Behringer DCX2496

Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.
Jump to Latest
Coolin

Coolin

Member
Joined 2003
Quality...

Hello Spearmint,

there is an older thread on the DCX with pictures of the inside and the used components. The members here have spoken about improving parts like caps etc. I think this will surely helpout in the sound quality department if you can solder a little.

Also it will probably sound better after a few weeks of break ik. I recommend you feed it a signal and connect all the outputs to other equipment or short them with a 20k ohm resistor and let it all burn in for atleast a few days and nights. You can hear the improvement in soundquality if your equipment has the resolution to let you hear this effect.

Please let us know how you like the stock DCX in your setup the way it is now if it influences the sound (used flat) before using the crossovers. I mean putting it inbetween the source and amp you are using now with your pasive crossovers. And then compare again after the burn in period. I'm thinking of getting one too.

The only thing that bothers me is that when using conventional fiters (Butterworth etc.) there are phase shifts as well. There was a more exspensive brand that did it without the phase shifts but it was much more $. I would think it could be programmed easily in the digital domain.

Greetings, Coolin
 
K

Ken L

Member
Joined 2002
sfdoddsy said:
All these pro units can accept the signal, but they are set up for higher fixed input signals, ie from a mixing desk. To get the theoretical best signal to noise you should keep the input level as high as possible. This means turning your preamp up as high as you can which usually means attenuating the signal before your power amps.

Cheers

Steve
Click to expand...

Excellent post - pay attention _grin_

ramonramonet said:

Sorry to tell you that the news I´ve heard about DCX aren´t good.
Click to expand...

I owned a Berhringer DCX2496 and now own a BSS Omnidrive Compact Plus.

The Behringer is excellent value - The pro crossovers need to be used with low-gain amps or amps with input attenuators in order to reduce low-level noise. These units are designed for pro applications where levels are normally different than in domestic use. Also, input impedances must be correct. Searching the forum on DCX2496 will bring you a number of hits.

Planet 10 was (is?) opposed to the Behringer for reasons relating to their business practices - that should also come up in the search.

Use a digital crossover and you will be far ahead of the non-digital units -

Last but not least -

Steve Doddsy is a poster that has actually tried and made direct comparisons of some various digital crossovers. I saw somewhere that he had posted to the effect he was going to sell his Driverack 260 - and keep the DCX2496 due to the fact he was unable to hear any difference.

That is a very telling post - in that the Driverack 260 would likely be one of the best recommendtations for the next step up from a Behringer DCX2496.

The Omnidrive is cleaner and more natural sounding than the Behringer. I would expect it to be so at approximately ten times the cost. _grin_How much cleaner and more natural? Certainly not night and day. I'll just say that I got a super deal on used Omnidrive or I would have felt that the money would have been better spent on other parts of the system. Also, keep in mind that I am going for an "all out" system and _everything_ is passing through the crossover.

This is like a number of other things in audio - the law of diminishing returns comes into play, you start having to spend multiples of money for incremental gains.

If you are concerned about the Behringer you might want to try a Driverack PA - about 80 bucks more street price in the US - not sure what would be the case in OZ. A comparable unit that is used by some posters instead of the dcx2496

Regards

Ken L
 
EC8010

EC8010

Ex-Moderator
Joined 2003
I have a Behringer but haven't plumbed it in yet. I have (of course) had the lid off and looked inside. I then downloaded the data sheets for the ICs. The ADCs and DACs are pretty reasonable, but they need to be driven properly. An earlier poster mentioned this. The output op-amps might not be quite the best, but they aren't offensive. If you really wanted to get fussy, you could make up a complete new I/O board without input attenuators (changing input sensitivity to 500mV, I think) and add your analogue component of choice at the output. Since the I/O board is conected by an IDC connector, this wouldn't be difficult. Finally, you could just treat the thing as a bodge-box for quickly determining the optimum crossover frequency, slope, equalistion etc, before making an analogue equivalent. I have played with a BSS. Of course, you wouldn't be able to add the delays and phase compensation...
 
K

Ken L

Member
Joined 2002
Spearmint said:


Ken I also have a DEQ2496, I was going to feed the line level via this as this accepts consumer input levels and from this feed the DCX, not sure how it will go.
Click to expand...


I'm not technically oriented - so unable to comment with any certainty _big grin_

Off the top of my head, my guess is that you don't need both units - The DCX has EQ so you can EQ with the DCX2496, probably. You will get more transparency with less in the signal path, so I suggest trying it without the DEQ - the DCX is analog outs so if you use both units you're adding an additional ADC/DAC step to the chain.

Plug 'er up with the DCX and see how it sounds.

Inputs may not be as much of a problem as attenuating the outputs.

Regards

Ken L
 
S

Spearmint

Member
Joined 2004
Okay, got a call tonight my DCX is ready to collect...

Now I have just ordered a 6 channel passive unit as per Steve Dodd’s recommendation.

An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.


Now I am having trouble coming to terms with the input level, I have checked the out put levels of my gear and they are all listed as 1V, I think the DCX requires 10V, so how do I achieve this?

I am thinking as an interim method of sending the analogue out of the pre/pro to the analogue in of my DEQ which has a switch to accept the lower input levels. Program the digital out of the DEQ to use unprocessed analogue input channels as source, then connect to DCX via digital.

Will this work?
 
Ricren

Ricren

Member
Joined 2001
klangaudio.com
sounds Ok

Hi there,

I've been using the Behringer for several months now in a stereo tri-amp setup wuth Urei monitors and all I can say is that it really sounds ok to me. You can read the thread about the mod here:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=28305&highlight=

A few weeks ago a college brought an Omnidrive unit here and we compared the two units in a very non-scientifical way (just listening to material) and I concluded that the B. is an exellent value. I would not pay that much for "upgrade" to the Omni unit.

I can not offer any comments about the analog input stage, I'm using the digital AES input and the analog out with this setup.

cheers

Ric
 
SpeakerBob

SpeakerBob

Member
Joined 2002
Spearmint said:
Hey thanks for the excellent posts Ken & EC8010...

Ken I also have a DEQ2496, I was going to feed the line level via this as this accepts consumer input levels and from this feed the DCX, not sure how it will go.

Hopefully the DCX will be here Friday.
Click to expand...


This is the same as what I'm using - you can connect the deq to the dcx via aes/ebu digital - no extra a/d d/a conversions.


I use the dcx filters to get the basic setup (baffle step correction, slight eq of drivers etc ), and the deq to do the room stuff : bass eq, roll off the top end a bit etc....

Works ok for me !

I believe if you make a custom lead (shorting pin 3 to pin 1 ) on the input xlr then the unit will recognise an unbalanced input and compensate. This works for the xlr outs on the dcx - I'm using xlr to phono leads there. See page 19 of the deq manual.

At the mo I'm using a direct injection box, but will try the above way soon.

Cheers

Rob


edit - I guess the right way is to make sure that any peaks at your loudest listening level just fall short of the clip light on the deq. This means you're getting the best quality from the sampling, and the best signal to noise. I did this by using test tones on dvd, the 85dB ones for channel balancing. This is a -20dB signal, so should light the -24dB constantly, and bringing the vol. pot on my pre up 2 or 3 dB should light the -18 light. Then use your spl meter to set the real levels after the dcx...

I hope this made sense...:D
 
E

ergo

Member
Joined 2001
Got my DCX2496 also few days ago.

Did you guys have a serial cable included with the unit? Mine didn't. The manual suggest it should be included.

So now I have to make it but does anyone know which type of connection the cable should use. Is it a standart nullmodem type or something else ???

Regards,
Ergo
 
S

sfdoddsy

Member
Joined 2002
doddsy.net
I'd suggest not using a USB/serial adaptor, or at least being very careful. That's what stuffed me up.

As for the attenuator (for Spearmint) turn up your analog preamp as high as possible and set the attenuator to give clipping on the DEQ at your loudest level. The average output of a CD player may be 1V, but your preamp should get that up to +8 or so.


Steve
 
S

Spearmint

Member
Joined 2004
Thanks for the input Steve,

Also thanks Janneman, Ricren, & Rob for your inputs as well, I figured I'd wait until I got my unit tonight and play, so at least I know what everyone is talking about, and can put these great ideas into practice.

I will hook the unit up via my HTPC which has a serial port.

BTW Steve what version of firmware are you using 1.15 or 1.16?
 
E

ergo

Member
Joined 2001
The answer to my own question is that the Behringer expects a total 1:1 cable. Meaning that pin 2 in one D-sub is connected to pin 2 in the other one etc. Also it seems that it expects more than RX, TX and GND. With only three wires it didn't work, so for next step I connected all and voila :)

Regards,
Ergo

PS. Next up is some measurements, but this needs a bunch of XLR cables first.
 
E

ergo

Member
Joined 2001
Yes, I already have a couple of those. Actually exactly what is on the pictures. The quality is not convincing though, but I only plan to use them in testing phase. Later I will get rid of the XLR stuff and replace with good quality RCA-s along with a new analog stages.

XLR cable I want to buy as I have a soundcard that accepts also balanced signal. So for my own education I plan to measure THD etc. both ways.

Ergo
 
Coolin

Coolin

Member
Joined 2003
Harsh sound software version 1.16?

Spearmint said:
BTW Steve what version of firmware are you using 1.15 or 1.16? [/B]
Click to expand...


In another thread Petervv has noticed version 1.16 sounded Harsh !

Anyone else notice this?



>>>>>>>>
Guys,

My DCX came with software version 1.14, last week I downloaded and installed version 1.16. To my ears, this version sounds a lot worse! Highs are harsh, overall sound is compressed.

This version was introduced because users complained about not having enough processor power, could it be they did some dirty tricks to free processor power?

I downloaded and installed version 1.15, sound is back to normal, anyone else has this experience?

regards, Peter
>>>>>>

Coolin
 
Status
This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.
Top Bottom