| Robert GS |
Hello my name is Robert, owner of Ground Sound. This introduction is made mainly to satisfy curiosity about the reason of the company and who I am. The company was founded in the mid 80’s. It all started out at the pro-stage (amps, speakers and other gear). From ’90-‘95 I had the distribution of the Lab.Gruppen products, in Denmark. Then again from ‘99 until recently I have had contact with Lab.Gruppen as a subcontractor. In these years I have build thousands of amps and parts of amps and learned a great deal about amp design.
The interest of DIY started in the early ‘80s. Over the years, I’ve built speakers, amps, active analogue crossovers and a little bit of lighting equipment. One of the things that have had my interest was pro subwoofer horn and I think that I’ve achieved some pretty good designs. Early on, the HiFi part of DIY was concentrated on amplifier design and somewhat later active crossovers. I will highlight two experiences that I’ve had over the years:
The first was when I build a Lab clone to a friend of mine. He owned a pair of Martin Logan CLS and at the time he had had quite a few amps to drive them. None of them really doing the job and the last one had blown up. He was ready to experiment with my stuff. At first we started with a Lab.Gruppen LAB1000 with fans. This worked and the sound was quite okay, but the fans did mess up even though quite low noisy. So the next step was taken with a passive cooled amp clone with rather small PSU in terms of capacitors value to limit the budget. It worked fine, but I persuaded him to invest heavily in capacitors and sound got to another dimension in terms of clarity, bass control, frequency balance and room positioning. After that, we did a lot of tests concerning Class AB and Class A to see if something could be gained – nothing at all. This has led me to conclude that Class A amps often sound good because they don’t work unless the PSU is heavy in capacitors and that is their gain. My advice of amps: Use a sensible engineered amplifier and a low ESR PSU.
By the way, he called them the shoeboxes as the boxes he made looked like that.
The other experience was my introduction to digital crossover filters. This was around ’92, I think. Lab.Gruppen was developing the later DSP24. The demonstration was A/B on a pair of HiFi speakers driven by a small NAD amp. I simply just didn’t believe what I heard. Amazing. That was the next item for me. The software math was based on an advanced kind of FIR filters demanding less MIPS. When the DSP24 went into production, I bought a pair to the pro stage activities. But I was sorry, because it was damn difficult to make a satisfactory setup with the clumsy software. The hardware was also rather complex with software controlled multi settings of output level. A too efficient input clip limiter making levels of +20dB sounding okay just with less dynamics and compressing the sound risking burned drivers to the inexperienced sound engineer. The DSP24 was also rather noisy when used with high efficiency pro drivers. The DSP24 flopped totally also being a 2 input and only 4 output device and no real display.
Anyway, I was hooked on the digital crossover filter idea. The resent years, my interest has evolved into home cinema. As I wasn’t satisfied using active analogue crossovers, not to mention passive crossovers, I began searching for a DIY digital crossover, finding absolutely none. Destiny suddenly gave me the opportunity to make the DCN23 and the rather convincing XOverWizard software. The amplifiers are developed and adapted to the DCN23 from the clone. I want to emphasize the unique profile of the amplifiers, it is much better at heat transferring than normal profiles, more stable than direct mount of power transistors.
Ground Sound’s products might not be as DIY as many of you people would want. As the DCN23 only could be constructed with SMT which is very difficult to hand solder, I chose to make all products with as much SMT devices as possible. This also makes the modules smaller in size.
I know this could be seen as advertising and I suppose it is a kind of. I have considered posting some replies on the threads that involve Ground Sound for some time, but as it will be time consuming, I’ve made this introduction and I hope you all will be able to understand that I seldom will post replies/comments. Finally, I can recommend the technical pages at Lab.Gruppen and the work of the founder Kenneth Anderson, especially the superior class TD incorporated in the first model LAB2000 from 1990, the still superior C-series models and soon coming fP+ models with 12kW+ specs. Sadly he has left the company. Last comment: I will not disclose any schematics of any Ground Sound products.
Thank you for your time reading this introduction, I hope you will be inspired to DIY some more. |
|
|
| planet10 |
Welcome to the forum Robert. It is always nice to have people like yourself participating 1st hand in the forum.
Any chance we'll see the XO software running on OS X natively (easy enuff now to run it under Windows on the Mac, but Windows is such a kludge)
dave |
|
|
| Robert GS |
Hi guys,
and Planet10 thank you for replying. It's not very likely that the XOverWizard run on other than Windows, as time is limited. But now it's ready for download at the link on the DCN23 page. Do have a look and try it out, but I'm sure you are missing the best part unless you buy the hardware - sorry ;)
By the way you can se what Stefan Woessner did with his DCN Kit at Customer Galleries.. :) |
|
|
| planet10 |
| quote: | Originally posted by Robert GS
Do have a look and try it out, but I'm sure you are missing the best part unless you buy the hardware - sorry ;) |
Won't be able to do that until i get an Intel Mac, but i have it bookmarked.
Thanx for the link.
dave |
|
|
| Kay |
Hello Robert,
I see you program and this looks good for me,
but I don't need the DCN23.
It's possible to get the SW and the controller (Atmel?),
so I can make my own hardware?
At this moment I need only one audio channel for my
planned DBA (Daul Bass Array).
I need a delay, three parametric EQs and may be a limiter.
For AD/DA I like to use the TLC320ad77, it's enough for
my game. |
|
|
| Robert GS |
Hi KAY.
I think exactly - that you need the DCN23 and all of its possibilities.
It's right for the job. Why do you want to waste a lot of energy to get a less performing crossover/eq/room correction device?
I think that all loudspeaker systems would benefit of an active setup with a digital crossover.
We are currently working on a similarly product as the DCN23.
:)
The new product will be named DCN26DAV. The DCN26DAV will have stereo input - automatically choosing between 1 AES3 digital input, 2 coaxial digital inputs and 1 analogue input.
3-way stereo/6-way mono processing and a digital controlled master volume at the output – optional hardwired bypass of the volume – if you want to use your own volume control. The board also includes PSU and relay circuitry.
There are also plans of a very nice chassis for the DCN26DAV.:cool:
Robert |
|
|
| Kay |
Hi Robert,
I understand your arguments,
but if I need a complete crossover, than I buy a
Behringer DCX.
I like to have only a "intelligent Subwoofer" for my
home theater. May be, for my DBA, I need two Sub-channels,
but not at the same location. So a Stereo-PCB is not the
best idea.
O.K.,
I'm thinking about wireless digital audio transmission
too (Nordic Semiconductor), but in this case, I need
delays for all 7.1 channels. |
|
|
| Robert GS |
Hi KAY.
I am sorry - then I can't help you. Have a nice hunt for the right solution.:cool: |
|
|
| peranders |
Hej, Robert, välkommen till världens bästa DIY audio forum. Anyone who not understood this :)
I am also the biggest SMD fan here, quite exotic in DIY circles. |
|
|
| djQUAN |
| quote: | Originally posted by peranders
Hej, Robert, välkommen till världens bästa DIY audio forum. Anyone who not understood this :)
I am also the biggest SMD fan here, quite exotic in DIY circles. |
I don't. :D
I also like building SMD stuff. :) |
|
|
| Robert GS |
| quote: | | Hej, Robert, välkommen till världens bästa DIY audio forum. Anyone who not understood this |
Thank you - understood it very well as I'm pretty good at swedish - most at speaking it.:cool:
Robert |
|
|
| ds23man |
Hello Robert,
How is the progress on the new X-over?
Greetings Gerhard |
|
|
| Robert GS |
Hey Gerhard,
Well, we are working on the new x-over - right now we redesigning some of the schematics incorporating a new processor. This will give 2 additional output channels, more processing power and more flexibility.:D
Unfortunately this takes some extra time - but the x-over will be much better.:)
In addition we have been in the metal shop and soon we will present some nice external active amp chassis's housing 3 amp modules, power supply and DCN23. :smash:
Robert |
|
|
| ds23man |
That sounds nice, but when is soon??
Greetings Gerhard |
|
|
| Robert GS |
| quote: | | That sounds nice, but when is soon?? |
The external chassis's should be presented within 10 days.
The new x-over proto type board will hopefully work in a month.
I will give a hint - right here - stay tuned.
Robert :cool: |
|
|
| Robert GS |
Hey all.
The new digital crossover/amplifier chassis are ready. I think they look rather good - what do you think? :rolleyes:
Have a look at the home page.
Regrads Robert |
|
|
| peranders |
Nice looking boxes, 34 kg :eek:
I checked the distortion figures. I'll notice that the distortion is constant and not below the noise. Why is that? Low feedback and low open-loop gain? |
|
|
| Robert GS |
Hey Per-Anders.
The amplifiers are in fact measured with the signal going through the hole system also the digital crossover DCN23. At the time it was the easiest way for me and Michael Madsen at High Fidelity. So you see the hole truth and then again not quiet. I think that the possibilities of the system are much more important than the measurements, but now you have them.
Thanks for the approval of design. ;)
Robert |
|
|
| fgroen |
Just had contect with you, Robert. Just have to put my foot in this thread so I get notification for updates.
Interesting stuff indeed. I think you go in the right direction: progress based on technology instead of tradition. |
|
|
| peranders |
| Robert, it would be interesting to see what the distortion would have been for the amp alone. :nod: |
|
|
| Robert GS |
Per-Anders:
It might be possible - as High Fidelity will test Chassis 600 and/or Chassis 1500 in very near future - that they will test the amplifier modules alone.
fgroen:
Thank you for the supporting words.:yes: |
|
|
| 4real |
It has been a long while now...
.. So what's up with the DCN28DAV? Is it a myth, or will it be in production any time soon? |
|
|
| Robert GS |
4real - You are quiet right – ”a long while” is a bit of an understatement, but it isn’t a myth though. :D
Facts are that the hardware is working as proto type module, but haven’t been tested with audio in normal crossover operation mode – only in “direct through mode” and I haven’t evaluated this for sound quality. :rolleyes:
I really hope for at presentation on the homepage in January, but…no promise.
I could put a picture here, but it will properly lead to more questions and more excuses…. :violin:
Okay – one promise – I will reveal a picture here the 24.dec 3.00 PM C.E.T. – a little Christmas present from me to you. :santa2:
Robert |
|
|
| 4real |
Ow, nice :D
I guess you people have been very busy all year, having had so much attention form lots of different magazines en other sources.
Do you have any idea about the pricing? About twice as much as one DCN23, maybe a bit more sound reasonable to me. |
|
|
| Robert GS |
It has been a very busy year and the next will probably be even more…:xeye:
I have great expectations to the new range of product which will be lanced during the spring. ;)
Pricing of the DCN28DAV - I can only say ??? for now. |
|
|
| 4real |
| Ow well, I'll just have to wait then... I have time. |
|
|
| Robert GS |
Hi all.
As promissed - you can see some pictures of our future product DCN28DAV.
Merry XMAS :santa2: |
|
|
| TNT |
| Maybe you should put a webserver in there and a web interface + the XIwizard - then anyone could run the box from any OS. |
|
|
| 4real |
Wow, looks kind of huge!
Am I correct in thinking that this one is fully balanced? I see an unconnected pin at every in- and output. |
|
|
| Robert GS |
| quote: | Originally posted by TNT
Maybe you should put a webserver in there and a web interface + the XIwizard - then anyone could run the box from any OS. |
TNT – why can’t you just use a Slim Device like everybody else? I’m not especially interested in making the product more expensive – just to add another feature that many got already. You’ll have to settle with the Wintendo OS or simulate it – that’s how the world works today. ;)
- Too many are satisfied with the MS dominance and I'm not going to start the revolution! :D
Did I misunderstand your question – did you want the web server thing only for controlling the XOverWizard? This would be totally overkill to have such a control for something you very seldom will be using. :confused: |
|
|
| Robert GS |
| quote: | Originally posted by 4real
Wow, looks kind of huge!
Am I correct in thinking that this one is fully balanced? I see an unconnected pin at every in- and output. |
4real – no it’s not balanced al the way. The analogue input is balanced to the ADC and after the DAC it’s “only” balanced to the end of the DAC output filter – again why add extra circuitry when it’s not necessary? - Not really my stile. ;)
There is a pseudo balanced output after the relays – which works just as well as a “real” one when long signal cables are used. It’s a matter of taste I guess. :cool: |
|
|
| 4real |
| quote: | Originally posted by Robert GS
4real – no it’s not balanced al the way. The analogue input is balanced to the ADC and after the DAC it’s “only” balanced to the end of the DAC output filter – again why add extra circuitry when it’s not necessary? - Not really my stile. ;)
|
Well, since all my components are fully balanced I would not mind having a fully balanced filter.
| quote: | | There is a pseudo balanced output after the relays – which works just as well as a “real” one when long signal cables are used. It’s a matter of taste I guess. :cool: [/B] |
I guess, it will be good enough :)
Can you comment on the used DAC chips? Same as the old board? How does the volume control work? It it the control integrated in the DAC chips? |
|
|
| Robert GS |
I know that the converters are all balanced, but the volume control, buffers and the relays will be the double requiring more surface, power and extra passive components.
The DAC will be PCM1798, which should be quite adequate for this job and it haven’t got volume control on board. The volume control is a separate chip – it will be fun to evaluate it. :D Very soon :D |
|
|
| 4real |
| Seperate volume control? There are not a lot of options I guess, it could be either a BB or a Wolfson chip? Or do you have something special? |
|
|
| Robert GS |
| quote: | Originally posted by 4real
Seperate volume control? There are not a lot of options I guess, it could be either a BB or a Wolfson chip? Or do you have something special? |
You should be able to spot the volume control very easily just above the second DAC output row – but it isn’t a BB or Wolfson chip!!! :cool:
It’s a LQFP-48 chip -> 8-channels. :) Now you'll have to guess a little ;) |
|
|
| 4real |
So you're just throwing bits away for volume control ?
I guess, doing that for 24 bit is fine, but what about 16 bit sources via SPDIF? A 60 dB decrease in volume will only leave you with 6 bits of resolution (14 bits for 24 bit sources). |
|
|
| Robert GS |
| quote: | Originally posted by 4real
So you're just throwing bits away for volume control ?
I guess, doing that for 24 bit is fine, but what about 16 bit sources via SPDIF? A 60 dB decrease in volume will only leave you with 6 bits of resolution (14 bits for 24 bit sources). |
Sorry - I really don't understand you calculation. :confused:
A digital input will be full range 16bits or 24bits and handled as a 24bit signal in the DSP + full resolution output in the DACs, then the volume will attenuate the level as you see on the display. Always – something in dB. ;) |
|
|
| TNT |
Doing a volume control rigth, having 24 bit available, it should be possible to "transpose" the 16 bis to represent a lower level and thus, not sacrifying any resolution !?
|
|
|
| Robert GS |
| quote: | Originally posted by TNT
Doing a volume control rigth, having 24 bit available, it should be possible to "transpose" the 16 bis to represent a lower level and thus, not sacrifying any resolution !?
|
Sorry - I really don't understand your "transpose". :confused:
You simply set the DAI receiver to an output format of your choice - in our case I2S 24bits as the rest works in I2S! :)
If the DAI receive a 16bit resolution signal - the msb of the incoming will be the msb of the 24bit output, but it will not have better resolution than 16bits. |
|
|
| 4real |
| quote: | Originally posted by Robert GS
A digital input will be full range 16bits or 24bits and handled as a 24bit signal in the DSP + full resolution output in the DACs, then the volume will attenuate the level as you see on the display. Always – something in dB. ;) |
I guessed that you would do the volume control in the DSP ;) Turn out you don't!
A bit of google brings me to CS3308. Am I right? You might also go for the PGA4311 (twice) better specs and it might even be cheaper :)
About the sound I don't know. -110 dB THD should be more than adequate. Anyway, right now, I'm spoiled with a Relay volume control ;) I'd have to sacrifice it if I'm going for the groundsound module. I guess, it will bring me much more benefits than drawbacks :) |
|
|
| Robert GS |
4real - you are close. :D - with the CS.
-110dB should do. What is your dynamic range of your loudspeakers? :cool: |
|
|
| 4real |
If I'm close, It's probably the 18, allowing for a higher analog voltage.
Dynamic range of the speaker :smash: ... Well I guess, I might be able to get to the 110 dB At most frequencies :D .
Well, I'll keep on waiting until the product is finished. I'm patient :)
Thanks for the great info! |
|
|
| Duck-Twacy |
I still have a CDPro2M laying around. Would it be possible to feed I2S signal from the cd player into the DCN28DAV? Probable keeping the wires very short (10 cm or so).
I currious how the DCN28DAV will compare with its rival products. Pricewise I think it wil be somewhere between a DCX2496 and a DEQX PDC-2.6P (also because its only the pcbs). Question is of course where will it be in terms of quality and capabilities..
Anyway its good to see more usable products of this type. |
|
|
| Robert GS |
| quote: | Originally posted by Duck-Twacy
I still have a CDPro2M laying around. Would it be possible to feed I2S signal from the cd player into the DCN28DAV? Probable keeping the wires very short (10 cm or so).
I currious how the DCN28DAV will compare with its rival products. Pricewise I think it wil be somewhere between a DCX2496 and a DEQX PDC-2.6P (also because its only the pcbs). Question is of course where will it be in terms of quality and capabilities..
Anyway its good to see more usable products of this type. |
DCN28DAV will not take I2S direct – but if you are very keen on a direct feed from the CDPro2M you could desolder the DAI receiver…..no warranty and no other digital input possibilities. The choice is yours of course and keep the wires short - very short. :cool: |
|
|
| Jeroenkv |
Hello Robert,
Will the DCN28DAV also take the DSD signal from a SACD? |
|
|
| 4real |
| I think I can answer that with a NO. You'd have to convert DSD to PCM anyway to be able to do any DSP'ing with it (you actually can do DSP stuff in DSD, but it is a whole lot more complex than in PCM). |
|
|
| Robert GS |
| quote: | Originally posted by 4real
I think I can answer that with a NO. You'd have to convert DSD to PCM anyway to be able to do any DSP'ing with it (you actually can do DSP stuff in DSD, but it is a whole lot more complex than in PCM). |
Correct – SACD / DSD is 1 bit with higher sampling rate and demands noise shaping filtering technique.
The DAI receiver accepts 16bits-24bits and 32kHz-192kHz.
DVD audio should work, but no TDM / multi channels...no decoding capability |
|
|
| Martijn_H |
| quote: | Originally posted by Robert GS
-110dB should do. :cool: |
Hello Robert,
I am also in the run for a digital filter. Are you going to release measurements when the product is finished? :D
I've used the behringer DCX but I think it lacks quality for usage in high end systems. The filter works perfect, but I loose clarity. The dcx brings in too much noise, which gets worse with complicated filters. Hopefully you solved all this! ;)
How long before spring?! :clown:
Best regards,
Martijn |
|
|
| Robert GS |
Hello Martijn.
| quote: | | I am also in the run for a digital filter. |
Very good – I look forward to sell you one or as many as you like!!!
| quote: | | Are you going to release measurements when the product is finished? |
No – why should I? :D People will only compare the measurements to the rather misguiding specs of ex. DCX? :mad:
Sorry – I couldn’t help it – of course I will populate specs, but it might not be as “good” as my competitors’ products. Then what can you use that for? :confused:
| quote: | | I've used the Behringer DCX but I think it lacks quality for usage in high end systems. |
Me too – I got the DCX for my Disco, but even modified a bit it doesn’t perform. What the heck – it’s a very old construction and very cheap!:D
| quote: | | The filter works perfect, but I loose clarity. The DCX brings in too much noise, which gets worse with complicated filters. |
This might be the hardware (PCB design and construction) or the DSP (66MIPS and 48kHz –DCN23 is around 500MIPS) or all of it! I doubt it’s the converters, but...
| quote: | | Hopefully you solved all this! |
I really hope so too. The DCN23 performs much better than the DCX – so I think I have a good chance of succeeding with the DCN28DAV too, but then again…? :)
| quote: | | How long before spring?! |
To me it has been spring for months as the hardware proto is working, but…soon hopefully. :cool: |
|
|
| 4real |
| quote: | Originally posted by Robert GS
[B]No – why should I? :D People will only compare the measurements to the rather misguiding specs of ex. DCX? :mad: |
I'm guessing that the people that don't want to buy a DCX will not comare stock DCX specs (Behringer does not even specs a lot actually) with yours. And by showing measurements, at least we know that you don't sell ******** ;) If they are as good as the groundsound amps you should have nothing to worry about. I have never seen any good measurements of the DCX actually...
| quote: |
This might be the hardware (PCB design and construction) or the DSP (66MIPS and 48kHz –DCN23 is around 500MIPS) or all of it! I doubt it’s the converters, but... |
Actually internal processing is 96 Khz. And since it does IIR just as is DCN23 the filters will be basically the same, and will therefore need an equal amount of processing. You could also say that the DCX DSP is much more efficient... You don't offer much more filter option than the DCX so there should not be a whole lot of difference. The advantage DCN DSP is that is has better processing features such as dithering. But simply comparing MIPS is just to easy...
Anyway, what DSP is the DCN28 going to have? |
|
|
| Robert GS |
| quote: | | Behringer does not even specs a lot actually |
Okay you got me on that - I didn't know how many specs they show and I have had the measurements on the homepage for ages without really showing them!! The pics have been uploaded for more than one and a half year, but I have forgotten to code the DCN23 page! Embarrassing – thank you for making me aware. ;)
| quote: | | Actually internal processing is 96 Khz. And since it does IIR just as is DCN23 the filters will be basically the same, and will therefore need an equal amount of processing. You could also say that the DCX DSP is much more efficient... You don't offer much more filter option than the DCX so there should not be a whole lot of difference. The advantage DCN DSP is that is has better processing features such as dithering. But simply comparing MIPS is just to easy... |
Okay – it’s so easy, then I’m much better at doing something right, but what? :confused:
I haven’t counted the numbers of filter, but you can’t ignore the fact that the ADSP 21065 only has 66MIPS. How much more efficient can the processor be? :confused:
I don’t use any dithering = noise – noise is introduced in the ADC/input buffer, so why add more? :confused: |
|
|
| 4real |
| quote: | Originally posted by Robert GS
Okay you got me on that - I didn't know how many specs they show and I have had the measurements on the homepage for ages without really showing them!! The pics have been uploaded for more than one and a half year, but I have forgotten to code the DCN23 page! Embarrassing – thank you for making me aware. ;)
|
I would really be interested in them :)
| quote: |
Okay – it’s so easy, then I’m much better at doing something right, but what? :confused: |
I never said it was easy... It's just easy to compare MIPS and say that based on that one is better than the other..
| quote: |
I haven’t counted the numbers of filter, but you can’t ignore the fact that the ADSP 21065 only has 66MIPS. How much more efficient can the processor be? :confused: |
Well, I tried to get some more information on that, but it is very difficult to compare the two, since Ti doesn't actually offer a low of information on it's internal workings. Counting MIPS can be done in lots of ways...
| quote: | | I don’t use any dithering = noise – noise is introduced in the ADC/input buffer, so why add more? :confused: [/B] |
Well, what else do you do to get from the internal data format to the 24 bits that go into the DAC? Dithering might introduce a bit of extra noise, but you will also gain resolution. Without it, you will get a bit more THD. So it's a choice you can make.. Anyway, dither in 24 bit audio will be below the rest of the noise, and you could therefore argue the need of dithering in 24 bit audio applications. |
|
|
| Robert GS |
| quote: | | I would really be interested in them |
Just click the link in the previous post - it's at the bottom of the DCN23 page. :) |
|
|
| 4real |
Ah, browser cache :(
THD is about 0.015%. That is not bad. |
|
|
| Martijn_H |
Showing measurements might give you more potential buyers. The people I know who are interested in Groundsound will only buy a Groundsound when there are proven specs (or when pricing is like behringer style). I am one of them. Showing good measurements will distinguish yourself in a positive way from the competitors that don't publish testresults and therefor may be talking rubbish.
PLease keep us informed! We appreciate it! :up: |
|
|
| Martijn_H |
Hello Robert,
I have a question about the level control of the different outputs. Is the gain adjusted in the dsp or after in the volume control when I want to put the woofer on -10dB.
thank you!
Martijn |
|
|
| Robert GS |
| The gain of each channel will be set in the processor. |
|
|
| 4real |
That is actually to bad. Would be great to be able to set the individual levels via the volume control chip, and then let it do the master volume. That way the DSP can use full resolution on every channel :)
Should be fairly easy to implement in the uC controlling the thing. |
|
|
| Robert GS |
| Yes - it's fairly easy to implement and it is too bad that I not going to design it this way – I simply have my reasons for doing it the way I do it. Sometimes one has a reason for doing things a bit different that most people think would be the obvious choice. :confused: |
|
|
| 4real |
| Sure, it's great if you have reasons, but since we don't know them, we can always question your choices, can't we? |
|
|
| Robert GS |
| Sure you can question my choices, but you can't have my reasons why.... :D |
|
|
| 4real |
| Well, that's a hell of a sales talk... :smash: |
|
|
| Paulus1981 |
Hi robert,
I was wondering when the DCN28DAV becomes available, any information concerning specs (or prices; I'm dutch;) ) etcetra is highly appreciated! |
|
|
| Robert GS |
4real - I'm the best salesman you'll ever find :D
I have quite a few orders of products that are not even beyond the proto type stage! :cool:
Although I would prefer that I could deliver the products - still working on the software...
For DCN28DAV information please go here: DCN28DAV product page.
Yes - I know you want more... within a week I'll put some screenshots of the XOverWizard II software at the product page of the new DCN24
The price will be around 1000 EURO for the DCN28DAV kit.
Very soon I'll also display some inspiring box design, which show how you could build a power amplifier with our SPA600 Kit :)
Thanks for your patience
Robert |
|
|
| TNT |
Looking good :-)
Why no balanced outputs on the DCN?
Is that SW in Java so that it is possible to run on OS X?
/J |
|
|
| Robert GS |
Thanks :)
DCN23 + DCN24 + DCN22PRO is intended for integrated solutions = no balanced output. DCN48CAR is...yes - you guessed = RCA connections.
DCN28DAV has a kind of balanced output - what I call pseudo balanced output - it not adding a lot of extra circuitry and works similar way - but how long cables do you intend to run?
The XOverWizard II is running on Windows XP and Vista - on a MAC you'll have to run a virtual Windows OS - it should be easy - I'm told :rolleyes: |
|
|
| Robert GS |
| Thanks TNT - You really got a way with words :rolleyes: |
|
|
| peranders |
| Indeed. What did he mean really? :scratch: |
|
|
| Jeroenkv |
Hello Robert,
Is it correct that the new software also works with the old DCN23? What will be the costs for the new software including measuring?
Jeroen |
|
|
| TNT |
Well, no balanced output and no OS X....
Sorry for voicing it :clown: |
|
|
| Robert GS |
Hello Jeroen,
The advanced version with the measurement option will be sold at 670€ including Danish tax (EU) - as stated in our pricelist:
http://www.groundsound.com/prices.html
We are still fixing some bugs and some functionality, but I think we will be ready with an early version that already on the DCN23 module within two weeks. :) |
|
|
| Paulus1981 |
€670 for software only?:bigeyes:
What is the complementary value of the new basic software compared to the old software, since it is 130€ more expensive than the old software? |
|
|
| Robert GS |
€670 for software only? :confused:
Yes - includes optimizer and no import/export between software. :)
What did you expect second grade measurement system prices!
I’m sorry - but not many measurement systems are as good as they claim. :eek:
What is the complementary value of the new basic software compared to the old software, since it is 130€ more expensive than the old software?
You get the chance to operate the new products DCN22PRO, DCN24, DCN28DAV and DCN48CAR. It costs to be at the top…and development costs - this is no poor China copy of an old piece of pro gear digital crossover. :eek:
But if you insist on no cost software you can simply buy DCN23... :) |
|
|
| just.sounds |
| How do you calculate the optimum response of the speaker? Does it make a difference if the problem lies in the frequency response of the speaker itself or in the cabinet and room acoustics? |
|
|
| Robert GS |
| quote: | | How do you calculate the optimum response of the speaker? |
I'm not quite sure what you want to know.| quote: | | Does it make a difference if the problem lies in the frequency response of the speaker itself or in the cabinet and room acoustics? |
When you measure the drivers you have to get as little influence from the room as possible. Our new XOverWizard II software has some calculating tools to do this in a normal room - called Multi-windows. After the drivers have been measured and a setup has been created you can make a sweep measurement to determine if there are any disturbing room modes, which need attention. You might have a 58Hz room resonance and you will get a much better tight bass if you use a notch filter at the exact frequency. More can be seen here: XOverWizard II and in practice: Klang+Ton Visit 2008 |
|
|
|
