AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Ultra Hi-End HT Gear ($20,000+) › Best sounding active crossovers?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Best sounding active crossovers?

post #1 of 12
Thread Starter 
I currently use a heavily modified DEQX as my crossover in an active three way system with tube amps above the subs. I've also used a heavily modified Behringer, and, a Tact unit. In both cases I preferred the DEQX. Most of my source material is digital served off a high end low jitter hard drive setup.

Has anyone here compared the merits of some of the better active crossovers?

Am thinking about the Pass units, a heavily modified Marchand tube unit, Dolby Lake, Sonic Solutions, etc.
post #2 of 12
Behringer DCX2496 is hard to beat.....
post #3 of 12
Thread Starter 
For the money the Behringer is a staggering bargain.

But, it wasn't close to the DEQX, even after modding the power supply, analog stages, and clock. The DEQX has a far better user interface, greater out of the box functionality, and superior sonics. The Behringer had a bit of a "tinny hard edge" to it that got materially better, but did not go away, with power supply and analog output stage upgrades.

I'm wondering whether the hard core "pro" units or hard core analog units (e.g. Pass) sound better.
post #4 of 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brucemck2 View Post

I currently use a heavily modified DEQX as my crossover in an active three way system with tube amps above the subs. I've also used a heavily modified Behringer, and, a Tact unit. In both cases I preferred the DEQX. Most of my source material is digital served off a high end low jitter hard drive setup.

Brucemck2,

I've compared TacT and DEQX - and the TacT blows the DEQX away.

The problem is the setup. The DEQX is pretty much a "turn-key" system; that is
you install it and let it do its thing - and you get pretty good sound.

The TacT requires that the user "tune" the system - via selection of "target curves",
crossover order....

If you don't "tune" the TacT properly; I wouldn't be surprised that it would lose to a DEQX.

However, if you know the science and put in the effort to tune the TacT properly - the
results beat the DEQX by a long mile - especially if you get the Aberdeen mods.
[ Give Anthony Padilla a call - TacT owners know who he is. ]
post #5 of 12
Count me in for Rane. Well built, bulletproof.

I know Behringer is popular, but in the pro industry, it's considered a joke line frankly. (at least to me). There's a reason they are so cheap. Pop the cover.

I'm sure it's fine in a controlled environment such as a home, but I would never sell or install it in a pro installation.

If you want a bunch of processing in a box, check out www.xilica.com. I've used a few of these now, they work well, give lots of control and are inexpensive for what you get.
post #6 of 12
posts deleted/ infraction issued
post #7 of 12
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Morbius View Post

especially if you get the Aberdeen mods.
[ Give Anthony Padilla a call - TacT owners know who he is. ]

Anthony is working on my DEQX as we speak

I spent a lot of time playing with the Tact target curves. It was a nice unit.

I also spent a lot of time with the DEQX configuration, so my implementation was far from "turnkey"

I guess I could reframe my original question: (1) does the best pro gear, like Rane or Sonic Solutions or Lake, beat the best "consumer" gear like DEQX or Tact (and, why?), and, (2) how do the best analog units like the Pass or modded Marchands compare to the best digital units? Cost is not really the issue: it's pure performance.
post #8 of 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brucemck2 View Post

Anthony is working on my DEQX as we speak

I spent a lot of time playing with the Tact target curves. It was a nice unit.

I also spent a lot of time with the DEQX configuration, so my implementation was far from "turnkey"

Brucemck2,

Anthony does a great job.

Perhaps a good example of a "turn key" system would be the Lyngdorf system. You
still have to decide on what points in the room to sample for the Lyngdorf - but Lyngdorf
is attempting to be as "turn key" as possible.

TacT is attempting to do some of that too - but it does remain the consumer-level system that
has the most flexibility in terms of configuration. Flexibility is a "double edged sword". If you
are knowledgeable in acoustics - then the flexibility of the TacT gives you all the "knobs"
you need to tune the TacT to your room - something that really hasn't been completely
automated. That is a knowledgeable human can tweek the system better than a
software program. However, it also means that the human also has the ability to really
mess the system up - hence the "double edged" nature of the sword.

One should attempt to get a system that fits one's own expertise. In that regard, I would
expect that the professional systems are designed with an expectation that the user has
a good deal of knowledge. If one is an amateur audiophile - then I would doubt that a
professional system would be the best match. However, for a knowledgeable audiophile,
the pro system may just fit the bill. I don't have experience with the pro systems mentioned.

I would also point out that the TacT RCS 2.2 XP has the unique ability of doing DRC -
Dynamic Room Correction. That is the 2.2 XP can alter its correction algorithm based
on the volume level. Since human hearing isn't linear - the appropriate correction is a
function of the volume level. The TacT products are unique in implementing a correction
algorithm which is a function of volume level; as it should be.
post #9 of 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by Morbius View Post

I would also point out that the TacT RCS 2.2 XP has the unique ability of doing DRC -
Dynamic Room Correction. That is the 2.2 XP can alter its correction algorithm based
on the volume level. Since human hearing isn't linear - the appropriate correction is a
function of the volume level. The TacT products are unique in implementing a correction
algorithm which is a function of volume level; as it should be.

Mostly true but the TacT is not unique in that many Audyssey-equipped devices will do this as well.
post #10 of 12
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kal Rubinson View Post

Mostly true but the TacT is not unique in that many Audyssey-equipped devices will do this as well.

Kal,

Thank You for the update. I wasn't quite sure that others had not also implemented
the DRC technology.

I'm glad to see that some of the other manufacturers have followed TacT's lead on this.
post #11 of 12
Thread Starter 
I really like what the Audyssey Pro does for movies, but prefer it out of the chain with two channel music (largely because my subs have a separate PEQ that was professionally dialed in; the Pro really dials in the surrounds' timber match very nicely.)

Since almost all of my two channel source material is now hard drive based, I suspect I'll be able to get Tact / Audyssey quality PEQ on the laptop that's acting as my player.

Anyone with experience with either the Pass or the Marchand tube crossovers vs. the digital units?
post #12 of 12
...Am thinking about the Pass units, a heavily modified Marchand tube unit, Dolby Lake, Sonic Solutions, etc....

Dolby Lake is gone as of last year. They closed down the product line. You might also want to look at Bryston, TC Electronic and dBX Pro.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Ultra Hi-End HT Gear ($20,000+)
AVS › AVS Forum › Display Devices › Ultra Hi-End HT Gear ($20,000+) › Best sounding active crossovers?