Behringer DCX2496 is great if you want to start a modding adventure, if you want cheaper but equivalent sq to the unmodded Behringer unit then there's the t.racks mini 4x4.
the t.racks DSP 4x4 Mini – Thomann Norway
the t.racks DSP 4x4 Mini – Thomann Norway
Do you think this kind of crossovers have lower noise?
Linkwitz-Riley 3-Way Active Crossover, Fully Assembled [XOVER-3] – Xkitz Electronics
3 Ways -24dB/Oct Active Electrical Frequency Divider Crossover Network For BIAMP | eBay
Thank you!
Linkwitz-Riley 3-Way Active Crossover, Fully Assembled [XOVER-3] – Xkitz Electronics
3 Ways -24dB/Oct Active Electrical Frequency Divider Crossover Network For BIAMP | eBay
Thank you!
I do not think those boards have lower noise.
Part of the problem with active xo, is that sometimes you get strange artifacts on the frequency response.
Textbook filters do not always work that well, since the drivers you want normally to match are different in nature (Tweeter vs midrange vs woofer). They have different performance characteristics and will in 99% of the cases behave differently at a fixed frequency with a fixed filter.
A proper, well implemented old school filter using op amps and classic circuits for filter design may in some cases perform extremely well, but to finely hone the filters and adjust slopes and frequencies just so takes a lot of work and time.
For the sake of simplicity I strongly recommend using some form of DSP, in most cases you are guaranteed to outmatch conventional classic circuits, different filter slopes and values are way easier to just "try out", and in addition you gain the possibility to adjust and compensate for other flaws in the frequency response.
I do not think you will be able to get better noise figures using those boards you linked to, and they come with no box, no psu. The T. Racks 4x4 may be seem a bit more expensive, but the difference is probably negligible when you start adding work and other surrounding parts.
Part of the problem with active xo, is that sometimes you get strange artifacts on the frequency response.
Textbook filters do not always work that well, since the drivers you want normally to match are different in nature (Tweeter vs midrange vs woofer). They have different performance characteristics and will in 99% of the cases behave differently at a fixed frequency with a fixed filter.
A proper, well implemented old school filter using op amps and classic circuits for filter design may in some cases perform extremely well, but to finely hone the filters and adjust slopes and frequencies just so takes a lot of work and time.
For the sake of simplicity I strongly recommend using some form of DSP, in most cases you are guaranteed to outmatch conventional classic circuits, different filter slopes and values are way easier to just "try out", and in addition you gain the possibility to adjust and compensate for other flaws in the frequency response.
I do not think you will be able to get better noise figures using those boards you linked to, and they come with no box, no psu. The T. Racks 4x4 may be seem a bit more expensive, but the difference is probably negligible when you start adding work and other surrounding parts.
Last edited:
dbx driverack first version can be found cheap used and it is probably best you can buy for money, also has measurment mic and signal generator with automatic option that works realy nice. only problem is it is balanced not se and probably not cheap in terms of simple ebay xo but it is cheap for what you get with it..
Hi
I have never used before any DSP device. In the manual they say it can work for 3 -way stereo but on the Thomann page they say it will work only for two way stereo.
I guess the web page is right.
For a 3 way system I will need two of this?
Thank you!
I use a symetrix symnet 8x8 dsp which are sometimes available inexpensively second hand and are more flexible (flow chart based). I modified it to remove the noisy fan.
instead of two of the the mini t.racks there are larger models available: the t.racks Crossovers – Thomann UK
instead of two of the the mini t.racks there are larger models available: the t.racks Crossovers – Thomann UK
I use two for a stereo four way. For stereo three way, yes, you need two as well. It is very simple to use - download the software at the product page and see what it can do for you. the t.racks DSP 4x4 Mini – Thomann esko Even a pair is cheaper and smaller than Behringer DCX and is a bit more flexible as I see it. The DSP mini is programmed by Windows PC and USB only.
There are two warnings.
1) you will have two wall warts (one for each, included for free) - and that means two power sockets
2) unfortunately, in the current version, preset transfer does not too well - you need to write down the settings you made on one (or make screenshots) and then reproduce manually on the other one.
There are two warnings.
1) you will have two wall warts (one for each, included for free) - and that means two power sockets
2) unfortunately, in the current version, preset transfer does not too well - you need to write down the settings you made on one (or make screenshots) and then reproduce manually on the other one.
Last edited:
I'm sorry for my lack of knowledge.
What can I do more with a the t.racks DSP 206
the t.racks DSP 206 – Thomann UK
than with two mini t.tracks?
Thank you!
For the cost of the t.racks DSP206 I'd rather look at the DB Mark XCA series I suggested earlier. Far better noise figures.
Other than that, my point was only that: As long as your wallet can support it (and you can find really dirt cheap DSP solutions these days), DSP setups will, in most uses and scenarios, be far superior to non-DSP setups. Mostly for reasons of ability to adapt and tune the setups in a much more flexible way.
Other than that, my point was only that: As long as your wallet can support it (and you can find really dirt cheap DSP solutions these days), DSP setups will, in most uses and scenarios, be far superior to non-DSP setups. Mostly for reasons of ability to adapt and tune the setups in a much more flexible way.
A pair of Minis is hard to beat with the price-to-performance ratio. I first bought one to try out and then a second one - until I save up for some used profi PA DSP (used), I will am more than happy with these.
To see what it can do differently, you can download the software for each and compare the function.
To see what it can do differently, you can download the software for each and compare the function.
I have no first hand experience with the t.racks 4x4 mini. But it should be superior to the lower range minidsp products, another benefit is the balanced TRS jacks. Next real upgrade in sound quality would be DB Mark XCA, and similar in sq but better in build quality + increased functionality are the Driverack Venu360. Not much sense in getting anything more expensive than that, unless you want some very specific features.
Completely agree on the running balanced thing.
Best decision I've made was going over to fully balanced setup. Not going back to single ended anytime soon.
So much noise everywhere, using fully balanced makes a difference even on shorter cable runs these days.
Rane is good stuff! Very much like their approach to bessel topology filters.
Best decision I've made was going over to fully balanced setup. Not going back to single ended anytime soon.
So much noise everywhere, using fully balanced makes a difference even on shorter cable runs these days.
Rane is good stuff! Very much like their approach to bessel topology filters.
I have just found an ex display dB-Mark XCA26. Thank you for your suggestion!
Amplifiers, next hunting
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.