DEQX - TACT - QOL - Thoughts on these?


My two main setup both involve bi-amping with external active crossovers. My first set is for a Sander sound 10b electro static speaker and my second speaker is a pair of celestion SL6000. Both use different active crossovers, the Sander sound 10b uses the Behringer 2496 processor for this task.

Since both my setup already goes through this digital crossover layer, I'm exploring if I can optimize the sound more in this process.

I've been hearing/seeing good things around digital processors such as DEQX, TACT and QOL. They seem to have different focus and different approach to optimizing the sound, but I am unclear as to where these overlap with each other and my existing active cross over and preamp even.

If anyone has insights on these, please share your experience.

Inquiring minds want to know...

Gerald
geraldedison
Hi Gerald

First if you are using active crossovers I am very confident a DEQX will outperform the crossovers you have. The only crossovers I have heard that can better a DEQX is a special crossover a speaker maker I know hit upon called the PRC crossover. Before that it easily bested any crossover he used previously.

The way it works with the new DEQX is it has inbuilt DAC's but also includes outputs to connect your own DAC's if you want. The internal ones are OK but better quality audiophile grade DAC's are better - but of course at a significant cost.

My suggestion is to use the internal DAC's to start with and experiment with external DAC's a bit later.

Thanks
Bill
I have the Sanders 10C system and have been considering something other than the Behringer also. The new DEQXMate looks like a good solution if you have a preamp you already like.

TACT seems to be out of business. Their website is down, and the principal of the company is supposedly doing work for Emotiva.

Nyal at Acoustic Frontiers is a DEQX dealer...he knows his stuff!
Catastrofe,

I too had thought the DEQXMate may be what I needed, but When I was speaking with one of the DEQX reps, he indicated the DEQXMate does not perform the crossover function, so the option would be the HDP-4 or the express. However, if you want to avoid the switching power supply and lower quality caps of the express, the 4 would be the option.

When I was researching this, the HDP-3 seem like a very good alternative compare to the newer Express. The folks who had both the HDP3 and HDP 4 cited only minor gains between the two.
I used DEQX at shows in the past and I modded it for customers. They actually adopted many of my mods in the latest unit. What I found is the best way to use it is with the internal DACs. Going external was problematic for me. I used it once with 2 external DACs at a show. Things got crazy when I tried this. The automated speaker and room correction failed to work and the programming got changed magically by itself. I dont think many customers actually use it like this.

DEQX is still the best crossover box out there IMO.

I use EQ with Amarra on my Mac. Now this is totally transparent and transforms even the most expensive systems. Unfortunately, crossover using a server is still very difficult and expensive.

Steve N.
Empirical Audio
I've just got ot chime-in to this old thread to counter Steve's experience above. I've had DEQX HDP-3s and always used them with external DACs, and never experienced the issues he described - never. The internal DAC is not "bad" but one can do quite a bit better. The conventional wisdom that the extra ADC stage would be a large detriment does not seem to apply - at all.

I find the room correction the least important feature of the unit, by a longshot. The steep, linear-phase crossovers and time & phase alignment can (and normally do IME) give results I would call "stunning". Then there is all the parametric EQ one could want. If one is DIYing a horn system, with PEQ and time-alignment necessary, I think it is impossible to do better with analog xovers, passive or active.

When properly used, the unit is completely transparent and does not have the slightest hint of anything "digital". (I think anyone who heard the Cogent True To Life field-coil horn system at RMAF 2006 would attest to that.)