[JohnR]

Rclark - I believe if you review this thread you will find that everyone who has actually done this active speaker thing says it was a lot of work. Your belief that it would be fun stands in contradiction of numerous testimonials.

I don't see why work and fun are necessarily mutually exclusive. Most (?) people find learning and accomplishing new things to be rewarding.

[JohnR]

Nope, sold it.  There are better (IMO) computer-based solutions out there like Audiolense and Acourate - and they actually get updated, unlike the DEQX.  The DEQX is nice in that its stand-alone but this also makes it difficult to upgrade as technology advances.

I am curious - would you be willing to provide some information on the upgrades that you would have liked to see? Are they in the DSP engine itself, or the control software? I'm interested in a "generic" sense, not wrt the DEQX specifically.

[sts9fan]

I don't see why work and fun are necessarily mutually exclusive. Most (?) people find learning and accomplishing new things to be rewarding.

His comment is because MJ does not build stuff.  Personally I believe if you don't enjoy this stuff then you need to find another hobby!  I love tweaking slopes and seeing what is gonna happen in REW or HOLM.

[doug s.]

I don't see why work and fun are necessarily mutually exclusive. Most (?) people find learning and accomplishing new things to be rewarding.

+1! 

doug s.

[rajacat]

I don't see why work and fun are necessarily mutually exclusive. Most (?) people find learning and accomplishing new things to be rewarding.

+2

[Tyson]

It is a lot of work, and it's a steep learning curve, but once you figure it out and get a feel for it, it's super cool to be able to hear how different changes affect the sound.  Obviously this is too much time/work/effort for some people and it not worth it, and I'd say they should probably not be hanging out in "The Lab"

[Davey]

Much of the "design" work in line-level crossovers is related to creating the proper acoustic responses, crossover slopes, etc, etc.  That's an effort that would be required regardless of whether the design is passive (speaker-level) or line-level.  That is where the steep learning curve is located.

However, creating the actual electronic circuits does take a bit of skill, but there are plenty of resources available nowadays for capable DIY'ers.  Active crossover pcb board group-buys, information pages on creating active filters and passive-line-level filters, etc, etc.

DSP-based crossovers are deceptively simple and may "endow" some speaker designers with capabilities they don't really have.    It's easy to twiddle knobs until it sounds "right" but that will hardly yield anything outstanding.  The devil is in the details.

Cheers,

Dave. 

[Tyson]

Agreed.  One lesson I learned - I can use almost unlimited amounts of EQ in my miniDSP to get the FR response "Flat" regardless of how bad it is without EQ.  But I find that getting the basic, non-EQ'd response as flat as possible and then only using a few points of EQ to finish it off is a far better sounding approach.  EQ is powerful, but not a panacea.

[JDUBS]

I am curious - would you be willing to provide some information on the upgrades that you would have liked to see? Are they in the DSP engine itself, or the control software? I'm interested in a "generic" sense, not wrt the DEQX specifically.

John, I was referring to the dsp.  The user control is great but I believe that dsps can / should continue to evolve in the context of pc horsepower increasing.  Check out Audiolense - Bernt is continually working to advance the product.  Something that isn't nearly as easy to do with static and dated hardware.

-Jim

[JohnR]

John, I was referring to the dsp.  The user control is great but I believe that dsps can / should continue to evolve in the context of pc horsepower increasing.  Check out Audiolense - Bernt is continually working to advance the product.  Something that isn't nearly as easy to do with static and dated hardware.

-Jim

I'd really like to have a go at an active crossover/EQ in computer, but last I looked it was pretty hard to get a standalone multi-channel DAC for the same price as one built into an active crossover. At the low end, the miniDSP 2x8 isn't perfect by any means but I didn't find any 8-ch DACs for < $400; at the high end, the DEQX at $4k seems high until you look at the prices of recommended DACs. I'm sure Metric Halo etc are very good, but ...

[JDUBS]

I'd really like to have a go at an active crossover/EQ in computer, but last I looked it was pretty hard to get a standalone multi-channel DAC for the same price as one built into an active crossover. At the low end, the miniDSP 2x8 isn't perfect by any means but I didn't find any 8-ch DACs for < $400; at the high end, the DEQX at $4k seems high until you look at the prices of recommended DACs. I'm sure Metric Halo etc are very good, but ...

John, take a look at pro audio solutions. You can pick up a 6 or 8-channel 24/192 solution for much less than "audiophile" brands.  Brands like TC Konnekt and Avid are two that come to mind as very good solutions when coupled with a software-based crossover package like Audiolense.  You can certainly put together something for MUCH less than the price of a DEQX.  Plus, the TC Konnekt and Avid have mic inputs in addition to their balanced outputs.

-Jim

[randytsuch]

I'd really like to have a go at an active crossover/EQ in computer, but last I looked it was pretty hard to get a standalone multi-channel DAC for the same price as one built into an active crossover. At the low end, the miniDSP 2x8 isn't perfect by any means but I didn't find any 8-ch DACs for < $400; at the high end, the DEQX at $4k seems high until you look at the prices of recommended DACs. I'm sure Metric Halo etc are very good, but ...

I have been thinking about the same type of project, and running into the same lack of options.  I have been looking at the miniDSP 2x8, and the Behringer, most other options are out of my budget.

There was an interesting project at diyaudio, someone was trying to use a COTS FPGA eval board, to implement a multi channel USB to I2S convertor.  The originator was using it for an active speaker.

They stopped posting end of last year, so not sure what happened.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/digital-line-level/200448-24-channels-usb-i2s-interface-source-codes-asio-vhdl-schematic.html

Randy

[Rick Craig]

I'd really like to have a go at an active crossover/EQ in computer, but last I looked it was pretty hard to get a standalone multi-channel DAC for the same price as one built into an active crossover. At the low end, the miniDSP 2x8 isn't perfect by any means but I didn't find any 8-ch DACs for < $400; at the high end, the DEQX at $4k seems high until you look at the prices of recommended DACs. I'm sure Metric Halo etc are very good, but ...

DEQX has the HD-Express unit for $2,150 (USD). Since you basically get a remote control preamp, DAC, and DSP crossover/EQ I think it's a great value.

[JDUBS]

I'd look at it like this:

TC Konnekt 48  $700 - or so; this is the lowest-priced one I saw on eBay.  You can score an Mbox Pro 3 (what I have) for < $500 but it only has 6 outputs.
Audiolense  $509 - includes a full year of upgrades - a significant upgrade seems to come out at least once per year.
JRiver MC  $49 - Best way (full 64-bit processing) to play music / movies using the convolution filters created in Audiolense. 

Total = $1258

The above assumes you already have a mic and a computer.  The mic plugs into the TC Konnekt which plugs into your computer via firewire.

-Jim

[Redefy Audio]

MOTU 828mk3 is currently have the best performance vs value for an audio interface.
check this
http://www.gearslutz.com/board/gear-shoot-outs-sound-file-comparisons-audio-tests/660499-ultimate-converter-da-ad-loopback-shootout-thread.html

they got similar performance to metric halo with only $750.

cheers
henry

[Russell Dawkins]

It's worth mentioning that TC has a strong reputation for sound in the pro community. Metric Halo has perhaps the strongest. That would be why Sonic Studio chose MH as the maker upon which to base their pricey interfaces.

[sts9fan]

Are anyone you running analog active system or all DSP?

[jtwrace]

Are anyone you running analog active system or all DSP?

I think I remember someone saying they're using a Marchaland.   

[chester_audio]

I use two Marchand two-ways cascaded on my horns. xm26 and xm126

[PRELUDE]

Are anyone you running analog active system or all DSP?

I use 3 way PASS LABS XVR1.
Here is the picture.
http://www.audiocircle.com/index.php?topic=94674.0