Behringer DCX2496 Ultradrive Pro

[mah]

DCX2496 - Is it a good compromise vs a CX3400 + DEQ2496 pairing?

Marshall.

[bowtie427ss]

Only vs the CX3400 IMO. The DEQ is a very versatile unit itself and for some of us can even function as a useful stand alone basic analysis tool.

The DCX while touting a parametric EQ function really only offers one band of EQ per output and input channel, and the extent to which you can push the parameters is very strictly limited by the amount of internal memory in use. Probably best to look at it as a crossover only, as it cannot really perform the function of a stand alone EQ, and certainly not one like the DEQ.

Another thing to consider is that the DEQ can be connected to the DCX in the digital domain maintaining the minimum in A/D-D/A conversions.

Just my .02....................

[Old Guy]

The DEQ/DCX combo is quite good however.

D/A is where quality generally degrades, so straight digital between the two.

Bear in mind the 96 kHz of the Behringer vs 48 for most units in that price range...

[mah]

Very helpful, guys.

The DCX2496 is $AU230 more than the CX3400 at Downunder best prices. I guess I will have to look at the benefit of spending the extra amount, giving consideration to my ageing ears and whether they would benefit from the digital to digital transfer.

The Luddite in me likes the fact that the CX3400 has KNOBS.

Mmmm?, Marshall.

[Steve Mac]

...

The DCX while touting a parametric EQ function really only offers one band of EQ per output and input channel, and the extent to which you can push the parameters is very strictly limited by the amount of internal memory in use. Probably best to look at it as a crossover only, as it cannot really perform the function of a stand alone EQ, and certainly not one like ...

Just my .02....................

My goodness...this is not true!
Page 3...the parameter "NR", when highlighted...simply rotate the adjustment knob and a brand new band of EQ is added.

I've had multiple bands, slopes and shelves on all outputs of a stereo three way setting and was able to do all required work to bring the multiple speakers/transducers into balance. This is why I have not had the need to add the DEQ.

[Steve Mac]

Very helpful, guys.

The DCX2496 is $AU230 more than the CX3400 at Downunder best prices. I guess I will have to look at the benefit of spending the extra amount, giving consideration to my ageing ears and whether they would benefit from the digital to digital transfer.

The Luddite in me likes the fact that the CX3400 has KNOBS.

Mmmm?, Marshall.

I'm pretty sure you would be intrigued at how easy the dcx is to operate...

[Panomaniac]

The DCX is an amazing bit of kit. It does so much for so little money. Nothing else comes close. I also use the DEQ.

The DCX is not without its problems, tho. A lot of that is the output circuits, they just don't sound great (and I have measurements to prove it). Fixing those is a whole cottage industry. The digital input and clock can be improved, as well as the power supply. All that will cost more than the DCX, maybe 3X more - but in the end you'll have a superb crossover/DAC that can do what no other can.

Highest priority IMO is the analog outputs.

[Old Guy]

The DCX works fine into pro type gear...

Worth a read here...

Why modify the Behringer DCX2496 ?


http://www.linearaudio.nl/6chan-1.htm

[Panomaniac]

The second site you linked to is Jan Didden. A good and knowledgeable fellow. I think Jan will be in Austin next month when I'm there. It will be nice to meet him.

[mah]

I have read comments elsewhere stating the DCX2496 is noisy when used in home-type equipment because of lower drive levels. Has anyone noticed this?
I am concerned that this may be an issue with a 802/511B combination.

Would this concern also apply to the CX3400?

I have an almost completed DIY analogue LR crossover but thought I would look at the Behringer units because they include time delay. I have to say that the possibility of audible noise is a worry.

Marshall.