Behringer crossover audiophile quality, bi/tri amping stereo speakers? - Page 2 - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Loudspeakers > Multi-Way

Multi-Way Conventional loudspeakers with crossovers

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 28th December 2008, 12:37 AM   #11
DougL is offline DougL  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Wheaton IL.
Blog Entries: 30
Quote:
look up the threads on dcx2496.
You'll be disappointed with the performance as it comes from the factory.
I have been using a DCX2496 in my main system for 3 years. While I am sure its not perfect, I have been very happy with the results.

Quote:
If the stock crossover is properly designed, you are going to gain nothing by going active.
Active crossovers have several demonstrable advantages.
They also have drawbacks. If you want to do this, do not let others talk you out of it.

Quote:
Could you please explain in a little more detail what sort of equipment and programmes you are using to do this.
I was able to get a "fun" sound just buy listening in a weekend, with the help of my brother. It is much easier to use a measurement microphone and software. I use Soundeasy and the Behringer Microphone.

HTH

Doug
__________________
Scienta sine ars nihil est - Science without Art is nothing. (Implies the converse as well)
Mater tua criceta fuit, et pater tuo redoluit bacarum sambucus
  Reply With Quote
Old 28th December 2008, 01:46 PM   #12
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Default Re: Re: Behringer crossover audiophile quality, bi/tri amping stereo speakers?

Quote:
Originally posted by Rudolf

I have a hard time to understand what you really want. You have a passive crossover that you want to replace. Does that mean that the passive XOver does not work for you? Do you want to develop your own crossover? In that case you will need some deeper knowledge how filters work and probably some measuring equipment. And the Behringer stuff would simply substitute the usual assortment of coils and capacitors other people already have at hand.
Is this what you want to achieve?
Because..................................!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The Active Solution; http://sound.westhost.com/bi-amp.htm

Quote:
With an active crossover, the amplifier is connected directly to the driver, and the only thing between them is the loudspeaker cable. The amplifier presents the maximum damping factor at all times, regardless of frequency, and is not affected by the crossover network, since that is also active, and located before the power amp.

The loudspeaker driver now has the maximum control that the amplifier can provide, across the entire frequency range - not just the crossover network's pass band. The difference in damping is quite obvious, and although some (very well behaved) drivers will show little improvement, the vast majority will be much better controlled, and this will show in an impulse measurement. Not at all uncommonly, it will also show up on a swept sinewave frequency response measurement as well, with the amplitude of peaks and dips generally reduced (albeit marginally in most cases).

Well apart from the other advantages of an active system, this is perhaps one of the most compelling reasons to use an active system rather than passive. Not only is it possible to achieve the maximum damping, but if it is determined that a particular driver is best suited to some defined impedance, this can be provided by the amplifier, and will be stable across the frequency range. In some cases, just a series resistor will be sufficient, and even though there will be some power loss, if it makes the driver behave the way it should, then any small power loss is a small price to pay.

In short, there is simply no comparison between the two systems. A passive XO will always add (usually) undesirable impedance to that seen by the driver(s), the impedance is frequency dependent, and ranges from perhaps an ohm or so to almost infinite. The potential for uncontrolled cone movement, intermodulation distortion and loss of performance is so great that it is impossible to determine in advance, but it is all negated in one fell swoop by using a fully active system.
  Reply With Quote
Old 28th December 2008, 02:01 PM   #13
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Default Digital X-overs

Look at the Xilica XM 2040. Might be just what you need. You can see my posting under the for sale listings as i have some extras available.
  Reply With Quote
Old 28th December 2008, 02:33 PM   #14
HK26147 is offline HK26147  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Though not stated in your post; I'm assuming you are interested in the DCX2496 only.
I have a CX2310 and after 2 years is starting to have "issues" in the switches.
With products designed to meet a low price demand, cost cutting frequently manifests later as reliability problems.
The DCX2496 is widely used for live sound. Some users ( in that capacity ) have reported problems with the wiring interface, and chaffing against the chassis.

Not to flare up the active vs passive argument:
Other that offer my personal preference for active.
The flexibility of being able to tweak/fine tune crossover points and driver levels on demand is a huge plus.
I could not cost justify spending the money on quality caps and coils to assemble all the 24db 4th order passive filters necessary.
The cost and size of caps and coils rises precipitously with decreasing frequency; so caps and coils for subwoofer crossovers are big and expensive.
To my ears, adding the large inductors necessary in a passive woofer circuit always added "grit", which I attribute to the coil saturation.
Again my opinion, since many of the very expensive speaker systems sold utilize elaborate passive crossovers ( using quality crossover materials of course ).
  Reply With Quote
Old 28th December 2008, 03:03 PM   #15
Rudolf is offline Rudolf  Germany
diyAudio Member
 
Rudolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Germany
Default Re: Re: Re: Behringer crossover audiophile quality, bi/tri amping stereo speakers?

Quote:
Originally posted by cirrus18
Because..................................!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
OK ... understood.
If you want to improve the quality of your loudspeakers by multiamping, you probably need a completely new crossover architecture. Itīs less than optimal to simply follow the passive xover frequencies and filter slopes. At least you need to measure the acoustical filter characteristics (if you canīt find it fully documented somewhere). And you will need the know how to find and implement the optimal electronic crossover architecture. There is nothing you get with a digital Xover that will do this for you.
How about reading the books by David B. Weems, Vance Dickason or Joseph D'Appolito for a starter?

For measurement I would recommend ARTA.
__________________
www.dipolplus.de
  Reply With Quote
Old 28th December 2008, 03:24 PM   #16
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: May 2008
Default Re: Re: Re: Behringer crossover audiophile quality, bi/tri amping stereo speakers?

Quote:
Originally posted by cirrus18
Quote:
With an active crossover, the amplifier is connected directly to the driver, and the only thing between them is the loudspeaker cable. The amplifier presents the maximum damping factor at all times, regardless of frequency, and is not affected by the crossover network, since that is also active, and located before the power amp.

The loudspeaker driver now has the maximum control that the amplifier can provide, across the entire frequency range - not just the crossover network's pass band. The difference in damping is quite obvious, and although some (very well behaved) drivers will show little improvement, the vast majority will be much better controlled, and this will show in an impulse measurement. Not at all uncommonly, it will also show up on a swept sinewave frequency response measurement as well, with the amplitude of peaks and dips generally reduced (albeit marginally in most cases).

Well apart from the other advantages of an active system, this is perhaps one of the most compelling reasons to use an active system rather than passive. Not only is it possible to achieve the maximum damping, but if it is determined that a particular driver is best suited to some defined impedance, this can be provided by the amplifier, and will be stable across the frequency range. In some cases, just a series resistor will be sufficient, and even though there will be some power loss, if it makes the driver behave the way it should, then any small power loss is a small price to pay.

In short, there is simply no comparison between the two systems. A passive XO will always add (usually) undesirable impedance to that seen by the driver(s), the impedance is frequency dependent, and ranges from perhaps an ohm or so to almost infinite. The potential for uncontrolled cone movement, intermodulation distortion and loss of performance is so great that it is impossible to determine in advance, but it is all negated in one fell swoop by using a fully active system.
Reality is a bit more complex.

Damping factor influences the sonic performance less than rumor has it.

Uncontrolled cone movement as a result of a passive crossover seems a bit farstretched, if the design did not go totally wrong.

And a crossover design usually is more than just to determine a crossover frequency and a slope. A good passive design makes use of the interaction between speaker and crossover components. A good example is to choose the inductor for a woofer so that the total quality is raised and fs lowered just the right amount for best performance in a given cabinet. To compensate for that in an active filter you need something like a Linkwitz transform. In other words you may gain better amplifier-to-speaker-control at the cost of other qualities.
__________________
If you've always done it like that, then it's probably wrong. (Henry Ford)
  Reply With Quote
Old 28th December 2008, 04:34 PM   #17
HK26147 is offline HK26147  United States
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
There is the reality of bringing a speaker such as the KEF Q55 to market:
In the context of what can be fabricated, implemented and delivered to market at the desired MSRP of this product.
* I have not heard this speaker - the reviews online are mixed, it was largely discounted in price.
Simple market economics generally don't allow for implementation of anything other than the most basic of crossover for a product in this price range.
Can Zobel networks, baffle compensation, notch filters or other shaping circuits really be expected to be part of a product at this price point...
Reverse engineer the economics: Subtract profit from cost paid and reduce that figure to a much smaller percentage and that will represent the actual cost of materials.
Because quality caps and coils are not cheap, passive crossovers are often implemented according to the "laws of economics", usually simple and cheap, ( no Solens caps etc )

The best control over a woofer cone I have heard to date is implemented with a servo circuit tied to the amplifiers circuit, obviously not possible with passive elements.

* KEF says the Q55 utilizes a 2 1/2 way crossover design so conversion to active may not be clear cut.
  Reply With Quote
Old 29th December 2008, 02:00 AM   #18
diyAudio Member
 
Cloth Ears's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Melbourne, Australia
Quote:
Originally posted by cirrus18
Because..................................!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Without wanting to put words into Rod's mouth, I think you'll find he is talking about the design solution, not a replacement solution. While the Q55's are by no means perfect, they have had some effort put into the crossover design (mostly derivatice from previous 'Q' crossovers. The amount of effort to reproduce this would be considerable - whereas creating a new crossover solution from scratch is much easier with a Behringer CX2310 (for example).

If you were creating a new speaker from component drivers, I would recommend going with the active solution. Destroying a pair of working speakers I could not recommend. I would instead use your Q55's as a 'reference' and build pair of 'active' speakers and see if you can get an improvement. If you can't, then you still have music.
__________________
Jont.
"It is impossible to build a fool proof system; because fools are so ingenious."
  Reply With Quote
Old 29th December 2008, 09:56 AM   #19
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Default Re: Re: Behringer crossover audiophile quality, bi/tri amping stereo speakers?

Quote:
Originally posted by Rudolf




I tried several times to translate your webpage http://www.dipolplus.de/frameset.htm into English using Google translate but got the following message instead of a translation.

Object not found!

The requested URL was not found on this server. The link on the referring page seems to be wrong or outdated. Please inform the author of that page about the error.

If you think this is a server error, please contact the webmaster.
Error 404
www.dipolplus.de
Mon Dec 29 10:49:04 2008
Apache/2.2

Any ideas how to get it to work?
  Reply With Quote
Old 29th December 2008, 10:52 AM   #20
AndrewT is offline AndrewT  Scotland
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Scottish Borders
the web site is live.
It must be your translator that is going wrong.
__________________
regards Andrew T.
  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
Audiophile Quality 6x9s M50SNIPER Car Audio 14 21st January 2009 01:38 AM
Using 5x220w parasound 2205a for stereo bi-amping, good or better off? Frosti Solid State 0 16th June 2008 03:14 AM
Audiophile quality multi room? MMeche Digital Source 2 24th March 2008 01:20 AM
bi-amping (active crossover) keyser Multi-Way 16 28th January 2005 10:03 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 02:18 AM.


vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright Đ1999-2014 diyAudio

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2