behringer crossover
Amigos, I am building a line array with 12 ribbon tweeters and 12 5" eton midbasses per side. I have a post in loudspeakers. For starters I am crossing over at 2k hz at 24 db with a passive network because I still have a large vinyl collection as well as SACD's, DAD's, and redbooks. I plan to bi-wire for start and I am building an external crossover box.
I have two Pass 1.2 aleph amps that I built back in 2000 and a Pass Tharagard 75 stereo amp that I built back in 1993/4. They are balanced inputs and have volume controls. So in the future I can bi-amp. I already have a powered sub with a variable crossover. I run this combination in parallel from my borbely balanced tube line stage.
Now the question? Behringer offers two cross overs, the ultra and X. My question is does the ultra allow some type of by pass so I can run my vinyl analog around the dacs? Also, I hate to run my SACD analog output through a 25/96 AD to DA converter.
I don't foresee me building a digital amp anytime soon. Perhaps the less expensive analog crossover is better in my case. Please advise and thanks for your time. dave
Amigos, I am building a line array with 12 ribbon tweeters and 12 5" eton midbasses per side. I have a post in loudspeakers. For starters I am crossing over at 2k hz at 24 db with a passive network because I still have a large vinyl collection as well as SACD's, DAD's, and redbooks. I plan to bi-wire for start and I am building an external crossover box.
I have two Pass 1.2 aleph amps that I built back in 2000 and a Pass Tharagard 75 stereo amp that I built back in 1993/4. They are balanced inputs and have volume controls. So in the future I can bi-amp. I already have a powered sub with a variable crossover. I run this combination in parallel from my borbely balanced tube line stage.
Now the question? Behringer offers two cross overs, the ultra and X. My question is does the ultra allow some type of by pass so I can run my vinyl analog around the dacs? Also, I hate to run my SACD analog output through a 25/96 AD to DA converter.
I don't foresee me building a digital amp anytime soon. Perhaps the less expensive analog crossover is better in my case. Please advise and thanks for your time. dave
I have the problem too - but only recently after I had the unit in storage for a few months building a new rack.
I run every signal through a src first, When I selected th sample rate at 96 kHz on the src - crackling occured. So I run the unit at 88.2/24 bits - no problem there.
As I say - never had the problem before, and didn't change anything in the setup.
It does not happen when I send the analogue signal from the deq (upsampled to 96kHz via the src) to the dcx, so the problem could be in the dcx and not the deq.
The sampling rate of the dcx is as far as I know determined by the digital input signal. If fed analogue, it operates in 24/96 mode.
The deq sampling rate can be chosen, when an analogue signal is present in the I/O menu, I think its page 2.
I run every signal through a src first, When I selected th sample rate at 96 kHz on the src - crackling occured. So I run the unit at 88.2/24 bits - no problem there.
As I say - never had the problem before, and didn't change anything in the setup.
It does not happen when I send the analogue signal from the deq (upsampled to 96kHz via the src) to the dcx, so the problem could be in the dcx and not the deq.
The sampling rate of the dcx is as far as I know determined by the digital input signal. If fed analogue, it operates in 24/96 mode.
The deq sampling rate can be chosen, when an analogue signal is present in the I/O menu, I think its page 2.
DEQ Crackling
My DEQ doesn't care which settings I use from the SRC. It will perform 100% with any rate/ word length and shows on the I/O page 1 that it is locked to whatever rate is coming in except 32kHz. I do get a cutting in and out with crackling noise if it is disconnected from power and reboots with a different selection of the digital input which seems to default to XLR even though I had been using the optical. I/O page 2 button A selects S/PDIF or AES but again this doesn't seem to matter. Hopefully turning yours off and back on and double checking the I/O settings will clear up the noise. It could also be the noisey ribbon connector in the DEQ or DCX. Push the connectors off and on a few times to clean them up.
My DEQ doesn't care which settings I use from the SRC. It will perform 100% with any rate/ word length and shows on the I/O page 1 that it is locked to whatever rate is coming in except 32kHz. I do get a cutting in and out with crackling noise if it is disconnected from power and reboots with a different selection of the digital input which seems to default to XLR even though I had been using the optical. I/O page 2 button A selects S/PDIF or AES but again this doesn't seem to matter. Hopefully turning yours off and back on and double checking the I/O settings will clear up the noise. It could also be the noisey ribbon connector in the DEQ or DCX. Push the connectors off and on a few times to clean them up.
have to try this next. But ads I say - it is only when I try to have the whole digital chain in 96 kHz mode. Does not happen in 88.2 . It also does not occur with just voice. Could that be a overload problem - although all the indicators are still in the acceptable range - red only on very loud passages?
In a/b comparison between 44.1/96 kHz i noticed extended treble - without getting shrill, and the intruments seemed to be a bit more separated. Very small but still audible differences. In blind switching I could identify 9/10 times what sampling rate was switched on. Not a scientific blind test by any means, just to prove to myself that there were differences.
96kHz
I leave my SRC set to upsample to 24/96 as this does make an audible improvement through the DCX even though the DCX receiver chip is already set to upsample. I also have a DEQ in the middle of the chain which may benefit from the higher sampling rate but even without the DEQ in the chain the DCX sounds marginally better when receiving 96kHZ. Mybe there is an advantage for the digital interconnect or input circuitry which favors the higher rates.
I leave my SRC set to upsample to 24/96 as this does make an audible improvement through the DCX even though the DCX receiver chip is already set to upsample. I also have a DEQ in the middle of the chain which may benefit from the higher sampling rate but even without the DEQ in the chain the DCX sounds marginally better when receiving 96kHZ. Mybe there is an advantage for the digital interconnect or input circuitry which favors the higher rates.
janneman said:
Hello Jan,
I have ordered 3 kits and assembled one. The 2 others are for friends ( we saved some money by sharing the shipping cost).
Very nice stuff indeed. Circuitry is very well designed and the quality is excellent. It's very easy to swap buffer output stage opamps (TL072) as all of the ICs are using sockets.
This morning I and a friend will listen to the unit inserted in my audio system (some pictures here )
I'll let you know how bad or good is the K5600.
Although I'm not sure at all that the output opamps need to be upgraded I am wondering which reference would be suitable to replace the original TL072s ?
AD811 ? AD825 ? NE5532 ? Any suggestions ?
Regards
Thierry
Hello Thierry,
My unit is on its way. (Actually, it was already in Brussels, but some moron made a mistake and sent it back to ... Perth, Australia!.I hope this time it makes it to me
).
I'll be interested to exchange info. One thing I plan is to change the software so that I can set the volume for each pair differently for use with the Behringer.
Jan
My unit is on its way. (Actually, it was already in Brussels, but some moron made a mistake and sent it back to ... Perth, Australia!.I hope this time it makes it to me
).I'll be interested to exchange info. One thing I plan is to change the software so that I can set the volume for each pair differently for use with the Behringer.
Jan
No problem Jan, my friend shall pop in this afternoon, I'll let you know conclusions. I haven't had a chance to listen to the unit yet because I completed assembly late in the night and I could only check the various testpoints voltages after powering on the unit. Everything is spot on
I'm using a cheap Lifetec programmable remote control bought from Aldi, real good stuff for 10€.
It has all the bells and whistles and of course allows you to turn the volume UP/DOWN and MUTE the inputs.
Funnily enough I discovered that using the CHANNEL buttons of the remote makes the volume control run twice faster than using the regular VOLUME buttons. Nice feature, something between VOL and MUTE actually. Let's call that new function FAST VOL
I'm using a cheap Lifetec programmable remote control bought from Aldi, real good stuff for 10€.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
It has all the bells and whistles and of course allows you to turn the volume UP/DOWN and MUTE the inputs.
Funnily enough I discovered that using the CHANNEL buttons of the remote makes the volume control run twice faster than using the regular VOLUME buttons. Nice feature, something between VOL and MUTE actually. Let's call that new function FAST VOL
TL072 replacement
The TL072 are duals so you could try the AD812, OPA2134 and OPA2604 but my favorite based on sound, range of applications and durability is the LT1361. You may also want to try the even faster LT1364 but but I find only slight sonic differences when compared to 1361 and the 1361 will be theoreticaly easier on the high speed stiffness of the power supply bypassing although I have never I have never had any problems with the 1364. The AD will probably give you problems. The LT chips will be a big step up from the 072 which are now clearly outclassed by any of the more modern opamps.
The TL072 are duals so you could try the AD812, OPA2134 and OPA2604 but my favorite based on sound, range of applications and durability is the LT1361. You may also want to try the even faster LT1364 but but I find only slight sonic differences when compared to 1361 and the 1361 will be theoreticaly easier on the high speed stiffness of the power supply bypassing although I have never I have never had any problems with the 1364. The AD will probably give you problems. The LT chips will be a big step up from the 072 which are now clearly outclassed by any of the more modern opamps.
Re: TL072 replacement
Please note that the article specifically specifies TL072's as they give the least (almost inaudible) clicking noise, which is a usual problem in these applications.
So changing an opamp could have unpleasant surprises. It would probably be wise to read the article first to know better what you are doing. BTW, although the TL072 is a dual, only one half is used because of ther easons above.
Jan Didden
sendler said:
Please note that the article specifically specifies TL072's as they give the least (almost inaudible) clicking noise, which is a usual problem in these applications.
So changing an opamp could have unpleasant surprises. It would probably be wise to read the article first to know better what you are doing. BTW, although the TL072 is a dual, only one half is used because of ther easons above.
Jan Didden
Just noticed this thread has a lot of DIYers. So, here's my question. I've looked at the specs for the Behringer x-overs and several other brands. Most seem to have built-in D/A without the ability to pass a digital output. The only one I know of is the very expensive DEQX crossover, which can have a digital out added as an option.
The idea is that it would be nice to use a separate D/A converter for the different channels, after they've been digitally filtered. For example, the Lavry Blue with 2 or 3 different channels could be used to do the D/A for a 2- or 3-way system. The advantage is that the D/A in the Lavry is much higher quality than the onboard Behringer D/A. I also thought about using PC cards, but then I would have to write a bunch of software. Anyway, if the DIY community here has a cheaper solution, I'd love to hear about it.
The idea is that it would be nice to use a separate D/A converter for the different channels, after they've been digitally filtered. For example, the Lavry Blue with 2 or 3 different channels could be used to do the D/A for a 2- or 3-way system. The advantage is that the D/A in the Lavry is much higher quality than the onboard Behringer D/A. I also thought about using PC cards, but then I would have to write a bunch of software. Anyway, if the DIY community here has a cheaper solution, I'd love to hear about it.
janneman said:
Hello Jan
As promised, I'm back with some info : the K5600 is a fairly nice 6 ch. volume control. It doesn't eat details nor dynamics. Using a remote is a real pleasure (we belong to the lazy civilization don't we). My friend brought it back home and will keep it - he saved the hassle of building the kit
- and says that this device is a much better solution than the passive attenuator he was using using.One thing bothers us though : there is a high pitched hum noise at intermediate volume settings
Noise completely disapears at full throttle or when muting is on. What could it be ? Defective cap in the power supply ? Bad decoupling somewhere ?
Thierry
Hi
As mentioned before I have a K5600 SC 6 channel. In the assembly notes it has details of any earth problems that
may arise.It can be seen in Figure 13 of Part2
of the assembly guide.That's page 76 of April 2002
Silicon Chip magazine. Referred to as "Earth loop
breaks" on the main signal board. The Unit price here is back at
AUD$199 again but it not a bad deal with the case etc.
Have seen suitable remotes here in OZ for AUD$10.00
Must get round to finishing my unit.-)
Hope this helps if the caps check out OK.
Maybe in the future we could all look at upgrading the
signal board with better ICs all round , The
chip code is easily availbale for mods and maybe other codes
besides Phillips might be developed. It looks good
on the outside with other chips or even 6 Valve buffers
something special might result ! ! ! Why not XLR in and
Rca and XLR out ?
regards
AnthonyPT
As mentioned before I have a K5600 SC 6 channel. In the assembly notes it has details of any earth problems that
may arise.It can be seen in Figure 13 of Part2
of the assembly guide.That's page 76 of April 2002
Silicon Chip magazine. Referred to as "Earth loop
breaks" on the main signal board. The Unit price here is back at
AUD$199 again but it not a bad deal with the case etc.
Have seen suitable remotes here in OZ for AUD$10.00
Must get round to finishing my unit.
-)Hope this helps if the caps check out OK.
Maybe in the future we could all look at upgrading the
signal board with better ICs all round , The
chip code is easily availbale for mods and maybe other codes
besides Phillips might be developed. It looks good
on the outside with other chips or even 6 Valve buffers
something special might result ! ! ! Why not XLR in and
Rca and XLR out ?
regards
AnthonyPT
Hi AnthonyPT
Thanks for the info.
I have seen that diagram and I'll break the ground plane trace, that's an easy one.
Even with the shipping cost to France that K5600 is a killer (actually I bought three of them). Is it available in other countries than Oz ?
Thierry
Edited
Wouldn'it be wise to start a K5600 thread ?
Thanks for the info.
I have seen that diagram and I'll break the ground plane trace, that's an easy one.
Even with the shipping cost to France that K5600 is a killer (actually I bought three of them). Is it available in other countries than Oz ?
Thierry
Edited
Wouldn'it be wise to start a K5600 thread ?
This is a small teaser of my doings the last two weeks...
Here you can see the new analog stage and the 6 channel ALPS volume pot in righ lower corner.
Here is a better view on the analog stage itself
I hope I can finalize to put all the measurement I did in a presentable form and post on my web site today.
Ergo
Here you can see the new analog stage and the 6 channel ALPS volume pot in righ lower corner.
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
Here is a better view on the analog stage itself
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
I hope I can finalize to put all the measurement I did in a presentable form and post on my web site today.
Ergo