[jonywalker]

I am now thinking of using an EQ to gain more improvement. The main difference between them is the DQXS has onboard crossovers and DQS doesn't. Since my amps (I am going to order an additional JL 300/4 to my existing 300/2) have both 24dB active crossovers for LP and HP, should it be enough with DQS?
If the DQ(X)S are added the system will work on this way: analog ->digital ->analog, will this transform. and inverse transfrom. cause more or less degradation on sound quality although it is a 24bit digitalizing? Thanks!

[VP Electricity]

Yes, there is sonic degradation, but today's DSP-based digital EQs are better sounding than all but the very best analog EQs (such as Zapco).

If you're going to be tuning your system from the DXXX, I would get the crossovers, because then you can tune everything from one place. The crossovers in the processor are better sounding than the ones in the amp - and a darned sight easier to reach.

[sageashton]

I would agree with VP. Having a DQX, DQXS or DQL-8 (all the ones with the crossover built in) is really nice and you can make huge changes to your system by just changing the crossover points. Also, there is alot you can do with the preamp side of it too.

And if you like to 'tweak' or have presets for different sounds run the Digital Dash Control to you center console and you can switch, adjust and all that without having to go back to your trunk.

Having used a couple of the EQ's on the market, I have to say I really like the AudioControl unit too.

[jonywalker]

Thanks for the very useful information. The Zapco amps coming with those network EQ features are really fine, but too large to be managed for a OEM look install, therefore I chose the JL. I am less worried about the redigitizing since the 24bit should have an extremly small quantization error, but I read somewhere the DQX DSP has the intelligence to restore a clean flat preamp signal spectrum from the preprocessed OEM HU output. I don't know how could it be realized without being ware of the original spectrum. If that were true, would the build-in mini-EQ in HU (just has bass and high regulation) lose its function? I hope it is not true.
The DDC is also really fine, if it is wireless accessable that would be much much greater .
Are the build-in crossovers in DQXX also digital? A digital filter should be better than an analog filter, I think. I have to add more ...

[jonywalker]

I think such EQ processor as from Audiocontrol is quite practical, it could be better integrated into system with separate amps. I would even expect there is an integrated DQXX with DDC in one box coming with a wireless access console .

[VP Electricity]

Originally Posted by jonywalker

The Zapco amps coming with those network EQ features are really fine, but too large to be managed for a OEM look install, therefore I chose the JL.

Ah, under the R deck

Originally Posted by jonywalker

..I read somewhere the DQX DSP has the intelligence to restore a clean flat preamp signal spectrum from the preprocessed OEM HU output.

Not so - it only makes adjustments you set, and does none of those automatically. The JL CleanSweep and the RF 360 and the Alpine 650 can do this automatically - they come with a test tone CD you play through the system. To do this sort of thing precisely with the Zapco or the AC you need a real-time analyzer.

Originally Posted by jonywalker

I hope it is not true.

It's not...

Originally Posted by jonywalker

The DDC is also really fine, if it is wireless accessable that would be much much greater .

No offense to those who already own it, but it is butt ugly to me... but the utility is neat.

Originally Posted by jonywalker

Are the build-in crossovers in DQXX also digital? A digital filter should be better than an analog filter, I think.

Yes, they are, and in theory it should be, certainly.

[jonywalker]

Thanks!

best regards