Look for my post #2023. Same question - different answers - same outcome.
For those, like Legis, who want to see graphs and numbers that show that a modified unit sounds better, I'd love to oblige you! But I don't own any AP equipment. Far out of my price range. I've been trying to come up with some meaningful measurements, but it's not easy on a DIY budget.
And what would I show you, anyway? A few decibels more or less distortion or noise? If the level is still low, how would that be heard? Can you tell me how the THD relates to what you hear? (honest question)
As SY states, there are objective ways to measure or test the subjective. As long as the listening tests are well controlled, they are valid. If I could set up such a test with the DCX, I'd love to.
It's nicely logical to think "If it distorts less, it sounds better." This seems to make good sense. Unfortunately, the ear does not work that way. The ear is much more sensitive to the shape and content of the distortion than it is to the absolute amount. If you are interested in learning more about this, look up the work of Matti Otala. A number of other researchers have since taken up his work and published too. This is a more complete and complex view of distortion than a simple "less is better" approach. This stuff can be measured. In fact it has been in this thread.
And what would I show you, anyway? A few decibels more or less distortion or noise? If the level is still low, how would that be heard? Can you tell me how the THD relates to what you hear? (honest question)
As SY states, there are objective ways to measure or test the subjective. As long as the listening tests are well controlled, they are valid. If I could set up such a test with the DCX, I'd love to.
It's nicely logical to think "If it distorts less, it sounds better." This seems to make good sense. Unfortunately, the ear does not work that way. The ear is much more sensitive to the shape and content of the distortion than it is to the absolute amount. If you are interested in learning more about this, look up the work of Matti Otala. A number of other researchers have since taken up his work and published too. This is a more complete and complex view of distortion than a simple "less is better" approach. This stuff can be measured. In fact it has been in this thread.
Legis,
It seems like you have been a member at DIYAudio since December. I do not think that for such a short membership time you had a chance to read through this thread from beginning to the end. Once you do that it will help you a lot. In the first place, your posts would gain some validity at least with statements like "if measurements were done or not". For your info, it was done in detail and published here by people that had something to contribute. I think if you would like to contribute something of value to this thread you should read it first before you go into any heated discussions.
Next, we had several times these conversations regarding mods on Behringer.
There are people that made improvements to their DCXs. They were happy with it. They shared here with everyone their results, schematics, measurements, pictures... in another word they contributed something of value for everyones pleasure. They obviously had a chance to listen, compare, measure and to have a full knowledge of before and after. Their and only their opinion, in my mind has substance worth reading.
On another side there are guys like yourself, that did not read the thread, did not made any modifications and are demanding measurements to be done by someone else. On the top of all this you are issuing opinions that are based neither on experience nor measurements (that you are so passionately clinging to)
Let me quote you:
"Person who makes a claim should present some evidence that supports his claim. Until that is done, the claim is just another unverified anecdote."
Very arrogant statement, don't you think? Lets flip the table here. We already proved what you are asking for, but you haven't read. Why don't you prove to us your statements. Go ahead, do the mods, do the A/B measurements, do the listening and publish them here. Do the work, come back to us and give us something of value and substance. Give any meaning or weight to your statements. Without it it is just a noise, waist of time and space here. You are demanding a measurements and you are issuing validity statements without any experience or knowledge so far. Blindly. So stand behind your demands and statements and follow through please.
I believe anyone should buy and enjoy what they like. Because its their money, their time and their hobby. If you enjoy the modded sound (believing it is better) then that is cool.
The problem here is more about opinion online posted as fact more then just what someone likes. Others read this opinion and convince themselves they need to spend money.
I just think its important to protect against opinion just becoming fact alone.
Yep, there will never be any common ground.
Last edited:
I spent a long time reading the threads on the DCX and I guess I have missed the posts with valid measurements showing the differences.
btw, Im not against the mods. When I have the time to compare I will get a mod done on one of my DCXs (the one with the fried egg sound that is unused right now). I remember email conversations that the mod is a money back garuntee anyways.
Doug, you are right on all points. But, there is such a simple logic here. Behringer made great product with DCX. We all love it. You buy it, plug it, it works and sounds OK. Fine. But what Behringer did is they made product geared for professional market. It is reliable with many functions needed for the PA systems, high in gain and more than anything it is inexpensive. So they got their market. Talking about their market, professionals do not like it. You will never find Behringer in any big serious studio. So why is that?
Because those ones that can, they care about sound. They are looking for something much more sofisticated, something that sounds better. They are looking for units that are above Behringer where analog output circuits are dealt with much more attention, where digital clock and digital input circuitry are simply better. And so do we.
So yes, Behringer made an outstanding unit for the money. With that, they cut some corners in order to fit the budget, space, goal... Even with all that, DCX sounds pretty OK out of the box. Now the big question is:
Could it be improved or we are saying - this is it. No better could be done.
We have to agree on this one - it could be improved. Just like professional users that are seeking for the best, we are also after the same. And we found out - it is simple and not that expensive to make a big improvements. Now someone will say, AHA how big improvements. This is where the argument is. So lets see. We all know that having electrolythic cap in the path of the signal is a bad thing, I hope no argument here. And that is what you find in Behringer. The reasons are clear. Anything else would be highly price and space prohibitive for the market they intended to achieve. Next several opamps in the path of the analog signal that goes from balanced to non balance to balanced again... Again nothing is better than several opamps and cap? Discrete or passive carefully done output is better than that. Don't we agree on that one?
When it comes to digital path: Even manufacturer - Cirrus Logic admitted that part used in Behringer is faulty. They published it in the paper. We all know that improvements in the clock circuitry are making big benefits with overall sound and jitter. And those are issues we dealt with and we tried to improve upon.
So why is it so hard to understand than that you could make improvements, typically by the ones that didn't even try to improve? Could we express how big difference you gain with improvements? For me it was a lot and for everyone that did it. Just like professionals, we strive to make it better, all in our own way. If it is different everyone would use Behringer for $ 300. Noone would buy similar units for $ 4,5, or 7,000.00. But they still do.
Last edited:
Actually if we stick to the epistemological meaning of knowledge, uncontrolled listening tests such as yours don't "prove" anything. We can't know anything for sure based on uncontrolled tests.
Controlled listening tests on the other hand usually prove quite the opposite: people have failed to determine 10000$ amplifier from 200$ amplifier. http://www.bruce.coppola.name/audio/Amp_Sound.pdf Almost everybody thought thay heard differences at the first places but nobody was not able show this in direct double-blind a/b comparison. They get even to choose the pair of amps that they thought to sound the most different to each other.
On the other hand I can say that I would distinguis my Marantz sr5004 and XTZ integrated from each other, at least when I know which one is playing. There is difference in their tone. In amps and speakers the sonical differencies can easily be understanded, they are the most important components in the system. But DCX is only on the signal path, trying to do it's best not to corrupt the original signal. (And based on the measurements, it does a good job.)
I will definitely test my DCX once it arrives, probably tomorrow. By connecting it in the signal path I will hear whether it corrupts/changes the signal the way I can hear it. DCX does never enhance the signal, so testing it's transparency is adequate, since that is all it can ever do: be transparent, unnoticeable in the signal path. If modded DCX would sound different to completely transparent stock DCX, it would mean that the modded version corrupts/changes the signal more than stock DCX, because it can be heard.
Test setup: bi-amped Monitor Audio RX6s, 2x Peerless XXLS based subwoofers (each with it's own bridged EAW CAZ1400 amplifier), XTZ Class A D3 integrated as a preamp, 2x XTZ AP100 amplifiers, high quality ICs, PC as a source with flacs and E-MU 0404 digital output. If the sound is corrupted by the behringer, I will hear it.
If I can hear some corruption in signal, I will definitely start to think some remedies to negate that, in other words, mods.
If no corruption is heard, it is totally unnecessary to mod DCX because it can't be better (more transparent) in my system. (repeating: it cannot enhance the signal any way.)
I have tested FBQ2496 the same way and seen that it does not corrupt the signal in any audible way, except by hissing little (audible to 50cm/ 1 2/3 feet away) from speaker. Test was done by making 3 different eqs and their counter eqs to FBQ. Result: No audible difference in A) no FBQ2496 in the signal path B) FBQ in the signal path but bypassed C) FBQ on. It is obvious that it is not the same as DCX, and contains way less electronics than DCX, so results are not applicable to DCX. I would gladly try the same in a/b comparison settings to see if difference can be heard.
Last edited:
Based on our systems and set ups we all hear different. Many factors are affecting good sound. No good sound will come out of bad design. Good design and good sound will be associated with good measurement. But you cannot say my system has 0.009 % distortion and it is automatically better than 0.01% It is not as simple as that. In my experience systems with enhanced and better tweeters would show any improvement in transparency. Systems with not as enhanced tweeters would exhibit more space and threedimensionality. Speaker position in the room and distance from the walls will affect greatly depth. These parameters are impossible to measure, and typically these are parameters that are affected the most with different improvements. Cleaning out electrolytic caps and opamps will immediately affect transparency. How do you measure difference between the electrolytic and film cap in the sound? But they do sound very differently. Have you ever try to plug your CD straight into your amp? Yes you will loose some, but listen to transparency.It is more than noticeable, it is very pleasant to listen. So eliminating stuff that are not needed does benefit better sound.
With improvements, depending on our setups we will all hear different, but I guarantee you it will be an improvement if properly done. And this is all about that, isn't it? Trying to improve things on our own. This is not board where we discuss a new Denon receiver and its specs and reviews, but place where we make or improve circuits.
With improvements, depending on our setups we will all hear different, but I guarantee you it will be an improvement if properly done. And this is all about that, isn't it? Trying to improve things on our own. This is not board where we discuss a new Denon receiver and its specs and reviews, but place where we make or improve circuits.
AR2
I have to still buy the mod to confirm if its a difference I care about. Im also aware of the gain structure issues (balanced vs unbalanced) and I have been battling that for years
I disagree with your reasoning big studios don't buy the Behringer because of SQ. Behringer has a history of problems but if working SQ is just fine. Big Studios are not going to buy it because of BRANDING!! Its the same reason the guy selling Armani suits doesnt wear a JC Penny suit and its the same reason a guy selling luxury cars doesnt drive a ford. You have to convince your customers that the product is good and that has to do with brand awareness. Using Behringer does not convince an Artist/producer/ etc that your studio is a big player Heck some studios have agreements with certain companies just like pro athletes do with equipment companies!! It seldom has anything to do with SQ because the level of SQ that is need already exists in most brands. Try to go beyond that level of SQ is just subjective stuff.
The debate about SQ here is is no different then amp debates, speaker wire debates and so on. People are going to be subjective and the difference is subjective. Some people will think its the biggest difference in the world while others will deem it not that important.
Everyone has a different room, different setup, different requirements, different content and different ears/sound processing abilities. IMO, its almost impossible agree ever on differences because of the variables involved.
One thing I think is key here is that its a $300 product. Pretty incredible for that price, IMO.
Other then that if someone is going to spend the time testing, listening and then debating SQ online I would hope they have some decent measurements to show why it sounds different otherwise I know I care zero about their subjective opinion.
I have to still buy the mod to confirm if its a difference I care about. Im also aware of the gain structure issues (balanced vs unbalanced) and I have been battling that for years
I disagree with your reasoning big studios don't buy the Behringer because of SQ. Behringer has a history of problems but if working SQ is just fine. Big Studios are not going to buy it because of BRANDING!! Its the same reason the guy selling Armani suits doesnt wear a JC Penny suit and its the same reason a guy selling luxury cars doesnt drive a ford. You have to convince your customers that the product is good and that has to do with brand awareness. Using Behringer does not convince an Artist/producer/ etc that your studio is a big player
Heck some studios have agreements with certain companies just like pro athletes do with equipment companies!! It seldom has anything to do with SQ because the level of SQ that is need already exists in most brands. Try to go beyond that level of SQ is just subjective stuff.The debate about SQ here is is no different then amp debates, speaker wire debates and so on. People are going to be subjective and the difference is subjective. Some people will think its the biggest difference in the world while others will deem it not that important.
Everyone has a different room, different setup, different requirements, different content and different ears/sound processing abilities. IMO, its almost impossible agree ever on differences because of the variables involved.
One thing I think is key here is that its a $300 product. Pretty incredible for that price, IMO.
Other then that if someone is going to spend the time testing, listening and then debating SQ online I would hope they have some decent measurements to show why it sounds different otherwise I know I care zero about their subjective opinion.
Last edited:
How do you know they are actually "Improvements". It could all just be response differences? You may like a change because its a "new" sound but have you ever stopped tweaking? Cleaning, adding, modding is always a great labor of love for some and that alone sets of a huge trigger in the brain telling its OF COURSE the sound will be better
Yes, I believe "Placebo" is alive and strong in the world of audio.Improvements can not only be subjective they should be backed up with data so that there is validation behind the "Improvement" opinion.
I just don't see the point of the argument. If you like the sound of the DCX the way it is, use it that way. Why wouldn't you?
And why do you want to tell those who mod them and like them that they are wrong - the DCX is as good as it will ever be? Again, I just don't see the point. Are you trying to protect them from their folly? A noble sentiment, to be sure. I don't hear enough difference in cables to justify buying fancy ones. But I don't beat the cable huggers over the head with it.
As for demanding measurements of the improvements, OK, that's legit - on the surface. But what measurements do you want that proves it sounds better? Lower distortion? Lower noise? A different harmonic spectrum? Those may prove a difference, but they won't prove it sounds better (or worse, unless things go really bad).
So I still don't see the point.
P.S. For any Behringer haters out there, I just saw a photo in the L.A. Times of James Cameron on the set of Avatar. He's tweaking a knob on a Berhinger mixer. It's probably stock
And why do you want to tell those who mod them and like them that they are wrong - the DCX is as good as it will ever be? Again, I just don't see the point. Are you trying to protect them from their folly? A noble sentiment, to be sure. I don't hear enough difference in cables to justify buying fancy ones. But I don't beat the cable huggers over the head with it.
As for demanding measurements of the improvements, OK, that's legit - on the surface. But what measurements do you want that proves it sounds better? Lower distortion? Lower noise? A different harmonic spectrum? Those may prove a difference, but they won't prove it sounds better (or worse, unless things go really bad).
So I still don't see the point.
P.S. For any Behringer haters out there, I just saw a photo in the L.A. Times of James Cameron on the set of Avatar. He's tweaking a knob on a Berhinger mixer. It's probably stock
Maybe not demanding... but it would be nice to see what differences, if any, are measurable.
The most common mods I've seen people doing are the "direct out" mods, that skip all output buffering, analog LP filtering, and muting to instead cap-couple the output directly from the DACs. This has an obvious tradeoff in that the DAC's are not specced to directly drive 600 Ohm loads. Most people aren't running 600 Ohm loads, though I am for my bass amp; so, if I were to do this mod, and then measured it, I'd expect to see all sorts of attenuation and other problems driving the bass amp.
Personally, I plan to mod my DCX, swapping the output section into more-or-less the topology recommended by AKM, and using .1% resistors and LME47920's as diff amps to remove the 2.5V DC offset. This will allow me to DC couple the output. I plan to do some before and after scope shots, at least, of VLF (like 2Hz or so) square waves, to see whether I see any obvious differences by removing the coupling caps. I've got the parts and the plans, just waiting for time and a bit of motivation.
I'm also curious about measurements of others' mods because it's my theory that a lot of what people call better sound from mods is actually deviation from accuracy. If that's really the case, then I can see why people that do mods (for a living) don't want them measured. I mean, the original specs are really quite good; if your 3rd party (probably not cheap) mod doesn't noticably improve on them, or worse, significantly degrades them, you certainly wouldn't want to advertise that.
Last edited:
Absolutely.
And I am trying to do that, more for myself than anything else.
Getting those measurements to relate to what I hear is going to be more difficult... But it's sure worth trying.
Could be that these "improvements" may be detrimental to the overall performance, have you thought of that? It's not a given (for me at least) that whenever you do something to "tweak" a product its specs improve:
Ladies, ladies...
Please, behave.
Those few posts of someones appearance, college sports, personal achievements outside of audio e.t.c are simply tasteless, low balls and should have no place in this forum. I see absolutely no reason for this type of behavior. This is about audio, it should be relaxing and pleasure. If you are so uptight that you go into this kind of language and personal attack than you should ether need to relax or not participate in the forums.
Doug you might felt that Zen Mod's post was uncalled, for what I would agree that he might mixed you with someone else, but he certainly didn't give you reason for the language and attack you did.
Please, behave.
Those few posts of someones appearance, college sports, personal achievements outside of audio e.t.c are simply tasteless, low balls and should have no place in this forum. I see absolutely no reason for this type of behavior. This is about audio, it should be relaxing and pleasure. If you are so uptight that you go into this kind of language and personal attack than you should ether need to relax or not participate in the forums.
Doug you might felt that Zen Mod's post was uncalled, for what I would agree that he might mixed you with someone else, but he certainly didn't give you reason for the language and attack you did.
Oh yes - I have very much thought of it. Remember "Primum non nocere".
The only way the mods I've done hurt the sound, is a little less drive. I am using a passive output, after all. But the mods are not detrimental to the overall sonic performance. Quite the opposite. At least to my ears.