Well, I hope it cleared things up for you. 🙂 Nothing needed to be cleared up for me or many other users.
The pin 3 connection is confusing for some users I guess. In spite of some recommendations, grounding it is not mandatory. Depending upon what you want in your gain structure, you can either ground it or not. With the trade-offs I mentioned.
Dave.
If you say so. Both the articles I linked explain the problem of not grounding pin3 and that the same output level is maintained when it is
I don't care what those articles say. I started fiddling with the DCX2496 about fifteen years ago and I know how it works and what the possible connection schemes are.
Dave.
IIRC volume control does not affect digital output on this unit, only analog output.
An openDRC would do the job, and let you use a convolution for DRC and/or phase linearization.
My Xonar U7 serves as a digital volume control at the moment, and that is very inexpensive.
The knob on my Motu is very small, and not very handy to say the least. I have to find a solution to this.
The knob on my Motu is very small, and not very handy to say the least. I have to find a solution to this.
for an XLR or TRS the signal is the DIFFERENCE between pin 2 and 3. Always.
Pin1 is enclosure. Always.
You can convert to unbalanced and all you have to remember is that the signal is between pin2 and pin3.
At the unbalanced end you can connect pin3 to audio/signal ground. Do not connect pin3 to enclosure.
Pin1 is enclosure. Always.
You can convert to unbalanced and all you have to remember is that the signal is between pin2 and pin3.
At the unbalanced end you can connect pin3 to audio/signal ground. Do not connect pin3 to enclosure.
I agree with Andrew. This is also what happens with the little switch you often see on gear with selectable balanced/unbalanced input.
I'm confused. In practice, chassis and signal ground are the same, esp. at high signal levels, like here.
As i mentioned days ago, you can use trick grounding schemes with the chassis shield connected at just one end and two audio wires inside the coax. But in most systems, not really worth bothering with unless you are near a broadcast antenna.
My experience with troublesome systems is that using $15 in-line coupling transformers from eBay can be very beneficial. You'd be amazed how well they measure too, despite anxieties you might have about them apriori.
BTW, the not-inexpensive Xonar U7 is a pretty inelegant replacement for a multi-gang passive volume control. And hard to figure how to connect it between a DCX with stock analog output signals and amps with analog input.
B.
Last edited:
In the DCX2496 pin 1 is connected to audio ground and the enclosure. So, don't connect cold and ground at XLR, but connect at RCA plug?
Funny thing, whenever I challenge anybody to reference all that abundant evidence they say demonstrates the DCX needs mods, I gat the same abusive non-answer.
Frankly, for all the hoopla about mods, I've never seen evidence that anybody can tell a modified DCX from an unmodified one. If you have credible evidence, speak up now*.
B.
*dealers excepted
The chassis/enclosure is NOT the same as audio/signal ground
Coaxial cable is single core plus screen/shield layer. STP is screened twisted two core.
The chassis/enclosure serves multiple purposes. To shield the internals as if it were a Faraday Cage, to separate probing fingers from the dangerous voltages/currents inside, to cool the internals.
NONE of those have any need to connect to audio/signal ground.
One will want to take interference from incoming cables to the enclosure, but that is usually done with capacitors.
There is a Safety exception:
Any exposed conductive parts should be connected to the protected chassis.
Last edited:
Figure 15 at the end of this article by Doug Self seems to be the best way to do it then? Balanced Line Technology
I like this because it means the shield is connected at both ends
See "case9)" farther down the page....
I like this because it means the shield is connected at both ends
See "case9)" farther down the page....
Last edited:
It's NOT used as an analog control, but digital. It can contol the volume of the SPDIF output. PC --> U7 --> SPDIF out --> SPDIF in to crossover
If the input is 16 bit, it upsamples, then attenuates the bit depth, then into the crossover, to be processed? Wouldn't it be better to allow the crossover to process it's own upsampled data and attenuate after the final DACs?
It depends - I only use this as an alterntive for the moment. It's not a permanent solution.
But if you are working at more than 16 bit, then it's not an issue.
All DSP's and soundcards are using higher than 16 bit internally. Otherwise you will loose audio quality.
Rubbish, rubbish and lies. I have posted measurements at least twice in this thread. You just whine that they aren't whatever it is you want to see. Your arguments had very little credibility to begin with, they now have zero. Tedium ad plus tedium.
Scott, the DCX uses a Cirrus CS8240 as its receiver chip, which can do either AES balanced or SPDIF unbalanced no problem. In the DCX it's set up with a transformer in front of it, and a 110 ohm termination - in other words AES. But it works just fine with SPDIF, unbalanced. Normally you just use pin 2 as hot, and tie pin 1&3 together. It will also work between pins 2&3, but I found it more susceptible to noise and glitches that way. That might just have been a grounding problem.
Because I used mine with a SPDIF run of over 10 meters, I bought a used Neutrik SPDIF to AES transformer off eBay. It worked great.
Because I used mine with a SPDIF run of over 10 meters, I bought a used Neutrik SPDIF to AES transformer off eBay. It worked great.
I haven't got as far as the digital input yet, I was talking about the analogue outputs. According to the schematic the relay on input A switches pins 2 & 3 to the digital input. My temporary set up at the moment is a pot on the analogue inputs, so outputs are wide open to the power amps, hence I'm getting some noise, planning to attenuate at the outputs so that should cure it
Last edited: