Hi,
The large "excursions" (I suspect you mean large degrees of correction) may require the overall level (master) to be lowered, be it being used digital or analogue. Again, you can equally overload an analogue equaliser. If you get this "rude noise" effect, sorry - user error.
As for "is 31 points enough", seeing that you are in London, why don't you drop by one day and have a listen as to what is actually possible with 31 points and three parametrics.
Sayonara
fmak said:
The large "excursions" (I suspect you mean large degrees of correction) may require the overall level (master) to be lowered, be it being used digital or analogue. Again, you can equally overload an analogue equaliser. If you get this "rude noise" effect, sorry - user error.
As for "is 31 points enough", seeing that you are in London, why don't you drop by one day and have a listen as to what is actually possible with 31 points and three parametrics.
Sayonara
Kuei Yang Wang said:
I have mentioned before that I thought the Q of the graphics in the Ultracurve was too tight, and this is the only possible problem with two few bands of EQ. I have since found out that this has changed from the early models of Utracurve that I was unhappy with, and now the Q is less sharp in the new models.
With the right Q of the filter, 31 bands is more than enough for any room, and with the addition of the broad brush strokes, or small notch facility possible with the parametrics, I can see no reason for any more.
With the right Q of the filter, 31 bands is more than enough for any room, and with the addition of the broad brush strokes, or small notch facility possible with the parametrics, I can see no reason for any more. [/B][/QUOTE]
---------------------------------------------
This depends on what you mean and how you analyse the frequency response. If you use 1/3 octave analysis, things may look fairly smooth. Do a narrower band analysis and you will see large excursions. Going below 1/3 octave brings further clarity and solidity of imaging. You can also fine tune sonics much better with a high end system.
Your point about Q matters also. The 8024 does variable Q and the result depends on the algorithm.
The phase response is also important and here the 8024 has the software to access this; although I haven't gone round to connecting it up myself.
---------------------------------------------
This depends on what you mean and how you analyse the frequency response. If you use 1/3 octave analysis, things may look fairly smooth. Do a narrower band analysis and you will see large excursions. Going below 1/3 octave brings further clarity and solidity of imaging. You can also fine tune sonics much better with a high end system.
Your point about Q matters also. The 8024 does variable Q and the result depends on the algorithm.
The phase response is also important and here the 8024 has the software to access this; although I haven't gone round to connecting it up myself.
haldor wrote---------
Behringer just released the DCX2496, a 3 in, 6 out DSP speaker processor that gives you active crossovers, time alignment delays, eq and limiting for around $440 US list. Street price will probably be around $300 US which is a very inexpensive for that kind of functionality.
-------------------------
I came to the local Behringer supplier and ask for the product. It will be available after 3 months. They wrote AD ADSP Sharc inside. It will be nice, but I didn't trust Behringer. Maybe somebody try the unit or open the lid?
Behringer just released the DCX2496, a 3 in, 6 out DSP speaker processor that gives you active crossovers, time alignment delays, eq and limiting for around $440 US list. Street price will probably be around $300 US which is a very inexpensive for that kind of functionality.
-------------------------
I came to the local Behringer supplier and ask for the product. It will be available after 3 months. They wrote AD ADSP Sharc inside. It will be nice, but I didn't trust Behringer. Maybe somebody try the unit or open the lid?
Thanks for the responses, guys. I must say that I was intrigued a while ago when Thorsten (Wang?) waxed enthusiastic about it on the Asylum, but at $699 it wasn't going to happen. Now, at about $179, it sounds like something to work with a bit.
I'm also disinclined to digitize the entire audio spectrum from the Vendetta, but just mucking around with the lowest level of the bass is something else entirely. - Pat
I'm also disinclined to digitize the entire audio spectrum from the Vendetta, but just mucking around with the lowest level of the bass is something else entirely. - Pat
Z systems
Just curious. Does anybody know this Z-system products??
http://www.z-sys.com/cp_rdq1s.html
It als works in digital domain and should be quite good (fow wahta I red). Also costly (around €5000)
They also have a prof line
http://www.z-sys.com/pp_eqm.html
Just curious. Does anybody know this Z-system products??
http://www.z-sys.com/cp_rdq1s.html
It als works in digital domain and should be quite good (fow wahta I red). Also costly (around €5000)
They also have a prof line
http://www.z-sys.com/pp_eqm.html
Check out www.tnt-audio.com,
there was a review of it many years ago.
It seems that it has less functionality than the much cheaper Behringer, although its quality of implementation and execution may be higher. When used in the digital domain only this probably amounts to nothing, though.
there was a review of it many years ago.
It seems that it has less functionality than the much cheaper Behringer, although its quality of implementation and execution may be higher. When used in the digital domain only this probably amounts to nothing, though.
Drewllll.....
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
dear all,
The Behringer uses the Crystal CS8412, which puts out about 200 ps jitter at pin 19 (which is next to the filt pin - PUT a 10 nF cap to ground there !).
Ofcourse, that amount of jitter is too high for serious low distortion music playback
A friend of mine recently fitted my new clock module for external DACs, called XO-DAC
That modle contains a low jitter VCXO, and a decently designed PLL, with a dominant pole at about 1 Hz.
Besides that, he mounted an output transformer (3:1) and passive filtering after the (diferential output) DAC chips, ommiting too many opamps.
The thing now is totally transformed, it smokes the standard Behringer.
all the best
The Behringer uses the Crystal CS8412, which puts out about 200 ps jitter at pin 19 (which is next to the filt pin - PUT a 10 nF cap to ground there !).
Ofcourse, that amount of jitter is too high for serious low distortion music playback
A friend of mine recently fitted my new clock module for external DACs, called XO-DAC
That modle contains a low jitter VCXO, and a decently designed PLL, with a dominant pole at about 1 Hz.
Besides that, he mounted an output transformer (3:1) and passive filtering after the (diferential output) DAC chips, ommiting too many opamps.
The thing now is totally transformed, it smokes the standard Behringer.
all the best
tubeguy
If your using lothx's backloaded horn "speaks" you will have to place the ultracurve "in the chain" so to speak to eq the bass ONLY.
An alternative that NO ONE has mentioned is that you could use this eq. to alter bass response in another fashion for "fullrange" speakers w/ a fair amount of bass (that needs to be "unsullied" so-to-speak). You can do this by making your own subwoofer and reversing the phase (not using it as a sub) while using the eq to drive the "peaks" in the bass response to null them out. This won't do anything for dips in response.
If your using lothx's backloaded horn "speaks" you will have to place the ultracurve "in the chain" so to speak to eq the bass ONLY.
An alternative that NO ONE has mentioned is that you could use this eq. to alter bass response in another fashion for "fullrange" speakers w/ a fair amount of bass (that needs to be "unsullied" so-to-speak). You can do this by making your own subwoofer and reversing the phase (not using it as a sub) while using the eq to drive the "peaks" in the bass response to null them out. This won't do anything for dips in response.
Guido Tent said:
Guido,
Thanks for this info, definiteloy worthwhile.
I am attacking it from another angle, wanting to get rid of the electronically balanced output buffers after the DACs. Those DACs, as you know, have a balanced voltage output. I'm working on a SE power amp, fed by the DACs direct through a transformer to preserve the balancing. The amp will directly drive the speaker drivers for mid & high freqs. Have the design simulated only so far, will need some more time to get it implemented. Still trying to find a good solution for the volume control, as the volume control of the Behringer definitively impacts quality.
Jan Didden
ScottG said:
I used the DCX2496 succesfully as a xover for my active speakers using Jordan drivers. Finally settled on 48dB Butherworth, with a small freq gap between the xover points. Used an equalizer setting to fill in a 6kHz dip in the Jordans.
Also used a BP filter to lift the area around 25 Hz some 4db with a Q of 2 IIRC. Great equipment, "what-if" tests are done in minutes, without needing expensive parts to try it out. But as Guido noted above, it can use some pooging.
Jan Didden
There will be some review of the DEQ in the near (?) future.ergo said:DCX2496 or DEQ2496
Has anyone played with either of these yet?
Or better yet have some shots of the insides of these beasts....
The DSP8024 seesm to be discontinued
Ergo
http://www.enjoythemusic.com/magazine/comingsoon.htm
Does this mean that prices of second hand DSP8024 are going up? In that case, I have a (hardly used) 8024 with all the features ...
Gor blimey!
I have a 1024 which took a lot of fiddling to get set right. Looking at the 2496, the complexity of setup looks like it goes up by a factor of 4 or so.
The bottom line is that (despite the hassels) everything sounds much better with the 1024 switched in than out. This 2496 will probably sound even better (despite even more hassels).
I wonder how much of their market is simply audiophile room EQ. I widh the would build a product just for that application and leave off the other bells and whistles.
I have a 1024 which took a lot of fiddling to get set right. Looking at the 2496, the complexity of setup looks like it goes up by a factor of 4 or so.
The bottom line is that (despite the hassels) everything sounds much better with the 1024 switched in than out. This 2496 will probably sound even better (despite even more hassels).
I wonder how much of their market is simply audiophile room EQ. I widh the would build a product just for that application and leave off the other bells and whistles.
Duck-Twacy if you have plans to sell the unit I might be interested...
From Netherlands even the shipping price might be acceptable
Anyway, give me an email if interested (remove ___)
____ergo.esken@mail.ee ____
PS. I would have mailed you but unfortunately you don't accept mails from me.
From Netherlands even the shipping price might be acceptable
Anyway, give me an email if interested (remove ___)
____ergo.esken@mail.ee ____
PS. I would have mailed you but unfortunately you don't accept mails from me.
sam9 said:
With a bit of luck Perpetual Technology might still reach the market with their speaker correction and room correction software for the P-1A upsampler/DSP. Not so flexible as a Behringer, but it probably beats the s**t out of it soundwise (at least that is what I would expect).
http://www.av123.com/products_product.php?section=processors&product=1
If the company survives they may even bring out a high end digital pre with DSP + correction options (P-5) somewhere next year.
Of course that still has to be seen.
Behringer
I have a question.I have never used behringer equalizer and I was wondering.
If I use Behringer unit so it makes up for bad room acoustics,does room correction devices (diffusors,reflectors) bring any further improvement or in case of using properly set up Behringer unit they are useless?
Bartek
I have a question.I have never used behringer equalizer and I was wondering.
If I use Behringer unit so it makes up for bad room acoustics,does room correction devices (diffusors,reflectors) bring any further improvement or in case of using properly set up Behringer unit they are useless?
Bartek
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.