Behringer crossover audiophile quality, bi/tri amping stereo speakers?

[cirrus18]

I want to replace the passive crossovers on my KEF Q55s with active ones, using the most inexpensive audiophile quality Behringer possible, i.e. I want to spend the least as possible but get quality sound. Don't we all?

Behringer have lots of different models, at various prices and as I don't know too much about them, I was hoping that those here who do would kindly help me with their recommendations.

I don't think Behringer supplies any software for ease of setting up the crossover for each individual driver. So how does one go about it? Perhaps there is a site somewhere dedicated to this subject. Also, Is there any free software available which would make this easier?

I have tried googling for this information but drawn a blank. Any help would be greatly appreciated.

[AndrewT]

look up the threads on dcx2496
You'll be disappointed with the performance as it comes from the factory.
You end up spending 2 to 3 times the purchase cost on add-ons/modifications to get what you need.
Then you have to start creating the crossover & EQs to make the Q55s sound nice. It becomes a long and relatively expensive job.

[Eva]

I'm tired of working with DCX2496 and other digital filters and al the tales about modifications and sound quality improvements are just myths. 100% placebo effect.

If the stock crossover is properly designed, you are going to gain nothing by going active.

If the stock crossover leaves room for improvement, you are unlikely to learn the methods to improve it within a reasonable amount of time (a few years maybe).

One of the faults of the DCX2496 (and of most digital filters) are the rudimentary phase shifters (absent in most other filters). A system can't be properly crossed over without enough programmable phase shifters per channel. To my knowledge, the only filters having smart phase shifters currently on the market are Xilica XD series but they are expensive. I'm currently enjoying a XD-4080 in place of my DCX2496, and the interface is much worse but it allows to get better performance from the same drivers.

[Pano]

Originally posted by Eva
[B]....tales about modifications and sound quality improvements are just myths. .../B]

Eva's subjective opinion, of course.

But thanks for pointing out the Xilica, that's a new one for me - will have to check it out. Digital filters can always be better, no argument there.

[ttan98]

Originally posted by AndrewT
look up the threads on dcx2496
You'll be disappointed with the performance as it comes from the factory.
You end up spending 2 to 3 times the purchase cost on add-ons/modifications to get what you need.
Then you have to start creating the crossover & EQs to make the Q55s sound nice. It becomes a long and relatively expensive job.

I am not sure you have played or owned a DCX to make such comments. I own one and played with the stock std version and I am quite please with it and what it can do. There are many here just read the forum/thread on DCX here.

For example, the stock std version can still give you good sound refer to Emerald Physics CS2 that comes with the std version. A lot rave reviews about these speakers.

The real adv. it that one can use it as a x-over device without actually using a measuring instruments to measure the freq., response the ear the measuring device. BTW I use the DCX with FR measuring device to get the response fairly flat.

[MJL21193]

Originally posted by AndrewT
look up the threads on dcx2496
You'll be disappointed with the performance as it comes from the factory.
You end up spending 2 to 3 times the purchase cost on add-ons/modifications to get what you need.

Hi Andrew,
Wow. You have one? I have and I must have been lucky since mine is more than just fine. Well worth the money, even if you leave it in stock condition.

Originally posted by Eva
I'm tired of working with DCX2496 and other digital filters and al the tales about modifications and sound quality improvements are just myths. 100% placebo effect.

[cirrus18]

Originally posted by ttan98



BTW I use the DCX with FR measuring device to get the response fairly flat.

Could you please explain in a little more detail what sort of equipment and programmes you are using to do this.

Looking at the answers here. it seems that the problems people are experiencing is setting up the crossover correctly for your actual drivers.

Surely, there is available, preferably for free, software and explanations to do this more scientifically than just using your ears.

I can see it is easy to set the DCXs crossover frequencies if you know all the details on one's own particular drivers. If you don't know this, which is so in my case, I do definitely need one which will analyse my drivers and give me the correct information.

Please someone, recommend me a PC programme, whatever, which will do what I am looking for.

[John Sheerin]

Speaker Workshop is a free one. Some people have problems setting it up. There is a manual for how to use it available for free online. There are many other programs as well - do a search on this forum.

[otto88]

Eva

Can you suggest something in between the DCX and the XD-4080 (2000 euros) . .

Thanks

[Rudolf]

Originally posted by cirrus18
I want to replace the passive crossovers on my KEF Q55s with active ones, using the most inexpensive audiophile quality Behringer possible

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?