[John Casler]

Seems the "buzz" about these is now starting to heat up.

It has been a couple years since i began gently suggesting this route and it is now aggressively involved in the sound.

The RM30 SDE, The RM2 SDE, and the 626jr SDE are the opening volleys of what is to come.

BUT. . . . aa  There is more.

The SDE BOX has 6 channels of which B, is using 4 for the Mains.  This leaves 2 full channels to be used for subwoofer systems.

It can be used for either Mono or Stereo subs and the seemless integration that it will provide will again create the VMPS cohesiveness and smoothness that is beyond description.

So if you are looking to "pick up" any of the SDE models B is currently offering, you MOST CERTAINLY should be thinking SUB.

Just imagine the 626jr SDE with the 215 in a blended 3/way

The RM30 or RM2 SDE's with a VSS pair!!!

You wouldn't want those two channels to go to waste, and as B always says "Waste not, want not"

[Brian Cheney]

I can program the extra outputs on the DCX2496 for a subwoofer no problem, when the purchaser buys his SDE system or later on by sending over a reprogrammed PCMCIA card.  Anyone with a spare amp can turn it into a subwoofer amp, and I can include room correction for the entire bass range if the owner gives me room dimensions and listening position, also at no charge.

Crossover and EQ updates are also easy to do via PCMCIA card which will be made available free to owners as they become available.

[Brian Cheney]

SDE owners and purchasers who have analog sources (particularly those with large LP collections and high end turntables) can purchase auxilliary analogue crossovers with their SDE speakers at low cost.

If you are ordering new speakers, you can have Digital Direct inputs and full analog inputs on the same speaker.  Charge is $200 for inboard analogue xovers and $450 fror outboard versions with stock capacitors.

This allows you to switch from digitally crossover-over/EQ'd/corrected operation to first order analogue filters simply by moving the speaker wires and bypassing the DCX2496.   You need not sacrifice the full glory of analogue sound to enter the digital age.  I believe we are the only manufacturer to offer this flexibility, which many audiophiles with multiple sources should value.

Cap upgrades ($650 for the Auricaps, $1200 for the TRT) are of course also available for the analogue filters of the SDE's.

[Housteau]

Is the quality of the ADC, DAC and digital signal in general through the DCX2496 really that good, or is this just all relative due do everything else that this unit can do so well?  I ask because it seems that most of the people that use these different Behringer units for high end audio just do so for the lower frequency EQ and management, where any unwanted artifacts would not be noticed.  However, higher frequencies can be much less forgiving.  Very good DACs and ADCs usually cost quite a bit more, and often even have good technical reasons for doing so .  Is the idea to keep the signal in the digital realm from the source to the amplifier?  If so, then the internal Behringer DAC would be taking the full duty of the systems main DAC, such as a Wadia, correct?  So, I am a bit puzzled.

[Brian Cheney]

The ADC/DAC section of the DCX2496 is a curious animal I don't think I've run into before.

It's obviously inexpensive.  Heard by itself by using the digital input fed from the digital output of my Krell transport, it sounds rather flat and uninvolving.  However, with the analog input engaged and fed from the analog output of my Wadia 27ix DAC with the digital volume control, it retains the lush sound of the Wadia pretty much without alteration.  Feeding the analog DCX input from the analog output of another player I use, the Denon 1300 DVDA player, you can clearly hear the difference between the Denon and the Wadia DAC's.

So with the analog inputs, I would call the ADC/DAC of the DCX2496 "tonally neutral".  If I were using it as a DAC only, I'd probably hire one of the many modders who improve the analog output with quality parts and wiring to enliven its sound.

[Russtafarian]

As a RM30 owner, I'm following the SDE developments closely.  My sources are vinyl, a universal player for SACD/DVD-A multichannel, and a squeezebox for 16 bit digital.  I could digitally connect the squeezebox to a Behringer x-over but I would prefer analog signal paths for the other sources. 

Brian, where would the analog SDE unit sit in the SDE signal path?  After the amp?  Between the amp and dig X-over?  Before the dig x-over?  What speaker wires would be moved to switch between analog and digital? 

How would the analog SDE differ from the TRT x-over that are in the speakers now?


BTW, Scott Endler has some interesting thoughts on Behringer based on his modification experiments. 

http://mysite.verizon.net/vze4c5pt/id11.html

Thanks.

Russ

[Housteau]

With a total of 6 channels available, 3 for the left and 3 for the right, I was curious on what the best options for a system like the V60 / VLA would be.  With this system there are choices to be made, since there are 4 sets of separate binding posts available.  You have the tweeters, midrange and upper bass for the RM-V60, then there is the set for the VLA bass towers.  Would you combine the upper frequencies using a passive crossover and then use the remaining 4 channels for the upper and lower bass, or use the entire DCX2496 on the V60s and let that Dayton sub amp take care of those bass towers?  I would think that option #1 would be the best since that gives the most control over the bass region that most folks generally need, but the second option has benefits as well, especially for the lucky person with a good room that does not suffer those bass issues.  I assume one of these methods will be the plan for the CES.

[Brian Cheney]

The analog crossover added to the SDE is the same one you have now.

The idea is to use the analog crossover on analog sources, and the digital crossover on digital sources.  If you have the OXO this is easy, as you just move the speaker wire to the direct inputs on the speaker and install the "digilog" adpter for the tweeter.

If you have inboard crossovers you should probably stay in the analog domain, or send the speakers to the factory for coversion to the OXO.

[Brian Cheney]

Housteau:

At CES we will control the main V60 wings and one sub from the DCX2496, the second sub from a Dayton sub amp with EQ.  This is because the DCX is set up for biamping a two way and one subwoofer and does not permit stereo subs.

What I suggest for you or any V60 owner is biamping the wings with the DCX and a second amp through the speakers' direct inputs, using the "digilog" adapter, rather than triamping.  I don't think triamping will improve matters and we have programs written for biamp operation with the "digilog" that took weeks to do.  I'd continue to use the Dayton amps on the VLA's, they sound good, have plenty of power, and that nice parametric EQ builtin.

The big improvements from biamping through the DCX: floor-to-ceiling room mode correction for the wings as well as for the VLA's, elimination of the mid panel 1-3kHz hump, compensation for the CDWG treble rolloff, and a few more tricks I won't discuss that are embedded in the password-protected program.

If you have an unused good quality amp for the bass section of the wings, go for it.  Otherwise amplification options have been discussed here at length.

[Housteau]

If you have an unused good quality amp for the bass section of the wings, go for it. 

I have passively biamped my V60s from the beginning with VTL on top and an older Electron Kinetics Eagle 2a for the upper bass.  That Eagle was one of the best bass amps for my Infinity RS1bs and it still has plenty of magic left for the V60.

Using your passive OXOs I can balance the tweeter and midrange drivers independently to the upper bass woofers, which is important when biamping with amps having different input sensitivities.  Does your digilog adaptor and the DCX allow for this along with the EQ functions that it has to offer?

[Brian Cheney]

You have two excellent amps for biamping.  I owned the Iverson amplifiers the entire time John was active in this country (his mysterious disappearance on the way by motocycle to CES--shortly after sending me the power amps I used there--is no proof of his demise).  At one time, when David Manley still ran VTL, I attempted rather feebly to represent his line here in Northern California.

When you biamp your speakers with the DCX2496 the following good things happen:

1. The bass coil is out of the circuit.  Inspite of our using a very low DCR choke and a simple first order network, taking this part out of the signal path benefits low frequency reproduction in many ways, not the least of which is better damping factor, and removing both resistive losses and 90 degrees of phase shift. 
2. The Lpads are taken out of the circuit.  Lpads whether fixed (using a pair of resistors) or variable (like we have) drain current to ground in order to match levels.  Dynamics improve when they're gone, as well as clarity and definition from eliminating the Lpad's inductive component.  The DCX has enough range (30dB) to compensate for differences in input sensitivity of any two amplifiers ever made, and you can do it in 0.1dB steps which I consider mandatory.  Plus it can be done quickly.
3. The midrange caps are out of the circuit.  Even with TRT's there is some signal degredation with series capacitors passing the signal through.  The trade off is whatever coloration the processor introduces, but I think you gain much more than you lose.  The treble caps in our "digilog" filter remain, but if they are high quality I see little advantage in triamping.

Since your amps have very different input sensitivities I suggest you send them to me for level matching and V60 EQ programming.  That costs $150 plus roundtrip shipping but assures you getting the maximum from your system. You can also learn how to make EQ changes yourself with the DCX, if you go slowly and are patient about it.

[Housteau]

Thank you for all the good information.  It is all definitely great food for thought, as it is actually hard to believe that it could get even better than what I have now.  I will download the manual and do some reading.

Both David Manely and John Iverson were quite something in their day.  My Deluxe 100 monos didn't come with a lot of information on the inner workings such as the bias adjustments, etc.  When asked about it from a third party Mr. Manley was of the opinion that if someone didn't know how to, or couldn't figure out how to properly use his amps, they didn't deserve to own them .  I really don't know if that is true, but I think it sounds likely.

John Iverson was also involved in developing some sort of advanced weaponry for the government around this same time.  It was all very hush, hush top secret sort of stuff.  He came to visit one one of his dealers in town for a few days, Wilson Audio in New Orleans.  Doug Wilson the owner had told me an interesting story about his visit.  I will email you about that, as I don't think it is appropriate to print here.  It is kinda out there, but I believe what I was told.

[Russtafarian]

If you have inboard crossovers you should probably stay in the analog domain

Thanks for the reply Brian.  I figured it'd be best to stick with the passive configuration for now. 

Here's another biamp question.  How about keeping the midrange/tweeter section passive and fed by it's own amp.  Then bypass the woofers' passive crossover components and use the Behringer to digitally shape the woofer's LPF to blend with the passive midrange's HPF?  That would take the bass coil out of the circuit, would it not?  And that would still leave another digital crossover point that could be used between the woofers and a sub, right?  That would give me eq and crossover control from about 300 hz on down for room correction and sub blending, while leaving 300hz and up completely in the analog domain.

My one concern with this approach would be whether the woofers would cohesively blend with the mids/tweeter when digitizing the bass and using different amps.  At one point I tried passively biamping the RM30s with Quicksilver monoblocks on the mids/tweeter and Hypex digital amps on the woofers and it screwed up the coherency of the speaker. 

Russ

[Brian Cheney]

You've discovered the importance of level matching.  Obviously there was too great a sensitivity difference between your two amps for them to work well together.

Hiwever, shorting the bass coil and using the DCX to control the woofer and sub is an excellent idea and will improve matters greatly.  Not only do you improve tightness and damping, but you are flexible with crossover on both sides of the woofer passband and you can notch out multiple room modes.

My advice: go for it.

[woodsyi]

Passive biamping is like kissing your sister -- a little peck on the cheek is all you get.  Short that coil and go active for the real Frencher.   

[Brian Cheney]

No argument there, but only when the EQ is sufficiently flexible and the speakers respond as well to EQ as the SDE's.