2. digital
  3. 1111728131

Behringer DEQ2496 - wow

Has anyone forked over the $300 for this unit? I was using a Z-Systems RDQ-1 between my CD transport and preamp, and decided to try the Behringer mainly because it has 10 channels of parametric EQ vs four for the Z-Systems. I cannot tell a difference in sound quality between the Behringer (digital in-out only... the DACS might not be of the highest quality) and the many times more expensive Z-Systems. In fact, the Behringer is much better ergonomically and has many more features than the Z-Systems. It also has an auto EQ mode which I tried, but prefer to trust my own ears. The Behringer does not have the kind of build quality that the Z-Systems has (the Behringer is very light), but it works very well, and am amazed at the number of features it has and how inexpensive it is. By the way I'm using the unit in a very high-end audio system. I'm curious what others have experienced with this unit. It seems like an incredible value to me.
smeyers
smeyers OP
181 posts
 
You might be right about the autoeq feature being better... but then again why do you think that? One of the problems I see with the autoeq feature is it's use of the graphic eq for correction. The graphic eq has predefined center frequences which cannot be adjusted. Since there are only 31 of them, it cannot get very precise as to the frequency being adjusted. The parametric eq has a much finer range of adjustments.
smeyers OP
181 posts
 
Bill, I am not using the Behringer DAC's. Although I have not confirmed this, the internal DAC's might not be the highest quality. I am passing the digital output of the Behringer to a high-end surround-sound processer/preamp with it's own internal DAC's.
racarlson
68 posts
 
Thanks for the additional detail. I also use the Rives disc and RS meter for adjusting my z-Systems, but it is a pain. I may just have to give the Behringer a try.
smeyers OP
181 posts
 
I am now trying a combination of auto-eq and additional adjustment by ear. I'm letting the Behringer auto adjust to a flat tonal curve (which uses the graphic eq), then using the parameteric eq to tailer the tone to taste. This seems to work pretty well. It's very cool to be able to save many different profiles, then recall each one to compare to the next. This is a good way to determine what our preference is.
sean
6,231 posts
 
This kind of device is a phenomenally handy "tool" and can also be used to compensate for very poor recordings. The fact that you can save various EQ curves and select them at the flip of a switch is very handy indeed. Got a disc that sounds "digital" i.e. lean and glaring? No problem. Program in the right "correction curve" and you've got a whole new presentation of that specific material. Next disc sounds thick on the bottom and closed in up top? No problem there either. Modern technology hard at work.

Smeyers: Sometimes it's not a matter of having "great" quality parts so much as how those parts are implimented i.e. circuit design. One can use the finest parts in a poor circuit and / or a circuit that is less than optimally laid out ( impedance problems ) and come out worse than a circuit using lower grade parts with better execution. If you check in another thread, i make mention of folks modifying the Behringer's for better sonics. Most of these are basic mods, but like anything else, one can get as "crazy" as they'd like to in terms of how far they want to take these modifications. Sean
>
More to discover