Behringer Ultracurve review - Page 2 - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Source & Line > Digital Line Level

Digital Line Level DACs, Digital Crossovers, Equalizers, etc.

Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you.

Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 8th February 2003, 04:16 PM   #11
Previously: Kuei Yang Wang
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Hi,

Quote:
Originally posted by Duck-Twacy

One thing I dont understand. Mr Wang are you the same person as mr Thorsten??
Of sorts. Thorsten is my "NICE" Alter Ego. I'm the evil twin....



EVIL LAUGH

Quote:
Originally posted by Duck-Twacy
Also interresting speakers (Tannoy I believe). Did you make those yourself?
These Speakers where build nearly 30 Years ago by a friend of mine, based on the plans of Tannoy's Corner York, but in 1 Inch "Carpenter plate" (two layers of plywood sandwiching a solid wood core. My Friend sadly passed out of this plane of existence into the next, the speakers ended up with me.

Quote:
Originally posted by jean-paul


Quite contary to my own experiences with clock modules ( and I use them a lot ). Groundloop issues are a risk but if you know what you're doing the results in cd players can be very big.
I agree. All I remarked was that when fitting a comercial clock module to the EQ I did not notice any significant improvement.


Quote:
Originally posted by jean-paul

Feeding the clock with a separate power supply and grounding it only at the point in the player where the crystal's ground was gives the best results.
Plus RF decoupling with ferrite beads and a metal case for the module are some of the ingredients to success.
Yes, however the merchants of replacement clocks rarely make sure that such a length is adhered to. If you have a fully seperated, low noise, low leakage noise supply for the clock even the most CMOS Inverter circuit is very good. Assuming Behring resolved the grounding issues it may be surmised that their C-Mos Inverter Oscillator works well. Well enough anyway.

Quote:
Originally posted by jean-paul

What module did you use ? How did you find jitter became worse ?
I have over time tried most of the Modules in the market. The one applied in the Behringer was a review item - I felt it was not sufficiently good (also in a CDP) to warrant a review, so I will not comment on the identity of the module.

I have found several of the earlier tricord clock modules to make CD-Players worse (sonically and measured Jitter - measurment via HP FFT Analyser), also some others that where arguably all fed from the internal supplies.

I think my point here was that "replace the clock" is not as such good advise taht will result in an immediate magic upgrade. In fact, unless great care is taken in implementation the results may make a good unit worse....

Sayonara
  Reply With Quote
Old 8th February 2003, 05:24 PM   #12
diyAudio Moderator Emeritus
 
jean-paul's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Germany
Quote:
I think my point here was that "replace the clock" is not as such good advise taht will result in an immediate magic upgrade. In fact, unless great care is taken in implementation the results may make a good unit worse....
OK, I know my advices are not the best. But my point of view is always to take great care or just leave it like it is. I don't assume that simply stirring around in the unit is what most of the DIY community would do with such a delicate piece of equipment...

There is no way an immediate magic upgrade can be done since the complexity of the unit demands serious thinking and careful implementation. Modification of this baby is of another league than building a Gainclone don't you agree ?
__________________
It's only audio. Official member of the Norske Brillegeit Gang.
  Reply With Quote
Old 8th February 2003, 07:58 PM   #13
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: London UK
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Kuei Yang Wang

As I never had a TACT in my system I could not say if a Behringer Ultracurve 8024 modified as I suggest will equal the sonics of the TACT. Nor has the UC quite the same correction ability as the TACT has. On occasions where I heard the TACT in other systems I did however that if the UC is used correctly and with sense the results in correcting room/speaker deficiencies where not that different and both TACT and Behringer tend to bring huge improvements.

-------------------------------------------------

Whatever you do to a 8024 you cannot match a Tact or Accuphase. The 32 point is too few for room eq. The Accuphase 64 point makes a hell of a difference. The Tact is, of course, even finer still.

The 8024 is also limited by its internal dc power supply. Modding is not easy without a circuit diagram which is at least not availble to me. The unit is cheap and cheerful and works ok, but not earth shattering even with the many mods.
  Reply With Quote
Old 9th February 2003, 04:26 AM   #14
haldor is offline haldor  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Columbus, Ohio
Quote:
Originally posted by jean-paul
This was my plan only Behringer doesn't give or sell manuals because of Intellectual Property.
Hi Jean-Paul. I agree on the idea about improving the clock, that is likely to make an audible improvement. I'll bet those schematics are available at your local music store that sells PA gear. In the USA I'd check Guitar Center's repair shop.

The comment about Behringer wanting to protect their IP really makes me smile. I know a number of people who are very down on Behringer because they have a long history of swiping designs from other companies (right down to the PCB layout) and then selling it as their own. Mackie won a copyrite infringment case against Behringer for a mixer they copied from Mackie. As I recall the key evidence was the text etched into the Behringer PCB matched the text on the Mackie's board exactly. Plus Behringer must have been in a rush to bring it to market, because the initial production was shipped with photocopies of Mackie manuals with the Mackie logo blacked out. Pretty cheesy ethics, but I guess not having to pay for R&D is one way to lower prices.

Behringer definitely beats everyone when it comes to bang for the buck, especially their analog compressors (the Composer Pro is pretty well regarded as at least 'B' level gear in the sound biz).

Behringers DSP based gear has not been as well regarded though. I understand that the latest UltraCurve firmware has been improved from earlier versions. I have even seen references to touring acts using the 8024 for monitor duty, so it must be improving. Monitor eq is a very demanding application in sound reinforcement.

I had some hands-on experiance with an 8024 about 2 years ago and wasn't very impressed with the effectiveness of the auto-tune function. Also in my opinion the menues where unnecessarily confusing and the sound quality was not great. That is one of the beauties of digital gear though in that it is possible to totally renew the audio performance with a firmware upgrade.

Behringer just released the DCX2496, a 3 in, 6 out DSP speaker processor that gives you active crossovers, time alignment delays, eq and limiting for around $440 US list. Street price will probably be around $300 US which is a very inexpensive for that kind of functionality.

Based on features and exterior apperance, it looks like the DCX2496 is a knock off of the BSS Omnidrive. This could be a very attractive offering if it works as well as it looks on paper since the model it copies sells for three times as much.

Here is a link to the DCX2496 if you are interested.

http://www.behringer.com/02_products...x2496&lang=eng

Phil
  Reply With Quote
Old 9th February 2003, 10:44 AM   #15
Previously: Kuei Yang Wang
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Hi,

Quote:

Whatever you do to a 8024 you cannot match a Tact or Accuphase. The 32 point is too few for room eq. The Accuphase 64 point makes a hell of a difference. The Tact is, of course, even finer still.
Well, the Behringer has tree further parametric EQ's per channel, which when used, as I pointed out, intelligently can go a long way to bridge the gap. During my pro-audio I had much time to learn using EQ's and just having "more points" will not neccesarily be "better".

Quote:

The 8024 is also limited by its internal dc power supply.
Agreed. I had the intention to fit something better yet found withy my UC as it is now it "good enough" for me to stop screwing around with it.

Quote:

Modding is not easy without a circuit diagram
Well, I generally recommend to people modding gear to have service manuals available. This is not so much because I feel it is esential (I do quite well without) but because many of those wanting do mods lack experience.

Quote:

The unit is cheap and cheerful and works ok, but not earth shattering even with the many mods.
I can only repeat that after hearing the "with/without" Test with Tact (several times) Accuphase (once) and often at home with various speakers the fundamental changes I noted where the same for any of the named units. As said, i have not had the respective units in my system for an extensive test and thus cannot draw direct comparisons, but a well modded Behringer UC8024 used "intelligentley" (with enough level) is transparent enough and if used sensibly (Target curves, Use of parametric EQ's, sensible EQ curve smoothing) can very well lead to "earth shattering" improvements. If you ever find yourself in London I will be happy to illustrate my point.

Sayonara
  Reply With Quote
Old 9th February 2003, 11:52 AM   #16
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: London UK
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Kuei Yang Wang
[B]Hi,



Well, the Behringer has tree further parametric EQ's per channel, which when used, as I pointed out, intelligently can go a long way to bridge the gap. During my pro-audio I had much time to learn using EQ's and just having "more points" will not neccesarily be "better".
---------------------------------------------------------
The whole point of room equalisation using digital techniques is that you fine tune after getting rid of resonances and system non linearities. You can tweak an analoguec 32 point system and get good sound. If one goes for the Tact and Accuphase, one is going for high end in the rest of the system. However you tweak, the 8024 is out of it's league.

What you hear when comapring the systems depend on how good the rest of the gear is.







I
  Reply With Quote
Old 9th February 2003, 12:53 PM   #17
Previously: Kuei Yang Wang
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Hi,

Quote:

However you tweak, the 8024 is out of it's league.
It would then be my understanding that you have either:

A) Compared a fully modied (at least to the same level as my unit) Ultracurve, operated with the correct levels analogue (or digital via S/P-DIF or AES/EBU) to the Accuphase and TACT while making maximum intelligent use of the capabilities of the Ultracurve and found the correction capability of the TACT and Accuphase subjectively "leagues" better.

OR

B) You have a fundamental theory and understanding of acoustics that would suggest that an infinite resolution correction is either desirable or beneficial, over a fairly coarsegrained correction of main aberations.

I would argue that in the ned the wavelength are so small at higher freqiencies that an overly "detailed" correction will tend to be wrong in more positions than it is right and that even the UC has TOO MUCH resolution at higher frequencies to allow a fully "automatic" correction without loosing some coherence. At lower frequencies if you make use of the parametrics in the UC you have a much more powerful correction capbility than the Accuphase, though not quiet as much as TACT.

My experience has been that Accuphase, TACT and Behringer (and I would argue by implication opther digital EQ's out of the Pro Audio sector) seem equally good in taming the Low end that that in all cases the imaging is much firmed up (especially the center image) with usually a more even midrange tonality.

Demos where done by TACT's themseles with their usual gear and by the UK Accuphase Distributor in a fairly esotheric system including Nagra, dCS, Accuphase and Verity Audio Speakers.

While the gear used by TACT may be criticied for not being High Endy enough, no such accusations apply to the R. T. Demo. Still, the general "signature" I noted from applying room specific compensation of frequency response was the same. In fact I also noted this with the (now discontinued) german digital active Speakers from T+A which also included digital correction on board.

This should not discourage anyone from spending the kind of money Accuphase and/or TACT are asking, yte I would recon that many of the rest of us will do fine with any one of the currently available digital EQ's fromn the Pro-Audio sector where the very different economy of scales provide us with the same sort of technology, chipsets et all as the "HIgh End" stuff, while playing a fraction of the price.

Each to their own.

Sayonara
  Reply With Quote
Old 9th February 2003, 03:54 PM   #18
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Holland, The Hague
Anyway, most of use will never want to spent the amount of money the Accuphase ($20000 I believe) of Tact ($15000 I believe) is costing, so even if a modded Behringes is only around 90% of the quality of the Acc/Tact, it is still a great deal (for around $300, probably around $600 with some mods).

I only want to use to tame some bassbooms in the 40-150 Hz range due to room influences. I wouldnt want to spend $20000 on that. I would rather buy another house.

I understood that Tact does now also has an "cheaper" digital amp with roomcorrection function, something around $6000. That is more reasonable.
__________________
Is that all there is?
  Reply With Quote
Old 9th February 2003, 04:46 PM   #19
sam9 is offline sam9  United States
diyAudio Member
 
sam9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Left Coast
In either case the unit (Behringer or TACT) can only optimize the location where where you put the calibration mic. A few feet away in the same room the results may be terrible. In practice with the Behringer, I find it is not as bad as that (in my room), but in principle it could be. Paying <$300 to get a single optimised listening position is reasonable to me. Multikilo bucks would not be reasonable unless I carried that kind of cash around in my pocket.

The situation, could be improved by applying acoustic treatment of some kind first. However, I've read that with TACT you are supossed to remove it-which makes no sense to me at all.
  Reply With Quote
Old 10th February 2003, 04:06 PM   #20
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: US
The UC is in slave mode when the digital input is active, means the timigg is generated with the 8412 and the internal clock is not used.
In analog mode the AD/DA converter is clocked with the same clock source and the inherent delay is very low, so the higher frequency above 1kHz component of the clock jitter is negated.
  Reply With Quote

Reply


Hide this!Advertise here!
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Behringer DEQ24/94 UltraCurve Pro $200 Zero Cool Swap Meet 1 19th March 2007 11:09 PM
FS: Behringer DEQ2496 UltraCurve Pro Rescue Toaster Swap Meet 3 4th February 2006 01:38 AM
Behringer Ultracurve DEQ2496 - ways to use it? paulspencer Multi-Way 28 25th December 2004 11:56 AM
For Sale: Behringer Ultracurve w/digital I/O Bill F. Swap Meet 13 9th February 2004 03:23 PM
Behringer UltraCurve Pro DEQ 24/96 Intelonetwo Swap Meet 5 7th October 2003 06:21 AM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 12:58 AM.


vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 1999-2014 diyAudio

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2