Using Matrix to feed FOH?

Forums Forums SQ Forums SQ general discussions Using Matrix to feed FOH?

This topic contains 6 replies, has 5 voices, and was last updated by Profile photo of SteffenR SteffenR 3 years, 3 months ago.

Viewing 7 posts - 1 through 7 (of 7 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #73518
    Profile photo of David
    David
    Participant

    Hi all,

    I am a satisfied user of a SQ5.
    At this moment my setup is an AR2412 stageblock, but I am thinking about buying two DX168 to go working op 96Khz.
    BUT the MAIN stereo output of the new DX168 is (at this moment) going INTO an Dynacord DSP 260 to split the signal into low and hi frequencies.
    This DSP 260 is working on 48Khz, so it would be downsampling the signal again.

    My question is: “Would it be (a good) idea to use 2 Matrix-groups on my SQ5 to feed the amplifiers?”
    One Matrix for LOW frequencies (using the EQ within SQ to achieve this) and a second Matrix group for the HIGH frequencies.

    My idea was that the signal stays at 96Khz and second, I will save some latency time that the DSP 260 needs to calculate.

    I hope that some of you can give me some useful advice,

    Many thanks in advantage, greetings David

    #73523
    Profile photo of airickess
    airickess
    Participant

    I recommend staying with the Dynacord DSP 260. It should have the proper processing for crossovers. If your AR2412 is already downsampling to 48kHz then you are fine.

    #74473
    Profile photo of David
    David
    Participant

    Hi Airickless, thanks for your answer. I understand when staying with the AR2412 I am fine. But I thinking about “updating to 96kHz” by buying 2 DX168.

    Does anybody from Allen & Heath have some advice?

    Is it another option to use the digital AES output from the SQ5 to feed the Dynacord 260. (digitally this DSP260 can handle 96kHz inputs) And if Yess, which cable (something like 50 meters) I have to use to make a good/stabile connection from SQ5 AES to DSP260 AES?

    I hope someone can help me, many thanks in advance..

    Greetings, David

    #78157
    Profile photo of KeithJ A&H
    KeithJ A&H
    Moderator

    Hi David,

    As you say, there would be benefits when moving up to 96kHz, although I would point out that the SQ is not intended to be used for speaker management. There are many processing tools in SQ that can get you some of the way, but as airickess points out, depending on your system, you will almost certainly be better off with a crossover.

    Saying that and even if downsampling to 48kHz right at the end of your signal path, by using DX168’s you would still get lower latency and have dLive quality preamps with 96kHz conversion in the front end, and you would be in a position where you would just need to update your processor to get the full benefits on the output.

    Thanks,
    Keith.

    #78754
    Profile photo of Stonepiano
    Stonepiano
    Participant

    Yes. A mixing-console is not a very good X-over… I´m still feeding my PA-amplifiers fully analogue via the system processor, while stage inputs+ monitor feeds go trough the AR2412.

    #78755
    Profile photo of Stonepiano
    Stonepiano
    Participant

    Another (related?) question: Which one should I choose as the clock-source- AR or SQ? Currently I´m on SQ “internal”.

    #78758
    Profile photo of SteffenR
    SteffenR
    Participant

    SQ is fine as clock source

Viewing 7 posts - 1 through 7 (of 7 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.