I used a microphone to make the auto Eq, from dbx. I will see the links since I want to make it propperly.
For the sub should i go directely from the dbx? Or better use the full range option of the dbx and pass through the amp first.?
-
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!
Quick measurements of dbx DriveRack PA2 speaker management system
- Thread starter pkane
- Start date
For the sub should i go directely from the dbx? Or better use the full range option of the dbx and pass through the amp first.?
For the out line from the dbx i used HIGH for all high freq, and LOW (in mono) to go directly into the sub, as it is an active sub. I also chose PASIVE in the dbx configuration when it asks that option.
Should I choose full range and only use HIGH, and then go out to the sub from the amp? Thats someting I couldnt figure out the propper way.
OP
- Thread Starter
- #43
It sounds right. You could play with levels to adjust the balance, as well as the cut over frequency for the sub. The measurement mic and PC + REW will tell you much more precisely how to make those adjustments.
Ok great, Ill get into REW. I guess I will need an external audio card or phantom power to go into the laptop right?
OP
- Thread Starter
- #45
Yes, you could go that way if you already have an interface that supplies phantom power and has a USB or other digital PC interface. You could also consider a mic that don’t require phantom power or audio to digital conversion. MiniDSP UMIK mics plug right into a PC USB port, for example.
Thanks a lot!!!! Really
Oh, just one more doubt please
, if I want to use a DAC between dox and amp, how can I do to make it? since the output from dbx is analog XLR, I could use a xls to orca but still not a digital cable. And haven't seen DACs with analog inputs.
OP
- Thread Starter
- #48
There’s no good reason to use a DAC after DriveRack, but if you really want to try, you’ll need to do another analog to digital conversion that can then feed a DAC. Many pro interfaces can do this, but why?Oh, just one more doubt please
Just in case I still need more definition, instrument separation, and bigger deeper soundstage. Because the DAC from the NODE is ok.. but nothing spectacular. How could I make this conversion? which would be the way? Unless I use the DAC before the dox, so I have a very clean signal to EQ? But don't know if all the work that the DAC can do would be preserved after the dbx.
Last edited:
OP
- Thread Starter
- #50
You may be going about this the wrong way if you want a different DAC. You already have two DACs in the chain, one in Node the other in DriveRack. You're asking if you can add yet another one. You can, but you'll then have three DACs and two ADCs in your audio path. Seems like an unnecessary overkill and unlikely to achieve what you're trying to get out of it.
So sorry because of the doomie questions. I get the idea. So even after the dbx d be unnecessary I guess, that's the approach you suggest. How could I generate a 1khz signal to measure the volts to be equal in all the output connections?
OP
- Thread Starter
- #52
Yes. Getting the right room/curve correction and better speaker positioning (and good speakers) is a much more effective way to improve sound than replacing or adding another DAC in the chain. DACs have very little to do with instrument separation or "microdynamics" whatever that is
a good DAC is simply transparent: it doesn't add or remove anything audible when converting the signal from digital to analog.Alright! well Im getting into the logic. In case I want to measure the Volts in a 1khz signal, how could I generate a 1 kHz signal? I tried with dbx but I found it impossible.Yes. Getting the right room/curve correction and better speaker positioning (and good speakers) is a much more effective way to improve sound than replacing or adding another DAC in the chain. DACs have very little to do with instrument separation or "microdynamics" whatever that is
OP
- Thread Starter
- #54
1KHz can easily be generated by REW. Just make sure you make it low-level enough that you don't blow your speakers or your ears while trying to measure.
hahahaha Il be careful. So I need to connect the computer to the Node....by HDMI for example? so I can reproduce the signal through the speakers?
OP
- Thread Starter
- #56
I’m not familiar with Node, but I assume there is a way to stream audio from the PC. That’s what I would suggest you do, if possible.
I made it!!!!!!! Through the web OS to my LG TV, that is connected to Node by HDMI eArc. Cool!!!!! Thanks a lot and have a wonderful night
Just saw this thread. Good to see testing of loudspeaker management systems like this. I've seldom seen similar testing elsewhere. For the higher tier models (say, > $700) even user reviews are scarce.
On the general subject of testing DSP-based audio processors, it's been the subjective experience of many sound engineers that greater DSP bit depth is a very good thing if a lot of EQ manipulation is required. 24 bits used to be considered "good enough" but led to 32 bits led to 40 bits etc. Where I'm going here is, I wonder how you objectively test that? I know I use some fairly deep EQ in my home system, for example an 8.5dB second-order shelf to compensate my array of W18s.
I have an issue equalizing with the dbx. I bought a better microphone (beyerdinamics), but the TARGET curve is not flat, its steeper in the left side so the eq enhances the low bass region according to this line. Is there a way to set the target? So I can make it as flat as posible?
Similar threads
