Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#81
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Who Owns the Behringer DEQ2496?
On 8/13/2014 12:14 AM, Gary Eickmeier wrote:
I am not an electronics technician but I do have a RS Sound Level Meter and a little volt meter. But my question doesn't call for all of this measurement that you guys are talking about. "All this measurement" is really very basic. The reason what it was recommended to you was to eliminate one possible cause for the deficiencies that you're hearing with the DEQ in line with your signal path. It isn't a straight wire, and there's no button to turn it into one. If it changes the level to your speakers even a small amount, it can affect what you hear. But you have tossed that suggestion off without investigating it. All I wanted to know was what the translated German manual was trying to tell us about that little switch. And you got it, in several versions, many times over. But since it doesn't do what you want it to do, you've brushed those explanations off. You've been pointed to at least one web article that explains the relationship between gain and operating levels but you said you didn't need to know that. Some of you who own the device would probably know. I learned that it probably pads down the output by 10 dB so that you can input more gain and use more of the AD converter's bits. That's bassackwards. Paul is trying to communicate to me about the well-known level difference problem in A/B comparisons. But this is not an A/B direct comparison, and my supposed sound quality difference would have nothing to do with that. But your initial complaint was that when you connect the DEQ, you heard several things that were different from when it wasn't connected. A direct A/B comparison is difficult to make without a "true bypass" switch (which you could build pretty easily, by the way) but you could make a measurement that would explain at least one difference between in and out, and furthermore, could explain the difference you believe you're hearing. But long term (meaning more than about 15 seconds) aural memory isn't very reliable. You may be hearing a problem because you THINK there is one. More probable - if there is a difference - is that the AD converter isn't getting a healthy enough signal to operate with, hence my question. Learned lots here as usual. What have you learned? If you learned anything from this aspect of the discussion, it should have been that this "healthy enough signal" business is not part of the problem. But still, you stick to what's "probable" to you. My current project is to evaluate my new speakers that I had built by a very talented man in Indiana. If I bring in some other, more commercial speakers to compare them with, I might want to EQ them to the same standard to take that factor out of the comparison. Why are you EQ-ing speakers at all if you're comparing them? -- For a good time, visit http://mikeriversaudio.wordpress.com |
#82
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Who Owns the Behringer DEQ2496?
On 13/08/2014 13:10, Mike Rivers wrote:
My current project is to evaluate my new speakers that I had built by a very talented man in Indiana. If I bring in some other, more commercial speakers to compare them with, I might want to EQ them to the same standard to take that factor out of the comparison. Why are you EQ-ing speakers at all if you're comparing them? And, bearing in mind a lot of the differences between speakers are in the time domain, not the frequency domain and so can't be equalised out, why bother? I'll equalise an installation to get the best sound possible, but that's only half the answer IME. -- Tciao for Now! John. |
#83
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Who Owns the Behringer DEQ2496?
None wrote:
"Gary Eickmeier" wrote in message ... You might get a better understanding of levels and how they're measured by reading the Meter Madness article on my web site. I would love to Mike, but I think after doing this stuff for some 60 years I have enough understanding of levels to get along. Whooooosh! This could be a record setting event. Frisbies in the dark during a luny eclipse. -- shut up and play your guitar * HankAlrich.Com HankandShaidriMusic.Com YouTube.Com/WalkinayMusic |
#84
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Who Owns the Behringer DEQ2496?
Frank Stearns wrote:
Knowing Behringer, probably not very well -- or when they copied someone's design they cut every possible corner in power supply quality, board quality, connector quality, caps, etc, etc. So I'd be nervous too! And these days, I probably wouldn't worry as much about the converters as the analog signal paths to and from those converters. I repeat, the quality of the DEQ2496 and companion crossover DCX2496 is very much better than the older analog kit. The problems in this thread have not to do with the device. -- shut up and play your guitar * HankAlrich.Com HankandShaidriMusic.Com YouTube.Com/WalkinayMusic |
#85
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Who Owns the Behringer DEQ2496?
Scott Dorsey wrote:
Gary Eickmeier wrote: So my main question would be: Whenever we have a digital component in the system, especially a digital recorder, we try and make best use of available bits. But the analog inputs to the unit from my receiver were variable IAW the volume knob. So how did I ever know that I was using all of the bits in the equalizer? The output meter usually barely moved. The input I doubt had enough gain for 16 bits to be filled up. Where did you get this idea? What makes you think "using all the bits" is significant or even useful? Do you always operate your power amplifier at full tilt for fear you're not getting all the output ower it's capable of? --scott Well, ****, you're paying for the electricity, so why not use all of it?? -- shut up and play your guitar * HankAlrich.Com HankandShaidriMusic.Com YouTube.Com/WalkinayMusic |
#86
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Who Owns the Behringer DEQ2496?
PStamler wrote:
I'm not Scott, and can't speak for him, but I often make recordings where the highest level is -20dBFS, and they sound fine. As they ought to, since the theoretical dynamic range of a 24-bit system under those circumstances is 124dB, meaning that whatever I'm recording is well above the muck and mud level. That, plus easing strain on the analog chain feeding conversion. We need enough level throughout to avoid the noise floor, but that is easy with 24 bits unless something up stream is broken or poorly adjusted. I've been looking for -20dBFS average and peaks not above -12dBFS. The results leave lots of room for mixing and mastering, and avoids the "every last bit as loud as can be" syndrome from the gitgo. -- shut up and play your guitar * HankAlrich.Com HankandShaidriMusic.Com YouTube.Com/WalkinayMusic |
#87
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Who Owns the Behringer DEQ2496?
Gary Eickmeier wrote:
All I wanted to know was what the translated German manual was trying to tell us about that little switch. You posted all that crap to ask THAT? What are you thinking? -- shut up and play your guitar * HankAlrich.Com HankandShaidriMusic.Com YouTube.Com/WalkinayMusic |
#88
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Who Owns the Behringer DEQ2496?
PStamler wrote:
you're simply fumbling in the dark That would be a step up. -- shut up and play your guitar * HankAlrich.Com HankandShaidriMusic.Com YouTube.Com/WalkinayMusic |
#89
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Who Owns the Behringer DEQ2496?
Mike Rivers wrote:
On 8/13/2014 12:14 AM, Gary Eickmeier wrote: I am not an electronics technician but I do have a RS Sound Level Meter and a little volt meter. But my question doesn't call for all of this measurement that you guys are talking about. "All this measurement" is really very basic. The reason what it was recommended to you was to eliminate one possible cause for the deficiencies that you're hearing with the DEQ in line with your signal path. It isn't a straight wire, and there's no button to turn it into one. If it changes the level to your speakers even a small amount, it can affect what you hear. But you have tossed that suggestion off without investigating it. Hmmm€¦ Where have I seen that before? All I wanted to know was what the translated German manual was trying to tell us about that little switch. And you got it, in several versions, many times over. But since it doesn't do what you want it to do, you've brushed those explanations off. You've been pointed to at least one web article that explains the relationship between gain and operating levels but you said you didn't need to know that. Some of you who own the device would probably know. I learned that it probably pads down the output by 10 dB so that you can input more gain and use more of the AD converter's bits. That's bassackwards. Dude, retro is where it's at these days. Paul is trying to communicate to me about the well-known level difference problem in A/B comparisons. But this is not an A/B direct comparison, and my supposed sound quality difference would have nothing to do with that. But your initial complaint was that when you connect the DEQ, you heard several things that were different from when it wasn't connected. A direct A/B comparison is difficult to make without a "true bypass" switch (which you could build pretty easily, by the way) but you could make a measurement that would explain at least one difference between in and out, and furthermore, could explain the difference you believe you're hearing. But long term (meaning more than about 15 seconds) aural memory isn't very reliable. You may be hearing a problem because you THINK there is one. Did the Internet report a problem with the sound of Gary's sytem? More probable - if there is a difference - is that the AD converter isn't getting a healthy enough signal to operate with, hence my question. Learned lots here as usual. What have you learned? If you learned anything from this aspect of the discussion, it should have been that this "healthy enough signal" business is not part of the problem. But still, you stick to what's "probable" to you. Amazing feats of illogic. My current project is to evaluate my new speakers that I had built by a very talented man in Indiana. If I bring in some other, more commercial speakers to compare them with, I might want to EQ them to the same standard to take that factor out of the comparison. Why are you EQ-ing speakers at all if you're comparing them? Oh, you just had to go there, didn't you!?! -- shut up and play your guitar * HankAlrich.Com HankandShaidriMusic.Com YouTube.Com/WalkinayMusic |
#90
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Who Owns the Behringer DEQ2496?
Sean Conolly wrote:
"hank alrich" wrote in message ... Gary Eickmeier wrote: I played with the 2496 long enough to learn all of its functions and features, did a few EQs with it, measured my speakers etc etc, but I got a little nervous about having an additional A/D D/A in my system so I yanked it out of there and the sound seems a lot better now, tighter, more together, larger soundstage, etc. Man, you're just so sciency about all this. NOT! So my main question would be: Step 1: Gain staging? "It's not about the knobs so much as it is about the person twisting them" Whenever we have a digital component in the system, especially a digital recorder, we try and make best use of available bits. But the analog inputs to the unit from my receiver were variable IAW the volume knob. So how did I ever know that I was using all of the bits in the equalizer? The output meter usually barely moved. The input I doubt had enough gain for 16 bits to be filled up. Input level sensitivity. So would Behringer have a way of working around these problems or am I correct in being nervous about it? The unit is much more powerful than one might expect at first glance, and some sectors offer significant potential newbie danger, particularly the parametric and dynamic EQ sections. You're thinking "digital" and "bits" but you're using the analog I/O of the equalizer. Get levels in order and listen again. BTW the metering is quite good. I have used the DEQ2496's for FOH and stage monitor EQ and the peak reading 31 band meter will show me the next potential feedback point before the system starts ringing. Pretty cool. These shows were all acoustic sources with the occasional tiny bass amp. Is it a Weiss? No. The sales tax on a Weiss is more than the cost of the Behringer. I should feel like a dumb-ass for having one of these for years and not knowing some of these functions, but a lot of this falls under 'problems I don't have'. I've never needed to switch the levels because everything I own uses +4. I never use the auto-eq function because I don't need it at home, and it's a time-soak at a show. I've used swept tone tests to find a good flattish curve for the speakers I have and use that as a starting point. If I'm using someone else's speakers I prefer to start flat and EQ by ear. I never use the feedback eliminator because it's usually too little and too late. I use the RTA display to look for resonant frequencies and notch those with the parametric as needed. I guess this makes me a happy user but not an expert. Sean Sean, what it makes you is one experienced enough to avoid the automatic functions and use the device under your own control in real time. Works great that way. That's how I use it, mostly. I had to dig into some of the other features for installations, where memories, lockdown, feedback suppression for dance teacher's or preacher's head mics, etc., were important. -- shut up and play your guitar * HankAlrich.Com HankandShaidriMusic.Com YouTube.Com/WalkinayMusic |
#91
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Who Owns the Behringer DEQ2496?
On 14/08/2014 12:25 a.m., John Williamson wrote:
On 13/08/2014 13:10, Mike Rivers wrote: My current project is to evaluate my new speakers that I had built by a very talented man in Indiana. If I bring in some other, more commercial speakers to compare them with, I might want to EQ them to the same standard to take that factor out of the comparison. Why are you EQ-ing speakers at all if you're comparing them? And, bearing in mind a lot of the differences between speakers are in the time domain, not the frequency domain and so can't be equalised out, why bother? Yes they can - DEQX . geoff |
#92
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Who Owns the Behringer DEQ2496?
"Gary Eickmeier" wrote in message ... I played with the 2496 long enough to learn all of its functions and features, did a few EQs with it, measured my speakers etc etc, but I got a little nervous about having an additional A/D D/A in my system so I yanked it out of there and the sound seems a lot better now, tighter, more together, larger soundstage, etc. So my main question would be: Whenever we have a digital component in the system, especially a digital recorder, we try and make best use of available bits. But the analog inputs to the unit from my receiver were variable IAW the volume knob. So how did I ever know that I was using all of the bits in the equalizer? The output meter usually barely moved. The input I doubt had enough gain for 16 bits to be filled up. Finally had time to re-insert the equalizer and see what the switch does. As you say, it changes the input level by 10 dB, with compensating padding of output by the same amount. IOW, nothing changes but the input meters. With a healthy signal coming in and played loud, my input meters are hitting about at the -40 level with the switch in the +22 position. With the +12 position they hit -30, with peaks getting dangerously close to clipping. So I guess if I keep it in the system I will keep it on the +22 position. I am using plenty of bits and no danger of clipping. As for sound quality differences, I will have to listen some more when I am more relaxed, have more time to evaluate things. As I said, could just be psychoacoustic. Whenever you change something you may perceive an imaginary improvement. Thanks, Gary |
#93
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Who Owns the Behringer DEQ2496?
"Gary Eickmeier" wrote in message
... "Gary Eickmeier" wrote in message ... I played with the 2496 long enough to learn all of its functions and features, did a few EQs with it, measured my speakers etc etc, but I got a little nervous about having an additional A/D D/A in my system so I yanked it out of there and the sound seems a lot better now, tighter, more together, larger soundstage, etc. So my main question would be: Whenever we have a digital component in the system, especially a digital recorder, we try and make best use of available bits. But the analog inputs to the unit from my receiver were variable IAW the volume knob. So how did I ever know that I was using all of the bits in the equalizer? The output meter usually barely moved. The input I doubt had enough gain for 16 bits to be filled up. Finally had time to re-insert the equalizer and see what the switch does. As you say, it changes the input level by 10 dB, with compensating padding of output by the same amount. IOW, nothing changes but the input meters. With a healthy signal coming in and played loud, my input meters are hitting about at the -40 level with the switch in the +22 position. With the +12 position they hit -30, with peaks getting dangerously close to clipping. So I guess if I keep it in the system I will keep it on the +22 position. I am using plenty of bits and no danger of clipping. As for sound quality differences, I will have to listen some more when I am more relaxed, have more time to evaluate things. As I said, could just be psychoacoustic. Whenever you change something you may perceive an imaginary improvement. Thanks, Gary Are you responding to your own post because nobody else will? |
#94
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Who Owns the Behringer DEQ2496?
On 17-08-2014 03:32, Gary Eickmeier wrote:
Finally had time to re-insert the equalizer and see what the switch does. As you say, it changes the input level by 10 dB, with compensating padding of output by the same amount. Thanks, confirms that the device description by someone is to the point. IOW, nothing changes but the input meters. IF nothing changed but the meters it would be a meter sensitivity switch. With a healthy signal coming in and played loud, my input meters are hitting about at the -40 level with the switch in the +22 position. With the +12 position they hit -30, with peaks getting dangerously close to clipping. Some of the time one has to pick nits. This is one of those times. If the meters hit -40 with the switch in the high line level position then there CAN NOT exist peaks above -30 when in the household line level position. Also, what does "dangerously close to clipping" mean? What is the input sensitivity of your poweramp? - are you running it as per my recommendations, ie. with attenuated input or are you running it flat out? - in the latter case you appear to imply that it is smallish for the task you ask it to do. So I guess if I keep it in the system I will keep it on the +22 position. I am using plenty of bits and no danger of clipping. As for sound quality differences, I will have to listen some more when I am more relaxed, have more time to evaluate things. As I said, could just be psychoacoustic. Whenever you change something you may perceive an imaginary improvement. When I get me one of those thingies I am going to run it hot and attenuate its output. There is no reason for me to see - I may end up standing corrected, but I want to see that correction if any - to increase its input gain *because* doing that will also increase its input stage distortion. Gary Kind regards Peter Larsen |
#95
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Who Owns the Behringer DEQ2496?
"Peter Larsen" wrote in message k... On 17-08-2014 03:32, Gary Eickmeier wrote: Finally had time to re-insert the equalizer and see what the switch does. As you say, it changes the input level by 10 dB, with compensating padding of output by the same amount. Thanks, confirms that the device description by someone is to the point. IOW, nothing changes but the input meters. IF nothing changed but the meters it would be a meter sensitivity switch. I'm just reporting what happens. With a healthy signal coming in and played loud, my input meters are hitting about at the -40 level with the switch in the +22 position. With the +12 position they hit -30, with peaks getting dangerously close to clipping. Some of the time one has to pick nits. This is one of those times. If the meters hit -40 with the switch in the high line level position then there CAN NOT exist peaks above -30 when in the household line level position. I'm just reporting what happens. Also, what does "dangerously close to clipping" mean? In the particular recording that I was using, it hit peaks of -13. On another recording I could foresee it clipping easily. Clipping is bad. What is the input sensitivity of your poweramp? - are you running it as per my recommendations, ie. with attenuated input or are you running it flat out? - in the latter case you appear to imply that it is smallish for the task you ask it to do. Just some Carver M 1.5s. So I guess if I keep it in the system I will keep it on the +22 position. I am using plenty of bits and no danger of clipping. As for sound quality differences, I will have to listen some more when I am more relaxed, have more time to evaluate things. As I said, could just be psychoacoustic. Whenever you change something you may perceive an imaginary improvement. When I get me one of those thingies I am going to run it hot and attenuate its output. There is no reason for me to see - I may end up standing corrected, but I want to see that correction if any - to increase its input gain *because* doing that will also increase its input stage distortion. Then just keep it at the +22 position. Behringer thought of everyithing. Gary Kind regards Peter Larsen |
#96
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Who Owns the Behringer DEQ2496?
"Gary Eickmeier" wrote in message
... "Peter Larsen" wrote in message k... On 17-08-2014 03:32, Gary Eickmeier wrote: Finally had time to re-insert the equalizer and see what the switch does. As you say, it changes the input level by 10 dB, with compensating padding of output by the same amount. Thanks, confirms that the device description by someone is to the point. IOW, nothing changes but the input meters. IF nothing changed but the meters it would be a meter sensitivity switch. I'm just reporting what happens. You're just squawking about what you observe with your eyes and mind closed. When anyone tries to tell you how it works (or point you to a source such as a text), you're too busy squawking about what you observe with your eyes and mind closed, and you insist that you have no time to actually understand. Do you think anyone who knows how it works has any interest in your reporting of your limited observations? Then just keep it at the +22 position. Behringer thought of everyithing. Yeah, that's certainly easier than actually learning something. |
#97
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Who Owns the Behringer DEQ2496?
PStamler wrote: "You really don't want to be "filling up" the bits; that means you're pushing the edge of digital clipping, which sounds horrible. "
When you say it, you get praise. When I say it, I get flamed! WTF?! Agreed Paul, and I wish this F~~~ING "use all the bits" mentality would disappear completely from mother Earth ONCE AND FOR FRICKIN' ALL!! |
#98
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Who Owns the Behringer DEQ2496?
wrote:
PStamler wrote: "You really don't want to be "filling up" the bits; that means you're pushing the edge of digital clipping, which sounds horrible. " When you say it, you get praise. When I say it, I get flamed! WTF?! Because you're saying two totally different things. Moving the reference level up and down does not necessarily cause clipping and is totally independent of compression. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#99
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Who Owns the Behringer DEQ2496?
|
#100
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Who Owns the Behringer DEQ2496?
geoff wrote: "Because you clear have no understanding that "using all the bits" has
nothing to do with loudness, and does not inherently have anything to do " A 16bit file of a 1kHz sine at full scale is using all 16bits. A 16bit file of a 1kHz sine peaking at -12dBfs is effectively a 14bit recording. All things equal at playback, the former of the above two will be LOUDER. Simple common sense. Bits determine total AMPLITUDE(absolute dynamic range) between noise floor and full scale. |
#101
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Who Owns the Behringer DEQ2496?
"Peter Larsen" wrote in message
k... On 17-08-2014 03:32, Gary Eickmeier wrote: When I get me one of those thingies I am going to run it hot and attenuate its output. There is no reason for me to see - I may end up standing corrected, but I want to see that correction if any - to increase its input gain *because* doing that will also increase its input stage distortion. Maybe, and maybe not. A lot of opamps with will have a tiny amount of crossover distortion on the output, but at a fixed level. The distortion percentage goes down as the output signal increases, until some other mechanism dominates the distortion. You just need the right level, not too low and not too high. Sean |
#102
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Who Owns the Behringer DEQ2496?
wrote in message ... geoff wrote: "Because you clear have no understanding that "using all the bits" has nothing to do with loudness, and does not inherently have anything to do " A 16bit file of a 1kHz sine at full scale is using all 16bits. A 16bit file of a 1kHz sine peaking at -12dBfs is effectively a 14bit recording. All things equal at playback, the former of the above two will be LOUDER. Simple common sense. Bits determine total AMPLITUDE(absolute dynamic range) between noise floor and full scale. OK OK, this group seems to get hold of a topic - or even a sentence - like a junkyard dog and tear it to "bits." All I meant by fill up the bits was the commonly understood principle of using the full dynamic range of whatever AD processor we are talking about. If you are recording, you generally want the peaks to go as high as possible without going over, just like in the analog days. Using 24 bit converters maybe makes the task easier and gives us more headroom, but within reason, we want to put a good strong signal through the processor lest the LSB get lost in noise. Right? Gary |
#103
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Who Owns the Behringer DEQ2496?
"Sean Conolly" wrote in message ... "Peter Larsen" wrote in message k... On 17-08-2014 03:32, Gary Eickmeier wrote: When I get me one of those thingies I am going to run it hot and attenuate its output. There is no reason for me to see - I may end up standing corrected, but I want to see that correction if any - to increase its input gain *because* doing that will also increase its input stage distortion. Maybe, and maybe not. A lot of opamps with will have a tiny amount of crossover distortion on the output, but at a fixed level. The distortion percentage goes down as the output signal increases, until some other mechanism dominates the distortion. You just need the right level, not too low and not too high. Sean Reasonable! Sean, which position of the switch do you use? Was my description of what it does correct? I need to play with it just a little more, maybe this weekend. Also need to measure the loudness with it in and out of the system, as Paul suggests. There may be a difference, even tho there shouldn't be. Gary |
#104
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Who Owns the Behringer DEQ2496?
"Gary Eickmeier" wrote in message
... "Sean Conolly" wrote in message ... "Peter Larsen" wrote in message k... On 17-08-2014 03:32, Gary Eickmeier wrote: When I get me one of those thingies I am going to run it hot and attenuate its output. There is no reason for me to see - I may end up standing corrected, but I want to see that correction if any - to increase its input gain *because* doing that will also increase its input stage distortion. Maybe, and maybe not. A lot of opamps with will have a tiny amount of crossover distortion on the output, but at a fixed level. The distortion percentage goes down as the output signal increases, until some other mechanism dominates the distortion. You just need the right level, not too low and not too high. Sean Reasonable! Sean, which position of the switch do you use? Was my description of what it does correct? I need to play with it just a little more, maybe this weekend. Also need to measure the loudness with it in and out of the system, as Paul suggests. There may be a difference, even tho there shouldn't be. I never even knew the switch wasn't for the RTA mic until this thread started! But all of my gear runs at 'pro' level so the default setting is fine. I can also patch it into my DAW using the AES jacks to bypass the analog stages entirely if needed. And no, it's not just the meters that are changing. The actual conversion level is being shifted by 10db so maybe a little less noise on quiet signals, and easier to clip on louder signals. Try both, and listen carefully to the difference. I would not be suprised if you don't hear any, and that you still hear a subtle difference if you take it out of the chain. It's not 'audiophile' grade gear, it's a good piece of 'pro-sumer' gear - better than most home stereo equipment but still has some tradeoffs to meet a price point. The real value of the unit is the stuff between the converters, so if you have a digital source like S/PDIF from a CD player that would be good to try. Sean |
#105
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Who Owns the Behringer DEQ2496?
On Tuesday, August 19, 2014 7:34:35 PM UTC-6, Sean Conolly wrote:
A lot of opamps with will have a tiny amount of crossover distortion on the output, but at a fixed level. The distortion percentage goes down as the output signal increases, until some other mechanism dominates the distortion. I expected that to be the case when I began reading Samuel Groner's exhaustive tests of opamps; I was surprised to find that it wasn't so. A few of the circuits he tested showed crossover distortion, but the majority didn't. Peace, Paul |
#106
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Who Owns the Behringer DEQ2496?
On 20-08-2014 02:34, Sean Conolly wrote:
"Peter Larsen" wrote in message k... On 17-08-2014 03:32, Gary Eickmeier wrote: When I get me one of those thingies I am going to run it hot and attenuate its output. There is no reason for me to see - I may end up standing corrected, but I want to see that correction if any - to increase its input gain *because* doing that will also increase its input stage distortion. Maybe, and maybe not. A lot of opamps with will have a tiny amount of crossover distortion on the output, but at a fixed level. The distortion percentage goes down as the output signal increases, until some other mechanism dominates the distortion. You just need the right level, not too low and not too high. Yes. I have twice experienced more signal though a gizmo being a clear advantage, first as previously mentioned with an electronic x-over when it had LF356'es in it - 15 dB more signal = 15 dB less noise and cleaner treble - and later with my SV3800, with that one it probably was/is a converter linearity issue. Also there are marginal circuitry out there that benefits from running with max negative feedback, my MR8HD is an example, it is actually very good when running with input gain low and sounds like plastic with it set high, so using an external mic pre is a good choice with it. Knowing that there are people out there actually making a living - or part of a living - from selling new analog boards to the DCX - for me makes it a good first hypothesis that the Behringer 1 rack unit DCX and DEQ boxes should be run as hot as possible, albeit of course allowing proper operational headroom. This also because audible noise has been reported in home use context with household type power amplifier input sensitivity. Digital in and if possible out may be a good strategy, even just digital in will take one set of mediocre opamps out of the circuit. Having both is probably also a good idea for loudspeaker experiments. Sean Kind regards Peter Larsen |
#107
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Who Owns the Behringer DEQ2496?
|
#108
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Who Owns the Behringer DEQ2496?
This (L)east (S)ignificant (B)it: Done some reading up on it and all I need is a simple answer: Is the lsb at the top(near full scale) or at the bottom, amplitude-wise?
|
#109
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Who Owns the Behringer DEQ2496?
wrote in message
... This (L)east (S)ignificant (B)it: Done some reading up on it and all I need is a simple answer: Is the lsb at the top(near full scale) or at the bottom, amplitude-wise? No. |
#110
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Who Owns the Behringer DEQ2496?
Sean Conolly wrote:
"Peter Larsen" wrote in message . dk... On 17-08-2014 03:32, Gary Eickmeier wrote: When I get me one of those thingies I am going to run it hot and attenuate its output. There is no reason for me to see - I may end up standing corrected, but I want to see that correction if any - to increase its input gain *because* doing that will also increase its input stage distortion. Maybe, and maybe not. A lot of opamps with will have a tiny amount of crossover distortion on the output, but at a fixed level. The distortion percentage goes down as the output signal increases, until some other mechanism dominates the distortion. There aren't so many of these left any more. This was a very popular distortion source with early op-amps, and it's still the primary distortion source of the INA103. This is why some of the popular Walt Jung modifications involved adding DC bias to the output to turn off one of the output transistors and shift the whole thing into class A single-transistor operation at the expense of voltage swing and current drive. These days this is a much more rare thing, although it can be still found now and then. The good news is that most datasheets will have a plot of output swing vs. distortion so you can be forewarned. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#111
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Who Owns the Behringer DEQ2496?
Gary Eickmeier wrote:
All I meant by fill up the bits was the commonly understood principle of using the full dynamic range of whatever AD processor we are talking about. If you are recording, you generally want the peaks to go as high as possible without going over, just like in the analog days. Using 24 bit converters maybe makes the task easier and gives us more headroom, but within reason, we want to put a good strong signal through the processor lest the LSB get lost in noise. Correct. What you're talking about has nothing to do with linearity, only with gain reference level, and there is one unfortunately frequent poster who does not understand the difference between these. However, we do live in the 21st century where it's common for the noise floor to be well below -100dBFS, so the need to worry about working as close as possible to the limit no longer exists except for the final release. It is very common for people to be recording with peaks at -20dBFS in order to have safety margin today. You could not do that with 1/4", even with Dolby A. --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#112
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Who Owns the Behringer DEQ2496?
PStamler wrote:
On Tuesday, August 19, 2014 7:34:35 PM UTC-6, Sean Conolly wrote: A lot of opamps with will have a tiny amount of crossover distortion on the output, but at a fixed level. The distortion percentage goes down as the output signal increases, until some other mechanism dominates the distortion. I expected that to be the case when I began reading Samuel Groner's exhaustive tests of opamps; I was surprised to find that it wasn't so. A few of the circuits he tested showed crossover distortion, but the majority didn't. And let me guess, the ones that showed a lot of crossover distortion were video op-amps designed for driving 75 ohm loads? --scott -- "C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis." |
#113
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Who Owns the Behringer DEQ2496?
Scott Dorsey wrote:
wrote: PStamler wrote: "You really don't want to be "filling up" the bits; that means you're pushing the edge of digital clipping, which sounds horrible. " When you say it, you get praise. When I say it, I get flamed! WTF?! WTF = Way Too Funny! Because you're saying two totally different things. Moving the reference level up and down does not necessarily cause clipping and is totally independent of compression. --scott Did you hear the one about the pinhead who uses Vise-Grips for hatbands? -- shut up and play your guitar * HankAlrich.Com HankandShaidriMusic.Com YouTube.Com/WalkinayMusic |
#114
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Who Owns the Behringer DEQ2496?
On Wednesday, August 20, 2014 8:46:49 AM UTC-6, Scott Dorsey wrote:
PStamler wrote: On Tuesday, August 19, 2014 7:34:35 PM UTC-6, Sean Conolly wrote: A lot of opamps with will have a tiny amount of crossover distortion on the output, but at a fixed level. The distortion percentage goes down as the output signal increases, until some other mechanism dominates the distortion. I expected that to be the case when I began reading Samuel Groner's exhaustive tests of opamps; I was surprised to find that it wasn't so. A few of the circuits he tested showed crossover distortion, but the majority didn't. And let me guess, the ones that showed a lot of crossover distortion were video op-amps designed for driving 75 ohm loads? Actually no. The two chips that showed crossover distortion significant enough to mention were the LT1007 and LT1632, neither of which seems to be designed for video use. BTW, if anyone wants to download this extremely useful set of tests, it can be found at: http://tinyurl.com/opamptests Peace, Paul |
#115
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Who Owns the Behringer DEQ2496?
|
#116
Posted to rec.audio.pro
|
|||
|
|||
Who Owns the Behringer DEQ2496?
"geoff" wrote in message
... On 20/08/2014 11:33 p.m., wrote: This (L)east (S)ignificant (B)it: Done some reading up on it and all I need is a simple answer: Is the lsb at the top(near full scale) or at the bottom, amplitude-wise? You needed to read up on it ?!!! Krissie Kretin has been reading up on the numbers from one to ten. All he needs is a simple answer: Is ten the biggie or the smallie? All that "reading up" didn't sink in. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Behringer DEQ2496 failure(s)? | Pro Audio | |||
Behringer DEQ2496 crashes | Tech | |||
Behringer Ultracurve Pro DEQ2496 | High End Audio |