Behringer xover

Status
Not open for further replies.
Jump to Latest
F

Flavius

Member
Joined 2003
#1
I have built my 3way home speakers using Eminence drivers, namely Delta 12 LF, Alpha 8 and a phenolic tweeter. Dont ask me why I didnt use proper home drivers; this was my best option, even if I dont need concert SPL 🙂 and my amp gives only 2x30 W.
For xover, simplest possible Butterworth 6db all the way, at 500 and 4000 Hz. And of course some serious pading on the tweeter :d but that doesnt really matter here. I must add that Eminence would recommend an 18 db, 3.5 KHz xover for the tweeter, but maybe just to improve power handling; however I dont care about power handling. Hope my xover choice is good at least in theory.

I am happy with their sound. Perhaps the midrange is a bit too aggresive in the 2-3KHz area.

Anyway, Ive seen this wonderfully equiped Behringer xover, Linkwitz-Riley 24db, adjustable slopes from 44 to 930 Hz and from 440 to 9300 Hz. Also polarity switches, 25 Hz lowcut, low f. delay, subw summing, etc etc 😱

It is rather affordable and looks like an awesome toy. My question is.. not exactly a question, but rather looking for the oppinion of the more experienced members. Like what would be the difference between a 6db Butterworth and a 24db Linkwitz-Riley and so on...
A big thank you.
 
#2
Do a search - I know I've discussed Behringer products before.

It shouldn't be too hard to find. Peoples general opinions on this are divided if I remember correctly.

A) Good for the money

B) Supurb upgrade (in the case of the room correction feature)

C) Only good for a DJ & therefore good for nothing! (😉)

Gaz
 
#3
Hi,

the (analog) "Super-X" products are a rare case in the Behringer "portfolio": a device one can recommend, because it is *not* cr[]p! People who ever expected serious quality from a Behringer Virtualizer, Modulizer, Feedback-Destroyer or Eurorack-Mixer probably know what I'm talking about.

But (if there wasn't always this "but"...):

> I am happy with their sound. Perhaps the midrange is a bit too aggresive in the 2-3KHz area.

Replacing the crossover you described with a Behringer 19" device isn't just a little tweak! You'll completely change the sound of your system, as a "sharper" filter slope will always remove more frequencies from the drivers.

You'll probably get a completely different system!

On the other hand, a 6dB filter with PA-like drivers (hard suspension etc.) is not what I would want... You will have to try it! Order one where you can give it back for full refund!

Bye,
Sebastian.

PS: The Super-X are designed to cross over from one dedicated box to another. Actually their intended use is *not* to replace the internal crossover in a box. They won't be able to "flatten" the response curve like a custom made filter system or a (correctly) programmed DSP...
 
#4
I voted with my dollars and bought a Behringer digital crossover unit (OK, for some reason I have not received it, but still it is supposed to be on order). It is a very impressive unit.

The deal with this unit is that you need and amplifier channel for each speaker range: (3 way stereo speakers means 3 stereo power amplifiers).

I have not been able to ascertain whether the unit has built-in volume control and decided to go my own way and build a 6 channel Apox tracking volume control.

Also, if you have a lot of analog material, you should consider whether it is OK or not to convert this to digital before splitting + sending to internal DAC's + external power amps.

Petter
 
#5
Thanks for the replyes. Testing and sending back will be a bit of a problem though. I jumped and asked asap because I was charmed by the ideea of a fully tweakable crossover. For example i would like to lower from 500 to 350 or so, but for the love of God I dont really want to wind another monster coil and shell heaps of $ for 60uF polipropilene !!! just to see theres no big difference.

Regarding the stiffnes, yes the woofer is stiff compared to home drivers. Wont move too much unless i put the amp at work, like 60% volume. The next second I have the neighbours on my door 🙂 The efficiency of PA stuff is amazing. I used to test them with a tape recorder delivering 5W before buying the proper amp, and I could still throw a decent party

To Petter: the cheaper analogue version comes with a level, if i read it well from -12 to +6 db ? So the digital thing surelly must have one too.


One issue that I did not see addressed in the pdf. Where is it supposed to enter the system ? Before or after the amp. Before the amp will be a bit of a problem, actually a big one. I have the typical stereo with sources and integrated stereo amp. I did have the inspiration to design the speakers with fully separate cabling, and the xovers are in small boxes somewhere in between.
 
#6
I'm struggling with the same issues as above....

I'm contemplating throwing a Behringer Ultra-curve EQ into my signal path.

I've heard great things about it ( Hell, even Thorsten's got one 🙂 ) .... but i cant escape the feeling that putting a digital EQ in the middle of an all tube system could be shooting myself in the foot.

On the other hand, i have a listening room that is all hardwood floors, no carpet or anything..... So perhaps a 'smart' EQ could help me reduce all the negative aspects of listening in a room that's the farthest from anechoeic you can get.

.... oh what is a boy to do....

-maz
 
#7
Originally posted by Flavius
Where is it supposed to enter the system ? Before or after the amp.
Click to expand...

Before the amps. These are signal level devices. FromPre-amp out to electronic cross-over. Then cross-over to power amps.

So, if you have a 3-way speaker and you would like to use an electronic crossover, you will need 3 (stereo)power amps. 1 for tweeter, 1 for mid and 1 for woofer. This is what is called a 3-way active system. Of course, your speaker would also need 3 inputs, 1 straight to tweeter, 1 for mid and 1 for lows.

Have fun. 🙂

Regards
 
#9
Petter said:
I voted with my dollars and bought a Behringer digital crossover unit (OK, for some reason I have not received it, but still it is supposed to be on order). It is a very impressive unit.

Also, if you have a lot of analog material, you should consider whether it is OK or not to convert this to digital before splitting + sending to internal DAC's + external power amps.

Petter
Click to expand...

Hi Petter, all

I am thinking of the same thing, the Behringer digital crossover
seems to be an impressive unit for the money, I am very unsure
about the influence on the sound , though :scratch:

I would be very interested to hear your impressions
of the Behringer when you have tested the unit in your system 🙂

cheers 😉
 
#10
Hi,

The cx3400 is good for the price. Just don't like his sound when he still "warm-up". In digital crossovers you can try too the LEM audio DX26 or dbx driverack pa, 260. Bss, Klark Teknik, xta are more expensive, maybe in second hand, but check the unit before buying, they are sometimes partially defect.

http://www.lemaudio.com/en/products/DX_series/overview.html
Program for controling the unit(can work in demo mode without the unit) http://www.lemaudio.com/download/dxeb400.exe
no graphic equalizer, no rta, but a nice 2*5 band parametric eq, delay adjustment, assignable routing, and other features not really useful imho with a hifi system at home(limiters,etc..)
~650€

Dbx driverack
http://www.driverack.com/
260:http://www.driverack.com/260.htm
PA: http://www.driverack.com/PA.htm ~620€
The PA internal signal routing is fixed, in the 260 you can assign any in to any out. the PA and 260 have a auto-eq but with a 28band equaliser only, not with the peq. 260 can be controlled by a pc , the PA don't have a serial link.

Rémy
 
#13
I am thinking of using CX2310 for my Sub project. Refer below link for the CX2310.

http://www.behringer.co.uk/02_products/prodindex.cfm?id=CX2310&lang=eng

Many people suggested it is better with two subs instead of one, especially my XO is very high - around 140Hz !

Instead of using two separate dedicated subamps (type plate amps) I am thinking to use convential 2 channel Poweramplifier connected to a variable filter, such as CX2310. This unit seems to me have "everything" with very affordable price:

Such as:
- 24 dB Linkwits-Riley filter, Stereo variable XO 44-930Hz.
- Switchable subsonic filter at the input to each channel. (This is
a 2nd order active filter with a -3dB at 25Hz.)
- 3:rd channel "suboutput" also 24dB (in case I want to add a 3:rd subwoofer in future)


To start with, I will have the two Subs (actually woofers in my case) with Peerless CSX 10" in sealed enclosures with XO 140Hz supporting my two Fullrangers (FE168S)

Anyone with experience of CX2310 here ?? On paper it surely looks good !


/ LageB
 
#15
You could also save money by going for the Slave versions of the DBX products, as most of us have a computer, setting up is no problem, and you can still switch between different presets, (say one for music, and one for HT) using the front panel.

The DBX products also have a bit of a turn on thump, so need to be powered up before anything else😉

I was also playing with the XTA controllers the other day, very nice, but expensive...£1200 second hand!
 
#17
Jan,

If you are close to Oslo, you can try mine (if I ever get it ...).

I would expect that the digital sections will be good (everything is fairly standard, and nobody writes their own numerical methods anymore). The D/A section is probably not optimal, though -- and there is probably room for clocking enhancements. My plan is to graft in my own D/A converters + IV using TI PCM1792 -- and possibly even a stack of them per channel. Then there is the power supply ....

Petter
 
#19
I think in this case "sound quality" really just means "warm fuzzies" and that this quality is something no inexpensive piece can ever have. 🙂

The much of the Behringer stuff is on par with (more expensive) offerings from ART, Yamaha, Alesis, Ashly, and even Rane, IMO. Some of their products (digital stuff) are better than others (small mixers).

With that said, I think for equal quality you'd have to spend at least as much on passives and then you're stuck with those component values.

Just IMO, no flames. 🙂
 
#20
Petter said:
Jan,

If you are close to Oslo, you can try mine (if I ever get it ...).

I would expect that the digital sections will be good (everything is fairly standard, and nobody writes their own numerical methods anymore). The D/A section is probably not optimal, though -- and there is probably room for clocking enhancements. My plan is to graft in my own D/A converters + IV using TI PCM1792 -- and possibly even a stack of them per channel. Then there is the power supply ....

Petter
Click to expand...


Hei Petter,

So you are allready planning to modify it, interesting...

I must admit that to me , digital = "black box",
I would not know where to start
if I were to modify a digital crossover. :scratch:

I can follow instructions, tho 😉

cheers 😉
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom