I've been using the Behringer at home with a set of Maggie MMGs and homemade dipole subs for years. In general, I have been pretty pleased with the performance, but after doing a direct A/B comparison with the BSS Omnidrive 366 I can safely say that the Behringer is lacking the audio quality to be used in top notch systems.
I used the 2496 for initial protyping and testing of these studio monitors both at my house and in the studio.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=141320
Once we got in the ballpark of where we wanted to be with the sound, I had the boss purchase a used BSS, so I could take the 2496 back home. Everyone at the studio was hoping for a nice performance boost, but weren't really sure if there would be much of a difference. After adjusting the BSS to perfectly match the settings on the 2496, we hooked up both units and rigged a way to quickly switch back and forth btw the two. The result was a pleasant suprise for all of us. There is a significantly smoother presentation in the upper mids and treble with the BSS and the soundstage grew in width and depth. Sounds that were originally confined to just being between the speakers now spead out much wider than the cabinets. Sounds as if some 'glare' has been removed.
I was impressed enough that the Behringer is back to testing duties only for me and I've purchased a used BSS Soundweb 9088iis for the home system.
Greg
I used the 2496 for initial protyping and testing of these studio monitors both at my house and in the studio.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=141320
Once we got in the ballpark of where we wanted to be with the sound, I had the boss purchase a used BSS, so I could take the 2496 back home. Everyone at the studio was hoping for a nice performance boost, but weren't really sure if there would be much of a difference. After adjusting the BSS to perfectly match the settings on the 2496, we hooked up both units and rigged a way to quickly switch back and forth btw the two. The result was a pleasant suprise for all of us. There is a significantly smoother presentation in the upper mids and treble with the BSS and the soundstage grew in width and depth. Sounds that were originally confined to just being between the speakers now spead out much wider than the cabinets. Sounds as if some 'glare' has been removed.
I was impressed enough that the Behringer is back to testing duties only for me and I've purchased a used BSS Soundweb 9088iis for the home system.
Greg
Cool
Thanks for sharing your results. As the many DCX modifiers know, the stock unit has some room for improvement. But the price is right and with a few more bucks worth of mods the performance is astonishing.
Thanks for sharing your results. As the many DCX modifiers know, the stock unit has some room for improvement. But the price is right and with a few more bucks worth of mods the performance is astonishing.
Short version: The $4000 device is better than the $300 device.
A modded DCX would make a more meaningful comparison.
A modded DCX would make a more meaningful comparison.
I did some ABX tests of unmodified DCX2496 (alone and also with other guys) with a QSC ABX switcher.
Two types of tests :
- analog in to analog out without any process
- analog in to analog out with some process (five parametric at -12dB plus five opposite parametric at +12dB)
But levels had to be matched : output of DCX was 0.8dB less than input !
With levels equalised, no difference has been heard in both tests.
So what could be the improvement ? 😉
Not quite $4000, try $800 used. At that point, I'll take the better sounding unit out of the box rather than mess with modding the Behringer. BTW, the Behringer is also severly limited in its Eq'ing capabilities compared to the BSS. It runs out of precessing power much more quickly.
Another fact that the BSS has going for it is the specific port on the back for recalling presets. All you have to do is short a certain pin on a DB9 connector to ground and it recalls that preset. Very good for A/B comparisons or different presets for specific engineers who might like a more 'hyped' sound rather than flat and accurate.
I'm as cheap as the next guy with my own money, but it's not just about the dollar value. There are things like reliability working in a professional studio to worry about also. Just my take....
Greg
Another fact that the BSS has going for it is the specific port on the back for recalling presets. All you have to do is short a certain pin on a DB9 connector to ground and it recalls that preset. Very good for A/B comparisons or different presets for specific engineers who might like a more 'hyped' sound rather than flat and accurate.
I'm as cheap as the next guy with my own money, but it's not just about the dollar value. There are things like reliability working in a professional studio to worry about also. Just my take....
Greg
Having borrowed a Beringer for a while, i'm not at all surprised. Its sonics (or lack thereof) are the reason behind all the upgrades available from 3rd parties.
I'd really like to see these products taken to the next level. I really think that, with analog source, there could be a sizable gain by doubling the sampling frequency.
dave
I'd really like to see these products taken to the next level. I really think that, with analog source, there could be a sizable gain by doubling the sampling frequency.
dave
jlo said:
Q1/ does the analog in to analog out include a ADC>DAC conversion?
Q2/ how much of the no difference is due to the very weak capabilities of ABX?
dave
possibly your hearing...just kidding. Maybe the room is not well treated and does not let you hear fine details or maybe the speakers are not resolving enough. Who knows. All I can give you is our impressions.
But seriously, we are talking 'trained' listeners if you think professional audio engineers count for anything. Before I let anyone say anything about what they heard, I made them write it down independently. Funny coincidence that we all had the same impression? I think not.
Greg
First off, the BSS Omnidrives are kind of dated. You can find them being yanked out of installations all the time for little to know money. The problem with the older networked blank panel stuff is that you will need an old Windows2k PC with a floppy drive if you want to use it.
The dbx stuff is ok, but it has an undeniable sonic character that I do not like. It's crossover points are course, and there is no latency compensation for any of the processing on the outputs, only the inputs. So if you must use the outputs, you have to measure for time alignment with third party software, like SMAART, etc.
Behringer's converters have severe ringing issues. It has to be one of the harshest sounding things out there. I cannot believe anyone with ears cannot hear it. It is noisy! The manual is a joke. There is little to no latency compensation as far as I can remember.
I cannot believe that anyone would be using this digital crap in a studio. I cannot believe that anyone would be using EQ, compression or delay with monitors. CRAZY! Digital processing cannot come close to the bandwidth of analog. Anything you do with it causes latency.
If you have to have something cheap, then buy the Peavey processors. They even have all pass filters which is something the audiophile community has not awakened to yet. They are WAAAY behind the curve on the digital stuff. But then again, they should be. Digital audio sucks most of the time.
I think that if people would build their rooms correctly, buy properly constructed and physically time aligned, linear, speaker systems, then most of the need for all of this digital crap would go away.
The dbx stuff is ok, but it has an undeniable sonic character that I do not like. It's crossover points are course, and there is no latency compensation for any of the processing on the outputs, only the inputs. So if you must use the outputs, you have to measure for time alignment with third party software, like SMAART, etc.
Behringer's converters have severe ringing issues. It has to be one of the harshest sounding things out there. I cannot believe anyone with ears cannot hear it. It is noisy! The manual is a joke. There is little to no latency compensation as far as I can remember.
I cannot believe that anyone would be using this digital crap in a studio. I cannot believe that anyone would be using EQ, compression or delay with monitors. CRAZY! Digital processing cannot come close to the bandwidth of analog. Anything you do with it causes latency.
If you have to have something cheap, then buy the Peavey processors. They even have all pass filters which is something the audiophile community has not awakened to yet. They are WAAAY behind the curve on the digital stuff. But then again, they should be. Digital audio sucks most of the time.
I think that if people would build their rooms correctly, buy properly constructed and physically time aligned, linear, speaker systems, then most of the need for all of this digital crap would go away.
Do you have any actual evidence (measured) of the 'severe ringing'?pdc said:
As for noise, set your gain structure up correctly and that are not noisy at all. I'm currently using mine with my new systems, which average 100dB sensitivity.
pdc said:
What is with all of this latency talk? I just don't get how that relates to the situation. Are you telling me that there is so much latency created by a simple processor, that it is creating so much delay that timing for tracking music will be off? How is that possible that people all over the world have been using units like this and none of use have problems? I have some news for you....a large percentage of custom main monitor installations use digital processing for the xover and room tuning.
Sure, building a perfect room, having perfect speakers is a great goal, but it turns out that people are working in a REAL environment that tends to mess up the response of a speaker. If a digital fix is not any more offensive sounding than the original problem, then why not do it? Sure, we all love the Studer A-80 2" tape machine in the corner too, but how often do we use it? Not as much as we would like. Does it sound better than ProTools? In many cases it does, but it is not always pratical to use in this age of shrinking budgets and shorter sessions. We made the conscious choice that digital processing was more of a help to get the sound that were looking for than analogue. No complaints from the engineers so far.
On the blank panel Soundwebs, how is it that I am programming one on a laptop with no floppy and running XP pro. At home I'm using a "green" 9088iis. Maybe your information is out of date.
http://www.bssaudio.com/products.php
Greg
Very interesting....
I saw your other thread too using the Lambda drivers!
I have 3-way active mains (Neopro5i,PHL1120,TD12S) using the DCX496.
I have had pretty good success with it, I guess there is a difference from porfessional studio to home use. I would love to get my hands on other digital crossovers to find out if there is a difference.
Active crossover is the best way to gain the exact sound we want in a room.
I saw your other thread too using the Lambda drivers!
I have 3-way active mains (Neopro5i,PHL1120,TD12S) using the DCX496.
I have had pretty good success with it, I guess there is a difference from porfessional studio to home use. I would love to get my hands on other digital crossovers to find out if there is a difference.
Active crossover is the best way to gain the exact sound we want in a room.
doug20 said:
Yeah, I was happy enough for years at home too, but once I heard the difference, I knew that for my own project at home it had to be a better unit than the Behringer.
Where are you located in Florida? I'd love to hear your 3 ways. My own plan is for TD15, unknown mid open baffle and Raals once I have the cash to do it.
Greg
R1 : ADC and DAC were included : signal entered in analog and went out in analog.
R2 : ABX on audio has been used for more 20 years now. You are right, this type of test has one weak capabilty : you can hear differences only if there are real differences.
Ringing has been noted by many industry professionals. I have not measured it myself. I hear it. I know of reviewers that have. There used to be a link on the Lab at www.prosoundweb.com. You might do a search there. If you cannot hear the ringing and it's artifacts, then do not sweat it.
Latency refers to the individual processes. ALL digital processing creates latency. In these boxes, the processing is "dumb". The latencies induced by the individual processes are addressed on the inputs only for some units. For instance if you use a factory preset in the system configuration library of a dbx Driverack PA, 260, etc, the process latency is backed out of the driver alignment settings so that everything is time aligned. Any processing on the outputs is not compensated for.
As for BSS, I realize that they have continued to develop the Soundweb line. So my comment was over generalized. I last worked for a major ministry that had the first gen BSS units. We were not able to update without an older computer with RS232, W2k, etc.
Media Matrix was much cooler than Soundweb and that is what I prefer using. If you can find a used MM system, you might want to try it.
Latency refers to the individual processes. ALL digital processing creates latency. In these boxes, the processing is "dumb". The latencies induced by the individual processes are addressed on the inputs only for some units. For instance if you use a factory preset in the system configuration library of a dbx Driverack PA, 260, etc, the process latency is backed out of the driver alignment settings so that everything is time aligned. Any processing on the outputs is not compensated for.
As for BSS, I realize that they have continued to develop the Soundweb line. So my comment was over generalized. I last worked for a major ministry that had the first gen BSS units. We were not able to update without an older computer with RS232, W2k, etc.
Media Matrix was much cooler than Soundweb and that is what I prefer using. If you can find a used MM system, you might want to try it.
I own a DCX2496 and I am thinking of upgrading myself either through modification of the DCX or buy a different brand. One option is BSS the other is from Protea, 3.24CL/3.24CL-d 3x6, try this website,
http://www.ashly.com/protea324cl-cl-d.html
any one has any experience with this unit? Do tell.
http://www.ashly.com/protea324cl-cl-d.html
any one has any experience with this unit? Do tell.
ttan98 said:
Be interesting to see the inside. The lack of 1st order filters would make it a non-starter for me.
dave
- Status
- Not open for further replies.