but there are SO many dacs to choose from! there is where your sound comes from. put your money and personal choice there. the numbers-box is a numbers box. cheap, capable but not critical anymore.
I used wolfson transmitter chips since I had them onhand and knew them. I plan to try AK transmitter chips and see how they compare. but I am sold on the concept of spdif-in and spdif-out. its so univeral and you have all the freedom to use $50 dacs or $50k dacs. even ones in between! 😉
I used wolfson transmitter chips since I had them onhand and knew them. I plan to try AK transmitter chips and see how they compare. but I am sold on the concept of spdif-in and spdif-out. its so univeral and you have all the freedom to use $50 dacs or $50k dacs. even ones in between! 😉
It's a great idea - I agree! And I had at least 6 channels of DAC lying around. But I was just too lazy to ever actually do it. 😛
do you run all 3 pairs in the dcx? my needs are just 2-way so its only a pair of dacs for me.
I paid next to nothing for them; a pair of ak4399 dacs in a common chassis with an r-core trafo off to the side (all in a 1U repurposed chassis).
I think the dacs were $50 or so, each. chassis was a spare junker that I put some lasercut acrylic over to hide the previous life of the 1U 😉
has been working out fine. you can spend more. probably less. but its no big deal! come on, now. a 24/96 dac is no big deal anymore. 2 or 3 is still not bank-breaking.
I paid next to nothing for them; a pair of ak4399 dacs in a common chassis with an r-core trafo off to the side (all in a 1U repurposed chassis).
I think the dacs were $50 or so, each. chassis was a spare junker that I put some lasercut acrylic over to hide the previous life of the 1U 😉
has been working out fine. you can spend more. probably less. but its no big deal! come on, now. a 24/96 dac is no big deal anymore. 2 or 3 is still not bank-breaking.
Attachments
I ran 2x2 or 2x3 depending on what my system was doing at the time. Sometimes I simply used it as stereo DAC with no crossovers turned on. . Usually it was proceeded by the DEQ2496. Short XLR between the two for the AES digital signal.
Anybody have data to post?
For example, there are claims the power supply is majorly deficient. Should be a piece of cake to measure (1) current shortcomings and (2) how much you made it better.
B.
For example, there are claims the power supply is majorly deficient. Should be a piece of cake to measure (1) current shortcomings and (2) how much you made it better.
B.
@pano; yes, I have the same pair and I run a short diy xlr cable between the deq and dcx. that was a GOOD marketing move by behringer. easy way to link them, and now the first box is the one that 'imports' your external source stream. then, its converted to 96k at the deq exit and the dcx sees ONLY 96k after that. if you know that, you could bypass the inbound resampling/receiver chip, use a simpler receiver chip (better chip) and that would be a simple enough mod.
I do like the option of the dcx+deq. B did a good job on thinking about that and I bet a lot more deq's were sold because of that. you can even import your stream via opto if you don't have 'high voltage' spdif in copper form. people probably buy deq's just for that, too, I'm sure.
I do like the option of the dcx+deq. B did a good job on thinking about that and I bet a lot more deq's were sold because of that. you can even import your stream via opto if you don't have 'high voltage' spdif in copper form. people probably buy deq's just for that, too, I'm sure.
Yes, I ran the optical input on the DEQ a good bit. I'm not a fan of the optical connectors, but some of my sources had only that.
It's a big thread, but I know that some has been posted here (some mine). Going to take some searching.
There is also a DCX modders forum on Yahoo, should be good data there, too.
That yahoo forum had some smart guys contributing, however, I think that forum has unfortunately died.
I use SPDIF for now with WaveIO USB interface. I'd like to use it's I2S interface but that would require an async sample rate converter which has compatible I2S with both the DCX and WaveIO. Way out of my league.
I've read an article about power supply noise where linear regs, batteries and shunts are compared. Can't find it again but even batteries have some noise and a good shunt beats them.
But a good clean power supply makes wonders.
edit: http://www.tnt-audio.com/clinica/regulators_noise4_e.html
And I'd very much like you to share some specifics of how to install them.
Maybe, but not my experience. I supply it from the unregulated 12V that powers the shunts. The shunts take some (little although) time to start so the clock starts first.
Last edited:
Here are the links I collected and used to modify the DCX.
Why modify the Behringer DCX2496 ?
Was the most helpful site although some of it isn't translated to English. The pictures in the french part are descriptive enough to be useful.
Here, I used the Capacitor out mod and learned about Selectronic clock.
AW DIY - DEQ/DCX PSU advantages
Here I got the details needed to implement the shunt power supply.
A linear power supply to replace the smps in the Behringer DCX2496 | Linear Audio NL
Jan Didden's page, he designed the popular 6ch volume control and output stage for the DCX, also a linear PS. His projects can be bought as kits at DCX-SRC/Clock
(I posted the SCR upgrade page)
https://maurmun.wordpress.com/2010/10/05/the-behringer-dcx2496-power-supply/
A simple power supply upgrade and measurments.
DIYaudio by ErgoSPDIF input upgrade I used.Hope this helps.
Why modify the Behringer DCX2496 ?
Was the most helpful site although some of it isn't translated to English. The pictures in the french part are descriptive enough to be useful.
Here, I used the Capacitor out mod and learned about Selectronic clock.
AW DIY - DEQ/DCX PSU advantages
Here I got the details needed to implement the shunt power supply.
A linear power supply to replace the smps in the Behringer DCX2496 | Linear Audio NL
Jan Didden's page, he designed the popular 6ch volume control and output stage for the DCX, also a linear PS. His projects can be bought as kits at DCX-SRC/Clock
(I posted the SCR upgrade page)
https://maurmun.wordpress.com/2010/10/05/the-behringer-dcx2496-power-supply/
A simple power supply upgrade and measurments.
DIYaudio by ErgoSPDIF input upgrade I used.Hope this helps.
Is that the evidence of perfomance you promised to post? Not a meaningful spec measuring performance that I could see. Pretty scope traces of power supply ripple aren't audio performance data.
A few people said they'd produce links to evidence "real soon now". Waiting. Everybody swears the evidence is out there but nobody seems able to produce it.
I think the fact that the evidence is so "elusive" suggests to me that fixing the DCX2496 is about as rational as buying expensive speaker wires. Helps in theory but not in practice.
Anybody have links to the measurements?
Ben
I don't know what do you expect but from my part I forgot to post the measurement sites. I found these from a 5-min google search.
MiniDSP vs DCX2496 - Page 3 - AVS Forum | Home Theater Discussions And Reviews
Behringer Mods - Upgrade DEQ2496, DCX2496, SRC2496
Ergo Audio :: Stock vs. modded
So Ben, are you interested in modifying your unit or just want to know is there a reason to do so? If you want to prove us that there is no need to modify the unit you've come to the wrong place, most of us in this thread already modified our DCX's and are happy with the results.
And yeah,
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
do you think the original output stage(grey) is optimal? The signal is passing through an electrolytic capacitor and it is not a Black-gate either, not to mention the "top of the line" OP-amps...
I don't mean to be rude with my remarks, but please don't look down on my efforts to share my insights. We are not judging you because you are happy with a stock unit so don't judge us 'cause we are not. After all this is a DIY forum and people here like to take things apart and fiddle with them.
The electrolytic is unlikely to be an issue. The opamps aren't the greatest, and that manifests as increasing distortion with frequency. I replaced the entire output stage with an RC filter (Jan Didden mod) and that greatly improved the measured performance.
Say Marko, your first link was to this comment, "Rubbish. Most people set up the gain structure incorrectly and have problems because of this when using it full range. It measures very well." Is that what you mean by improvements?
it is true that a lot of people don't understand "gain management" or understand using pro audio line levels. I run hotter levels, but live contentedly with some tiny loss of S/N as compared to balanced pro level performance.
And then the second link to a manufacturer (he, he, he) with unspecified test conditions. Yes, minor improvements on specs that are well beyond human detection already.
The third link had interesting data. Showing clear if minor benefits for major rebuilding. If you think I am being unfair using the word "minor", here is what the tester concluded:
"I would perhaps point out the following as the most important ones:
* Noise floor drop of as much as 5dB at high frequencies. (Low end is limited by something other than PS or analog stage.)
* IMD graphs show much lower “hash” around the two test sines [high freq]
* Jitter measurement shows much improved performance with both 44.1k and 48k sampling rates."
Sadly, aside from a wholly trivial figure of "5dB" improvement on a 100dB baseline, few hard numbers and no blind tests.
Ben
it is true that a lot of people don't understand "gain management" or understand using pro audio line levels. I run hotter levels, but live contentedly with some tiny loss of S/N as compared to balanced pro level performance.
And then the second link to a manufacturer (he, he, he) with unspecified test conditions. Yes, minor improvements on specs that are well beyond human detection already.
The third link had interesting data. Showing clear if minor benefits for major rebuilding. If you think I am being unfair using the word "minor", here is what the tester concluded:
"I would perhaps point out the following as the most important ones:
* Noise floor drop of as much as 5dB at high frequencies. (Low end is limited by something other than PS or analog stage.)
* IMD graphs show much lower “hash” around the two test sines [high freq]
* Jitter measurement shows much improved performance with both 44.1k and 48k sampling rates."
Sadly, aside from a wholly trivial figure of "5dB" improvement on a 100dB baseline, few hard numbers and no blind tests.
Ben
Ben,
I'm not sure why you have the bit between your teeth on this. This unit has been around for a long time now and the weak points and strong points are fairly well characterized. Some users have applied misguided "fixes" to the DCX but some have done worthwhile improvements. How we define "worthwhile" might be up for debate I guess.
If used optimally, the DCX2496 works fine stock. However, by definition, this is a forum where DIY'ers apply their ideas and see what happens. If those efforts are discounted because no hard numbers and blind tests are documented, then I guess you've (somewhat) proved your point.
Anyways, I suggest to relax about the whole thing and read through this thread from the beginning. Nearly every item of interest regarding the DCX is well discussed. Many tangents where folks have gone astray with their conclusions, but all-in-all most of it is good information.
Cheers,
Dave.
I'm not sure why you have the bit between your teeth on this. This unit has been around for a long time now and the weak points and strong points are fairly well characterized. Some users have applied misguided "fixes" to the DCX but some have done worthwhile improvements. How we define "worthwhile" might be up for debate I guess.
If used optimally, the DCX2496 works fine stock. However, by definition, this is a forum where DIY'ers apply their ideas and see what happens. If those efforts are discounted because no hard numbers and blind tests are documented, then I guess you've (somewhat) proved your point.
Anyways, I suggest to relax about the whole thing and read through this thread from the beginning. Nearly every item of interest regarding the DCX is well discussed. Many tangents where folks have gone astray with their conclusions, but all-in-all most of it is good information.
Cheers,
Dave.
Are you familiar with distinction between "testimony" and "evidence"? Of course Sy's opinion is very good testimony. But where are the numbers?
No one could want a more measured reply than Davey's well crafted post. I guess the situation looked like mass delusion to me... and still does. And there's something about the DCX or DSP or Behringer-type value-engineering that makes people want to fix things even when there's no data to identify the problem or the fix.
Davey, I think my real interest is seeing continuing the historic trend of HiFi* in finding means of quantifying listener experience. Some of the scope pictures in Marko's links look troublesome. But how to convert pictures into data?
Ben
*really a pity there's so little enthusiasm for knowing the HiFi past.... soon I'll be blubbering about my old Bozak aluminum cone speakers