X32 Discussion

[Per Søvik]

Re: X32 Discussion

Per,

If a simple 2nd order HPF or LPF and Totally Random EQ™ were all that was needed for loudspeaker processing nowadays life would be easier, indeed. I would like to know what manufacturer's DSP those filters match.

Agreed, trying to replicate a dedicated speaker processor is very hard (or impossible) and not done by simply twiddling a couple of knobs 'till it looks right.

However, the speaker tunings of a dbx driverack or some other multi purpose processor are within reach with some reasonably careful work. The settings in the picture was just the result of some quick fiddling to get noise looking right in the RTA without much regard for anything else. I could have tried to match closely to fourth order BW or LW and throw in some eq as per drpa speaker tunings, but my point here was to show a simple, usable 4th order filter.
I tried this very setup with some extra tuning as a replacement for my driverack, and to me it sounds clearer even without any fine-tuning. I didn't A-B properly, I'll do that later.
Much earlier in this topic, someone with proper filter knowledge describes the proper way to set up a couple of filter types.

 

[Phil Lewandowski]

Re: X32 Discussion

I just got my x32 yesterday and I was playing around with a mic and the channels, and I noticed that when I am talking into the mic (or making any noise at all into the mic) and at the same time am trying to change the Gain I hear a clicking/popping noise as it moves up and down the gain structure.

I am listening through the headphone monitor, so it is possible could only be there, and not the main outs. I have not hooked up to my system yet to the board. It will not make any noise when I am moving the gain for my MP3 player through the Aux 1&2 only through the Mic on any CH (I tried multiple.)

Let me know what you guys think, or if you can re-produce it.

Brian

Mine does that too, but it is only through the headphone out. (I didn't check monitor out thought) Outputs are clean.

 

[Tim McCulloch]

Re: X32 Discussion

Thats twice now in this thread that you have rubbished the idea of having the crossover in the desk.

For the audience that this desk is intended for, having a (or maybe several, as they are just software) DCX in there is a really good idea. For folks who might use this desk but who are not the intended audience, then it is an unnecessary function.

It's a really good idea, as long, of course, as it is done correctly. So that the virtual crossover "sticks" in place, despite recalling scenes. So the outputs stay in place and don't change on recall. The probably realisation of this would be another page on the display with the DCX on there with its own set of store and recall functions, all entirely independent of the console recall. As this'll use DSP resources, it may be that slots in the effects rack may need to be sacrificed. As these are all software choices made at runtime, its a choice a user can make "eyes wide open" with no penalty incurred for not using the crossover.

So a bijou band just runs a Cat5 from X32 to amp rack, and the S16 is in the rack all cabled ready to go.

After 30+ years in the audio biz, I've made most of the beginner mistakes (and a few of them several times). Based on my personal experience and the observations of others making the same and different mistakes, I stand by my statement that there ain't a damn thing wrong with using the right tool for a given job.

 

[John Roberts]

Re: X32 Discussion

Mine does that too, but it is only through the headphone out. (I didn't check monitor out thought) Outputs are clean.

The symptom description "sounds" like zipper noise. Since the digital gain gets changed in steps, it multiplies that step change times whatever signal is coming through. The fix or remedy for zipper noise is to coordinate gain changes with audio zero crossings, so the gain step times zero audio voltage makes zero click voltage (zero times anything is zero). It is not clear to me how this could be corrected in one place and not everywhere.
..

Caveat: This is pure speculation on my part, so it may be something else entirely.

JR

 

[Shane Presley]

Re: X32 Discussion

You wouldn't run an xlr to the amprack, anyone with half a brain that doesn't have a rack fetish would tuck the crossover away in the amprack and run the outs via the S16. Having a crossover at FOH would soon necessitate a multi to run all signals back to the amprack, my analogue setup have 10 returns to stage when I also count monitors. The S16 and any x-overs and feedback killers goes in the amprack. You don't spend money on digital stageboxes to have more cables to lay down.:

I think what you are implying is a crossover should be at FOH and not in the amp rack, it belongs in the amp rack (at least in our league JV), and if you have half a brain - and you have access to it wirelessly. Otherwise as someone said you could easily eat up 8 plus return lines. I repeat, console --------cat 5------- to s16, dual xlr to crossover (or if there is AES out of the s16, one 110ohm xlr cable)
please drive through

 

[Karl Barnes]

Re: X32 Discussion

The symptom description "sounds" like zipper noise. Since the digital gain gets changed in steps, it multiplies that step change times whatever signal is coming through. The fix or remedy for zipper noise is to coordinate gain changes with audio zero crossings, so the gain step times zero audio voltage makes zero click voltage (zero times anything is zero). It is not clear to me how this could be corrected in one place and not everywhere.
..

Caveat: This is pure speculation on my part, so it may be something else entirely.

JR

Yep, that's zipper noise and is a symptom found on many digital desks at many different price points (LS9, DM2000, etc).
With the pre-amp gain being controlled in digital steps rather, it is not as smooth as an analog gain.

It's the way that digital works. There is no fix, short of changing the resolution of the pre-amp gain control, but that's likely to add to the price.

But seeing as gain is usually set well before showtime, I fail so see that it's a problem.

I've noticed it on my X32 during line/soundchecks, but I don't ride the gain during the show, so it's not what I would class as being a problem.

Karl.

 

[Paul Johnson]

Re: X32 Discussion

I took the advice to my question about having the crossover filtering in the desk and not in a box near the amps - BUT - other people have commented on the 'pro' aspects against the 'cons' - and I've one more question. What is the difference between the processing taking place FOH, or on stage. Sure - getting it wrong can wreck things, but that can also be done by an idiot on stage playing with recallable memories in a processor there?

Nobody has yet given any logical reason why processing has to be done from stage, apart from statements saying it must, and detailing what can go wrong.

Not convinced yet. Has anyone else had to pull an amp rack centre stage to actually hear what the crossover tweaking actually sounds like?

 

[Dick Rees]

Re: X32 Discussion

I took the advice to my question about having the crossover filtering in the desk and not in a box near the amps - BUT - other people have commented on the 'pro' aspects against the 'cons' - and I've one more question. What is the difference between the processing taking place FOH, or on stage. Sure - getting it wrong can wreck things, but that can also be done by an idiot on stage playing with recallable memories in a processor there?

I've not seen any DSP where the settings cannot be locked down to prevent unauthorized tampering.

Not convinced yet. Has anyone else had to pull an amp rack centre stage to actually hear what the crossover tweaking actually sounds like?

Again, DSP units can be controlled remotely. No need to drag the amp rack center stage.....OR to be tied down to the console position. These days you can take a pad and tweak things from any seat in the house.

6 x one, 6 x other

 

[Tilen Sluga]

Re: X32 Discussion

Hello everybody,

Is there any way to route the main LR bus pre fader to the matrix buses? I would like to have a matrix LR output independent of the main bus fader but so far I only managed to send the main bus post fader to the matrix buses.

Thanks,

Tilen

 

[John Roberts]

Re: X32 Discussion

Yep, that's zipper noise and is a symptom found on many digital desks at many different price points (LS9, DM2000, etc).
With the pre-amp gain being controlled in digital steps rather, it is not as smooth as an analog gain.

It's the way that digital works. There is no fix, short of changing the resolution of the pre-amp gain control, but that's likely to add to the price.

But seeing as gain is usually set well before showtime, I fail so see that it's a problem.

I've noticed it on my X32 during line/soundchecks, but I don't ride the gain during the show, so it's not what I would class as being a problem.

Karl.

Zipper noise is avoidable the way I mentioned (zero crossing coordination). Premium digitally controlled mic preamp chip sets like the THAT 5171 use zero cross technology.

I repeat I do not know what is going on in the OPs case, but it seems odd to be present in one output and not another, if zipper noise is the cause..

JR

 

[Tim McCulloch]

Re: X32 Discussion

Agreed, trying to replicate a dedicated speaker processor is very hard (or impossible) and not done by simply twiddling a couple of knobs 'till it looks right.

{Snip}
Much earlier in this topic, someone with proper filter knowledge describes the proper way to set up a couple of filter types.

You've pointed out part of why I think the majority of console owners who attempt to do more than extremely simple crossover filters will fuck up more than they will accomplish. While I don't question that you like the results you achieved in situ for a simple crossover, doing loudspeaker alignments, system alignments/optimization, etc are best left to either dedicated DSP, amplifiers with internal DSP, or powered speakers that contain whatever processing they require for factory specified results.

The primary point of this console technology is to make mixing a more effective and controlled creative process, not necessarily drop the piece count of *SYSTEM* processing.

I realize that my current work and employment are not the same as what most Jr. Varsity/LAB Lounge participants experience, but I've been there, done that, and still have the battle scars to prove it... I don't need no stinkin' t-shirt. My advice is based on 3+ decades of experience. Experience means that I've probably made most of the mistakes possible with the technology available at the time; it means that I'm still learning new technology and techniques and making new mistakes along with finding better/faster/cheaper ways to do things. While I don't expect anyone to take my words as gospel, they do come for someone who would rather not see others needlessly repeat his mistakes.

Ultimately, though, everyone is free to try whatever tasks, duties, implementations etc with this mixer or any other product they choose to purchase. Each owner's situation and needs can be very different from one another. If someone really wants to eat up their output count attempting loudspeaker alignments with their X32; if someone isn't scared at the concept of putting system alignment and tuning into a desk that can't have those functions LOCKED, I don't suppose I'll lose any sleep over it... but I'll never design a system that way, even at the bar band level. The tuition for the "Why System Duties Need *System* Control" was rather steep...

(musical interlude)
"Do what you wanna, do what you will
Just don't mess up your neighbor's thrill
And as you pay the bill, kindly leave a little tip
To help the next poor sucker on his one-way trip."

Frank Zappa (/musical interlude)

Have fun, good luck.

 

[Chris Painter]

Re: X32 Discussion

Hello everybody,

Is there any way to route the main LR bus pre fader to the matrix buses? I would like to have a matrix LR output independent of the main bus fader but so far I only managed to send the main bus post fader to the matrix buses.

Thanks,

Tilen

Dear Tilen,

This is a really good question. It looks like the answer is no. You cannot send the Main Mix to a Matrix Pre fader. The Busses can be Pre or Post fader of course, but not the Main Mix. The "insert" on the Matrix can be selected Pre or Post.

Just as a suggestion, if you have a stereo bus still left available maybe you could use it as another version of the Main Mix instead of a Matrix. Alternately, perhaps you can switch what roles the Matrix and Main Mix are playing so that the Matrix is the thing being turned down while the Main Mix can stay up. I hope this helps!


Best,

Chris Painter
Specialist, Product Support
MUSIC Group
BEHRINGER

 

[Tim Ringgenberg]

Re: X32 Discussion

I took the advice to my question about having the crossover filtering in the desk and not in a box near the amps - BUT - other people have commented on the 'pro' aspects against the 'cons' - and I've one more question. What is the difference between the processing taking place FOH, or on stage. Sure - getting it wrong can wreck things, but that can also be done by an idiot on stage playing with recallable memories in a processor there?

Nobody has yet given any logical reason why processing has to be done from stage, apart from statements saying it must, and detailing what can go wrong.

Not convinced yet. Has anyone else had to pull an amp rack centre stage to actually hear what the crossover tweaking actually sounds like?

Having been doing live sound work for over 30 years and having my X-over in both positions I made the switch to my x-over in my amp rack if for nothing more than an easier set up. No more worrying about if the right cables are plugged into the right outs and ins. I find that I rarely have to make changes to my Driverack 260. Some tweeks to the EQ and that is about it. Maybe changing my sub settings once in a while or a minor adjustment to my limiters but that is not the norm for me. After working on tuning my system for a year I just don't need to make that many changes anymore. I had a guest engineer from a national touring band that after 2 different shows 4 months apart he said you really have this system tuned well. He was very complimentary about the system and how much sound he was able to get from what I had for the P.A.

Just think about what happens that one time you get your subs and tweets mixed up. I also have different programs in my Driverack for different types of set ups. Very handy to have at the rack rather than at FOH.

I was once told that what ever works for you might not work for someone else and this is one of those cases. I don't see any X-overs at the FOH position when working with large touring companies and there must be a good reason for it. Best of luck to you.

 

[Tim Ringgenberg]

Re: X32 Discussion

I can agree with Tim's comments almost 100%. When you have been doing this for 3+ decades you learn a thing or two. If you spend time setting up P.A.s and getting them to sound there best you make a mistake or two and also discover things that work well. If you are using a folded horn type sub with a front loaded mid/high cabinet you will need to do some delay work in there. A speaker management processor in almost a must these days. The X 32 is meant to be a mixing console and to make mixing easier. I suppose a simple X-over could be added in a firmware update but I would let a speaker management processor do the work for best results. I try to share my mistakes so others don't have learn the same way I did.

 

[Mike Johnson]

Re: X32 Discussion

Hello all. New member here. New subject: Connectivity X-32 / PC directly via RJ45. IP address, check. Latest firmware / X-Control, check. No dice. What's up? Go!
-MJ

 

[Mike Johnson]

Re: X32 Discussion

Oh, Instead of integrating x-over function, how about delay function on outputs (as the inputs have..). Like the parametrics on ins and outs. Made tuning wedges this weekend a snap! ...but that's not why I called
-M

 

[Dick Rees]

Re: X32 Discussion

Cut the abbreviated jargon and translate into clearer statements, then ask a specific question.

Go!

 

[Per Søvik]

Re: X32 Discussion

I took the advice to my question about having the crossover filtering in the desk and not in a box near the amps - BUT - other people have commented on the 'pro' aspects against the 'cons' - and I've one more question. What is the difference between the processing taking place FOH, or on stage. Sure - getting it wrong can wreck things, but that can also be done by an idiot on stage playing with recallable memories in a processor there?

Nobody has yet given any logical reason why processing has to be done from stage, apart from statements saying it must, and detailing what can go wrong.

Not convinced yet. Has anyone else had to pull an amp rack centre stage to actually hear what the crossover tweaking actually sounds like?

Of course the crossover doesn't have to be on stage, or in the amprack or anywhere else for that matter. I've had very good reasons for keeping mine in the FOH racks, because there I can control it, particularly the feedback function that is more of a dynamic thing than room-tuning and speaker alignment that can be done at the amprack pre show. My drpa+ can't be remote controlled, so having it in the amprack is a bit of a pita. Now, enter the X32 and at least one of my foh racks are gone, what is left is dual cd player, distribution amp, in-ear transmitters and wireless receivers. I'm still using my snakes, so transporting loads of channels from foh is not a problem, and FOH is still the most practical location for everything.
When the S16 arrives, it is essentially a waste of money unless I can leave something heavy and time-consuming at home. If I can lose a snake and a rack and a few connections, there is time and work and backpain saved right there. If that means having the crossover in the amprack, than that's a no-brainer. If it means I lose some functionality unless I can do the same with the console, than why not look at the console? Crossing between subs and full range tops is a relatively simple task, it doesn't require a genious and certainly doesn't involve any of the black art that goes on inside a Meyer or d&b dedicated processor. Losing feedback control on the mains is not a big deal most of the time, and the x32 plus a laptop is fully capable of taking care of any room tuning that is needed.
I might use the drpa+ to actively cross my unpowered monitors, for now it will probably be looking forward to duty as dedicated feedback killer on athose monitor channels, while the Behringer feedback exterminator looks after the feedback on the powered monitors (it pops, and powered speakers are less prone to be damaged).
I could replace the drpa+ with something that can be remote controlled and fed by aes/ebu, but I would rather not. I'm not going to spend the equivalent of an X32 on outboard gear that I don't believe I need, and I am not going to negate a lot of the potential time- and work saving by not doing doable things because experienced people say it can't be done. I'll always listen to any advice and learn what I can from it, but I won't always follow it.
I was told you couldn't cascade highpass or lowpass filters on the X32, but when I tried it it worked and measured fine. It might not be by the book, and not strictly LW or BW, but neither I or the speakers really care.

 

[Per Søvik]

Re: X32 Discussion

Hello everybody,

Is there any way to route the main LR bus pre fader to the matrix buses? I would like to have a matrix LR output independent of the main bus fader but so far I only managed to send the main bus post fader to the matrix buses.

Thanks,

Tilen

What you could do is replicate the Main LR in a subgroup, but that would obviously sacrifice two buschannels and require you to set up send for each individual inputchannel (doesn't take too long though)

Sorry, answered already, please ignore.

 

[Per Søvik]

Re: X32 Discussion

Oh, Instead of integrating x-over function, how about delay function on outputs (as the inputs have..). Like the parametrics on ins and outs. Made tuning wedges this weekend a snap! ...but that's not why I called
-M

There is, in the routing section