X32 Discussion

Re: X32 v2 RTA

Tim McCulloch said:
So how did you separate the analog preamp signal and monitor it before it went to the AD converter and through the rest of the signal chain?

Curious as to the techniques involved...
Click to expand...
Many (new generation?) people seems to include everything including the a/d-converter as the preamp on digital mixers and like, Perhaps it's time to redefine what a preamp is?
 
Re: X32 v2 RTA

Tim McCulloch said:
So how did you separate the analog preamp signal and monitor it before it went to the AD converter and through the rest of the signal chain?

Curious as to the techniques involved...
Click to expand...

Dear Tim,

of course i am talking about mic pre + ADC from DL251 vs Mic pre + ADC from X32 when I talk about the AB test.
just for your information: we did test several analogue consoles and only preamps in AB tests, and also Line inputs, which are
very close to the ADC performance when the signal chain is short enough. After all these tests in the past 15 Years my experience
shows me that the modern ADCs are quite good, and if nothing was done really bad, then these are NOT the bottleneck of the sound quality.
OTOH the Mic Preamps are so different, that they make almost all sonic differences between the consoles.

hope to answer your question,
Tamas
 
Re: X32 v2 RTA

Tamas Tako said:
X32 simply can not remote controll right now the gain of the DL251. Neither the phantom power. Period.
there is a remote controll software on KT''s ftp site, which allows for PC remote controll all of the functions of the DL251 however.
(i was not able to work with it, as the DL251 was not responding to the software somehow)
i did a quick ABC listening test in our studio with a DL251 how it sounds in comparison to the onboard X32 mic preamps...
all I can tell: even the Clock from DL251 (@48k) makes the system sound better, and the DL251 preamps are sounding also much better (much near to the quality of the reference signal) than the X32 onboard preamps. I think, this difference would be alone worth of the extra 2500 USD (for an M32) not to mention the pro series faders and the ergonomic design.
of course this is my subjective experience.

cheers,
Tamas
Click to expand...
Tamas,

Thanks for the evaluation. Would you mind giving some of the details about how you setup this test? I am surprised that there is a sonic difference since most off-the-shelf pre-amp chips these days are quite linear in their response.

Thanks in advance.
 
Re: X32 v2 RTA

Robert Lofgren said:
Hang on, just making sure...

Are you telling me that you think the x32 sounds much better when being externaly clocked by the dl251?
Click to expand...

corretly stated:

we did AB test the internal vs AES clocking on X32 (of course the DL251 was set accordingly) only with the DL251 inputs used!
(because they did sound so much better than the onboard X32 inputs)
so in that case we did hear a clear difference between X32's internal clock vs DL251 clock.
We did prefer the DL251 clock over the X32 internal definitely!

cheers,

Tamas
 
Re: X32 v2 RTA

Tamas Tako said:
corretly stated:

we did AB test the internal vs AES clocking on X32 (of course the DL251 was set accordingly) only with the DL251 inputs used!
(because they did sound so much better than the onboard X32 inputs)
so in that case we did hear a clear difference between X32's internal clock vs DL251 clock.
We did prefer the DL251 clock over the X32 internal definitely!

cheers,

Tamas
Click to expand...
Ok, would you mind explaining the sonic difference of this snakeoil. Can it be measured?
 
Re: X32 v2 RTA

Scott Bolt said:
Tamas,

Thanks for the evaluation. Would you mind giving some of the details about how you setup this test? I am surprised that there is a sonic difference since most off-the-shelf pre-amp chips these days are quite linear in their response.

Thanks in advance.
Click to expand...

Dear Scott,

first of all I dont know the schematics of the DL251 preamp, but the usual Midas pream is definitely not a Micpre chip.
also the X32 mic pre is not a single chip solution. And I can agree with you that moost of the MicPre chips on the market sound very similar to each other. But as stated above this is not the case with the X32 and the DL251...
we were in a studio listening room of ca 25 m2 with very good acoustics. Two 3 way high end studiomonitors.
One High End CD player as sound source.
One High End DAC to the X-32's AES/EBU output. From this DAC unit to the studio monitors.
we did use -12dBfs peak input signal (seen on the X-32 input level LEDs) and -6dBfs peak outut level (seen on the X-32's output LED bar)
we did listen several times several high end recordings.
tested X-32 inpit vs DL251 input, tested X-32 clock vs DL251 clock (only with DL251 inputs used) and as the reference we did listen to the CD players output directly on the Studio Monitors.
all listening levels were within 0.5 dB to eachother in order to avoid the "louder is alwas better" trap.

let me know, if you need more information.

cheers,

Tamas
 
Re: X32 v2 RTA

Robert Lofgren said:
Ok, would you mind explaining the sonic difference of this snakeoil. Can it be measured?
Click to expand...

Hm... Snakeoil..... :-) as you surely know, the quality of a digital signal depends on just a few things:
(technically) bit depth, sample rate and jitter (amplitude resolution, time resolution and sample timing accuarcy respectively). With a given ADC and/or DAC the signal quality depends only on the Jitter of the Clock.
Now with different clocking options you get different Jitter. ---> different signal quality.
the only way to really get rid of the influence of the jitter is to use a FiFo buffer ASRC, with very precise "secondar side" clock, to which you will reclock the incoming digital signal stream.

the effect on the sound in the actual test was, that with the DL251 Clock the sound was smoother but more accurate, as it would be less noise there which was covering all the fine details with the X-32's internal clock. This difference however was not that big, as the input circuit caused differences. I would say, i am not sure i would hear this difference in a real live gig situation. In the studio test the difference was altrough clearly there.

Cheers,

Tamas
 
Last edited:
Re: X32 v2 RTA

Tamas Tako said:
Hm... Snakeoil..... :-) as you surely know, the quality of a digital signal depends on just a few things:
(technically) bit depth, sample rate and jitter (amplitude resolution, time resolution and sample timing accuarcy respectively). With a given ADC and/or DAC the signal quality depends only on the Jitter of the Clock.
Now with different clocking options you get different Jitter. ---> different signal quality.
the only way to really get rid of the influence of the jitter is to use a FiFo buffer ASRC, with very precise "secondar side" clock, to which you will reclock the incoming digital signal stream.

the effect on the sound in the actual test was, that with the DL251 Clock the sound was smoother but more accurate, as it would be less noise there which was covering all the fine details with the X-32's internal clock. This difference however was not that big, as the input circuit caused differences. I would say, i am not sure i would hear this difference in a real live gig situation. In the studio test the difference was altrough clearly there.

Cheers,

Tamas
Click to expand...

Tamas,
I don't know how you did it but I can't even get my X32 to take clock sync from the DL251. For me, the X32 only works with the DL251 when the X32 is providing clock sync and the DL251 is set to external clock. Then again, I might be doing something wrong. However, I definitely agree that the sound quality is significantly better with the DL251 I/O vs. the X32's local I/O. I just don't know if where the sync comes from has any influence on this.

JP
 
Re: X32 v2 RTA

John Penkala said:
Tamas,
I don't know how you did it but I can't even get my X32 to take clock sync from the DL251. For me, the X32 only works with the DL251 when the X32 is providing clock sync and the DL251 is set to external clock. Then again, I might be doing something wrong. However, I definitely agree that the sound quality is significantly better with the DL251 I/O vs. the X32's local I/O. I just don't know if where the sync comes from has any influence on this.

JP
Click to expand...

Dear John,

i was able to set the DL251 to internal 48kHz and I was also able to set the X-32 to AES A input as Clock source. There was no problem. I use still 1.15 firmware version.

Someone stated here, he was able to adjust the ch1-24 GAIN and +48V right from the X32.... I was not able to do that. So there could be also some differences between X32 FW and or HW versions which differs in this manner.


cheers,

Tamas
 
Re: X32 v2 RTA

Tamas Tako said:
Dear John,

i was able to set the DL251 to internal 48kHz and I was also able to set the X-32 to AES A input as Clock source. There was no problem. I use still 1.15 firmware version.

Someone stated here, he was able to adjust the ch1-24 GAIN and +48V right from the X32.... I was not able to do that. So there could be also some differences between X32 FW and or HW versions which differs in this manner.


cheers,

Tamas
Click to expand...

Tamas,
That was me who has 1-24 working with the DL251. FWIW, I am back on 1.15 after trying 2.0 to see if I could get control of 25-32. No luck.

JP
 
Re: X32 v2 RTA

Has anyone run FFT tests on the X32 by itself and also with external stage boxes, either the Behringer or the Midas ones? Is the X32 flat or not? Is there a measurable difference with the external stage boxes? Someone recently made a comment to me as to how the X32 sounded compared to a different digital console. So I was wondering how it measures.
 
Re: X32 v2 RTA

Kevin Maxwell said:
Has anyone run FFT tests on the X32 by itself and also with external stage boxes, either the Behringer or the Midas ones? Is the X32 flat or not? Is there a measurable difference with the external stage boxes? Someone recently made a comment to me as to how the X32 sounded compared to a different digital console. So I was wondering how it measures.
Click to expand...
Behringer X32 | Media
 
Re: X32 v2 RTA

Brent Handy said:
You are wrong...AGAIN. I have Macbooks and iMacs in numerous churches using both simultaneously. If I show you a pic of the screen setting and shoot some video of it will you be quiet?
Click to expand...

Dude, what's wrong with your logic? Did you ever read my reply? I'm not saying it's impossible to use HDMI and analog audio from MacBook at the same time, it's just not a preferred way. Also, not all Apple products have analog audio out like you said. As for HDMI, I thought it's obvious for everyone, guess I should go down to ABC level and write "HDMI is an A/V interface standard". I thought it's obvious, HDMI is just a way to get audio and video from device A to device B, no more than that.

As for "quiet" and "ban", if you want to be a moderator, start your own forum. We have a moderators here who obviously have more brains than you. if you think you know everything and is right 100% all the time, good luck with that!

Chill out, dude! You make me laugh! Use your energy for something more productive.
 
Last edited:
Re: MUSIC Group Reviews - Unhappy Staff

Tamas Tako said:
Now that sounds really bad....
Click to expand...

I've seen some pretty back employer reviews on this site but nothing compared to this. A few dis-enfranchised employees mixed in with many positive reviews is what you normally get. But such consistent negative themes in these reviews... and we know when the IT goes wrong, like the web site and community forums... they are down for months. Far longer than any normal corporate organisation. No smoke without fire.

I hope this improves as I want the X32 and related products to be around for a long time given what we've spent on them.
 
Top Bottom