Lexicon 224X vs 224 XL

[SiliconAudioLab]

Originally Posted by Joel Silverman

It's all in the presets. It was always amazing there was seldom anything stored in the user areas too.

People just used the presets and moved the RT control a bit.

Gary Hall spent a long time developing the resonant chord programs, and almost no one knew they existed in the 224XL - hey it's just a reverb :-)

The 70 originally was going to have just the effects from the 224XL. We decided to throw in some reverb at the last minute.

Amazing, the 70 reverb still beats the pants off a lot of dedicated reverbs to this day.

Proud owner of 2 480L's, 224XL, 300M, PCM70 & 2 PCM42's.

[SiliconAudioLab]

Originally Posted by zmix

Joel,

Are these algorhythms in the PCM 70 ported over or were they re-coded?

I have never thought that they even sounded close...

It's haunting.

also,

What can you tell me about Bob Olhsson's claim that the 224, 224x and 300 caused the pitch to go flat if you used predelay? I say it's nonsense, but he claims it's a documented fact. I've looked in the 300 manual and found no reference to any such problem. and I've never heard this on any old metal-remote 224

Well there IS pitch modulation going on in the 70, the 300, the 224XL AND the 480L. That's why I love Lexicon reverbs so much (at least THOSE boxes anyway) but the predelay doesn't seem to change this one way or the other. Maybe we hear the polar direction of that pitch oscillation at a certain point in time further down stream in time during the delay.

This pitch modulation does happen in real life, doppler of red shift vs blue shift (coming at you and going away from you) so....

In the units, the pitch does move, but in an odd non linear (non regular LFO cycle kind of thing) and is part of the magic IMHO. Doesn't seem to me that they go flat per say. I'll try it and see what happens to make sure, but as I said above, the pitch seems to undulate in a smooth bit slightly random way.

[ourmanflint]

The 70 is very different technically than the 224 series, it has a lot in common with the PCM 60 & M480L although sonically it's a similar bandwidth to the 224 X & XL, 15Khz, it's only a 32k sample rate rather than the 44.1 or 48k you get on a 480L. You can really hear the difference between a 70 and a 480 side by side, the 480 is just so much brighter with the 15-20Khz added in. Even if you filter out the top end it's still a richer deeper sounding reverb than the 70. As I said, technically the 60, 70 and 480 are so similar you'd think they came from the same egg. I'd expect them to have used the same software, I'd kinda expect it to be still in the current machines in some form. I mean, if it ain't broke don't fix it. You'd have to re-compile it for the different DSP engines but surely it's basically the same Lexicon algorithms? I'm pleased to hear that the 224 is in the 70, I guess then it's also in the 200, 480 and 60.

I love the 224 tho, it's a great sounding machine. I do a lot of repairs on them here in the UK. The XL has more DSP memory than the X ( just a bunch of bigger devices on the same pcb ). This could account for the change in sound, a bigger DSP word length for more detailed calculations? I'm no programmer. Other than that the X and XL are physically the same bar the serial remote ( LARC ) rather than the parallel remote ( beige or blue metal )..and that just involves re-configuring the jumpers on the SBC card to use the other port. There is a different PCB to connect the serial remote to but essentially all that has on is 422 send and receive chips. All three use the same converter pair. The DSP engine changed drastically from original to X but stayed the same from X to XL, aside, as I said, from the 64k ( ! ) upgrade, oh, and more ROMS :-]. The OS changed of course but as I understand it there were no i/o word length or sample rate changes through all three models, 12 bit 32k all the way? The 224 may be different here to the X but I don't think so.

From a service point of view it's an awesome machine to work on, I just love that DSP engine, all those boards, it's all individual logic devices, it's a one-off, everything went 'large scale integration' after that..you can think of the DMEM, T&C, ARU & FPC cards as a discrete 'lexichip', with a bit of a stretch of the imagination of course...The 200 is the same from that respect, the DSP is all discrete and it uses the same converters as the 224 series. That DSP and converter all changed with the 60, 70 and 480L generation and then changed again with the PCM 80's, 90's and LXP's onwards. I believe it's still essentially the same now with the lexichip principal but I haven't seen inside anything newer than an MPX1 or so..!

Here's a couple of points that could keep folks interested..

If you look inside a '70 you can see that the pcb is designed for stereo input, ie there are pcb locations for another jack socket, all the input signal path component locations are there right up to the converter but none of it is 'populated' and none of it is detailed in the service docs...was there ever a stereo PCM 70 that never made it to the shops Mono does seem to be a bit of a variation in the Lexicon line up, almost everything is stereo in and out.

Are there many 200 users out there, does anyone know anything about the optional serial or parallel remotes you could have fitted to it? Were they 224 remotes or a completely different device?

Every 480l has digital i/o on the back panel, SDIF-2. Not very widely taken up.

[alexstringer]

Originally Posted by ourmanflint

Every 480l has digital i/o on the back panel, SDIF-2. Not very widely taken up.

Actually, the 480L's built after serial number 4950 were Aes ready yet that didn't mean the option was installed, your option was to buy either the Lexicon or Lemtech digital board which cost $2000 at the time. Aes/Ebu ready meant the Db9 connection was built in at the back left side of the unit. Units built before S/N 4950 had to be shipped over to lexicon so they could install the retrofit kit to receive the Aes board. The cost for this service was an xtra $500 + shipping if i remember well.

[ourmanflint]

I know the AES option, you had to buy that and it slots in as long as you didn't have an SME ( sample memory expansion ) board in there. I fitted some, you had to cut a hole in the back panel and fit in a 9 pin d-type to accept the AES breakout loom.

They all have SDIF-2 as is. No extra stuff needed apart from the breakout box that Lexicon sold to give the BNC connections. Never saw many of the breakout boxes but I know Funky Junk have one. It's only a breakout box AFAIN, no electronics.

From the Lexicon knowledge-base..

Early M480Ls had a single digital connector which conforms with the SDIF-2 format with pinouts as follows:
Pin1-chassis ground
Pin 2-Right Channel Output
Pin 3-Left Channel Input
Pin 4-Word Clock Input
Pin 5-Digital Ground
Pin 6-Word Clock Output
Pin 7-Left Channel Output
Pin 8-Right Channel Input
Pin 9-Digital Ground

Later model M480Ls will also have a 9 pin din labeled AES/EBU which only works when the AES OPTION card is installed and provides AES and SPDIF compatability. This connector has pin outs as follows:
Pin 1-Case
Pin 2-Input+
Pin 3-Input-
Pin 4-Output2+
Pin 5-no connection
Pin 6-GND
Pin 7-Output1-
Pin 8-Output1+
Pin 9-Output2-
Pins 2 and 3 are shielded together off of Pin 6
Pins 7 and 8 are shielded together off of Pin 6
Pins 4 and 9 are shielded together off of Pin 6

[bob st john]

i couldn't agree with fletcher more on his assertions about the 224x.

of course we both worked back at normandy sound together when we had more hair :) but that was the first place i was able to A/B the 224x and 224 xl (they had both). there really is no comparison...regardless of specs and data, the 224x sounded thicker, fatter, wider and more believable in the mix than the 224 xl. ran the test using the same programs, sends and inputs. other than the 480, lexicon has managed to disappoint me since then...

but i am fortunate enough to have two of these lovely, silky 224x units that i use daily :)

only problem with all this stuff, is you have to maintain it yourself (no biggie for me...but sometime you should try looking for some old Burr-Brown 8 bit DAC's online. i think it's easier getting hannah montana tickets or buying some weed downtown :)

and okay...a lot of my friends here in south florida giggle when they see those things (they do have an interesting "kit" look to them) but then they can't figure out why reverb one doesn't sound the same...go figure :)

[alexstringer]

Since the both look virtually identical, how can you differenciate a 224X to a 224xl? What's the OS version running on the 224X?

[bob st john]

the look of the two units is quite obvious:

224x remote is in a blue metal box; 224 xl uses the alphanumeric LARC

the head units look basically the same...some have different front plates, i believe...

[alexstringer]

All right but if you just replace the metal remote w/ the plastic one on the 224X, it makes it a XL...
Are you telling me that the remote changes the sound?

I've owned more than 8x different Lexicon 224X(L) units and each of them came with the plastic Larc (same as 480L) and as far as i know there is only 2 different Operating Systems: 8.1 or 8.2
8.2 gives you more presets but both OS makes the unit sound similar. And yes, the mainframe said 224X on it ...

[bob st john]

yes, if it was just the remote..that would be MOST confusing...but i believe it's related to the converters used in each unit. what i DO know, is that these two different units DO in fact sound completely different from each other (read elsewhere in the thread if curious).

i can't say one unit sounds metal and the other plastic...but that would be a good analogy :)

you would have to have both the 224x and 224xl at the same time to hear the difference...but in my opinion they're entirely different sounding. yes, same reverb programs...but entirely different audio from the two units...

[Steffmo]

Curious thatb this thread is running.

We are spring cleaning....and have come across a 224 brain. I remember one of the guys picked it up when DigiBid auctioned off all their left overs when they sold out to EBay a while back....thinking it wuld work with a 480 LARC.

I don't know if I have the patience to futz with it, If someone wants to make an offer PM me.

Better yet....trade me even for an R2D2................riiiight.

[anguswoodhead]

Bit of a 'gem' find this thread.
I am hoping to pick up a 224x in a week or two.
I'm quite excited about it after reading this thread.
It has the blue controller my supplier tells me.
What is the going rate on one of these? Anyone know?

[Jim Williams]

Originally Posted by alexstringer

All right but if you just replace the metal remote w/ the plastic one on the 224X, it makes it a XL...
Are you telling me that the remote changes the sound?

I've owned more than 8x different Lexicon 224X(L) units and each of them came with the plastic Larc (same as 480L) and as far as i know there is only 2 different Operating Systems: 8.1 or 8.2
8.2 gives you more presets but both OS makes the unit sound similar. And yes, the mainframe said 224X on it ...

224X with a LARC ran ver. 4.x software. It looks indentical to the 224XL. I bought mine as a X and converted it to the XL. This required many chip changes and an EPROM exchange. 224's with a blue remote have a different I/O controller card, not upgradable to the LARC.

BTW, I have some spare 224X or XL cards available including a spare DMEM, D/A and the rare but funtional main computer card with the un-obtainium National computer chips.

Jim Williams
Audio Upgrades

[dale116dot7]

Originally Posted by Joel Silverman

It wasa port if I recall correctly.
The concert hall algos have that though and increasing the pre-delay owuld make it more noticable.

Yea, I found that too. It looks to me like whoever wrote the hall algorithm was different (or in a way different mindset) than whoever wrote plate and room. The plate and room algorithms look pretty much the same between the 60 and the 70 to me, but the 60 obviously couldn't do modulation.

I think I found the random chorus. Clever.

-Dale

[jeremynothman]

Originally Posted by Jim Williams

224X with a LARC ran ver. 4.x software. It looks indentical to the 224XL. I bought mine as a X and converted it to the XL. This required many chip changes and an EPROM exchange. 224's with a blue remote have a different I/O controller card, not upgradable to the LARC.

BTW, I have some spare 224X or XL cards available including a spare DMEM, D/A and the rare but funtional main computer card with the un-obtainium National computer chips.

Jim Williams
Audio Upgrades

Do you mean that if you can use the LARC on it, it has been 'upgraded' to be an XL?

We have one at college - and the box is marked as a 224X, but we are definetely using a LARC with it...?

Either way it sounds miles better than the other stuff we've gotten to use (only software... Reverb One, H3000, or hardware like the Rev500).

I've gotta check out the CD Plates, i guess - i'd mostly made use of the rich plate so far

[Fletcher]

If you upgraded the software from 4-point something to 8-point something you could install the LARC [Lexicon Alphanurithmic Remote Control] on a 224X and turn it into a 224XL... inproved the 'resale value'... totally ruined the sound [no matter what Joel may tell you].

BTW, the "constant density plates" in the Bricasti M-7 are bloody close to the CD Plate in the 224X [which was the best damn "verb in the box" plate I've ever encountered... including the EMT 250... though YMMV].

Peace.

[neilio]

for some reason i always thought the 300 was the best sounding of all of em, and ive used them all...

what is the story with those, are they different than the others internally?