There is a very important difference between the Minidsp and the DLCP. The Minidsp is a dsp with different plugins you can use to transform it to a digital xover. The Dlcp is specificily designed as a digital xover with the correct workflow: start reading at page 6
http://www.grimmaudio.com/whitepapers/speakers.pdf
I looked at the filtersettings for your speakers and they can be dialed in with no problem in the Dlcp. Only the CD corrections will give some problems because the DLCP has no Eq in the input channels ( why should they be there, it is a xover...) This correction should be integrated in the output channels, but there are some shelving filters in the crossover region.
To get the best out of the Dlcp ( and maybe a better result with the standard filtering) is to do a new measurement with the DLCP and correct everything according the workflow suggested by Bruno.
The biqauds in the Dlcp are preconfigured, just select what you want ( shelf, hpf, lpf, boost/cut). You have 15 biquads per output channel. You cant make a biquad with node lines.
If you make measurements and send them to me, I can make a correct design for it in Filterdesigner.
http://www.grimmaudio.com/whitepapers/speakers.pdf
I looked at the filtersettings for your speakers and they can be dialed in with no problem in the Dlcp. Only the CD corrections will give some problems because the DLCP has no Eq in the input channels ( why should they be there, it is a xover...) This correction should be integrated in the output channels, but there are some shelving filters in the crossover region.
To get the best out of the Dlcp ( and maybe a better result with the standard filtering) is to do a new measurement with the DLCP and correct everything according the workflow suggested by Bruno.
The biqauds in the Dlcp are preconfigured, just select what you want ( shelf, hpf, lpf, boost/cut). You have 15 biquads per output channel. You cant make a biquad with node lines.
If you make measurements and send them to me, I can make a correct design for it in Filterdesigner.
How is it a difference? Aren't they basically the same, IIR based DSP platforms with multi channel output except that the MiniDSP is a cheaper product where the DLCP for example has a much better analogue part.
yep. I worked with both and found the way to input the filtering and correction basically the same (once you look through the different user interfaces), with only minor differences (e.g input of linkwitz transform is easier for the hypex, >12dB x-over easier for the minidsp)
Thanks. As long as I have all I need to enter the CBT settings and some extra PEQ, I should be fine. And with 15 biquads per channels it should be plenty.
Not sure if there's anything to improve. I trust Don Keele. I would also have to do anechoic measurements, but I don't see what can be improved. When it comes tailoring the response to the room and my taste, that's another matter. I've done that with the minDSP and will do the same with DLCP. Or am I missing something?
Seems like I'll buy one.
As long as the same settings are used, why shouldn't they be the same?
I ran out of PEQ with the minDSP and basics settings, but using advanced biquad gave me enough.
The miniDSP have Q adjustments of course, but the below explain how to use it.
Last edited:
No, proportional and constant Q EQs will not give the same curves for the same Q and gain:
Operator Adjustable Equalizers: An Overview
I think the new version of the ACD tools will let you generate constant Q EQs biquads parameters that you will be able to use in the miniDSP advanced plugin, but the old version I tried also used proportional Qs
Operator Adjustable Equalizers: An Overview
I think the new version of the ACD tools will let you generate constant Q EQs biquads parameters that you will be able to use in the miniDSP advanced plugin, but the old version I tried also used proportional Qs
I have my system up and running ( B&G RD-50, JBL 2235 Ncore and DLCP).
THIS IS F.CKING BRILJANT>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Can't find anything wrong, all loudspeaker systems I have heard before had always a problem at a certain point. This has not. Exact soundstage, open, transparent, low is low, no colouration and so on.
And you need so little time to get a perfect result: measure, do the neccesary corrections and load the dsp. Can be done in a hour with a perfect result..........
The neat thing of the DLCP is in the measurement system and simulation, if you do the initial measurements correct, the end result is the same as what you see in the simulation. No hassle with measurement after measurement and all tweaking in between.
THIS IS F.CKING BRILJANT>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Can't find anything wrong, all loudspeaker systems I have heard before had always a problem at a certain point. This has not. Exact soundstage, open, transparent, low is low, no colouration and so on.
And you need so little time to get a perfect result: measure, do the neccesary corrections and load the dsp. Can be done in a hour with a perfect result..........
The neat thing of the DLCP is in the measurement system and simulation, if you do the initial measurements correct, the end result is the same as what you see in the simulation. No hassle with measurement after measurement and all tweaking in between.
No, this is not possible.
Unfortunately we're still very busy. I'll keep you informed by this thread.
Because of the SRC? Not possible on i2s->i2s?
Not that I care much, I am more then pleased with the audio performance of my DLCP, through aes/spdif, for starters it severely betters a lavry da-11 on musical engagement AND detail.
Hello Jan Willem,
busy with other projects? Or busy with working on the dlcp?
Will FIR be possible 100%?
It would be sad to buy the DLCP now - if the FIR Phase correction would not be implemented in the near future.
Heard something like this from many manufacturers before...
Best regards
Daniel
busy with other projects? Or busy with working on the dlcp?
Will FIR be possible 100%?
It would be sad to buy the DLCP now - if the FIR Phase correction would not be implemented in the near future.
Heard something like this from many manufacturers before...
Best regards
Daniel
There are no pinheaders available with I2S in or out, actually the DLCP uses the left-justified format.
Good to hear that
I'm working on the DLCP as we speak, but we're very busy with other projects too. I'm sorry but we can't guarantee FIR functionality in the near future.
Hello Jan Willem,
thank you
Cant you guarantee FIR functionality in the near future or will it never be realized?
Best regards
Daniel
thank you
Cant you guarantee FIR functionality in the near future or will it never be realized?
Best regards
Daniel
There are no pinheaders available with I2S in or out, actually the DLCP uses the left-justified format.
Good to hear that
I'm working on the DLCP as we speak, but we're very busy with other projects too. I'm sorry but we can't guarantee FIR functionality in the near future.