Forums › Forums › dLive Forums › dLive troubleshooting › EQ effectiveness?
This topic contains 30 replies, has 11 voices, and was last updated by 
SteffenR 3 years, 4 months ago.
-
AuthorPosts
-
2018/05/12 at 3:20 am #70955
Coming from the X32/M32 world, we had 6 PEQ filters for each AUX out; never needed (nor used) the GEQ.
Combined with the built-in RTA overlay, we could set-up and ring-out monitor wedges in about 5-8 minutes. Never had feedback during a show, ever. Four years – no issues/problems.
“Upgraded” to the dLive system.
Even when using both the PEQ and GEQ, ringing out monitors takes forever. Much more difficult to eliminate troublesome frequency feedback. And, for the first time in years, we’re getting more feedback from our monitor wedges. Nothing else has changed in our rig other than swapping out the Behringer and/or Midas rig for the dLive. All mics, wedges, etc are exactly the same as they’ve always been. I swear we had less feedback with our old analog gear than we do with our dLive stuff!
What gives?
On the M32, I could take my iPad on stage, find my feedback frequencies, notch them in the PEQ and walk away. With the dLive rig, I sit there 5-6x longer and end-up compromising and praying we don’t get feedback. I’ve tried the different GEQ models… none of them are as effective as the M32’s built-in PEQ was/is.
Why? Our dLive rig (CDM32/C3500) cost 5x more than the M32… I’m really struggling to justify the “improvement.”
2018/05/12 at 10:29 am #70962I can’t believe, that dLive filters should be worse then the ones in M32. At least this is not my experience at all.
I am with you, that 6-Band PEQs would be better then 4-Band, and that a RTA overlay would help in the process. These are 2 things on the wishlist for a lot of users.
I for myself use a RTA as a tool to help but trust my ears in the first place, without getting feedbacks. And this is nothing I could spend a lot of time on, as I work for bands with 7 wedge mixes from FoH and very short soundcheck times in general.2018/05/12 at 11:52 am #70963I am also one of those who are working with Behridas desks as well as with the dLive. It is not the sound quality or the quality of the filters of the dLive. It is a great sounding console so far. There are differences how the filters will react when using them, but this is something you can easily learn. But what is not understandable that it seems that A&H just do not follow the demands on the market and ignore the wishes of the users for a overlay on ANY filter page with either a RTA and a spectrograph. It was easy to implement for the guys at Musictribe back when they build V2.0 for the X32. So why cant this be now part of all consoles in the A&H product range? I think there is not even a comment from the representatives of this Company to that issue. Things like this are small pieces which helps a lot for users which do not work all the day with that mixers or to not want to spent money for a software like Smaart. I know there are some users out there and they will say „what fo you want? The dLive is a console for real men and real men do not need such gimmicks because real men will hear feedback frequencies with an accuracy of 0.0001 Hz“. Ok I am not such a „real man“ but I love to make sound and I am used to use the build in spectrograph of the X32 simply because it make my job easier. And I would see it on the dLive too.
Thats it;-)2018/05/12 at 8:33 pm #70966I’ve used M32 once and during 40 min. soundcheck was happy just to get rack tom sounding more/less ok. One of my biggest struggles so far in last 25 years.
But then I thought they must have kept something from their “proportional Q” ideology even if the PEQ has all the controls available. I would test this with Smaart to see if filter gain does not affect Q at some point as well. This could be the reason for “audible” Midas eq.
I never have much trouble ringing out wedges- take narrow filter and sweep through all range at decent volume, when Larssens effect kicks in, make the same filter negative, usually I need maximum 3 peq filters.
2018/05/13 at 4:43 pm #70975The EQ is every bit as ‘effective’. The visual representation is different, so don’t just assume that your Q is the same just because it looks like it is. You likely have a wider Q on the X32. Which is neither better or worse.
Now, you could just use the GEQ’s. They are there anyway, and they have an RTA. GEQ’s are usually used for the specific task of notching out problematic frequencies. That would solve the issues you are having.
2018/05/13 at 10:27 pm #70980This contribution is another call for (min.) 6band parametric EQs in DEEP processing and an analyser display in the EQ window. all this is already on A&H’s wish list.
If A&H had listened to me 10 years ago, we would have listened before Behringer 😉about the mentioned problem, that you don’t get the feedback anymore:
if only the mixer has been changed and everything else has remained the same, then we obviously have more output level at the monitor loudspeakers. otherwise it could not feed back faster. so somewhere a higher sensitivity has crept in.It’s all just a matter of getting used to. you’ve been used to the Behringer desk for 4 years. I guess it won’t take you 4 years to be really happy with the dLive. You just have to learn to deal with it better and to reach your goals for others.
but it is also clear: the wishes for a further improvement of the dLive system are there and we hope that they will be implemented as soon as possible.
best regards
Wolfgang2018/05/16 at 3:19 am #71039Also, higher Q/lower bandwidth per band, please. It’s almost ridiculous that the cheapest Yamaha digital desk can do that while dLive and other A&H mixers are stuck there. Sometimes it’s not only about musicality…
2020/11/29 at 7:55 pm #96726Yes, I can never get my Neumann in the wedge too sound as good with my Dlive as I used to with my sc48.
I knew my sound quality took a hit when I got the Dlive. The dlive does amazing things functionally. But it does not impress me sonically. This console is marketed very well. It has a very flat boring sound with a very very weak eq. I don’t know how you could keep a loud stage stable with Dlive. I can pull down a frequency by -10db, yet still hear it🤔. I have even boosted and cut and swept a frequency by 5 dB during a live vocal and no one could hear that much difference. I feel like the eq is not affecting the entire signal, like it’s set to a default parallel eq proportion.
I still miss my sc48.
Do this: Record a virtual soundcheck and listen to it pre processing. The pres are weak and muddy, yet everyone says there awesome. Everyone in our church band agreed that our m32 sounded better than our Dlive when we did recording during covid shutdown.
I feel like I struggle to get clarity every week even though I have a nice PA.
There’s just something that lacks presence to me.2020/11/29 at 9:49 pm #96728I’m really sorry for you, but I absolutely cannot understand your negative experience.
Something must have gone wrong. Maybe the EQ was off?2020/11/30 at 11:13 am #96763Yes, I can never get my Neumann in the wedge too sound as good with my Dlive as I used to with my sc48.
I knew my sound quality took a hit when I got the Dlive. The dlive does amazing things functionally. But it does not impress me sonically. This console is marketed very well. It has a very flat boring sound with a very very weak eq. I don’t know how you could keep a loud stage stable with Dlive. I can pull down a frequency by -10db, yet still hear it🤔. I have even boosted and cut and swept a frequency by 5 dB during a live vocal and no one could hear that much difference. I feel like the eq is not affecting the entire signal, like it’s set to a default parallel eq proportion.
I still miss my sc48.
Do this: Record a virtual soundcheck and listen to it pre processing. The pres are weak and muddy, yet everyone says there awesome. Everyone in our church band agreed that our m32 sounded better than our Dlive when we did recording during covid shutdown.
I feel like I struggle to get clarity every week even though I have a nice PA.
There’s just something that lacks presence to me.sorry but then you need some hearing aid…
We replaced a SC48 with a dLive and all sound engineers recognized a big step up in clarity, precision and presence.
We can mix easier with less processing to get better results, and drive the mixes further with the available processing power.
The compressor models are incredible.The only thing we miss is a better room and reverb simulation.
2020/11/30 at 11:28 am #96764I am totally with Steffen in this respect. To my ears dLive is at least equal, but mostly superior in most aspects sonically, compared to sc48. Leave alone a m32.
In regards to reverb, that is why I added a Quantec to my system.
2020/11/30 at 11:35 am #96765damn… a Quantec… I’m impressed 😉
I’m thinking about a PCM or M3000 from time to time… but I have my Apollo USB at home so I should carry it with me for better reverbs…
2020/11/30 at 10:58 pm #96792As for the reverb: I use a Mac with Liveprofessor and Waves and Valhalla plugins for higher quality results. 😉
I have nothing to criticize about the quality of the mixing console itself.
But I haven’t heard the new preamps yet 🙂2020/12/01 at 8:57 am #96808Please allen and heath, give us an option for eq modeling , Midas, ssl etc..
I need a more aggressive eq.2020/12/01 at 10:20 pm #96818@Alu:
I measured the EQ function with an FFT program and could not find any deviation from the display on the console. So the EQ does exactly what you want it to do.It has been known for a long time that the EQs of analog Midas consoles had a strong effect in the first section of the encoder, which told the operator: “wow, the EQ works very well”. But towards the end of the control range the effect was not so strong anymore.
Why don’t you just turn the EQ as far as you need it?
Alternatively, you could increase the bandwidth of the filters so that they are more audible.
As I said: it does what you want it to do. -
AuthorPosts
You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
