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
racarlson
58 posts
 
Thanks for posting this. I also use an RDQ1, and have been leery of the Behringer because I thought it couldn't possibly be as transparent. Can you give more detail on your experience with the auto-EQ?
smeyers OP
181 posts
 
The auto-eq works by emitting pink noise and measuring it through a microphone. I bought the $50 Behringer mic for this purpose. I then makes a series of adjustments using its 31 band graphic EQ. Although it may measure properly, I prefer the following method (I disable the graphic EQ module and use the Parametric EQ:

I used the Rives Audio Test CD2 with a Radio Shack Sound Level Meter. The Rives Audio CD has a set of corrected tracks that work with this meter. I take the measurements of all the frequencies, and make some initial adjustments with the EQ corresponding to these frequencies. I find this works particularly well to clean up bass modes. I then use my ear to tweak levels to my liking. My preference is to use a shelving filter on the EQ to slightly reduce frequences above 3K or so, and a slightly bumped lower midrange.

Like I mentioned before, I think the Behringer used completely in the digital domain is very transparent, and I cannot tell a difference between it and the RDQ-1. I would imagine (although not confirmed) that the use of the interal DACS would diminish this transparency. I really was not expecting the Behringer to work this well, but as much as I 'wanted' to hear a difference in sound quality (I had a hard time believing the quality/features can be this good for so little money), I cannot as of yet. Although I think I have pretty good ears, others might be able to tell the difference.

I am very curious what other experiences people have had with this unit. If you decide to try it, please report back as to what you think.
smeyers OP
181 posts
 
Slight correction: the second sentence should read "It them makes a series of adjustments...",
eldartford
4,262 posts
 
I posted a review on the DEC2496. It worked so well for the front channels of my multichannel system, that I bought a second one for the rears.

IMHO, this unit is an example of how pro sound equipment, at reasonable cost, is rapidly approaching high end performance. High end manufacturers may still have a slight advantage, but must realize that the free ride is over.

Smeyers...I used to do the Rives audio disc and RS meter thing. The autoeq feature of the DEQ2496 is much better, and takes about 2 minutes vs an hour. If you don't want flat response, you can set in the "target" response for the autoeq to work to. Also, the "Room Corr" feature provides the high frequency tilt that you mention, and which I also like.
More to discover