Printable View
I am wanting to put together the SQ stereo I had always dreamed of now that I am leaning on 50 and can afford it. I have been collecting gear including an old 3 way (9-5-1) Phoenix Gold/morel components that I want to run active and I am wondering what is the best eq to run these, some rear fill and then of course some 12s(morel 12" Ultimo Ti's). What have you used and what did you like or dislike about it?
First off, I'm no expert. I have minimal experience with processors, but here's my take. All processors have pros and cons. I use a PPI DSP-88R. It has basic xovers, decent eq, optical input and time alignment. It does not have any auto tune features. It also has a clunky interface. I have it because it did what I needed for a price I could manage.
My advice is figure out what you need (want), and your budget. Once you find your options, test drive the software. Most have demo versions. When you get it to 2 or 3 options, post up. Folks will be able to give you better advice with specific units.
FWIW I've heard great cars with many different processors.
good luck with your search :)
Helix, jl, minidsp are usually the go to. Then arc, Dayton, alpine, etc are probably the next.
You're still running that dinosaur...
I am sure those are all great EQ's but on the digital EQ's it seems like there is always something that ends up almost making it a deal breaker that you only find out once you have it and are trying to figure it out. I am just trying to avoid that to see if anyone has experience with these brands to say yes/no to any of them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jdunk54nl
Quote:
Originally Posted by ttocs
I personally have helix, dayton, minidsp, adau eval boards, and have quite a bit of experience with JL.
JL - all pass filters limiting and 10 bands of eq for each channel - requries optical loopback for global eq great support with tun and autoset
Dayton - no all pass filters and 10 bands of eq for each channel also no input eq - requires rca loopback for any more of anything
minidsp - 10 bands of eq on output and 10 bands on input (can loop back for more if you want)
helix - most robust end user eq side currently
adau eval boards - the world of dsp is your oyster. - can be finicky and lower input/output voltages allowed. Also eval board so just basically a raw circuit board, but the 1467 eval is cool to play with!
Thanks this is exactly what I was looking for.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jdunk54nl
I throw in Mosconi into the mix.
Up to 12 channels of output depending on model, sophisticated input EQ including allpass, Notch and shelving filters, input time delay compensation, up to 4 global EQs, up to 10 band of filters for each channel, integrated measurement system including automatic time alignment, Auto-EQ for single drivers and global EQ, automatic phase correction after setting time alignment, crossovers and output filters.
Mixer where you can add, substract, mix signals from different sources, triggers for different sources. Triggers can use EQs, delay and output gains from other presets.
Ability to incorporate a CAN bus module for cars like when you want to use a digital source like a phone or digital audio player and still keeping stock volume, balance, fader and other controls if they are actually controlled via CAN bus....
Yes, at least in the US it comes with a price, but feature and soundwise it's easily on the same level as Helix.
How about the user interface? Is it fairly easy to pick up and make sense the way it is set up? Thanks for your time I had wondered about them.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cathul
Try it out yourself. You can use a demo mode for every supported Mosconi DSP product in the new GUI.Quote:
Originally Posted by ttocs
Some say it's bad, some love it (i do), so best would be to try for yourself and see if you can live with the workflow that Frank Miketta has in his mind when creating the GUI.
If in doubt ask me questions, i'll answer them as good as i can.
That phase correction is not actually measuring phase itself. It is just changing the phase of a driver to driver interaction, remeasure, check, repeat. There is no gurantees that it is actually aligning the phase the best it can be without measuring the phase directly. You could get the phase correct for that crossover, but now the rest of the system is out of phase or other driver to driver interactions are now messed up.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cathul
I would suggest someone only use that if they really know what they are doing. You have just as good of a chance of messing something up as actually fixing something.
Then you haven’t used the recent versions of the Mosconi software. PHaC is now based on actual acoustical measurements, not phase of electrical domain.
I edited my post to correct for the newest version. It does not measure phase directly and is only paying attention to certain driver interactions to change phase. I stand by my use only if you know what you're doing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Cathul
Only paying attention to phase via that method is a very dangerous slope and could easily fix one driver to driver interaction and mess up others. If one is doing phase this way, because it is the best tool they have, then they need to pay attention to any and all drivers that interact with each other when manipulating phase. Just doing it for one here, then one here will not work well for most and you're lucky if you are the good case.
Like all things, mosconi has some cool tools in the tool box, but the person using those tools should still have a great understanding of how to use that tool. You should choose the right tool for the right job based on your own knowledge. Otherwise bad things can happen if you are using a tool that you don't understand what it is actually for and doing. (This goes for all dsps)
PHaC works surprisingly good if you follow the Mosconi workflow of setting initial T/A with the help of a binaural mic, set crossovers and driver specific filters afterwards and then do the phase correction.
I verified this in some of the cars i did.
If you do some other workflow, like doing T/A after doing crossovers and driver specific filters then chances are good that it doesn't correctly work, that's true, but that's also not the intended workflow with the Mosconi software.
Sounds like an epic setup! Ever considered trying a DSP for fine-tuning?Quote:
Originally Posted by ttocs