 
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
|
|
Audio Asylum Thread Printer Get a view of an entire thread on one page |
For Sale Ads |
I'm using the Behringer pro DSP8024 for a month now... 277euro, I couldn't resist. I've been using it stock for now and I'm impressed about the overall quality (transparancy), really (as long as the input signal you use is high enough for not loosing to much in resolution). I'm searching right now for the schematics (at least of the analog in and outputs) before getting into the first tweaking sessions. Anybody out there who can help me with these?Looked already at the data sheets of the CS5394, AK5392 and AK5394 and the data sheets of their application boards. If I'm not mistaken, probably two NJM4580 are used per input, so 4 opamps (two for input signal, one CM DC correction and one as buffer for VCOM-pin) which could result to the circuit used on the CS5394 app. board as input for the AK5392 (since balanced and unbalanced compatibility). At least my idea after a quick look.
Does anybody has these schematics? Please contact me.
Thanks,
Bernie
Follow Ups:
I almost bought one of these yesterday, but the salesman sort of talked me out of it when I told him the system I would put it in doubles as a studio monitoring system and audiophile listening system.
He said Behringer wasn't "audiophile" quality, and I'd agree with him, based on the Behringer equipment I do own.
I presently have a Rane MOJO-series stereo 31 band EQ, came highly recommended, and it's only problem is that the EQ circuitry, when engaged, adds a fair amount of noise (and I'm not boosting the high-end of the EQ scale).
I liked having the RTA within this Behringer, and they CLAIM to have good noise specs.Is the DSP8024 *really* transparent and clean enough to use with audiophile components? Or is it realistically another not-so-great quality piece of gear for the "affordable" (read: low end) market that Behringer shoots for...?
I have one which is back in it's original box in the closet.
That must tell you something.
It's a great design idea that was poorly executed and with crappy
parts so they can sell a lot of them for cheap. That's their
business model.If your system has high enough resolving power you will notice
the jitter and harshness imparted to the sound.
It's also difficult to make it work properly without overloading
the input and other things like that.I would love to have the same sort of device only of truly audiophile
quality, made by someone who really understands how to do digital.
The dbx Driverack is the same price as the UC used to be ($500) and adds digital crossover capabilities, as well as Auto-EQ and parametric EQ.In my system, it sounds cleaner than the UC did, without the horrid A/D lowlevel garbage.
Hi,
> It's a great design idea that was poorly executed
> and with crappy partsMost of the key parts are the same as used by all the other in the business.
> If your system has high enough resolving power you
> will notice the jitter and harshness imparted to the sound.If you operate the EQ digital only than you have to connect it correctly to avoid jitter. The manual is not comprehensive in this context. If you use the EQ analog then, in stock condition it does impart a certain (small) degree of electronic sheen.
Note my comments apply ONLY to the earlier version of the DSP8024, the version currently sold cheaply appears to have altered circuits and parts, as well as a different firmware.
> It's also difficult to make it work properly
> without overloading the input and other things like that.This is your inability to ensure correct matching, nothing to blame on the EQ. User error. Any digital equalisation system will suffer similar problems, as will any analog EQ if not used sensibly. You cannot boost a EQ slider 16db and expect the thing not to clip if the level prior to the boosting was "0db"...
> I would love to have the same sort of device only of truly
> audiophile quality, made by someone who really understands
> how to do digital.Go buy an Accuphase.
Sayonara
Konichiwa, er, Kuei,show us a picture of the innards of your old Behr, coming week
I'll post some of the recent cheap version with v1.3 firmware.
LaterW
:-P
Mine has the digital interface board installed and I used it with
high quality 1 meter AES/EBU cables between the transport and the
DAC. I used only 6 to 8 db EQ on the worst spots.It sucks some of the life out of the music.
I use Camelot Merlin Pro transport and Uther II DAC so I can hook up
different cables (I2S,AES/EBU,coax,etc.) at the same time and then
sit back with the remote and do A,B comparisons, in this case
with the ultracurve in the path or out, and with everything zeroed
on the ultracurve you can clearly hear the difference in added
harshness, especially on something soft like female vocals.I will check into Accuphase, thanks for the tip.
Hi,If you compare an AES/EBU (or S/P-DIF) connection to a I2S connection the I2S connection will always win. However, you will never get a Digital EQ or Room Correction System with I2S inputs and outputs as there is no common I2S standard.
I doubt that other Digital EQ's have much better implementations of the I/O system, as effectively only one manufacturer makes the needed interface chips and they are used by all manufactuerers (namely the cirrus logic parts under the crystal brand). The Crystal parts are pretty had to implement badly, so I doubt Behringer nade something much worse than others....
You should perhaps invest into a db technologies, Weiss or Chord DAC, all of which strip the jitter out after the receiver by using a RAM Buffer and are also said to eliminate the sonic difference between Digital Cables and Transports.
As to "sucking life out of the music".... I have demonstrated repeatedly the difference with the Behringer in Circuit (analogue inputs) and doing nothing (flat EQ) and the unit bypassed (simply plug the XLR Input/Output cables together. The difference between in/out is absolutely minimal and even under sighted conditions impossible to accuratly catch.
When you equalise problems in the room/speaker system out you will alter the character of the sound. The result may be that when a certain technical flaw is correct which previously artifically injected "life" the sound will appear "flat". This is simply a question of understanding what equalisers do and use them to achieve what you want.
As for overload, if your digital signal has peaks of 0dbfs and you boost a given band by 6db than you need to attenuate the master by 6db or you will attemp to provide an output of 6db above the maximum possible.
I will repeat, if used correctly the Behringer is "good enough" in almost all systems. It can benefit from electronic modifications, sure and can be bettered, but not much.
Sayonara
The Behringer works, but doesn't sound too good. I guess it's ok for the price.
I use mine in my studio, a 16 channel Fostex digital deck fed by a Yamaha 01V board. The Behringer adds no perceptible noise. I don't use it in the recorded signal chain, only on playback with the auto EQ, but I have no complaints. For two hundred bucks it delivers. As for audiophile use, if your speakers and the rest of your gear truly qualify as audiophile grade you shouldn't need an EQ in the chain.
Valid point - audiophile gear shouldn't need or use EQ...
Unfortunately, the room this stuff is in SUCKS audio-wise, particularly in the low-end. (Another room isn't an option.)
I do have Auralex(?) foam on the walls, which helps a great deal, but the room shape & size sucks for bass. Rather than add a subwoofer, I prefer to EQ, which HAS been working nicely, except for the Rane's noise...
Precisely. Remember that the true audiophile is one who not only appreciates perfect reproduction but also can afford it. Rather than 'corrupt' a signal with processing equipment he'd build a new house to audio spec- whcih is certainly fine if you can afford it. The rest of us use EQ.
As to the noise from your Rane, 'tis unusual for good gear to add appreciable noise levels when used judiciously. If it's HF noise I think there's not enough level going into it- quite possible if the Rane is a pro +10dB configuration and the rest is consumer -4dB stuff. If the noise is LF a ground loop situation may be present. The Rane site can help you with both those problems.
Yea, I was figuring "levels" had something to do with the noise.
The Rane accepts -10 unbalanced and +4 balanced (same on output). The gear between the Rane is -10.
I bought the Ebtech Line Level Shifter, which changes -10 and +4 levels, and converts balanced & unbalanced, and also serves as an isolation transformer, breaking ground loops (which isn't a problem I'm having.)
I have to make up some special cables to get it going, but, I believe raising the input to +4 will help lower the noise level in the final stages.
Thanks for your input.
" if your speakers and the rest of your gear truly qualify as audiophile grade you shouldn't need an EQ in the chain. "Ah. So suddenly the laws of physics and room acoustics don't apply
anymore to those who throw enough money at their system.
While I personally have no problem with using EQ as required, very high-end equipment users tend to be reticent about making any alteration to the signal, to the extent of not even having tone controls on the pre-amp, and think nothing of doing whatever needs to be done to make the listening room acoustically perfect. You can more or less accomplish the same task electronically, but that runs counter to the goals of the average purist.
Yes. You can substantially improve high end systems by using high end EQ in the digital domain via Accuphase and Tact processors. The DAC on Tacts is crappish though.
though tweeking while in the digital domain is far less offensive to high end sensibilities than an alteration of an analog signal. This assumes that the tweeking gear is fed by a digital source so that there is no more than a single DA conversion in the chain, and that the source material is also of digital origin. But suggesting something of the sort be done to 'wax' or tape sourced material is heresy, though I wouldn't hesitate to resucitate 78s,45s and LPs using digital technology, and while at it fix things up sonically.
A previous post on the subject (if memory serves) indicated that Behinger does not hand out schematics. At least not unless to are an official authorized to service center.Not so surprising -- why would they want to help someone else make knock-off clones of the product.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Top of Page ]
[ Contact Us ]
[ Support/Wish List ]
[ Copyright © 2025, Audio Asylum, all rights reserved ]
