• WANTED: Happy members who like to discuss audio and other topics related to our interest. Desire to learn and share knowledge of science required. There are many reviews of audio hardware and expert members to help answer your questions. Click here to have your audio equipment measured for free!

Best Matrix Processor besides qsc core 110f? Replacement for Ashly Protea 24.24M

radeon

Member
Joined
Jan 8, 2022
Messages
25
Likes
3
What would be a good modern DSP? I'm currently using an Ashly Protea 24.24M but it's over 10 years old now and getting a newer processer with modern DA/AD chips seems like the next logical upgrade.

I'm looking at maybe the qsc core 110f, but want to make sure it's the best option, as it is quite a bit of money.

In an ideal world I would like to be able to create matrix's between several units, but it's not strictly required, especially if a single unit already has a ton of I/O.

Others have suggested minidsp, but based on Amir's review here, it does not seem like a good choice for an endgame system....

 
Last edited:
I use Symetrix they can handle big Matrices and support Dante for audio transport. I have 3 Radius AEC and the older 8x8 and DIGIO, you can download the software from Symetrix website to see if it meets your requirements. You may also consider BIAMP Tesira processors (with the latest software you have to enable 'legacy' processors in the settings for some of the older units. They are all very expensive new but are often available cheaply from Ebay and have good reliability.
 
I've installed many Xilica Solaro in stereo or 5.1 (Solaro QR1) up to 32 channels immersiv setups (Solaro FR1) : the DSP is quite as versatile and configurable as QSC Core110f.
Only its FIR capability is a bit less : 4096 taps per channel for Solaro against 8192 taps for Core110. But QR1 is less than half price of QSC.
 
I'm using 2x DDRC-88D for an Atmos setup; It's quite a flexible thing and I'm still loving the simplicity & results of Dirac to measure the room and build filters.

There's not a lot wrong with the digital version, that I can tell. Well, the UI is somewhat clunky compared to Trinnov and so on, but that's not a fair comparison.

I also have a DDRC-88A from when I had second 5.1 setup, and while adding a very slight veil to the sound, it was still a worthwhile trade off for me in terms of being a cheap way to get FR and phase straightened out by Dirac, the 8x8 matrix and x-overs/bass management. While it's not properly hi-fi, it isn't total garbage by any means, IMHO. If you do get an 88A, somewhat strangely channels 3-8 seem to have better converters than ch1&2, so in 5.1 I used ch3-8 for the main IO and then sometimes a second sub on channel 1 out.
 
I am using qsc core 250i and Symetrix Radius 12x8. qsc core 250i has far greater processing power than core 110f, up to 16 channels with 16384 taps.
Radius 12x8 support 64*64 dante/aes67 and slightly better analog lineout performance than qsc.

My setup : JBL SDP-55 or PC DVS 16 channels -> dante -> Symetrix Radius -> AES67 -> qsc core 250i -> lineout.
qsc core 250i ->AES67 -> Symetrix Radius -> lineout
 
For me, it all comes down to do I want FIR, and if so how much.
If I didn't want it, i think there are many very good options in the used marketplace, like some already mentioned.

I do use FIR a lot...so q-sys cores 250i, 500i, and 510i, which can all do 16k taps per channel are my choice.
Biggest dislikes with those cores are louder fans (than a 110f), and the need for a Dante card or AES or USB peripheral to get digital in.

I am beginning to really question the need for more than 8k taps however. Like many folks do, I've been doing all subwoofer work with IIR....other than the crossover to the main speaker. That xover gets complementary linear-phase, and it the requirement that determines the most number of taps needed. So it just comes down to xover order. 96dB/oct LR's at 100Hz are no problem for just the crossover. I think 6k taps works for 72 dB/oct without slippage. (Do remember when looking at oither brands, if they run at 96KHz you will need twice as many taps)
IIR PEQs imbedded into 8k taps don't work so well...simply not enough frequency resolution...so i just use IIR "perconditioning" including hpf, before then using a simple straightforward lin-phase xover.

Only saying that if folks feel the core110f is insufficient tap wise. ( i agree it's good for 8k per ch, but not sure for how many channels. Every new Designer release seem to get a little better in term of processor utilization.

If shopping for a used 110f, a little caution is in order.
Older V1 units are grandfathered with perpetual UCI licenses...BUT after a certain amount of time, their SSD drive fails (like any SSD)...and it means a $600 oh shit, mobo/SSD replacement repair.
If on ebay, all that is shown on the device LCD display is the QSYS system logo, there's a chance the unit has already failed.
Ask that they post some active screens.
If if the display shows details, like Design Status for example, it's still working fine....for now !
The V1 110f's going for parts only and very low price, may be a good deal, knowing you're going to send it to QSC and get back a new unit.
Alternative if a V2 with both UCI and 8x8 Dante can be had for a good price...that would be my first choice. (more for the Dante than anything..I need to inquire on what Dante add on licensces are for 110f's.)

Anyway, hope all that helps
 
Back
Top Bottom