ProSoundWeb Community

Sound Reinforcement - Forums for Live Sound Professionals - Your Displayed Name Must Be Your Real Full Name To Post In The Live Sound Forums => SR Forum Archives => LAB Lounge FUD Forum Archive => Topic started by: Josh Billings on April 10, 2007, 05:58:33 am

Title: Peavey VSX 26 vs. Behringer DCX2496 vs. DR260
Post by: Josh Billings on April 10, 2007, 05:58:33 am
Frying Bacon Aside if anybody has any opinions on either of these units i'd love to hear them. The 260 does a lot of stuff, but at the price i'm not too convinced.

Thinking about dropping the DRPA.

I'll dig a little deeper into this

1. I like the 96khz sample rate of the behringer (Peavey & Drive Rack PA are 48khz).

2. I do like the whole auto align thing of the behringer unit, none of the other units have this.

3. All have RTA (which i never use)

4. I do sometimes use the Feedback thing on the DRPA when DJs use turntables so it comes in handy some time.

5. Also I mix an SB-850 with 2 LAB Horns (SB-850 about 30 feet away) but i have to run that through a seperate crossover to get them to align correctly. The fact the peavey & behringer unit can delay each channel seperately is quite nice.

I figure if something goes out i can run my EAW LA325s full range until i get the behringer back up or have a DRPA on stand by.

Fill me in on actual SOUND. I really want to get opinions on people who have used 2 or more of the units.

-Josh Billings
Title: Re: Peavey VSX 26 vs. Behringer DCX2496 vs. DR260
Post by: MikeLascuola on April 10, 2007, 06:42:48 am
As far as sound goes, in none of the places I play would I personally be able to hear the difference between those two sampling rates.

I would follow the advice of others here, and save up for a DSP which will not leave you feeling the need for a spare!
Title: Re: Peavey VSX 26 vs. Behringer DCX2496 vs. DR260
Post by: Josh Billings on April 10, 2007, 06:50:27 am
Well I've heard stories of DR260s going down mid show before too so i would carry a spare regardless. Just seems like common sense for something that can crash

-Josh Billings
Title: Re: Peavey VSX 26 vs. Behringer DCX2496 vs. DR260
Post by: Scott Shaw on April 10, 2007, 08:41:01 am
The DCX2496 does not have a RTA. The sound quality seems to be very good compared to my old Peavey CEX-4. Not a fair comparison considering the Peavey is 15 years old! The time alignment function on the Behringer is nice but if you use the same speakers every show, You'll only need it once. I would think RTA would be a more important feature to be used as a starting point if nothing else.

Scott
Title: Re: Peavey VSX 26 vs. Behringer DCX2496 vs. DR260
Post by: John Roberts {JR} on April 10, 2007, 09:52:00 am
MikeLascuola wrote on Tue, 10 April 2007 05:42

As far as sound goes, in none of the places I play would I personally be able to hear the difference between those two sampling rates.

I would follow the advice of others here, and save up for a DSP which will not leave you feeling the need for a spare!


I'm no sure at what price point you no longer "feel" like you need a backup but its always good practice to anticipate the critical single point failure bottlenecks in your system and have some plan to deal with worst case scenario (most gremlins don't read price tags and do ones that do have a nasty sense of humor) . Backup doesn't need to match primary path bells and whistles but needs to get the job done.

JR
Title: Re: Peavey VSX 26 vs. Behringer DCX2496 vs. DR260
Post by: MikeLascuola on April 10, 2007, 10:10:57 am
Good points all.  Of course you want to have a spare for a single point of failure.
Title: Re: Peavey VSX 26 vs. Behringer DCX2496 vs. DR260
Post by: Aaron McQueen on April 10, 2007, 10:18:06 am
MikeLascuola wrote on Tue, 10 April 2007 10:10

Good points all.  Of course you want to have a spare for a single point of failure.


At least put an extra crossover in the rack.  Then you can still run the subs, even if they aren't properly aligned.
Title: Re: Peavey VSX 26 vs. Behringer DCX2496 vs. DR260
Post by: Scott Waldy on April 10, 2007, 12:48:50 pm
Quote:

Thinking about dropping the DRPA.


I have one in my FOH rack of my "A" rig.  Last year I over drove the inputs and it sounded like POO!!! However, my outputs meters said that there were doing fine.  I lowered the input and raised the outputs to even it out and get rid of the digital clipping sound.


Now, I purchased a Behringer DCX2494 from just the recommendations of others off of this board. I placed it in my "B" rig.  I wanted to experiment with the "Subs-On-An-Aux" thing at the same time. As of yet, I have no regrets at all.  The price point is great and the features are very good too.  If it continues to work out, I will purchase another one for my "A" rig and lose (loose for some  Laughing ) the DrPa.

Quote:

All have RTA (which i never use)


The DCX2496 does not have an RTA. I don't use one either.  I am saving myself for SMAART.  Laughing

Just my .02 worth.

Edit: Add more text
Title: Re: Peavey VSX 26 vs. Behringer DCX2496 vs. DR260
Post by: Andy Peters on April 10, 2007, 02:12:14 pm
Scott Shaw wrote on Tue, 10 April 2007 05:41

I would think RTA would be a more important feature to be used as a starting point if nothing else.


RTA is a waste of time.

-a
Title: Re: Peavey VSX 26 vs. Behringer DCX2496 vs. DR260
Post by: Josh Billings on April 10, 2007, 03:55:38 pm
Well it may not have an RTA feature but it does use a measurement mic for delay & polarity. Prettty snazzy feature. A lot more important to me than RTA Equalizing when i can use my ears for that

-Josh Billings
Title: Re: Peavey VSX 26 vs. Behringer DCX2496 vs. DR260
Post by: dave stojan on April 10, 2007, 04:09:55 pm
Andy Peters wrote on Tue, 10 April 2007 19:12

RTA is a waste of time.
-a



I've had it come in handy a few times - when there's an a**hole in the crowd that can scream or whistle a steady pitch just like something's feeding back. A quick look at the RTA (monitoring DSP inputs) can avert that "is it me?" feeling.
Title: Re: Peavey VSX 26 vs. Behringer DCX2496 vs. DR260
Post by: Geir Tystad on April 10, 2007, 05:08:44 pm
Title: Re: Peavey VSX 26 vs. Behringer DCX2496 vs. DR260
Post by: Scott Waldy on April 10, 2007, 05:33:52 pm
Quote:

A quick look at the RTA (monitoring DSP inputs) can avert that "is it me?" feeling.


Ahhh.... but, if I remember right, the DrPa does not display the RTA.  Even if it did, it'd be too small to do anyone any good.  It just uses its internal RTA to "flatten out" the system with the graphic.

I cannot comment on the Peavey offering as I don't have any experience with it, however, out of using both the DrPa and the Behringer, I'm gonna stick with the Behringer.

Title: Re: Peavey VSX 26 vs. Behringer DCX2496 vs. DR260
Post by: Josh Billings on April 10, 2007, 07:11:38 pm
Geir Inge Tystad wrote on Tue, 10 April 2007 14:08

I have been using the Behringer a couple years..  both it for my FOH amp rack. But changed back to the analog split in the amprack, put the behringer in my Driverack, hook it up to the computer and the fun begins.


I seriously don't understand anything about this post.
Title: Re: Peavey VSX 26 vs. Behringer DCX2496 vs. DR260
Post by: Andy Peters on April 10, 2007, 07:35:57 pm
Josh Billings wrote on Tue, 10 April 2007 16:11

Geir Inge Tystad wrote on Tue, 10 April 2007 14:08

I have been using the Behringer a couple years..  both it for my FOH amp rack. But changed back to the analog split in the amprack, put the behringer in my Driverack, hook it up to the computer and the fun begins.


I seriously don't understand anything about this post.


Neither do I. Google Translation gone awry?

-a
Title: Re: Peavey VSX 26 vs. Behringer DCX2496 vs. DR260
Post by: Scott Waldy on April 10, 2007, 09:14:50 pm
Quote:

I have been using the Behringer a couple years.. both it for my FOH amp rack. But changed back to the analog split in the amprack, put the behringer in my Driverack, hook it up to the computer and the fun begins.


Ummm.... maybe he had the Behringer in his amp rack.  Then maybe he decided to have the control out @ FOH, moved it from the amp rack to the Drive Rack and installed a jack panel or a multi pin?

Just guessing.  Razz
Title: Re: Peavey VSX 26 vs. Behringer DCX2496 vs. DR260
Post by: Robert Fielder on April 11, 2007, 02:58:16 pm
MikeLascuola wrote on Tue, 10 April 2007 10:10

Good points all.  Of course you want to have a spare for a single point of failure.

A spare, or a well thought out fallback strategy for equipment failure.

Sometimes, just going PC (or CD player) to tops can get you through the night, if you have all the cables you need, and you know how to use the speakers. No ideal, but it works, and the clients/dancers will get their money's worth.

I have experienced failure in various components. Mostly the people on the floor never know. The only time it was obvious was when I left the (rented) mixer at home. Went PC to active speaker, then cable to the second active speaker, and away. The "obvious" part was when the mixer arrived and I had to shut down the music to put it into use.

A bit of thinking can provide alternatives to carrying expensive but unused gear. If the gear is generally very reliable and locally available (or an equivilant is available), then put the money into better quality gear instead of duplicates.

Having said that - I had a couple of threads on crossovers, comparing Behringer to dBx. What was really surprising was that there were more dBx failures reported in the discussions than Behringer failures......
Title: Re: Peavey VSX 26 vs. Behringer DCX2496 vs. DR260
Post by: Robert Fielder on April 11, 2007, 03:01:20 pm
Andy Peters wrote on Tue, 10 April 2007 14:12

Scott Shaw wrote on Tue, 10 April 2007 05:41

I would think RTA would be a more important feature to be used as a starting point if nothing else.


RTA is a waste of time.

Major disagreement!

If used properly, with equipment that benefits from processing, it can be amazing.

Otherwise, it is worse than nothing.

I used a DRPA with Yorkville Elite E12, and E210s, and it make music like you dream of! Had I the $$$, I would have bought on the spot.

Used with the NX55P's I eventually purchased, it was horrible. Next time out, no DRPA, and much better sound.

RTA is good, when used where it should be used, when used properly.

Title: Re: Peavey VSX 26 vs. Behringer DCX2496 vs. DR260
Post by: Josh Billings on April 13, 2007, 05:31:37 am
I'm thinking of going with the behringer on this one and maybe using the digital input on the unit.

I have a DJM-800 mixer with Digital Inputs for the CDJs (which have digital outputs) and SPDIF digital output as well. I was thinking of getting an M-Audio C03 to convert SPDIF to AES to use with the behringer.

What do you guys think?

IS it worth the extra money to go all digital to the unit? Anybody have any experience with the digital input on the behringer?

-Josh Billings
Title: Re: Peavey VSX 26 vs. Behringer DCX2496 vs. DR260
Post by: Robert Fielder on April 13, 2007, 03:19:43 pm
Just had a look at the specs for the Peavey VSX 26.

First - it seems to cost more than a DRPA, and a lot more than the DCX2496. I see advertised prices from $440 to $615. Is it functionally closer to a DR260 and a combo DCX2496/DEQ2496?

Second - it has a 48Khz sampling rate. 96Khz and 192Khz are possible and fairly common - why just 48Khz? Arguments about if the difference could be heard are common, but I would suggest that in some situations that this unit will be used in, the difference might be heard. Besides, at that dollar figure, you should be getting bragging rights - and 48Khz max is apology time, not bragging rights.

Have these been shipping long enough for real life feedback on them?
Title: Re: Peavey VSX 26 vs. Behringer DCX2496 vs. DR260
Post by: Andy Peters on April 13, 2007, 03:26:29 pm
Robert Fielder wrote on Fri, 13 April 2007 12:19

Second - it has a 48Khz sampling rate. 96Khz and 192Khz are possible and fairly common - why just 48Khz? Arguments about if the difference could be heard are common, but I would suggest that in some situations that this unit will be used in, the difference might be heard. Besides, at that dollar figure, you should be getting bragging rights - and 48Khz max is apology time, not bragging rights.


The major benefit of running at 48 kHz as opposed to 96 kHz is that your processing requirements are greatly simplified.  For example, filters need more taps at the higher sampling frequency to implement the same response.  Thus, you can add more functionality as you've got more DSP horsepower available.

I would guess that the "benefit" of the higher sampling rate in a low-cost unit such as the Behringer literally gets lost in the noise.

-a
Title: Re: Peavey VSX 26 vs. Behringer DCX2496 vs. DR260
Post by: Josh Billings on April 13, 2007, 04:41:20 pm
The difference isn't in the sample rate as it is with all the stuff you are doing with the signal. In the studio side of things you sample at 24/96 to get a super clean sample to really mess around with (compress/EQ/limit/etc) The more you mess with that signal the higher that sample rate helps you in the end.

CD Audio is only 14/44 but almost always down sampled from 24/96 to get the cleanest sound possible. Granted weak DACs could throw the behringer out right off the bat and the sample rate wouldn't matter, but i do think it would make a big difference if all others were equal.

It's like the small differences between 320KBPs mp3s & wavs (14/44).

Anyways what do you guys think about going Digital from CD-> Mixer -> Signal Processor. Is that better than sending the unit an analog signal? WHat do you think is more stable & would sound better?

-Josh Billings
Title: Re: Peavey VSX 26 vs. Behringer DCX2496 vs. DR260
Post by: John Ward on April 13, 2007, 06:46:07 pm
One of my rental units signal flow is all digital - Tascam DM24 dig console w/ additional 16 ch. Presonus Digimax - Marantz dig CD input -  DEQ 2496 dig EQ - DCX 2496 dig processor. I'm pretty satisfied with all components and noise is non existant. I have a Monster Power 2500 power condition in the FOH rack and I noticed a marked difference over both a Furman and a ART in terms of trash on some power sources. Currently rented to a lyric opera for four performances and under these critical conditions everyone is very pleased. And they are hard to please. Decent all dig is the only way to go.

By the way - and stated many times before - I am very satisfied with the Behringer DCX2496. No problems whatsoever, enough processing for most of my applications and sounds great. A bunch in service for about two years.
Title: Re: Peavey VSX 26 vs. Behringer DCX2496 vs. DR260
Post by: Steven Alves on April 13, 2007, 08:02:14 pm
I guess it comes down to buying an entry level Mercedes or a Fully Loaded Yugo.. Behringer has allot of great features at a very attractive price point. Still when it comes to riders or high end users, It is a Yugo..


Steve
Title: Re: Peavey VSX 26 vs. Behringer DCX2496 vs. DR260
Post by: Scott Waldy on April 13, 2007, 10:59:43 pm
Quote:

Still when it comes to riders or high end users,It is a Yugo..


Hey, if it gets you from Point "A" to point "B".  Laughing

Title: Re: Peavey VSX 26 vs. Behringer DCX2496 vs. DR260
Post by: Caleb Dick on April 13, 2007, 11:24:00 pm
Scott Waldy wrote on Fri, 13 April 2007 19:59


Hey, if it gets you from Point "A" to point "B".  Laughing



Title: Re: Peavey VSX 26 vs. Behringer DCX2496 vs. DR260
Post by: Josh Billings on April 14, 2007, 03:09:24 am
I've kinda been tought to hate behringer...but i got so many experienced and knowledgeable people saying nothing but great things about this unit it really makes you consider this unit as a real piece of gear.

-Josh Billings
Title: Re: Peavey VSX 26 vs. Behringer DCX2496 vs. DR260
Post by: Scott Waldy on April 14, 2007, 03:20:17 am
Like I mentioned earlier, I bought mine solely off of the recommendations of the folks on these forums. Up to that point I hadn't played with one let alone seen one (except pics on the web site). I have some experience with the DrPa because I own one. I figured it can't be any worse, besides I wanted to see what all the fuss was about (I got it for $230 at G.C.).  Plus, "if" didn't like it, I probably could off it on ebay.

Now that I have purchased one and have used it.  I like it.  Very Happy
Title: Re: Peavey VSX 26 vs. Behringer DCX2496 vs. DR260
Post by: Dave Rickard on April 14, 2007, 05:07:19 am
Josh Billings wrote on Fri, 13 April 2007 14:41

CD Audio is only 14/44 but almost always down sampled from 24/96 to get the cleanest sound possible.


Close.  CD audio is 16 bit/44.1k
Title: Re: Peavey VSX 26 vs. Behringer DCX2496 vs. DR260
Post by: Travis Watson on April 14, 2007, 05:24:11 am
The VSX26 is cheaper than the DRPA, MSRP for the DRPA is 749 the VSX is 559.00 The DRPA sells for 499.00 You can get a VSX for about 4 out the door. I have a DRPA and two of the VSX 26's plus a few analog X-overs. The VSX is more flexible with what ever you are doing with it, has more filters with a wider range and has more delay built in both in the front end and the back end.  The GUI should be completed soon and for now can be updated with a memory stick. I have a idea for a update that if Don or Peavey liked as well they could put it out as a update. Your kind of limited on the DRPA. The RTA on the DRPA sucks in my book, I never got anything out of it that I liked after waiting for what seems an eternity. The VSX is short and sweet and you can average as many times/positions as you'd like. I'm not ready to go throw my DRPA out or anything cause I can find a place for it somewhere. As for the Behringer unit, I have no comment good or bad.
Title: Re: Peavey VSX 26 vs. Behringer DCX2496 vs. DR260
Post by: James Duncan on April 14, 2007, 07:50:26 am
I am hoping to find something in this market that has at least 3 inputs so I can run stereo to the tops and then run an aux-fed sub mix into the 3rd input.

It appears that the Behringer has this unit, but when looking closer, the 3rd input is the one that is used for the reference mic to do the auto-aligning function. I am not sure if this is a valuable feature or not, but it sure would have been more valuable (to me, at least) if there was a dedicated reference mic input.

Plus... "it is a Behringer."

Sorry folks, but I have had such bad experiences with Behringer in the past. I know folks are saying that this piece does not sound bad, etc., but you are still getting low-end components like power supplies and cheap caps on the boards. They may sound fine, but I am more worried about the long-term reliability. In a live rig, this is even more important.

Those are 2 strikes in my mind (no ref mic input and perceived reliability).

The Peavey also scares me from past experiences with the brand, but it also is getting some pretty good reviews around here. The soon-to-be-released VSX 48 looks promising as it has 4 ins and 8 outs...

As an alternative, the Sabine Nav3600 (3-in, 6-out) has been recommended to me from a few folks around here, and retails for about $1,000.
Title: Re: Peavey VSX 26 vs. Behringer DCX2496 vs. DR260
Post by: E. Lee Dickinson on April 14, 2007, 09:50:53 am
Input C can be routed anywhere you want. The other nice thing the Behringer does is treat the Sum input (selectable among A, B, and C) as though it were a separate input. That is to say, if you adjust the input gain on A, it does not affect SumAB. We have the Behringer in our B rig.

I currently have a DR260 in each of my amp racks on the A rig (left rack, right rack) which allows me to run aux-fed subs, since I'm only using one input (L or R, respectively) for program and the other for sub. 3 inputs would let me split the system in half much easier, so I've been thinking of replacing with the Sabine Nav360 (which also has better remote control options) or, for cost reasons, the Behringer.
Title: Re: Peavey VSX 26 vs. Behringer DCX2496 vs. DR260
Post by: John Roberts {JR} on April 14, 2007, 10:23:55 am
Josh Billings wrote on Fri, 13 April 2007 15:41

The difference isn't in the sample rate as it is with all the stuff you are doing with the signal. In the studio side of things you sample at 24/96 to get a super clean sample to really mess around with (compress/EQ/limit/etc) The more you mess with that signal the higher that sample rate helps you in the end.

There are several conditions for archival studio recording that don't apply to live SR. If you need to later convert to a different sample rate you can down convert which is discarding data more accurately than up converting which is essentially inventing data points between real samples.

The increased resolution in the time domain literally allows for a signal pass band up to 1/2 the sample rate (or 48 kHz for 96k clock). Since there isn't audible information that high, the practical benefit is relaxed anti aliasing filters and their impact on the top octave. Since the nominal audio passband is typically defined as 20-20kHz the difference between 24kHz and 48kHz, on paper at least is moot. This is also complicated by how some A/Ds use oversampling in the conversion process.

While perhaps slightly beneficial for EQ envelope symmetry in the very top octave, level manipulations such as compressing or limiting will be more affected by word length than sample rate.

Josh Billings wrote on Fri, 13 April 2007 15:41


CD Audio is only 14/44 but almost always down sampled from 24/96 to get the cleanest sound possible. Granted weak DACs could throw the behringer out right off the bat and the sample rate wouldn't matter, but i do think it would make a big difference if all others were equal.

It's like the small differences between 320KBPs mp3s & wavs (14/44).


The difference between 320kbps and 16b/44.1k is roughly 2:1, similar to the 2:1 ratio between 48k and 96k. But the very audible difference at the lower end (320k to 16b/441k) is because it is literally discarding audible audio data at the lower bit rate. The difference between 48k and 96k are far more subtle because both are higher than they need to be to capture the full audio passband with decent sample rate and resolution.

Josh Billings wrote on Fri, 13 April 2007 15:41


Anyways what do you guys think about going Digital from CD-> Mixer -> Signal Processor. Is that better than sending the unit an analog signal? WHat do you think is more stable & would sound better?

-Josh Billings


In principle avoiding unnecessary D/A-A/D conversions should reduce opportunities for signal degradation, but with modern gear that degradation is pretty minor, so do what works.

JR
Title: Re: Peavey VSX 26 vs. Behringer DCX2496 vs. DR260
Post by: Rob Spence on April 14, 2007, 11:09:31 am
Going all digital is good EXCEPT if you do too many format conversions. It will work best if all the digital connections are either the same type or at least running at the same speed.

Converting from SPDIF to AES, in my opinion would not be a good thing - you may introduce unpleasant artifacts.

While the high sample rate is very important for studio work, in live audio, or worse, playing commercial disks, no one is going to hear the difference.

Who here knows what the ambient background acoustic noise floor is at the venue you work at? I bet it is greater than 70dB Smile
Title: Re: Peavey VSX 26 vs. Behringer DCX2496 vs. DR260
Post by: Mike Pyle on April 14, 2007, 11:16:22 am
Does the VSX26 add any audible noise to the system? Any fuzz when it's idling with the amp gains up?
Title: Re: Peavey VSX 26 vs. Behringer DCX2496 vs. DR260
Post by: Bob Leonard on April 14, 2007, 11:40:29 am
John Roberts  {JR} wrote on Sat, 14 April 2007 10:23

Josh Billings wrote on Fri, 13 April 2007 15:41

The difference isn't in the sample rate as it is with all the stuff you are doing with the signal. In the studio side of things you sample at 24/96 to get a super clean sample to really mess around with (compress/EQ/limit/etc) The more you mess with that signal the higher that sample rate helps you in the end.

There are several conditions for archival studio recording that don't apply to live SR. If you need to later convert to a different sample rate you can down convert which is discarding data more accurately than up converting which is essentially inventing data points between real samples.

The increased resolution in the time domain literally allows for a signal pass band up to 1/2 the sample rate (or 48 kHz for 96k clock). Since there isn't audible information that high, the practical benefit is relaxed anti aliasing filters and their impact on the top octave. Since the nominal audio passband is typically defined as 20-20kHz the difference between 24kHz and 48kHz, on paper at least is moot. This is also complicated by how some A/Ds use oversampling in the conversion process.

While perhaps slightly beneficial for EQ envelope symmetry in the very top octave, level manipulations such as compressing or limiting will be more affected by word length than sample rate.

Josh Billings wrote on Fri, 13 April 2007 15:41


CD Audio is only 14/44 but almost always down sampled from 24/96 to get the cleanest sound possible. Granted weak DACs could throw the behringer out right off the bat and the sample rate wouldn't matter, but i do think it would make a big difference if all others were equal.

It's like the small differences between 320KBPs mp3s & wavs (14/44).


The difference between 320kbps and 16b/44.1k is roughly 2:1, similar to the 2:1 ratio between 48k and 96k. But the very audible difference at the lower end (320k to 16b/441k) is because it is literally discarding audible audio data at the lower bit rate. The difference between 48k and 96k are far more subtle because both are higher than they need to be to capture the full audio passband with decent sample rate and resolution.

Josh Billings wrote on Fri, 13 April 2007 15:41


Anyways what do you guys think about going Digital from CD-> Mixer -> Signal Processor. Is that better than sending the unit an analog signal? WHat do you think is more stable & would sound better?

-Josh Billings


In principle avoiding unnecessary D/A-A/D conversions should reduce opportunities for signal degradation, but with modern gear that degradation is pretty minor, so do what works.

JR




John, Finally the correct answers to the digital questions from you and Rob.

RTA has never been my first or even much of a consideration to me. I place more value in RTE, as in REAL TIME EARS.
Title: Re: Peavey VSX 26 vs. Behringer DCX2496 vs. DR260
Post by: James Duncan on April 14, 2007, 12:02:53 pm
E. Lee Dickinson wrote on Sat, 14 April 2007 09:50

Input C can be routed anywhere you want. The other nice thing the Behringer does is treat the Sum input (selectable among A, B, and C) as though it were a separate input. That is to say, if you adjust the input gain on A, it does not affect SumAB. We have the Behringer in our B rig.



Thanks for that, and yeah, I did understand that.

What I was saying I guess was that if I am running stereo mains, *and* the aux-fed subs, that would take up *all* three inputs on the Behringer, which means that I would have nowhere to put the reference mic.

Plus, I think it is obviously much more convenient to have the ref mic input on the front panel like DBX, Peavey, and others do. This saves having to dig around in the back of the rack to plug in the ref mic when needed.
Title: Re: Peavey VSX 26 vs. Behringer DCX2496 vs. DR260
Post by: Rob Spence on April 14, 2007, 01:15:42 pm
I think you will find that the reference mic isn't used much by folks who use speaker processors. The builders of these things figure out that for a little extra programming they can include all sorts of features that look good in the marketing adds but it real life don't get used much.

As far as I have seen, delay (input and output), patching/routing, filters (LP & HP), Crossover, Speaker EQ, and limiters are what you need the box for.

If you do use the reference mic, it (in my opinion) should be for finding the characteristics of your speakers, outdoors, so you can set the EQ for them in the box. Then, you use your graphic as needed to adjust for a particular room or mix.

I prefer having clean front panels where some dodo won't plug something in when I am not looking Smile
Title: Re: Peavey VSX 26 vs. Behringer DCX2496 vs. DR260
Post by: Steve Hurt on April 15, 2007, 12:00:26 am
Rob Spence wrote on Sat, 14 April 2007 13:15


.....If you do use the reference mic, it (in my opinion) should be for finding the characteristics of your speakers, outdoors, so you can set the EQ for them in the box.......


Exactly what I did today.  Shot my speakers w/RTA outside.
My best tuning's on the DRPA have all started that way.

I just got new bottoms cabs, and needed to come up with new tuning for my rig.
The RTA found a couple things I hadn't noticed which really helped.

Shooting the room inside is not near as much help for me, especially on the low end.  

I've never been able to EQ a room node away.  I doubt the RTA can do it either.  Physics getting in the way I think.

Using the RTA outside really does seem to be helpful for a starting place, despite all the people saying RTA sucks.  I consider the RTA a very useful feature.
Title: Re: Peavey VSX 26 vs. Behringer DCX2496 vs. DR260
Post by: Tim McCulloch on April 15, 2007, 12:33:38 am
Steve-

The difference between an RTA and a dual channel FFT analyzer (Smaart, SIM, etc) is this:  The RTA will show you how much level exists in a given frequency band for where ever the measurement mic is placed.  Move it, and the RTA display will change as the mic is moved in and out of comb filter nodes.

With FFT analyzers, the Transfer Function display will change, too, but by looking at the Impulse Response, you can determine if those changes are the result of time-domain issues like relections off of boundary surfaces or grossly mis-aligned systems.
Quote:

I've never been able to EQ a room node away. I doubt the RTA can do it either. Physics getting in the way I think.


That's quite right.  The FFT analyzer helps you see the result of nodes and modes and locate their sources.  The RTA only shows you a bump or dip in amplitude response.

The RTA can be a useful tool, but it helps to understand what it can't show you, as well as what it can.

Good luck, have fun.

Tim Mc
Title: Re: Peavey VSX 26 vs. Behringer DCX2496 vs. DR260
Post by: Jens Droessler on April 16, 2007, 06:33:15 pm
I have (amongst other devices) 6 Behringer UltraDrives now in my rigs. I replaced all analogue crossovers with them. The only thing I had was frying egg syndrome on two of them, which was easy to fix. I also installed many many of them, no problems so far.
One thing: They tend to dislike 96kHz AES/EBU input. Going back to 48kHz input (which will be upsampled internally, so you still got the benefit of higher quality processing and D/A converting (that's where the high sample rate is most useful!).

Converting SPDIF to AES/EBU won't hurt the signal at all. The data stream is compatible, only some additonal flags are present with AES/EBU. The main difference is that AES/EBU is a differential/balanced signal. In fact you don't need to convert coax SPDIF (like from the DJM800) to AES/EBU for the Behringer. It will accept SPDIF!

The third input being also for the aligning feature is not a problem, as you will use it only ONCE per setup. After that you replace the mic with a line signal XLR.

The AutoEQ functions of any hardware device I know (including Behringer UltraCURVE, DR PA and some more) won't work inside rooms that well. If you use it to create setups outside, in a non-reverbant area, it can work really well.... But IMO this is not a feature to look for. A graphic EQ is probably the worst thing you can use to 'tune' a system in the first place. It is ok to draw or push some faders to 'make the room sounding good', but it's NOT a tool to make the speakers sound good. It's a big difference. Parametric EQs are more gentile to the overall performance and much more precise for tailoring response.
Title: Re: Peavey VSX 26 vs. Behringer DCX2496 vs. DR260
Post by: Robert Fielder on April 17, 2007, 09:21:50 am
James Duncan wrote on Sat, 14 April 2007 12:02

Plus, I think it is obviously much more convenient to have the ref mic input on the front panel like DBX, Peavey, and others do. This saves having to dig around in the back of the rack to plug in the ref mic when needed.

Depends on how you wire your rack.

The Raxxess S16U is inexpensive, easy to use, and would allow you to have the mic at either the front or back of the rack, easily accessible. XLR connectors and cable is easy to get and easy to put together.

I have one on order so I can put an extra mic, two USB, one Firewire, and two RCA connectors on the front of my rack. Only for stuff that is used occasionally - and you don't want to have to dig around to get the stuff plugged in.
Title: Re: Peavey VSX 26 vs. Behringer DCX2496 vs. DR260
Post by: Robert Fielder on April 17, 2007, 09:52:26 am
Interesting comments on the Peavy VSX, and on Behringer.

I agree with the posts about Behringer making crap - but do not agree that all Behringer products are crap. They make some stuff that is OK.

Three that I have used and been impressed with are the CX2310 crossover, FCA202 firewire audio interface, and as of this past Saturday, the DCX2496.

The DCX2496 sounded good, did what I needed, and was moderatly easy to figure out and set up. I have used a DRPA several times, and would prefer the user interface on the DCX2496.

Audio quality was excellent - even raising the levels on the DCX2496 did not create any of the value-added background noise that Behringer is famous for. I did get compliments for my sound, both for music reproduction and for the clairity of vocals on the mics.

I also looked at the control software for the DCX2496, and was impressed with it. It ran well, showed you what was configured, and allowed you to change things easily. What was very, very impressive was that it was happy running on my backup laptop - an ancient Toshiba CDS4010 - P2 266Mhz, 166Mb RAM, XP.

Some concerns have been expressed here about the quality of components in Behringer products. That is not something I can speak to directly. Before buying the CX2310, or testing the DCX2496, I did look for feedback from owners of those products. The responses were very consistent - with the exception of the DCX2496's "frying bacon", there were two responses - those that own one of these products loved them with many in use for 1, 2, or more years problem free. Those that did not own one of these products were down on them, and on Behringer in general.

What was really interesting when I was collecting feedback on the CX2310, comparing specifically to the dBx223XL, was that there were more reports of DRPA and DR260 failures than of CX2310/DCX2496/etc failures!

This was a DJing gig where I was also testing the new Yorkville NX720S sub along with my NX55P tops. Since it was a DJing gig, I did not post the entire review.

My final conclustion - the NX720S will be a purchase as soon as funds permit, and the DCX2496 is on my short list.

I would like to use a DR260 and, if they are available in this area, a Peavey before making a final decision. However, if I had to buy tomorrow, I would not hesitate to put my $$$ down for a DCX2496. I do have strategies to work around component failures, but that is just common sense - even Rane and dBx may have hardware failures.
Title: Re: Peavey VSX 26 vs. Behringer DCX2496 vs. DR260
Post by: Jeff Babcock on April 17, 2007, 11:29:49 am
Having used both the VSX26 and DRPA, I will say that the VSX26 stomps the DRPA on almost every level.  I have not used the Behringer, nor do I want to, regardless of how they work for others.  I am simply unable to trust Behringer for anything critical as I have been burned enough in the past with their gear.  If others are willing to use that unit and it works for them, great.  You just won't ever find one in my rig.

I will say as I have said before on this forum that the VSX26 is a very slick unit.  Given that it will soon have a realtime PC and Mac GUI (and already has a non-realtime gui for making presets), it in my opionion is not in the same league as the Behringer or DRPA, they simply can't touch it on a user-friendliness comparison.  

I will also add that for those who actually want to use the RTA, the Peavey gives inordinately better results than the DRPA does.  The Peavey's RTA is actually almost always usable, whereas the DRPA often just makes things much worse.

Also my understanding is that the DRPA starts to sacrifice signal in the top end once you add multiple filters etc in order for it to keep up with the required processing.  I am told that in some cases this can cut off your top end between 14 and 15K. The VSX26 does not have this limitation. Somebody please correct me if I am mistaken.

VSX26, what a great unit at a great price.
Geez, you'd think I worked for Peavey or something.... nope, I just know a great product when I see it.

Cheers
Jeff
Title: Re: Peavey VSX 26 vs. Behringer DCX2496 vs. DR260
Post by: Bennett Prescott on April 17, 2007, 11:35:34 am
Jeff Babcock wrote on Tue, 17 April 2007 11:29

Also my understanding is that the DRPA starts to sacrifice signal in the top end once you add multiple filters etc in order for it to keep up with the required processing.  I am told that in some cases this can cut off your top end between 14 and 15K.

Please back up this claim with evidence.
Title: Re: Peavey VSX 26 vs. Behringer DCX2496 vs. DR260
Post by: Jeff Babcock on April 17, 2007, 11:47:07 am
Bennett,
I haven't had the chance to test this personally, however there was another post on PSW about this very issue.  I will see if I can find it.  If I recall the thread, I think Peavey themselves also discovered this while doing comparison research for the VSX project.

Cheers
Jeff
Title: Re: Peavey VSX 26 vs. Behringer DCX2496 vs. DR260
Post by: Stuart Pendleton on April 17, 2007, 11:48:49 am
Bennett, I know this is not evidence per se, but in the Peavey VSX forum Don Boomer made the following comments regarding DRPA vs VSX:

"First of all ... better frequency response. The Driverack PA loses top end every time you add anything. By the time you've made a crossover and a little EQ the high end is probably limited to below 14 kHz."

I don't expect marketing to tell the truth, but I do expect that Don wouldn't have made this statement without having something to go on.  Maybe he can enlighten you....
Title: Re: Peavey VSX 26 vs. Behringer DCX2496 vs. DR260
Post by: Jeff Babcock on April 17, 2007, 11:54:50 am
OK, I see it was Don B at Peavey who made that statement on their forums, not here on PSW.  Perhaps if Don has any measurements saved from their testing he can post them.  Hopefully he will, but regardless it wouldn't be in Don's best interest to make that claim unless he were absolutely certain, and given his reputation, I believe him.  I would sure love to see the measurements anyway though.

Cheers
Jeff
Title: Re: Peavey VSX 26 vs. Behringer DCX2496 vs. DR260
Post by: Bennett Prescott on April 17, 2007, 01:33:32 pm
Very interesting. I wasn't aware that this limitation existed in the DRPA, and would love to see some more information. I'm relatively sure it doesn't exist in my DR260, as I can't imagine I wouldn't have noticed, given how often I've measured that thing.
Title: Re: Peavey VSX 26 vs. Behringer DCX2496 vs. DR260
Post by: Michael 'Bink' Knowles on April 17, 2007, 01:38:49 pm
Stuart Pendleton wrote on Tue, 17 April 2007 08:48

Bennett, I know this is not evidence per se, but in the Peavey VSX forum Don Boomer made the following comments regarding DRPA vs VSX:

"First of all ... better frequency response. The Driverack PA loses top end every time you add anything. By the time you've made a crossover and a little EQ the high end is probably limited to below 14 kHz."

I don't expect marketing to tell the truth, but I do expect that Don wouldn't have made this statement without having something to go on.  Maybe he can enlighten you....




I saw that post by Don but when asked to back it up he didn't post again. I don't know what that means--could be as simple as being too busy to surf LAB. At any rate, I wouldn't give it a lot of weight until we see Don's evidence or proof from another tester.

Hint hint: any other tester. Me, I don't have a DRPA to poke at.

-Bink
Title: Re: Peavey VSX 26 vs. Behringer DCX2496 vs. DR260
Post by: John Roberts {JR} on April 17, 2007, 02:35:13 pm
I will only speak for myself, I have always been apprehensive about posting specific measurements of another manufacturer's product, while in the past I have privately advised others where the skeletons are hiding and sometimes made indirect references. We used to routinely blow up competitors amplifiers unintentionally (mostly) in the course of bench testing, so data from those units are suspect. While a DSP is not likely to be melted by testing, who knows what can occur with only one piece of gear, not to mention many units being evaluated are often early production units, with perhaps unpolished designs.

I have always (tried) to follow the unwritten rule about not openly attacking competitors. It gives them free advertising, and your comments will always be suspect. What's worse if they advertise more than you do, they can bury you with frequency of their message. In advertising it isn't always about being right. Perception is the reality. I had to be careful sometimes when making advertising claims because people often wouldn't believe the truth. If I claimed to be more than just good for the money they think I was lying.

JR
Title: Re: Peavey VSX 26 vs. Behringer DCX2496 vs. DR260
Post by: John Chiara on April 17, 2007, 03:28:17 pm
James Duncan wrote on Sat, 14 April 2007 07:50

I am hoping to find something in this market that has at least 3 inputs so I can run stereo to the tops and then run an aux-fed sub mix into the 3rd input.

It appears that the Behringer has this unit, but when looking closer, the 3rd input is the one that is used for the reference mic to do the auto-aligning function. I am not sure if this is a valuable feature or not, but it sure would have been more valuable (to me, at least) if there was a dedicated reference mic input.

.


All 3 inputs are usable..I use a DCX for 3 biamped monitor mixes and I just copied the setting to all 3 channels..all the same.
Title: Re: Peavey VSX 26 vs. Behringer DCX2496 vs. DR260
Post by: Jeff Babcock on April 17, 2007, 04:26:37 pm
Bennett, I'm fairly certain that this wouldn't apply to the DR260 given its extra horsepower - I presume a different chipset is used with the 260 and the other higher end DR's.  Hopefully somebody with a DRPA on hand can Smaart it and see what happens as you keep adding eq's and crossovers to place some stress load on the device.   BTW I hope I haven't unintentionally created some controversy over this, I was just blindly chiming in, but it seems this has created considerable interest....
Title: Re: Peavey VSX 26 vs. Behringer DCX2496 vs. DR260
Post by: Andy Peters on April 17, 2007, 07:42:22 pm
Jeff Babcock wrote on Tue, 17 April 2007 13:26

 I presume a different chipset is used with the 260 and the other higher end DR's.


I really doubt it ... why change processors?  The tools are expensive, the man-years spent learning the tools and the processors even more so.  They may use a more-powerful version of a processor in the higher-end versions (where more CPU horsepower and more I/O is required) but you can bet that it's the same processor family.

(Somebody open their DriveRacks and prove me wrong.)

-a
Title: Re: Peavey VSX 26 vs. Behringer DCX2496 vs. DR260
Post by: Jens Droessler on April 17, 2007, 08:24:14 pm
Or probably just more of the same DSPs inside.....
Title: Re: Peavey VSX 26 vs. Behringer DCX2496 vs. DR260
Post by: John Roberts {JR} on April 17, 2007, 08:46:57 pm
Jens Droessler wrote on Tue, 17 April 2007 19:24

Or probably just more of the same DSPs inside.....


Not my guess...

JR
Title: Re: Peavey VSX 26 vs. Behringer DCX2496 vs. DR260
Post by: Robert Fielder on April 18, 2007, 09:42:43 am
John Chiara wrote on Tue, 17 April 2007 15:28

James Duncan wrote on Sat, 14 April 2007 07:50

I am hoping to find something in this market that has at least 3 inputs so I can run stereo to the tops and then run an aux-fed sub mix into the 3rd input.

It appears that the Behringer has this unit, but when looking closer, the 3rd input is the one that is used for the reference mic to do the auto-aligning function. I am not sure if this is a valuable feature or not, but it sure would have been more valuable (to me, at least) if there was a dedicated reference mic input.

All 3 inputs are usable..I use a DCX for 3 biamped monitor mixes and I just copied the setting to all 3 channels..all the same.


After using a DCX2496 last weekend, I have been thinking about this. My rack is set up for aux fed sub, with a Raxxess S16U panel on the back having two XLRs from the main outs of my Mackie 1402, and one XLR from Aux2. This was set up since the subs I use have a variable xover, and my tops (Yorkville NX55P) has a switchable 100Hz cutoff.

If I use this with the DCX2496, it should work well. However, after giving it more thought....and please remember, I am just a DJ.....

In a situation where you wish to run with aux fed sub, and have one channel that is getting full range - for a remote speaker, for example - that won't be possible. You can sum A+B, A+C, or B+C, but the DCX2496 does not let you sum A+B+C, which is what you would need to do for a full range remote speaker.

Is this correct?
Title: Re: Peavey VSX 26 vs. Behringer DCX2496 vs. DR260
Post by: Joe Larsen on April 18, 2007, 10:02:14 am
When you are running subs on an aux all three inputs to the DCX are full range: full range Left, full range Right, and full range Aux. Its inside the DSP where filtering takes place, so you would sum A+B inside the box, giving you an extra virtual mono full range input to route for your remote speaker.

Joe
Title: Re: Peavey VSX 26 vs. Behringer DCX2496 vs. DR260
Post by: Robert Fielder on April 18, 2007, 12:22:46 pm
Joe Larsen wrote on Wed, 18 April 2007 10:02

When you are running subs on an aux all three inputs to the DCX are full range: full range Left, full range Right, and full range Aux. Its inside the DSP where filtering takes place, so you would sum A+B inside the box, giving you an extra virtual mono full range input to route for your remote speaker.

Joe:

Interesting. That makes sense. Perhaps I just did not think it through far enough the first time....

Thanks! Guess this is really a non-issue....  Razz

Title: Re: Peavey VSX 26 vs. Behringer DCX2496 vs. DR260
Post by: Robert Fielder on April 18, 2007, 12:24:22 pm
Speaking of the Peavey VSX 26 - I checked the Peavey web site, and the latest version of the control software is from mid-2006, and still listed as "beta".

Is this a dead project? Have they dropped development? Seems like a long time for something that even Behringer was able to ship and upgrade many times......
Title: Re: Peavey VSX 26 vs. Behringer DCX2496 vs. DR260
Post by: Phil LaDue on April 18, 2007, 12:34:03 pm
Robert Fielder wrote on Wed, 18 April 2007 12:24

Speaking of the Peavey VSX 26 - I checked the Peavey web site, and the latest version of the control software is from mid-2006, and still listed as "beta".

Is this a dead project? Have they dropped development? Seems like a long time for something that even Behringer was able to ship and upgrade many times......


There is a firmware update from February of this year, so I doubt it's been abandoned altogether.
http://www.peavey.com/support/software/vsx26_presets.cfm
Title: Re: Peavey VSX 26 vs. Behringer DCX2496 vs. DR260
Post by: Jens Droessler on April 18, 2007, 06:04:58 pm
By the way, the VSX26 is indeed pretty noisy. That's a known problem, and Peavey is already fixing it. The VSX48 is not suffering from that problem...
Title: Re: Peavey VSX 26 vs. Behringer DCX2496 vs. DR260
Post by: Scott Shaw on April 18, 2007, 07:14:49 pm
Naw, I think it's just a gain issue that can be solved by shading the amps by about 10db.

Scott
Title: Re: Peavey VSX 26 vs. Behringer DCX2496 vs. DR260
Post by: Greg Green on May 02, 2007, 12:33:34 am
Let the vendor wars continue...
I have the DCX2496 ( x2) , the VSX26 ( x1) and finally the Driverack260.

IMO, with lots of use as main amp dsp, just skip to item C:

a)DCX2496- Best unit for the money (if you don't get one with the "frying egg" syndrome). Has very usable gui for remote control.( compared to item B below) Have used for a couple years with no failures.

b)VSX26 - Nice autograph eq. Is VERY noisy at quiescent state ( no, its not a gain structure issue.. its a design issue)
No gui. Have not implemented since the missing remote control gui is yet to be delivered( sold by Peavey in 2006 to be included with unit)...save your money for the....

c)Driverack 260 - more money that a or b , but has the features you WILL want.  The sub synth, Live filters for feedback and autoEq, comp, gate,limit, etc, etc and Driveware gui are key items to consider why you buy a dsp. With infinite customization possibilities, it will serve me well until I can move everything over to dsp amps.
Title: Re: Peavey VSX 26 vs. Behringer DCX2496 vs. DR260
Post by: Tim Padrick on May 02, 2007, 02:09:03 am
Were I in the market, I'd look very closely at the Sabine range of DSPs.   http://www.sabine.com/sabine-professional-audio/Navigator2_M ain.htm  
Title: Re: Peavey VSX 26 vs. Behringer DCX2496 vs. DR260
Post by: Robert Fielder on May 02, 2007, 02:50:03 pm
Greg Green wrote on Wed, 02 May 2007 00:33

Let the vendor wars continue...
I have the DCX2496 ( x2) , the VSX26 ( x1) and finally the Driverack260.

Greg:

Great analysis! Thanks.

I am liking the DCX2496 more and more, the more I play with it. Really like that it is so quiet - not something Behringer is known for.

In the real world, it looks like my choices will be DCX2496 or dBx 260. The Peavey might be nice, but I don't think the features are there for what I need, and the lack of a GUI is a killer. Ditto the DRPA, plus it thumps.

Given the price difference between the DCX2496 and the 260, I need to spend a lot of time understanding the advantages the 260 offers. A few of them I know I will likely never, or almost never, use. RTAing can be amazing, if your system needs it, but my current stuff seems best run flat anyways. I used three different Yorkville Elite systems with the DRPA RTA, and the sound was so very, very nice.....I really wish I could have afforded them when it came time to buy.

One thing about the DCX is how easy it is to set up, even using the front panel. They really got the user interface right. Have not tried the 260 GUI, so maybe that would make it even easier.

If my lottery tickets come in, it becomes a different ball game, but until then it is a value equation, balancing quality against features against cost. So far, the DCX seems to be offering the quality.
Title: Re: Peavey VSX 26 vs. Behringer DCX2496 vs. DR260
Post by: Robert Fielder on May 02, 2007, 02:59:59 pm
Tim Padrick wrote on Wed, 02 May 2007 02:09

Were I in the market, I'd look very closely at the Sabine range of DSPs.    http://www.sabine.com/sabine-professional-audio/Navigator2_M ain.htm  

Tim:

Neat! Only the top two models appear to have sufficient delays.

I have to wonder why they put the RS232 and USB type B on the front.
Title: Re: Peavey VSX 26 vs. Behringer DCX2496 vs. DR260
Post by: Jens Droessler on May 02, 2007, 03:56:38 pm
It's nothing to wonder about. Just for easy access with the PC. RS232 and USB isn't that popular on the patch panel, so they put it on the units front itself.
Title: Re: Peavey VSX 26 vs. Behringer DCX2496 vs. DR260
Post by: Christopher Simons on May 02, 2007, 04:02:58 pm
sorry if this is a stupid question, but i only saw the Peavey VSX 48 mentioned once in this thread..  is there a reason that you're not considering this DSP??
Title: Re: Peavey VSX 26 vs. Behringer DCX2496 vs. DR260
Post by: Jens Droessler on May 02, 2007, 05:20:54 pm
Ummm, yeah, good question...

BTW: The VSX48 does not show the noise issue...
Title: Re: Peavey VSX 26 vs. Behringer DCX2496 vs. DR260
Post by: Robert Fielder on May 02, 2007, 05:42:08 pm
Christopher Simons wrote on Wed, 02 May 2007 16:02

sorry if this is a stupid question, but i only saw the Peavey VSX 48 mentioned once in this thread..  is there a reason that you're not considering this DSP??

If that is aimed at me - I can only consider the equipment I can get my hands on. So far, I have never seen a Peavey VSX in any store.

The one Driverack 260 that is around here can't be rented. I would consider it only because I have used the DRPA, and have some idea what dBx is like.

Also - my memory may be incorrect on this - but does the Peavey VSX line have much in the way of delay? I am running a satelite speaker up to 50' away at times, and need far more delay than the DRPA or (from what I have read in the specs) the VSX 2x series offer. The DCX2496 offers a lot of delay on each output, and I believe the 260 does as well.

Finally, the Peavey PC interface is MIA. That is almost a show stopper for me. If Behringer can offer one, I have trouble understanding why companies like Peavey do not.
Title: Re: Peavey VSX 26 vs. Behringer DCX2496 vs. DR260
Post by: Rob Spence on May 06, 2007, 12:12:29 pm
About the VSX48, they don't really exist yet...

I am told maybe this month but with a lesser feature set than was advertised. I had one on order for a while with no date for delivery so cancelled it.
Title: Re: Peavey VSX 26 vs. Behringer DCX2496 vs. DR260
Post by: Steve Hurt on May 06, 2007, 12:26:53 pm
Don't know about the others, but the Driverack 260 (that I got from Rob - thanks!) is a very nice piece of kit!  

My only real complaint right now is I wish the power switch was on the front panel.

When the Peavey 4 x 8 becomes available, I'm going to take a hard look at it for monitor duty.  Looking for something with 4 channels and cannot see affording a 480 or 4800 for monitors.
Title: Re: Peavey VSX 26 vs. Behringer DCX2496 vs. DR260
Post by: Rob Spence on May 06, 2007, 08:59:26 pm
Right now I plan to get a Sabine 3x6 since the VSX48 isn't available for now. I agree with Steve that it may do good duty in the monitor rack later on though. I only run my wedges in passive now since they do fine that way.

Steve, you will be happy the switch is on the back when some twit starts playing with the front of the amp rack Smile
Title: Re: Peavey VSX 26 vs. Behringer DCX2496 vs. DR260
Post by: Josh Billings on May 06, 2007, 10:34:05 pm
I got a DCX2496 the other day and i plan on trying it out tuesday. I think it was a no brainer switch from DRPA

Probably gonna buy that drawmer volume leveling thing

-Josh Billings
Title: Re: Peavey VSX 26 vs. Behringer DCX2496 vs. DR260
Post by: Anton Stjernbrant on May 11, 2007, 02:54:13 am
For your information, I didn't find the DCX2496(which I won't be using anymore) quiet at all. there's an annoying noise with the amps wide open, turning them down 7dB and raising the limiter thresholds accordingly solved the problem though.
Title: Re: Peavey VSX 26 vs. Behringer DCX2496 vs. DR260
Post by: Matt Harris on May 11, 2007, 08:08:03 am
i have a VSX 48 on the way. Talk to Caleb...
Title: Re: Peavey VSX 26 vs. Behringer DCX2496 vs. DR260
Post by: Jens Droessler on May 11, 2007, 11:12:50 am
It depends of course on your amps gain and what you're driving with the amp. If you got a 38dB gain amp and driving HF horns, you WILL hear noise, that's out of question. With 32dB gain or less and standard passive crossovered direct radiating boxes you won't hear annoying noise (usually).
Title: Re: Peavey VSX 26 vs. Behringer DCX2496 vs. DR260
Post by: Tony "T" Tissot on June 01, 2007, 03:27:03 pm
Did you get your VSX 48? - Dealers keep telling me - "discontinued" - and that it will not be produced - although Peavey says something different.

I need 4 bi-amap monitor mixes and need to go DSP in place of the traditional X-overs I have.
Title: Re: Peavey VSX 26 vs. Behringer DCX2496 vs. DR260
Post by: Donnie Evans on June 04, 2007, 03:53:45 pm
Does anybody have any experience with the Behringer DEQ 2496?  Is it comparable to these?  I know it doesn't offer a crossover or multi-outs like a "speaker management" processor, but are they decent?
Title: Re: Peavey VSX 26 vs. Behringer DCX2496 vs. DR260
Post by: Cory 'Rooster' McKinnon on June 04, 2007, 06:29:40 pm
Donnie Evans wrote on Mon, 04 June 2007 14:53

Does anybody have any experience with the Behringer DEQ 2496?  Is it comparable to these?  I know it doesn't offer a crossover or multi-outs like a "speaker management" processor, but are they decent?



The new ones actually aren't bad. I have installed quited a few of these, but it certainly wouldn't be my first choice for live use.  

It is quite easy to use and setup.  It offers long delay, dynamics, and 10FBD filters (up to 5 can be used for user defined parametric).  It's not noisy and the EQ response is good (you can actually hear a 3db cut).  Surprisingly, the AutoEQ works really well.  We took a pair of SRM450s in the shop one day and tweaked them using Smaart and the DEQ (probably the best I've heard those sound, which isn't saying much though).  We saved the preset and reset everything back to default.  We plugged the RTA mic into the back of the DEQ and went through the auto setup and auto EQ process.  The DEQ had boosted more in the highs and there was a little difference in the low mid curve, but other than that the EQ curves were almost identical.  We were all rather surprised at the results.  But again, this would still not be in my top 5 for live use.

-Back on topic-
I have used the DCX and DRPA and would pick the DCX.  The 260 is a great piece, but it's in a much higher price bracket.  For the money I think the DCX is a great value, but if you have the dough the 260 is a superior product (you pay for what you get).  The DCX is easy to use and setup from the front panel, and the control software is easy and pretty intuitive (should take about 5min to figure out).  I would recommend using the gui for initial setup because the parametrics are much easier to set.  The front panel display doesn't have enough resolution to display the graph very effectively.  Since the internal EQs are for box correction you shouldn't need an internal RTA anyway, since those settings shouldn't change.  I have presets for different speakers and configurations so it's just a matter of recalling the correct setup.  The differnce here might be that I don't use the DCX as my mains EQ.  I prefer to use a separate analog graphic for FOH and let the DSP handle all the system processing.

I didn't care for the DRPA because it didn't offer long delay and the graphic didn't seem very responsive.  I found myself having to cut filter much more than normal to get a similar response compared with other EQs.
Title: Re: Peavey VSX 26 vs. Behringer DCX2496 vs. DR260
Post by: Kevin Ballard on June 05, 2007, 04:23:10 am
Donnie,

I have the DEQ2496 running on a pair of passive 15 x 1" wedges. The DEQ is not quite as easy to use as a manuel graphic for those quick snatches during a deafening set, but My expirience is that having saved the auto eq for those boxes as a default and another couple of variations for "bright" or "smooth" tone edited by ear, I don't seem to have problems with mid set squeals and have headroom left for the small stages I do.

I also have a pair of DCX processors one of which runs FOH and one that runs another pair of wedges but this time in Bi-amp mode. Again the polarity checker and pink noise from the DCX sets up a reasonable starting place and although I had another graphic in line, I rarely used it and once it went unservicable, I found I didn't miss it so I fixed it and gave it to a DJ.

I always ensure I have plenty of setup time and ring out the monitors to my satisfaction. I do smaller venues under 350 heads and poxy stages. I do some of what you former colonials class as national acts (UK and european recording artists with a past). No drum fill type events and can't remember not being able to satisfy the artists who can work with 4 wix foldback. I mix foldback from FOH without active filters switched in, but have the processing in the amp racks. Shocked

So there are some weaknesses in the fast access, but other than ear splitting metal bands and perhaps hip hop which I don't do, I find them acceptable for my needs. I still use the old DEQ8024 as a FOH Graphic and it remains faultless, I prefer the bigger buttons on the 2U older unit too (it also had a good result in Binks GEQ test).

Strangely at street prices the DEQ is more expensive than the DCX here in the UK.

HTH