AVS Forum banner

1 - 10 of 10 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
474 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
My existing receiver is equipped with Audyssey MultiEQ and I don't like it. I was able to get my hands on a Denon X5200 and liked the improvement I heard with XT32. However I had to return that receiver due to a faulty thermal sensor causing the receiver to shut off all the time. I have since been using Equalizer APO for movies and music from the HTPC. My PS4 and Wii currently are not eq'd.

Moving forward I would like to go separates. For now I will be using my existing receiver. My plan is to add a low power PC (maybe a n NUC) controlling 2 Behringer UMC1820s - one for 7 LCR and surrounds and the other for subs (front and future nearfield). So the setup will be:

HTPC (bit stream), PS4, Wii -> AVR -> UMC1820 (EQ APO) -> Amps -> speakers and subs.

Anything wrong with this setup? Any comments/suggestions welcome. Thanks
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
15,940 Posts
Am I understanding this correctly that if going with the second setup, and not a functional XT32 Denon AVR like the 5200, that you are planning on setting the EQ by ear?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,991 Posts
My plan is to add a low power PC (maybe a n NUC) controlling 2 Behringer UMC1820s ...
I'm not sure how well a low-power PC would work with one interface, let alone two. These types of audio interfaces take a good amount of CPU, at least when recording—I'd imagine that a lot of tracks going out would also be tough on the CPU. I found a user over on Gearslutz who talked about audio glitching due to running out of CPU with an i7 with 24 gig of RAM, running to a SSD drive. Of course that was at 16 tracks in, but I'm running a different (read: much better) interface, and I don't go over eight tracks with an i5 Mac with 16 gig of RAM.

Also, if it were me (and I have some Behringer gear in my studio), I wouldn't use one of these Behringer interfaces for any of my home audio setups. This interface was delayed for at least two years, and was only finally released to market a couple of months ago. Using Windows, you'd probably be using version 1.0 drivers, meaning you'd essentially be a beta tester.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
474 Posts
Discussion Starter #4 (Edited)
Am I understanding this correctly that if going with the second setup, and not a functional XT32 Denon AVR like the 5200, that you are planning on setting the EQ by ear?
Sorry I forgot to mention I am using REW to measure and generate the correction filters. I then export those filters and plug them into Equalizer APO.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
474 Posts
Discussion Starter #5
I'm not sure how well a low-power PC would work with one interface, let alone two. These types of audio interfaces take a good amount of CPU, at least when recording—I'd imagine that a lot of tracks going out would also be tough on the CPU. I found a user over on Gearslutz who talked about audio glitching due to running out of CPU with an i7 with 24 gig of RAM, running to a SSD drive. Of course that was at 16 tracks in, but I'm running a different (read: much better) interface, and I don't go over eight tracks with an i5 Mac with 16 gig of RAM.

Also, if it were me (and I have some Behringer gear in my studio), I wouldn't use one of these Behringer interfaces for any of my home audio setups. This interface was delayed for at least two years, and was only finally released to market a couple of months ago. Using Windows, you'd probably be using version 1.0 drivers, meaning you'd essentially be a beta tester.
Thank you. Yikes, sounds like a disaster of an idea then. :D Sounds like more trouble that its worth.The beauty of this though is how cheap these behringer UMC1820s are.

My HTPC is an older i5 with 8GB of RAM and I think it says CPU usage is 3 to 4% depending on the filters I use. This is for 7 channels. But they are all internal source and processed before sending to the receiver. Maybe there in more overhead for incoming audio streams than outgoing ones?

Any recommendations for multichannel eqs that are not too expensive?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
474 Posts
Discussion Starter #7 (Edited)
This is a perfect situation for one of the MiniDSP boxes.
Thanks. It looks like the MiniDSP 10x10HD would actually work great for me. if it had 1 more output it would have been perfect (7 speakers plus 4 subs).

EDIT: Spoke too soon. This only has 8 analog outputs so I will need one more for the subs. At that point it is going to get expensive. Not sure if the benefits are worth the cost over a receiver with Audyssey XT32.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,991 Posts
Thank you. Yikes, sounds like a disaster of an idea then. :D Sounds like more trouble that its worth.The beauty of this though is how cheap these behringer UMC1820s are.

My HTPC is an older i5 with 8GB of RAM and I think it says CPU usage is 3 to 4% depending on the filters I use. This is for 7 channels. But they are all internal source and processed before sending to the receiver. Maybe there in more overhead for incoming audio streams than outgoing ones?

Any recommendations for multichannel eqs that are not too expensive?
In a project/composition studio like mine, that's the appeal of all Behringer gear—it's cheap. And if (when) it breaks, you can just throw it out and buy another (which reminds me—one of my Berry patch bays is crapping out on me).

That HTPC looks like it'd probably be powerful enough to run one of those interfaces. I don't know of anyone who's run two, though, or if it's even possible. It might be possible on a Mac as the interface is class-compliant, but it's hard to say if Windows drivers would work in multiples. The ones I've seen that can run multiple on any computer usually note in the specs that they can be expanded and/or daisy-chained. And usually it's much larger studios who'd need that much I/O anyway, and they're in a different world of gear—and you'd never see any Behringer in those places.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8,781 Posts
Thanks. It looks like the MiniDSP 10x10HD would actually work great for me. if it had 1 more output it would have been perfect (7 speakers plus 4 subs).
Do you need to be able to EQ the surrounds, especially the rears? And the subs individually? Have you actually measured them to see what they need to have done?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
474 Posts
Discussion Starter #10
Do you need to be able to EQ the surrounds, especially the rears? And the subs individually? Have you actually measured them to see what they need to have done?
I have DIYSG 893s for LCR, Volt 6's for surround and front height, and dual 15" subs in front. Planning to add 4 nearfield subs in the future. I have measured them using REW and currently eqing them using EQ APO with good results, better than Multi EQ my receiver has.

I want to work on room treatments before doing more intensive measurements and eq but that is on hold until I can get a new TV. In the meantime I want to gather and test the equipment I need to be able to do that.
 
1 - 10 of 10 Posts
Top