Behringer as DAC?


I have read several very positive posts regarding the Behringer EQ. Several members have reported it to be completely transparent except for its equalization effect, even in very high-end systems. Has anyone tried running a digital signal directly in? If it can disassemble and reconstruct the sound of a high-end player, doesn't that mean it is at least as good as that p[layer? Or do you need the high end player to somehow fill in the blanks between samples that the Behringer can't do? In other words, can I upgrade by selling my $7500 player and replace it with a $300 EQ and a $200 Pioneer player w/ a digitla output?
honest1

Showing 4 responses by eldartford

Abrahavt
...If I understand your question, that is NOT correct. The DEQ2496 has an analog to digital converter (ADC), digital processing(equalization and lots more), and finally a digital to analog converter(DAC) for output. It has provision to bypass the A/D converter (if you already have digital to input) and to bypass the DAC if you want digital output. Either, or both.

It also makes coffee :-)
.
Smeyers...Just curious... but what exactly is the problem you experienced with the autoequalization process? It works perfectly in my system. And the build "robustness" seems OK to me. After all, this is pro sound equipment built to withstand the rough handling of road trips.
The DEQ2496 has no volume control, so you would need to put it ahead of a preamp. But the DEQ2496 also has no signal selection, so it would only work with one source. This might be OK if all the other sources are analog, but you would only have the equalization and other DEQ2496 features for the one digital source.

The DEQ2496 is a great piece, but it would be a waste to use it only as a DAC. By the way, with 24 bits and 96KHz sampling there really aren't "blanks" to be filled in.

Suggestion...Spring for the $380 or so (with mic and cable) and give it a try. I (and some other people) hear no degradation of sound quality when the DEQ2496 is switched in, but, in any case, the overall sonic improvement resulting from equalization of room response is quite dramatic.
Smeyers...Let's not start an argument, but I am interested in why we have different experience.

1..I cross checked the Rives CD with the RS meter, and found them to be in agreement over the full range of frequencies.

2..If you want to make the response something other than flat you can do this by giving the autoeq a contoured "target" response curve.

3..I have a hunch that the "parametric" and "graphic" equalization really use the same digital filter process to do the job, and just take commands and display settings differently. If so the sonic character should be the same. Certainly the analog parts of the signal path are the same. Do you use the "Trueresponse" feature of the graphic eq that eliminates ripple from adjacent frequencies?
I have a seven band analog parametric equalizer (center channel) and the DEQ2496 does a better job (and does it automatically).

4..The graphic eq is 1/3 octave. (RTA display is 1/6 octave). The parametric eq allows a sharper response but my system has no need. My objective is room mode correction. If you are trying to correct loudspeaker resonances a sharper filter might be useful.