advertisement


Crossover change

C

cporton

pfm Member
My office system has been as follows...

Roon
Mac Mini
Denafrips Ares II
Khozmo Acoustic Passive Preamplifier
Behringer DCX2496
Linn AV 5125 (only using 4 channels, L+R/Treble+Mid)
Naim IBL
BK Gemini II Subwoofer

...using the Behringer DCX2496 to mirror the passive crossover of the IBLs between the treble and mid-range, together with spliting out the low bass to send to the subwoofer.

Anyway, I wondered what a more analogue approach to the crossover would do to the system, so bought a DBX 234 Xs crossover to replace the Behringer.

Obviously the Behringer is capable of much more than just the crossover, so it will depend on your requirements, but I have to say that I'm delighted with the improvement. The subwoofer is perfectly integrated, the musicality of the system is much improved and I think the "analogue" nature of the Denafrips is now really coming through... I've been listening hour after hour for weeks now and it's never disappointed.

I suspect there are even more expensive options to try... but in the context of an office system, I think this is probably where I will stop!

Anyway, highly recommended.

Chris
 
I was going to say the same thing. Likely the switch from a bargain basement cheaply made digital circuit to a better and more carefully built analog circuit accounts for the difference. Behringer products are not generally known for their outstanding sound quality, only their low cost.
 
I was using the DEQ 2496 via the analogue in / analogue out route... so there were two conversions... one A-D and one D-A... so I suspect this is where the loss of quality would occur.

Obviously if I was using it as digital in / digital out, then it would be a different matter, but that isn't an option when using it as a 3 way crossover device... unless maybe I had 3 x Denafrips Ares IIs to do the subsequent D-A?

In terms of "bargain basement", the DEQ 2496 is £366 and the DBX 234 Xs is £218 (comparing at the same site) so not an obvious upgrade maybe.

It does go to show your system is often only as good as its weakest link... makes me wonder where the weakest link is now :)

Chris
 
RJohan said:
Your OWN experience is?
Click to expand...

Just what I've picked up and had kicking about. I've always been into hi-fi and audio really. My eldest son is a sound engineer, my daughter is an RCS graduate and music teacher now. She's got a little recording set-up, which she hardly uses. Had a few Beringer bits and bobs.

Never been all that impressed with the quality, which is no shame to it as it's not the most expensive of stuff. I think we had a mixer which was pretty bad. Can't even remember the brand of the one there now but it's better.

Like I say, I don't think it fair to complain too much as it's budget kit but it's certainly not anything special. We've got a couple of SM58 clones which the internet says are as good as Shure. They're not. But they're a third of the price so...
 
cporton said:
I was using the DEQ 2496 via the analogue in / analogue out route... so there were two conversions... one A-D and one D-A... so I suspect this is where the loss of quality would occur.

Obviously if I was using it as digital in / digital out, then it would be a different matter, but that isn't an option when using it as a 3 way crossover device... unless maybe I had 3 x Denafrips Ares IIs to do the subsequent D-A?

In terms of "bargain basement", the DEQ 2496 is £366 and the DBX 234 Xs is £218 (comparing at the same site) so not an obvious upgrade maybe.

It does go to show your system is often only as good as its weakest link... makes me wonder where the weakest link is now :)

Chris
Click to expand...

Ok. You are using the DCX with the volume control before it? Well, then I suppose an analogue crossover might very well be better. And it's not exactly expensive, so...
 
RJohan said:
Ok. You are using the DCX with the volume control before it? Well, then I suppose an analogue crossover might very well be better. And it's not exactly expensive, so...
Click to expand...

Yes... otherwise I would need three volume controls after it, wouldn't I?

I do wonder, given that it isn't exactly expensive, whether it is still the limiting factor in the system. But what are the alternatives for a three way crossover with adjustable cutover frequencies?

Chris
 
cporton said:
My office system has been as follows...

Roon
Mac Mini
Denafrips Ares II
Khozmo Acoustic Passive Preamplifier
Behringer DCX2496
Linn AV 5125 (only using 4 channels, L+R/Treble+Mid)
Naim IBL
BK Gemini II Subwoofer

...using the Behringer DCX2496 to mirror the passive crossover of the IBLs between the treble and mid-range, together with spliting out the low bass to send to the subwoofer.

Anyway, I wondered what a more analogue approach to the crossover would do to the system, so bought a DBX 234 Xs crossover to replace the Behringer.

Obviously the Behringer is capable of much more than just the crossover, so it will depend on your requirements, but I have to say that I'm delighted with the improvement. The subwoofer is perfectly integrated, the musicality of the system is much improved and I think the "analogue" nature of the Denafrips is now really coming through... I've been listening hour after hour for weeks now and it's never disappointed.

I suspect there are even more expensive options to try... but in the context of an office system, I think this is probably where I will stop!

Anyway, highly recommended.

Chris
Click to expand...
WRT the Behringer, it is an ADC/DAC. It seems absolutely nuts to use a DAC as nice as the Denafrips and then pass the signal through the Behringer… what you hear will only ever be as good as the ADC/DAC in the Behringer. I’m not surprised the analog DBX XO sounds better… FWIW, I use the DBX in my PA system, preferring it to digital speaker management units that I’ve tried. I use a DBX Driverack for delay on large events, but the analog 234XS is better to my ears.
 
linnfomaniac83 said:
WRT the Behringer, it is an ADC/DAC. It seems absolutely nuts to use a DAC as nice as the Denafrips and then pass the signal through the Behringer… what you hear will only ever be as good as the ADC/DAC in the Behringer. I’m not surprised the analog DBX XO sounds better… FWIW, I use the DBX in my PA system, preferring it to digital speaker management units that I’ve tried. I use a DBX Driverack for delay on large events, but the analog 234XS is better to my ears.
Click to expand...

Yep... now I look at it, it was a completely nuts solution! Fair comment :)

Is there anything better than a 234XS that I should maybe look at now, do you know?

Chris
 
cporton said:
Yep... now I look at it, it was a completely nuts solution! Fair comment :)

Is there anything better than a 234XS that I should maybe look at now, do you know?

Chris
Click to expand...
Naim Naxo/Snaxo with your speakers… not going to be cheap though because it needs an external PSU too.

There are possible custom solutions available too. I know of a guy who may be able to help. I can get his details and PM them to you.

Edit,

I’m unsure of the Xover frequency/slope Naim use for the IBL, but it’s possible that Linn’s stereo active cards made for the Ninka or Katan would work, and they would sit inside your 5125… clean and simple as it gets. @sunbeamgls may know!
 
linnfomaniac83 said:
Naim Naxo/Snaxo with your speakers… not going to be cheap though because it needs an external PSU too.

There are possible custom solutions available too. I know of a guy who may be able to help. I can get his details and PM them to you.
Click to expand...

I dismissed the Naim Naxo/Snaxo route because they have fixed frequency cutover points... and given my IBL + Subwoofer configuration, I want the bass cutover point to be much lower than a NAXO 3-6.

Unless the Naxo/Snaxo frequency points can be altered significantly?

I would certainly be interested in a custom solution if that is an option... thanks so much for that :)

Chris
 
linnfomaniac83 said:
Naim Naxo/Snaxo with your speakers… not going to be cheap though because it needs an external PSU too.

There are possible custom solutions available too. I know of a guy who may be able to help. I can get his details and PM them to you.

Edit,

I’m unsure of the Xover frequency/slope Naim use for the IBL, but it’s possible that Linn’s stereo active cards made for the Ninka or Katan would work, and they would sit inside your 5125… clean and simple as it gets. @sunbeamgls may know!
Click to expand...
Naim mention defaults of 300Hz, 3rd order and 3kHz, 3rd order (i.e. 18dB/octave) for SNAXO3/6 (currently SNAXO362), but suggest this (and SNAXO242) be ordered for specific loudspeaker usage, whereupon, they set the crossover points to suit.
Level adjustment is spec'd at +0db, -5dB for each Fq band, which makes sense as adjustment is then made with reference to in-room bass response/the next band down.

I can't see this DBX unit not doing a great job of it, though. None adjustable professional crossover slopes at 24dB/octave with these.
 
linnfomaniac83 said:
I’m unsure of the Xover frequency/slope Naim use for the IBL, but it’s possible that Linn’s stereo active cards made for the Ninka or Katan would work, and they would sit inside your 5125… clean and simple as it gets. @sunbeamgls may know!
Click to expand...

Naim IBLs have a crossover frequency of 2.7kHz using 3rd order, 18dB/octave slopes. It measures -3dB at 45Hz.

I'm not sure the Linn stereo active cards would work because I need to syphon off the bass to the subwoofer - I'm creating a three way speaker system in effect.

I'm using crossover frequencies of 2.7kHz and 45Hz on the DBX unit, both with 4th order, 24dB/octave slopes.

It sounds good :) I'm greedily wondering if it could send even better!

Chris
 
Craig B said:
Naim mention defaults of 300Hz, 3rd order and 3kHz, 3rd order (i.e. 18dB/octave) for SNAXO3/6 (currently SNAXO362), but suggest this (and SNAXO242) be ordered for specific loudspeaker usage, whereupon, they set the crossover points to suit.
Level adjustment is spec'd at +0db, -5dB for each Fq band, which makes sense as adjustment is then made with reference to in-room bass response/the next band down.

I can't see this DBX unit not doing a great job of it, though. None adjustable professional crossover slopes at 24dB/octave with these.
Click to expand...

The DBX unit is doing a great job of it, to be fair... and clearly I'd have to order a custom Naxo/Snaxo from Naim with different crossover points, given I'm currently using 45Hz and 2.7kHz (both 4th order).

Chris
 
cporton said:
The DBX unit is doing a great job of it, to be fair... and clearly I'd have to order a custom Naxo/Snaxo from Naim with different crossover points, given I'm currently using 45Hz and 2.7kHz (both 4th order).

Chris
Click to expand...
I doubt that Naim would do more than tell you that the SNAXO 242 defaults are suitable for your IBL.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top