Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 21

Thread: The DEQX PreMate

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Coast of Maine
    Posts
    515

    The DEQX PreMate

    Just curious if anyone has used this piece? Reviews sound good and it looks interesting. I have no knowledge of this type of gear but would like to learn a bit more. Thanks.
    May your journey be free of incident.

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Coast of Maine
    Posts
    515
    Well, if G.T. uses these they must be pretty good. Expensive, but good.
    May your journey be free of incident.

  3. #3
    Senior Member JuniorJBL's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Denver
    Posts
    1,681
    If I were to try the DEQX gear I think I would opt for the HDP-4. I would want to go all active with a processor like this.

    They do look really interesting.

    GT mentioned these at one of the Dome's GTG's and was pretty impressed with them.
    Always fun learning more.......

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    Central Coast California
    Posts
    8,940
    Quote Originally Posted by JuniorJBL View Post
    If I were to try the DEQX gear I think I would opt for the HDP-4. I would want to go all active with a processor like this.

    They do look really interesting.

    GT mentioned these at one of the Dome's GTG's and was pretty impressed with them.

    I'd be fully onboard with you until the time the invoice had to be paid, especially if you're going to add the Earthworks calibration kit.
    Out.

  5. #5
    Senior Member richluvsound's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    london england
    Posts
    2,003

    Deqx

    Ken P ran his Westlakes with these and I used one with my 4345 ..... absolutely top drawer . Seems expensive , but look at what you get in that box ..... Pre-amp , DAC , Room correction (PEQ) , time alignment , Crossover .... thats good value for money anyway you look at it . Down side is you need to understand how to program it . If you have the money get the pro's to come and help you get started .

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hZA7S3DGz08


    Richard

  6. #6
    Administrator Mr. Widget's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    9,451
    I'd be interested in trying DEQX again. I used one of their first generation units for a few years when they were first introduced. The learning curve was pretty steep, but once you get the hang of it using the product made sense and was very good. I ultimately stopped using it because I didn't think the A to D and D to A was as invisible as I'd like, but that was over ten years ago and that technology has improved a hell of a lot since then.

    That said, whether you are using DEQX, BSS, DBX, Behringer, or any other DSP/crossover... there are only a handful of settings that will approach "correct" and an infinite or near infinite number of settings that will really screw your system up. You really need to know what you are doing and invest the time to get it "right".


    Widget

  7. #7
    Senior Member Goldjazz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    297
    Is there a model that has 4 outputs? I couldn't see one on theire website. If so, I would consider going fully active for my 4343's with this system. Agree the system is expensive but compared to what I need to do next with my system it may make sense. I need to get a good preamp, dac, and was going to fully rebuild the xovers with good components. If there's a 4 way unit that can do all this, then it may be worth it, especially since I have 4 good power amps already that would be good for a fully active 4 way system. I once did my 4343's fully active but was let down by the quality of the crossovers and I also felt it was too hard to eq properly, and was concerned about time alignment and room correction. So this could be a good solution.

  8. #8
    Administrator Mr. Widget's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2003
    Location
    San Francisco
    Posts
    9,451
    Quote Originally Posted by Goldjazz View Post
    I once did my 4343's fully active but was let down by the quality of the crossovers and I also felt it was too hard to eq properly, and was concerned about time alignment and room correction.
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. Widget View Post
    That said, whether you are using DEQX, BSS, DBX, Behringer, or any other DSP/crossover... there are only a handful of settings that will approach "correct" and an infinite or near infinite number of settings that will really screw your system up. You really need to know what you are doing and invest the time to get it "right".

    Widget

  9. #9
    Senior Member Goldjazz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    297

    Spoke to DEQX

    Ok so I've been in contact with DEQX, actually their production facility is in the same suburb as where I work.

    So I've asked them if they think a fully active 4 way system is possible with their gear for my JBL4343's and they've come back with a Yes. Basically it requires their 3-way unit HDP-4 and their Express II unit being used as a salve. They have offered to come around to my place and set up this system to demo it. I am considering taking them up on this offer, wht do you guys think?

    Obviously the question of cost is there. From my standpoint though I have 4 good quality power amps already. I don't have a great preamp, and I don't have a great dac. So I'm planning on upgrading both of those to an Accuphase 2410 pre and a Chord Hugo TT Dac. I'm also planning on building a full crossover with Jantzen silvers etc. Adding all that up it would come close to the cost of the 2 DEQX units and I wouldn't get the EQ, room correction and time alignment functions of the DEQX system. So I'm thinking demo it and see how it goes, am I crazy, what do you guys think?

    Regards,

  10. #10
    Senior Member Goldjazz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    297
    Quote Originally Posted by Mr. Widget View Post
    Widget
    Cheers

    Certainly willing to spend the time, but I'll be the first to admit I don't know what I'm doing

  11. #11
    Senior Member pos's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Paris, France
    Posts
    2,345
    Why not start with a 3-way active setup, leaving the HF/UHF crossover in place?
    You cannot consistently time-align that one anyway...

  12. #12
    Senior Member Goldjazz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    297
    Quote Originally Posted by pos View Post
    Why not start with a 3-way active setup, leaving the HF/UHF crossover in place?
    You cannot consistently time-align that one anyway...
    Yeah but sounds like it would be good to have control over the full frequency range using this system for EQ, room correction and time align, including the UHF. Could be annoying having part of the range off to the side out of control. But then again the cost of the additional slave unit to have this extra bit of control may be a little crazy. I don't know about what the tradeoff in control and result would be, I agree it sounds like not enough to justify.

  13. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    annapolis, md usa
    Posts
    299
    I would do the demo. It's a rare opportunity to audition something like this in your system, in your room, with people who know how to use it.

  14. #14
    Senior Member Goldjazz's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    297
    Quote Originally Posted by rusty jefferson View Post
    I would do the demo. It's a rare opportunity to audition something like this in your system, in your room, with people who know how to use it.
    Yeah I agree, just clarifying what the costs would be to make sure it's a feasible option. If the numbers stack up I'll defintly get it set up and will document the experiment well here. Also just enquiring if I need the second slave system or if I can just use my first watt b4 for the UHF. Will keep all interested updated.

  15. #15
    Senior Member pos's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Paris, France
    Posts
    2,345
    Just to clarify my suggestion was not to use an analogue crossover for the uhf, but to keep the hf and uhf as a single active channel in the deqx, with the passive crossover handling the hf/uhf separation.
    That way you keep everything under the control of the deqx, short of that ~9kHz crossover.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Ok here it is... [DEQX]
    By Ken Pachkowsky in forum Electronic Crossovers
    Replies: 13
    Last Post: 10-28-2006, 07:22 PM
  2. Ok here it is... [DEQX]
    By Ken Pachkowsky in forum Lansing Product Technical Help
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 10-07-2006, 03:43 PM
  3. Second DEQX is here...
    By Ken Pachkowsky in forum Electronic Crossovers
    Replies: 12
    Last Post: 09-19-2006, 10:58 AM
  4. Second DEQX is here...
    By Ken Pachkowsky in forum General Audio Discussion
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 08-30-2006, 04:21 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •