Behringer as DAC?

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.

Actually there are two digital inputs: one AES/EBU and one S/PDIF optical. As Eldartford already mentioned, you can place the DEQ2496 between your digital source and your preamp, or you can feed the digital output to a DAC of your choosing, or use the built-in DAC's of your preamp if it has them. As I've mentioned in another post, I was testing this unit as a potential replacement for the Z-Systems RDQ-1 in a high-end audio system due to it's greater number of parametric EQ bands and greater overall flexibility. I wasn't actually expecting it to sounds as transparent as the many times more expensive RDQ-1, but was shocked that I was wrong (at least using it without any DA conversion; I have not tried it's DACS). What you don't get is the robust build quality of the more expensive 'audiophile' processors. I agree that it's definitely worth the $300 for the unit, but don't agree with Eldartford that it's worth it to spring for the mic and cable, although for just a few bucks more you might want to give it a try. I didn't think the auto-correction feature works very well.

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.

If you dont want to use the DACs in the Behringer and you place it between the cd player and the preamp using the analog input then you are not using the DACs in the Behringer. Is this correct?

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 :-)
.

Eldartford, to answer your question, I found the EQ that the unit provided upon correction to sound very unnatural. The sound was muddy, hard, and nasal after correction. You might say that my ears need adjustment, and although this might be true, I was still not at all happy with the sound after adjustment. Although not perfect, I found using the Rives CD with a RS meter measurement to be much closer to what I was hearing. I then used to parameteric EQ bands of the Behringer to make corrections. I also wonder why the Behringer only uses the graphic eq portion of the unit to make corrections, since the center frequencies of the bands are static. You are only going to be able to be so precise with graphic eq.

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.

>>Smeyers...Let's not start an argument, but I am interested in why we have different experience.<<

Who's arguing? It's about personal opinion and preference.

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

Did not work that way for me. Who knows, maybe something is wrong with the unit or mic.

>> 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.<<

I know, but since it was way off to begin with, I decided to trust a combination of the Rives/RS method and my ears.

>> 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).<<

I'm not using any analog parts of the signal path since I'm going digital in and digital out and the EQ is done in the digital domain. Yes I have 'Trusresponse' turned on.

>> 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.<<

You can be much more precise with the parametric EQ since you can adjust both center frequency and width. The auto-correction feature only adjusts levels at predefined frequences and widths.