[Az B]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jhenderson010759 What data format do you use for the digital connection between the DEQ and DCX? I need to use SP/DIF from my CD transport to the DEQ, but it isn't clear from the DEQ manual whether it will simultaneously drive the AES/EBU outputs when receiving SP/DIF inputs via TOSLink. Is that your configuration also?

AES/EBU and S/PDIF are very similar. AES/EBU allows for manipulation, but it can be set up the same as S/PDIF and they're pretty compatible.

Here's an adaptor:

http://www.innovativemusic.com.au/Pr...htm?sync.htm&2

Az

 

[jhenderson010759]

Quote:

Originally Posted by gerG That sounds like a great approach. It was also quite informative. Is this a common approach for upsampling? I had always assumed that they interpolated to get to higher resolution, but this is certainly easier. I should think that a 45 db envelope would be plenty. Plus you get to have yet another digital toy in the loop! As an alternative, you could also do the digital volume control on the PC after upsampling. gerG

Even if another technique were used to extend the redbook 16-bit data to 24-bits, that data would not represent genuine, additional resolution. So, how could one argue that truncating it as part of an attenuation would represent an actual data loss?

I want an attenuator with a physical knob in my playback loop. Haven't you ever fired up your media player in Windows, only to discover that someone had previously ratcheted the Windows volume control to maximum, then left it there?

 

[gerG]

Ouch, touche. I am exactly the same way about having a volume control knob, preferably within arm's reach of my listening chair. I hooked up a system once that went from source to x-over to amps, and although it sounded great (dynamic as all he11) I could not deal with the lack of control. Just another character flaw that I have to live with, I guess.

gerG

 

[jhenderson010759]

Quote:

Originally Posted by jhenderson010759 gerG - I found a Roland M1000, 24-bit digital mixer for $299 on the web and ordered one for experimentation. This unit can perform the digital attenuator function, operates with 24-bit resolution and allows sourcing my CD player and/or my PC via USB to the Behringer DEQ and DCX. I don't think resolution loss will be an issue. Here's why: If I upsample from 16 to 24-bits before sending to the Roland, I should be free to effect an 8-bit attenuation, approximately 45 dB, with zero theoretical resolution loss. This is because upsampling produces samples with valid information in bits 23..8 and either dither or zeros in the least-significant byte. So, when the Roland attenuates the input signal using 24-bit arithmetic, the least-significant eight bits of each sample may be truncated without a loss in resolution. As my entire CD collection is stored on my PC in .ape format, I can use Foobar to upsample to 24-bits during playback - just as I do in my headphone setup. If I can find a a CD transport that up-samples, I should be in good shape. What do you think?

Upon reflection I don't think a 16-bit digital source of any kind (including my CD player) should be a problem after all. It is a virtual certainty that 16-bit sources will be arithmetically shifted to 24-bit significance (per above) upon receipt by the Roland. This is required in order to normalize the full-scale ranges (volumes) of all input sources. Bam!

 

[gradofan]

It's been 1 1/2 years since this thread's been added to. Where are you all now? Have you found new EQ settings, tried different programs, come up with other ways to measure headphone accuracy? Since I last posted, I'm DEQ-less (well, almost), and only have the EQ on my mp3 player. What has changed for you guys (and girls?)?

 

[gerG]

Jeez, my luck that I browse head-fi right after you dug this thread out of the dumpster.

I started looking into what was wrong with my technique. One big problem was that I was using a free-field mic for headphone measurements. Another issue was separating cavity effects from the headphone native response. I devised a mic method that gave me the data to separate the effects. I had to shelve the effort in January due to the real world intruding into my little diy lab. Some day I will lock myself in there again and finish up what I started. In the mean time I just enjoy the music and stick with small projects.


gerG

 

[jhenderson010759]

Quote:

Originally Posted by gradofan It's been 1 1/2 years since this thread's been added to. Where are you all now? Have you found new EQ settings, tried different programs, come up with other ways to measure headphone accuracy? Since I last posted, I'm DEQ-less (well, almost), and only have the EQ on my mp3 player. What has changed for you guys (and girls?)?

Aside from the poor reliability of the gear, I like the Behringer more and more. I have three DEQ2496s on my surround rig to equalize fronts, center and rears. I use the DEQ and DCX in my den for the K1000s+Sub and actively driving the N.C. Rhythms. And, I use a DCX in the garage for speaker building. Very flexible, good-sounding, well-measuring gear.

 

[jpelg]

God, you are soooo tempting me, gerG! With it's optical in/outs, I could put it in between my Sony portable & Benchmark, keeping everything in the digital domain until the amp section. Damn you

!

 

[gerG]

Hey zeplin, quite correct on my mistype. I was exhausted last night, but I wanted to get an update done before I take off to visit my family.

The Philips is an excellent choice. I really like the upsampling feature. I prefer the sound of my Sony S9000 for SACDs, but I have found damned few SACDs that I think are worth listening to.

The Behringer sells for around $300 (Musician's Friend, Guitar Center, etc.). I built the cables that go XLR to RCA. Less than $20 in parts there. It would have been less, but the Neutrik RCA connectors are $10 per pair. Very nice, but XLR on both ends would be cheaper and better both mechanically and electrically. EOW (end of whine).

A point that I forgot to make: if you want to run the 963sa with an SACD, or with a higher upsample rate, you have to go with the analog inputs, or bypass the eq altogether. In this setup the switchable amp inputs make it easy. I have it set up with an analog bypass that goes RCA to RCA and skips the eq. That was not in the photo because I need to make a short cable. The Outlaw is just too huge for a portable system like this.

jpelg, you will love it! It would also give you an upgrade path to a better player as well. I was quite stunned by the sound quality of the old Panasonic DVD A320 that I hooked up initially. DVD players make great CD transports, and they are getting cheap! Phillips has a slick little slot loading unit that would be wonderful, and Target has the damned thing on sale for $120 or so. I would be using one of those, but the 963sa works too perfectly here. It is reasonably small and light.

btw, the Behringer has a variable jitter compensator. I don't know what it does yet, so I haven't moved it from the default setting, yet.

A more gonzo approach would be a small, accurate transport, optical to an upsampling converter, optical to the Behringer, optical to a 96 khz D/A, analog to an amp. If I try that route I will skip the outboard D/A and go balanced analog to a balanced amp. Wouldn't a balanced Gilmore in a rack case be interesting? That was the initial goal, but no time to build. Some day.

As it is, this is a fun and amazing little system. I would have a tough time beating this sort of sound quality for the mony invested in the stack. At about $1100 for a system that includes everything from source to amp, does upsampling, plays SACDs, and can bring out the best in almost any set of headphones, it is one hell of a combo. Being transportable is just the ice cream on the cake (sorry to abuse an old phrase).

Another point to mention: my thanks to this board for the suggestions. Every piece here is something that I learned about on Head-Fi, right down to the inexpensive glass cable from MCM. The exception is the mini power strip, which has a flat 90 degree rotating grounded plug at the other end. Home depot has those (Belkin).

Thanks for keeping me aware guys!


gerG

 

[Bullseye]

After three years since the last post, how is the DEQ working for you guys?

I am reviving this thread because I am going to buy either this week or next week the DEQ2496.

As a source I will be using either PC with UCA202 external sound card via toslink cable to DEQ or a Cowon D2 mini jack with a mini-XLR male converter.

I am thrilled now after reading this thread about the use of the Ultracurve Pro with headphones. I have read a lot of this product before, but mostly with the use of speakers.

 

[ironmine]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bullseye /img/forum/go_quote.gif As a source I will be using either PC

Bullseye, if you intend to use a PC as a sorce, why do you need DEQ? You can do all equalization using Foobar's VST-plugins.

 

[Bullseye]

Quote:

Originally Posted by ironmine /img/forum/go_quote.gif Bullseye, if you intend to use a PC as a sorce, why do you need DEQ? You can do all equalization using Foobar's VST-plugins.

Well this question comes a bit late. I bought around a month ago the DEQ2496.

I need the DEQ because it has an excellent DAC. The sound card from my laptop is bad, and doesn't have optical output. I use an external one now with optical output.

Then also because right now I can't use a headphone system, but as soon as I can I will be buying some speakers and will treat my room according to the system. If I want a room to sound good I need proper equalization. If i can use it as a DAC with Headphones and an EQ with speakers I will be spending less money than buying separately.

 

[gilency]

Bullseye. You mention the DAC in the DEQ2496 as being excellent. I could not find information as to what kind it uses. How do you think it compares with more expensive, dedicated DACs? I am mainly interested in the equalizer feature and in playing with all the digital features.

 

[Bullseye]

Hey gilency,

The info I have over the DEQ2496 is here:

Google Translate

Original here: Matrix-HiFi --> Test Behringer DEQ2496


Hope it helps

 

[gilency]

Thank you Bullseye. Very interesting. Now I need to find me a used one at a decent price.