AudioRoundTable.com: Speaker » DEQX too expensive solution

Home » Audio » Speaker » DEQX too expensive solution

Show: Today's Messages :: Navigator :: Polls
E-mail to friend

DEQX too expensive solution [message #23721]

Thu, 10 May 2007 05:50

jphaggar
Messages: 51
Registered: May 2009

Baron

I'm thinking of switching to active xover and Eq , for my RS8 line array , but DEQX it way above my budjet, I'm thinking about Behringer DCX 2496 and DEQ 2496, any comments or opinion or other solutions would be most welcome .

Report message to a moderator

Re: DEQX too expensive solution [message #23722 is a reply to message #23721]

Thu, 10 May 2007 10:50

Anonymous

Try the DCX2496 [it has EQ ability], $250 experiment. If you don't
like it, sell it.

Report message to a moderator

Re: DEX2496 [message #23723 is a reply to message #23722]

Thu, 10 May 2007 10:58

Marlboro
Messages: 403
Registered: May 2009

Illuminati (1st Degree)

Come back over the border when you buy it. It can be had for about $230 US$, plus shipping. You'll pay a huge
Canadian duty on it.

Report message to a moderator

Re: DEX2496 or DCX2496 [message #23725 is a reply to message #23723]

Fri, 11 May 2007 01:46

jphaggar
Messages: 51
Registered: May 2009

Baron

The DCX is the crossover with built in EQ, there is also the DEQ 2496 wich they call a mastering processor for room EQ but I dont know of DEX ?
I understand that to get the same results as with DEQX you need to use both behringer DEX an DEQ ? My question is : would a graphic equalizer do appoximately the same job ? What I need is some control over the midrange frequencies , what would be the effect of a 1/3rd octave equalizer like behringer DEQ 1024 Digital Stereo 31-Band 24-Bit/96 kHz Equalizer/Feedback Destroyer/Dynamics Processor , compared to the use of DCX crossover and or DEQ processor ?

Report message to a moderator

Re: DEX2496 or DCX2496 [message #23727 is a reply to message #23725]

Fri, 11 May 2007 09:29

Anonymous

I run only a DCX for my line arrays. I don't need more EQ ability.
Why don't you try a simple setup first [DCX only] and try to
extract the most out of your array before adding another piece
of gear? A Parametric EQ is more precise than any graphic equializer
as it allows you to change the frequency, gain and Q. It's good
to zero in on problem areas but the graphic EQ might have more control over the wider spectrum if the whole audio system is out of
whack. If the DCX isn't enough, add another EQ.

Report message to a moderator

Re: DEX2496 or DCX2496 [message #23728 is a reply to message #23727]

Fri, 11 May 2007 10:10

jphaggar
Messages: 51
Registered: May 2009

Baron

Thanks thylander that is a wise decision and I concluded the same .
By the way could you describe your arrays ?

Report message to a moderator

Re: DEX2496 or DCX2496 [message #23729 is a reply to message #23728]

Fri, 11 May 2007 11:25

Anonymous

>>By the way could you describe your arrays ?

post #5
http://www.avsforum.com/avs-vb/showthread.php?t=646455

Report message to a moderator

Re: DEX2496 or DCX2496 [message #23730 is a reply to message #23729]

Sat, 12 May 2007 05:45

jphaggar
Messages: 51
Registered: May 2009

Baron

I've searched about the DCX 2496 and the question to ask is : do I use the integrated DAC or do I go analog ? Heard their DAC is mediocre , also found that you could upgrade the I/o board to get better tranparency ?Check this site : http://www.dcx2496.fr/en/cadre_en.htm
do you have any recommendations ?

Report message to a moderator