No. It's a DAC, the filtering it has inside is not suitable for creating a crossover.

The Buffalo 3 supports 8 channel output and has a user programmable FIR filter so i dont think the question is unreasonable. you could maybe apply unique filters to all 8 channels, which would allow for 4 way stereo with one DAC board.

FIR filters have been used successfully as crossovers in the past.I personnaly beleive that the crossover function is best performed prior to amplification whether its digtial or active/passive line level. If the buffalo could be made to work in this way it would certainly fill a void in the market and be of great interest to me and I am sure huge number of like minded DIYers.

I have loaded many filters. It is not particularly challenging to do so.

Your filter coefficients may not be correct more likely or your manner of loading them is not.

As Brian says, there are not enough taps for serious crossover work unfortunately.

Edited by user Tuesday, October 4, 2011 7:31:19 PM(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

I know something must be wrong :-)

Here are the coefficients if someone would like to try:

-45367, -34066, 67693, 156872, 47470, -202765,
-223779, 162275, 485166, 126314, -629433, -647244,
443951, 1246729, 264377, -1549065, -1449905, 1102057,
2718525, 394292, -3333843, -2782583, 2469771, 5265790,
347618, -6501007, -4759303, 5066432, 9323373, -208365,
-11741941, -7414434, 9658321, 15393271, -1845571, -19986083,
-10664811, 17379784, 24102346, -5500456, -32599926, -14291924,
30056103, 36443755, -12783980, -52020668, -17954819, 51216090,
54605383, -26997242, -83967944, -21236435, 89946575, 85259451,
-57554167, -147667892, -23716063, 182876923, 160733938, -154407580,
-373865298, -25051736, 856746075, 1627086483, 1627086483, 856746075,
-25051736, -373865298, -154407580, 160733938, 182876923, -23716063,
-147667892, -57554167, 85259451, 89946575, -21236435, -83967944,
-26997242, 54605383, 51216090, -17954819, -52020668, -12783980,
36443755, 30056103, -14291924, -32599926, -5500456, 24102346,
17379784, -10664811, -19986083, -1845571, 15393271, 9658321,
-7414434, -11741941, -208365, 9323373, 5066432, -4759303,
-6501007, 347618, 5265790, 2469771, -2782583, -3333843,
394292, 2718525, 1102057, -1449905, -1549065, 264377,
1246729, 443951, -647244, -629433, 126314, 485166,
162275, -223779, -202765, 47470, 156872, 67693,
-34066, -45367

It was generated in Matlab. Since the filter is symmetric you only need to load the first 64 (which is the size of the first stage filter).

I did not have coefficients for the second stage, so I used the built-in second stage

Even simple crossover can be useful. For example the LP crossover for my speaker is a simple LC second order at 1000Hz.

Edited by user Wednesday, October 5, 2011 9:16:37 AM(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified

Russ,

Thanks. At this point is just experimenting. There is huge appeal for having the crossover inside the DAC. All current digital solutions are "non optimal" because if put after Buffalo it needs a ADC and then DAC. If put before Buffalo, then they require sample rate conversion before the crossover.

Another solution may be to use a digital crossover and feed the buffalo in I2S.

For example, the Behringer DCX is a six-channel digital filter. Use three AK4393 as DAC, which receives the signal from the DSP in I2S. You just have to replace AK by Buffalo. It is relatively easy.

Regards

Edited by user Friday, October 14, 2011 9:06:44 AM(UTC)  | Reason: Not specified