Hi Hifijim,
Could not agree more, compared to Matlab, R Studio, Microsoft Developer Studio,
HFD seems quite user friendly.
And I think the HFD manual is a great piece of work, and an excellent general reference.
Where i think Q-Sys is simpler and more elegant, is that it has no built in measurement routines for building xovers and EQs.
That's completely left to the user to implement after making measurement with REW, Arta, Smaart, whatever etc.
And every available filter type is there for use.
So there is no tuning that is bound to processor software.
The other way i think it is more elegant is how it allows filter comparisons.
For example, one can instantly switch between fully IIR, this order vs that, this set of EQ's vs that. But many processors can do that, including miniDSP.
But how many can change instantly between IIR tuning to FIR tuning.
Or even rarer, instantly change without click or glitch, FIR to FIR.
Literally, the only thing holding back comparative DSP implementations is your imagination and experience. Makes tuning so much easier ime, both for measurements and listening.
Could not agree more, compared to Matlab, R Studio, Microsoft Developer Studio,
HFD seems quite user friendly.
And I think the HFD manual is a great piece of work, and an excellent general reference.
Where i think Q-Sys is simpler and more elegant, is that it has no built in measurement routines for building xovers and EQs.
That's completely left to the user to implement after making measurement with REW, Arta, Smaart, whatever etc.
And every available filter type is there for use.
So there is no tuning that is bound to processor software.
The other way i think it is more elegant is how it allows filter comparisons.
For example, one can instantly switch between fully IIR, this order vs that, this set of EQ's vs that. But many processors can do that, including miniDSP.
But how many can change instantly between IIR tuning to FIR tuning.
Or even rarer, instantly change without click or glitch, FIR to FIR.
Literally, the only thing holding back comparative DSP implementations is your imagination and experience. Makes tuning so much easier ime, both for measurements and listening.
Totally agree there. In the end you can do many things with many tools, and sometimes it's just preference, other times it the time investment that needs to be made to properly tune a system. In the end everybody should use whatever brings him/her/xxx closest to the goal. Finding that however is not always that easy..
To bad there is no version with digital outputs
Good points kipman,
I input music into the Core110f via USB, at pretty much maximum signal level. (JRiver's auto leveling). So 16 bits really doesn't matter much, i think.
Then I keep digital signal level just below clipping throughout the design, and let analog output trim control final output levels needed to amps.
Ala this QSC help file doc Gain Structure
It's easy to get it right, because you can place as many peak (and rms) meters you want, anywhere in the design. (Meters are in place for I/O components by default.)
yep the QSC document shows the the right way to do it and also why floating point processing is so important as you no longer have to worry about digital clipping or too low signal causing SNR inside the digital signal flow (some older/cheaper processors are fixed point). Only at the inputs and outputs of the DSP is level important.
DBX PA 2 is great value and easy to use
I have been using one of these for two years and love it...£Best £400 I have ever spent on audio gear.
DriveRack PA2 | dbx Professional Audio
I have used Mini DSP, Marchand, Behringer, Xilica and three (!) DEQX over the years, all between 2004 and sold the last one two years ago to get the DBX PA2...Its a keeper!
I feed it balanced out from a battery powered SD card player Cowon Plenue D2 Review | Headfonics Audio Reviews
which is also an amazing bargain.... It just blows away my £1,780 fully tricked out battery powered Asus lap top as a source.
When I go £1,700 Asus lap top into Chord Quest (another £1,000!) DAC into the PA2 and compare it to the £250 Plenue D2 (make sure its the Mk2) feeding the PA2 directly its not even close... The Plenue is gorgeous and musical and dynamic and inky black silent.... The Asus / Chord are bland and thin and lifeless.
Sorry about the digital rant but do try the PA2 and the Plenue and you wont look back!
I have been using one of these for two years and love it...£Best £400 I have ever spent on audio gear.
DriveRack PA2 | dbx Professional Audio
I have used Mini DSP, Marchand, Behringer, Xilica and three (!) DEQX over the years, all between 2004 and sold the last one two years ago to get the DBX PA2...Its a keeper!
I feed it balanced out from a battery powered SD card player Cowon Plenue D2 Review | Headfonics Audio Reviews
which is also an amazing bargain.... It just blows away my £1,780 fully tricked out battery powered Asus lap top as a source.
When I go £1,700 Asus lap top into Chord Quest (another £1,000!) DAC into the PA2 and compare it to the £250 Plenue D2 (make sure its the Mk2) feeding the PA2 directly its not even close... The Plenue is gorgeous and musical and dynamic and inky black silent.... The Asus / Chord are bland and thin and lifeless.
Sorry about the digital rant but do try the PA2 and the Plenue and you wont look back!
Totally agree there. In the end you can do many things with many tools, and sometimes it's just preference, other times it the time investment that needs to be made to properly tune a system. In the end everybody should use whatever brings him/her/xxx closest to the goal. Finding that however is not always that easy..
To bad there is no version with digital outputs
Cool 4real, always nice to have some common perspectives.
Digital outs from the Core110f exist in at least 3 ways that I know of:
First is the 16x16 USB soundcard capability. Only problem there is maybe a PC with 2 soundcards is needed to get USB inputs from one device (PC source), and output to another (USB DAC.) But i sure as hell dunno here...
The Core allows multiple soundcards in the design, but i haven't figured out how to physically connect then with only 1 USB-B connection....
Second, more for the proaudio world, is the Core110f now has software Dante capability. New cores ship with it. Older ones need a license purchase, not expensive.
Last i know of, is to add a QSC I/O frame with AES3 cards.
I got a used I/O frame with dataport cards for about $250 that I use for driving QSC amps over ethernet.
But I haven't bothered to get an AES3 card. Probably will someday, to be able to use my higher spec'ing DACs that have AES3 inputs.
Probably when i can't think of anything else to do to try for better sound.
So far, that day looks a long way off lol
I always pitch the system I use: a cheap "TV box" Windows PC such ss the Pipo X9 (about $150 US). I use JRiver (JRMC) as the media player and "crossover" too.
While I use a MiniDSP product to get 8 channels of ADAT output, which is then fed to Behringer DAC, pres and amps, a potentially much, much cheaper option is this: if your PC has HDMI outs, you should be able to use an HTR that accepts HDMI and re-use the surround channels for individual speaker channels. Depending upon how cheaply you could source the HTR (I've bought ones for just a few hundred $), you potentially can have the entire audio system, excluding speakers (+TV, keyboard, etc.), for $400-500.
While I use a MiniDSP product to get 8 channels of ADAT output, which is then fed to Behringer DAC, pres and amps, a potentially much, much cheaper option is this: if your PC has HDMI outs, you should be able to use an HTR that accepts HDMI and re-use the surround channels for individual speaker channels. Depending upon how cheaply you could source the HTR (I've bought ones for just a few hundred $), you potentially can have the entire audio system, excluding speakers (+TV, keyboard, etc.), for $400-500.
You actually don't need a "computer" as such. Some solutions run fine on a raspberry pi (4B), which already gives you plenty of flexibility and CPU power to do advanced stuff. The pi can be just as inconspicuous as a DSP box. You'd only need a USB audio interface to give you enough inputs and outputs, which will add to the cost, but will also give you more options in choosing a high quality ADC/DAC. On the other hand, if you already use the pre-outs of an AV receiver, it probably won't matter anyway, since generally those are quite crappy already. A MiniDSP will do just fine in those circumstances. If you don't mind buying amps as well, you could also have a look at the Hypex Fusion systems. They offer excellent quality, but will cost you a bit more, specially if you don't need the amps.
For a pure stereo setup, I'd recommend bypassing the AV receiver altogether. Sadly the world is not perfect in this regard. You'd love to have proper multi channel decoding and also have decent analog output.. sadly, even the latest high-end AV's are barely making the cut here. Even better would be digital outs, but sadly markey restrictions apply
How many channels in/out/a/d do you need anyway? What kind of DSP features are you looking for?
I would like more information about the RPI solution, I already use RPI as Slim Players and Slim Server. I currently run Max2Play with HiFiBerry sound cards because it is a complete solution. Do you have links to any RPI DSP/Xover implemtations?
A challenge
"My" method (a Win10 box a la Pipo X8) + using HDMI and a home theater receiver of your choice as the amplification confers two additional benefits:
1. Everything is off the shelf.
2. You have great flexibility in choosing how much and how expensive your amplfication will be.
3. No DIY required (other than program your x-over) and wire the speakers.
4. If you are militantly anti-Microsoft, JRMC also is available in Linux or for the Mac, if you prefer to use a $2000 computer in place of a $150 unit, the choice is completely up to you
Disadvantages:
1. You can't use the HDMI for "normal" surround audio -- since you have commandeered it for individual crossover frequencies.
2. (Based on a few HTR's I owned), each "speaker" must be 6 or more ohms, this will influence your choice of driver (or just add resistors!).
3. Power per channel may be limited, probably only an issue for bass/sub drivers.
Of course many other solutions are possible. For example, if you use freeware (Linux), yes you save, but only about $50 off the cost of JRMC.
I've made the challenge before: I defy anyone to come up with a cheaper (non-DIY) source, x-over, and amplification solution that what I present here. When you consider "my" idea basically only costs about $200 + whatever you choose to spend for the HTR, monitor, etc. I think you'd have a hell of a time beating the cost. It'd make an interesting contest.
"My" method (a Win10 box a la Pipo X8) + using HDMI and a home theater receiver of your choice as the amplification confers two additional benefits:
1. Everything is off the shelf.
2. You have great flexibility in choosing how much and how expensive your amplfication will be.
3. No DIY required (other than program your x-over) and wire the speakers.
4. If you are militantly anti-Microsoft, JRMC also is available in Linux or for the Mac, if you prefer to use a $2000 computer in place of a $150 unit, the choice is completely up to you
Disadvantages:
1. You can't use the HDMI for "normal" surround audio -- since you have commandeered it for individual crossover frequencies.
2. (Based on a few HTR's I owned), each "speaker" must be 6 or more ohms, this will influence your choice of driver (or just add resistors!).
3. Power per channel may be limited, probably only an issue for bass/sub drivers.
Of course many other solutions are possible. For example, if you use freeware (Linux), yes you save, but only about $50 off the cost of JRMC.
I've made the challenge before: I defy anyone to come up with a cheaper (non-DIY) source, x-over, and amplification solution that what I present here. When you consider "my" idea basically only costs about $200 + whatever you choose to spend for the HTR, monitor, etc. I think you'd have a hell of a time beating the cost. It'd make an interesting contest.
Last edited:
One problem I've run into is Amazon Prime. I prefer to access it through a web browser on a PC but Amazon doesn't make that 4K/surround friendly (probably licensing.) Consequently, I purchased an Amazon Cube. Unfortunately, I use active/DSP-crossed speakers and home theater receivers with pre-outs are really expensive. You pay for their amplification which you don't need if you use active speakers and you have to buy the more expensive models to get pre-outs.
Have you figured out an inexpensive path from streaming device (Fire Cube, Roku, etc.) to active speakers?
The AVR route only works if your receiver and computer can work together with HDMI. Mine do not. So I decided to build my own multichannel DAC and processor. Still in the planning stages, but I should be able to do 5 channel surround with the fronts as 2-way active and do multiple subs. multichannel inputs will be USB, HDMI or analog input (passthrough from an AVR). DSP processing would be minidsp minisharc or using some PC software (depending on options).
I use a MacMini USB out to a miniDSP 4x10. I also have a TT going into a phono preamp into the miniDSP analog inputs. 8 analog output channels from the miniDSP go into an 8 channel Savant 8125 amp (same as the Lexicon DD8 which is also the same as the Crown CT8150 - all rebrands of each other) which has 8 x 125W/channel of very quiet (no fan) class D power. The MacMini does all the streaming and file serving I need (and I also occasionally use it as a computer ;-). You can get a good used one for $400 or less. They appear to work forever if you have a SSD (rather than a magnetic spinning thing). The miniDSP 4x10 is $500 new and you can usually find a NOS or near mint Savant/Lexicon/Crown amp for under $500 on ebay. S0 1400 bucks, give or take. What I like about this system is that it's super flexible, while at the same time my spouse can just turn it on and push a button to play tunes - like a "normal" piece of hifi equipment. You can probably do something much cheaper using a PC and multi-channel sound card, but it won't be push-button simple to use and it might get tricky getting phono input. YMMV
Yeah I know.... but luckily I dont need HDMI, surround and the like. Actually movies are just fine with my to mains and 4 subs.... dont even need to tweak differently for switching between movies and music.
I made a simple quiet PC with linux mint, controlled by a wireless keyboard/mouse from my sofa. Running toslink from the PC to the DCN28. Everything from youtube to netflix runs flawlessly/snappy and there is really not that much of a loss of quality in sound. I then have Allo digi one for FLAC, with picoreplayer. Works great and I love to be totally free from tons of different systems/features to do this or that - and never think of bits, bytes or 4K
Thank you
I tried the other day to think of what I would do - if I suddenly had to do it all differently today.
Maybe I would use a minidsp as a pre or maybe just a more integrated pre-amp with steaming - and then something like a plateamp with Pascal modules or something:
Four Audio | Four Audio Integrates Dante Ultimo™ in DSP-Plate Amplifiers with Pascal Modules
Heard them in these speakers - which seemed to work very well:
Neo - genuin audio
Last edited:
Wonder what is chosen desing angle where that ragged bms 6.5" is flattened
I bought exactly that BMS after I heard the speakers.
It works pretty well, even though I need to dampen the tweeter a bit, since 110dB is going to reveil a bit of hiss from my DSP - not much, but still slightly annoying.
It takes a bit of fiddle to clean the ragged response up - but this driver sure can play pretty good. It does not have the absolute refined openness of a good 5" metal driver from lets say Seas or SB. But it can surely make alot of people happy. Just needs a good woofer to support the "oopmf" that this smaller driver does not naturely have
Oh - and this is the magic, but also the pit-falls of any DSP. You need to use it wisely. A DSP can do so many great things that are hugely difficult to optain with passive filters. But no one can break basic physics - play with them - but not break them. And this applies to any DSP - ever.
Last edited:
The Crossover
It is me, the OP. I received the QSC Basis 922az today. It is functional, I have configured it as two 3 way cross-overs. I can't do anything else until I get some more connectors, should have them sometime next week. I will post an update then. The only downside I see so far is the little fan makes a little noise.
It is me, the OP. I received the QSC Basis 922az today. It is functional, I have configured it as two 3 way cross-overs. I can't do anything else until I get some more connectors, should have them sometime next week. I will post an update then. The only downside I see so far is the little fan makes a little noise.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.