I have a dbx expander and graphic equalizer I would like to put in the sound path of the 950. However, as I've read in the forums, the 950 doesn't have a tape loop or effects loop. One suggestion was to put the processors between the CD and the input line, but that would require a separate processor on each input, CD, tape, VCR, phono, and DVD. There were other suggestions, but they eliminated using the 950 as a source selector.

If I were to put the processors in the audio line between the 950 PREAMP OUT and the amplifier INPUT, will it work? Will it cause damage? Someone told me connecting to the PREAMP OUT will not work because the processors require line level inputs.

Unfortunately the 950, like a great many surround sound receivers and processors, is not designed to integrate readily with processors such as the expander and graphic equalizer you have. Since these outboard processors are intended to work with a line level input, using the preamp outputs (which will have a lower signal level) may give the processors trouble. Locating them in this position would also mean that they are in effect for all sources at all times, even when listening in surround mode - at which point the mains would be passing through the outboard processing while the center and surrounds would not.

What sources do you plan to EQ? You mention DVD in your post as one example, but wouldn't the DVD input be handled digitally to allow for Dolby Digital and DTS processing?

I would like to use the processors for all inputs: tape, VCR, CD, phono, and DVD. My DVD player has built in decoder with 5 channel output.

Would you use it for all five channels of the DVD player? I'm just trying to get a feel for how this would be implemented.

Here's my advice - based on lots of past and current experience.

Can I assume that the "dbx expander" is a dynamic range expander - as opposed to one of those noise reduction units? If so there is absolutely no need to use it on any source that is already dynamic range gifted. For old tape, vinyl, and radio sources for sure. But not much else.

So for all of those old analogue sources go out and buy a good used NAD pre-amp (like the 1130) and connect all of those sources to it. Then put the expander either in a tape loop on the pre-amp - or between the pre-amp and the 950. I do exactly this with my turntable and Pioneer RG-1 dynamic range expander. Works like a charm. (The 1130 or its brethren can be had for as little as $50 off ebay.)

As for equalization. Use it only on a speaker by speaker basis. So with a single stereo equalizer I'd do the front mains - and insert it between the 950 and the power amp. I use one equalizer channel for each of the ten main speakers in my set-up. (ps. without a corresponding "analyser" capability, chances are that a regular equalizer will do more harm than good. I use one Numark EQ-2700 to handle all of the analysing - and slave the other 4 equalizers through it during calibration. It was designed with this in mind. Used ones can go for as little as $10 - $30 on ebay - with the calibrated mic.)

Good luck.

Jeff Mackwood

Ten main channels????? do you have an imax as your HT??

It's a 7.1 set-up with...

Two stacks of two each speakers for the front L/R.

Two centre speakers stacked sideways.

Four surrounds.

That makes ten main speakers - each with a ten band parametric EQ channel.

Oh yeah... and four subs.

See my last post under "Your System Saloon" http://ubb.outlawaudio.com/cgi-local/ubb/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=4;t=000355

The photos need to be updated. They only show three subs. Plus the DVD and CD players have just been replaced with a new Sony DVD/SACD - bringing the Outlaw ICBM back into play.

Jeff Mackwood

OK Jeff,

I traded out a straight equalizer for an equalizer with a built in analyzer and put it between the pre/pro and the amp. However, it doesn't get enough line juice to drive the display. If I put it between the tape deck and the pre/pro it's OK.

Second question, how much more difficult is it to equalize with a parametric vs. a graphic equalizer?

Since it is being driven by a variable signal it will likely not light up the display most of the time - as you point out. That's a cosmetic result - and has no effect on the quality of sound.

(I'm presuming that when you are in "analyse" mode, the EQ has a level control on the test signal output such that your display will be fully useable at that time. My Numark does. HOWEVER my Numark also puts out a maximum signal whenever the test tone is engaged (it was originally designed to be in the tape loop - thus under control of the pre-amp's volume control) which then feeds this max signal to the amps which then blows the speaker's fuse - as I learned the hard way. The solution was to buy a RS level control and insert it in between the EQ and amp when calibrating.)

One other issue related to inserting an EQ into the tape loop in multi-channel situations, is whether the loop comes before processing or not. In other words are you affecting all of the channels rather than just the two that you are hoping to correct. The beauty with connecting last in the chain before the amp is that once you've made the adjustments and gotten the speaker set up properly for the room, you never have to change the settings as they are good for all sources. My goal is to flatten out the speaker response - not to correct or adjust for source defficiencies.

I've not had any experience using parametric EQs but my guess is that, armed with the appropriate analysis / display capability it would do a much better job of smoothing things out than a fixed band / fixed "Q" graphic EQ. Problem areas can be very narrow dips or spikes, or be broad chunks of frequency spectrum, and can be centered at any frequency. The parametric EQ stands a much better chance of getting it right.

Jeff Mackwood

ps. wouldn't it be nice if some of those companies who are building automated EQ capabilities into their everyday receivers would come out with a stand-alone version that anyone could use? Surely you could package the whole works into a single box (with separate mic) that would sell for $300 or less. You'd probably have to do it up with analogue inputs and outputs - a la ICBM - to make it universally useable. Anyone at Outlaw taking notes?

>>ps. wouldn't it be nice if some of those companies who are building automated EQ capabilities into their everyday receivers would come out with a stand-alone version that anyone could use? Surely you could package the whole works into a single box (with separate mic) that would sell for $300 or less. You'd probably have to do it up with analogue inputs and outputs - a la ICBM - to make it universally useable. Anyone at Outlaw taking notes?<<

Your wish has been granted. Analog and digital inputs even.

http://www.behringer.com/DEQ2496/index.cfm?lang=ENG