Behringer B2030P Studio Monitor Review

[pierre]

 

[GelbeMusik]

Man years back I bought these once for a friend in the active version. Subjectively they couldn't compete with my 'econowave' implementation. Just too small I think. Neither distortion nor tonal balance were really o/k. The sound felt ragged, piercing. I like it plush. So far on my impression.

On the other hand, without the reference, taken as such it felt spot on to the owner. Price versus performance was hilariously good. It was well worth to accept some extra expenses for a complete solution, to go active. Connected to a laptop it made the best stereo she ever had. Alas, at the day I didn't know about the global EQ available with windows.

 

[Willem]

I guess the bright voicing makes it an ideal speaker for busy pubs and the like, with a lot of people damping the higher frequencies.

 

[Robbo99999]

Preference Rating
SCORE: 3.0
SCORE W/ sub: 6.0

Sensitivity: 84dB
Frequency response: +/-4.2dB 75Hz-20kHz ; +/-3.9dB 80Hz-20kHz
View attachment 73491View attachment 73492View attachment 73493View attachment 73494View attachment 73495View attachment 73496

All graphs/data

Wow, that's a low speaker preference score, must have been the EQ that saved it.

https://camelcamelcamel.com/product/B000N94S7O
Lowest was $74, highest was $235.20, averaging ~$190.

That high was a short peak, so I think for my data I’ll put it at $220.

Nice, a low price for a good speaker (if you were gonna EQ it, and I imagine back in 2013 when it was being made there were not many people doing that (UMIK/REW probably not existing back then?), perhaps not for speakers in this low price range either, so praps the price is less of steal considering the situation back in 2013).

 

[304290]

I have the active version of these I bought about 15 years ago when I was trying to put together a modest studio. I ran low of funds after getting everything else and read these were a good clone of the genelecs. I thought I would get a pair to get me by until I could afford better. I think these were 249.00 at the time. I was so impressed with them for the price, they ended up staying. Over these years these have been drug around and beat up, but still works great. The active version have room compensation and tweeter level controls that I did find useful. Now, they have been sitting in my garage for the past several years collecting dust. I would be willing to send them in testing if no one else offers.

 

[maty]

Years ago (April 2011) I heard a pair of B2031P in the near field and then a few more on a 9.2 system.

I loved the tweeter, as I wrote. The woofer was neither fa nor fa. The cabinets were very booming, clearly needing cushioning.

PS: On that system I was unable to hear differences in the recordings that I did listen to on my two systems.

 

[MZKM]

Thanks!

So what you're saying is, as long as the speaker has sufficient sensitivity, it is generally better to have higher impedance in speakers, because amplifiers that truly can push higher wattage at lower impedance levels consistently are harder to find?

Yes.

 

[MZKM]

Wow, that's a low speaker preference score, must have been the EQ that saved it.

This speaker has unusually wide dispersion, and from 2kHz-10kHz, the PIR curve is actually sloping upwards, so that harms it a bit.

 

[Robbo99999]

This speaker has unusually wide dispersion, and from 2kHz-10kHz, the PIR curve is actually sloping upwards, so that harms it a bit.

Predicted In-room Response Curve, yes sloping upwards so bright speaker.

 

[ctrl]

I worked on refining the 32-tone multitone test and I think the results are very presentable now:

Find it a very good idea to now measure multitone distortion (MD = HD + IMD). If this is done in a standardized way, the results for different speakers are directly comparable.
It may be necessary to carry out a further measurement at higher sound pressure levels for large floorstanding loudspeakers in order to make a qualitative distinction.

Wherever possible and the HD is not covered by the multitone signals, HD can be read directly - see the two purple circles in the diagram below which show us HD3@79dB for 100Hz fundamental frequency. Which is about 79dB-32dB = 47dB => 0.45% HD3@100Hz@79dB.
Which roughly corresponds to the HD3 value of Amir's HD measurement at 86dB - where it showed about 0.7% HD3@100Hz.

If the limits of certain distortion levels are transferred to the diagram (green 0.3% MD, blue 1%MD), areas with problematic IMD can be quickly located.

The most amazing is certainly the over 2% IMD around 1600Hz - yellow circle. A frequency range that was completely inconspicuous during the HD measurement.

@amirm due to the low frequency resolution I can't estimate it correctly, is the multitone signal selected in such a way that at least HD2 and HD3 are not masked by the following multitone signals?

 

[richard12511]

I have the active version of these I bought about 15 years ago when I was trying to put together a modest studio. I ran low of funds after getting everything else and read these were a good clone of the genelecs. I thought I would get a pair to get me by until I could afford better. I think these were 249.00 at the time. I was so impressed with them for the price, they ended up staying. Over these years these have been drug around and beat up, but still works great. The active version have room compensation and tweeter level controls that I did find useful. Now, they have been sitting in my garage for the past several years collecting dust. I would be willing to send them in testing if no one else offers.

I’d be really interested in that!

 

[JohnBooty]

Nice, now I really hope the B2031A will be sent by someone.

I'd love to see Amir take a crack at them. NoAudiophile did a nice thorough review and they are interesting: http://noaudiophile.com/Behringer_Truth_B2031A/

Interestingly, they don't seem to measure much better than the passive versions. I would have expected the active version to have some built in DSP/EQ.

NoAudiophile worked up an interesting parametric EQ solution for them. He was able to get them pretty flat down to 28hz, with a decent amount of headroom remaining thanks to the fact that they have some pretty serious output to begin with. So he was able to sacrifice efficiency for extension. If I was in the market in this price range and didn't mind throwing a MiniDS or something else in the signal chain for for some pEQ, I'd really consider them.

 

[Hifisound]

Some mods which were suggested on these speakers
https://forums.audioholics.com/foru...dget-system-question.52040/page-2#post-515629

 

[jcebedo11]

Ive owned these speakers for so many years! I have it currently as a nearfield desktop computer system. along with a svs pb1000. I use to own the Dynaudio Contour 1.3. While those are better speakers, I can live happily with the Behringer as they are enjoyable enough for me. I believe a brand new pair of 2030p cost me around $150 maybe 10 years ago. I should have bought more! The Dynaudios I bought $1000 a pair used.

 

[Lbstyling]

There's the

2030P 6.75" woofer
2030A same, active

2031P 8.75" woofer
2031A same, active ( some nonKlippel measurements here http://noaudiophile.com/Behringer_Truth_B2031A/ )

and it would be amazing to be able to 4-way compare their Klippel performance...but I won't hold my breath ;>

Yes.

You lot are going to find the 2031a at some point anyway, so I may as well give in.....

 

[Interference]

I was much satisfied with the active version (B2030A) on my desk. They had a linear power supply, a solid LR electronic crossover based on 553x opamps, and a class AB amplifier with LM3886 and/or chip of the same family. The amp assembly was pretty conspicuous and was mounted outside of the box.

Happy to see measurements confirming this is a good speaker.

I owned also the ribbon-tweeter version B3030A for a while, couldn't really tell the difference however.

Could be nice to see how the newer NEKKST series holds up. I could not find pictures of a disassembly of those, yet.

 

[P_M]

We see better power capability than the Revel M106 with its smaller woofer which is good.

Klippel measurements show our two distortion points:

View attachment 73474

This woofer is definitely a distortion source. Tweeter in contrast seems to be a calm amigo.

Do speakers have a sharp rise in distortion beyond a certain power level - like amps ? Or is it a progressive increase ?
I am wondering if it might give a more better idea of the power handilng of the speaker if its measured at various db levels to see at which level it breaks up into distortion, instead of one fixed level (96db) for all speakers.
Some speakers might break into distortion early say at 90db or some may not even at 100db.

 

[hardisj]

Do speakers have a sharp rise in distortion beyond a certain power level - like amps ? Or is it a progressive increase ?
I am wondering if it might give a more better idea of the power handilng of the speaker if its measured at various db levels to see at which level it breaks up into distortion, instead of one fixed level (96db) for all speakers.
Some speakers might break into distortion early say at 90db or some may not even at 100db.

Depends on what the source of distortion is. Drive units are the problem. In a speaker (drive units + enclosure + crossovers) the distortion is limited for pieces that have a crossover in front of it. For example, a 2-way speaker: you would have lower levels of tweeter distortion because there is a passive crossover implemented but the woofer would show closer to 'raw' distortion numbers.

You can ride along a low level of distortion for a while but with something like suspension-based distortion, you're encroaching the physical limits of the drive-unit and when you hit the maximum physical excursion allotted by the woofer ... bam... that's it.. sucker starts flopping all over and the distortion shoots through the roof. You can poke around my site (in my sig) at raw drivers to get a feel for what happens.

Alternatively, you can look at this link. I provide a varied-level HD plot of the speaker:
https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/neumi-bs5-bookshelf-speaker-review.14404/

 

[Steve Dallas]

Wow, that's a low speaker preference score, must have been the EQ that saved it.

Nice, a low price for a good speaker (if you were gonna EQ it, and I imagine back in 2013 when it was being made there were not many people doing that (UMIK/REW probably not existing back then?), perhaps not for speakers in this low price range either, so praps the price is less of steal considering the situation back in 2013).

REW most definitely did exist back then. I used it extensively starting in 2009, and it existed before that. To use REW then, you needed a Behringer ECM8000 or other measurement mic and an audio interface.

 

[AnalogSteph]

Something to note is that the 2030 woofers seem to be somewhat fragile and have needed replacement now and then... obviously they are not as solidly built as the rather massive 2031 ones. Either model used to be selling for a pittance, I think 179€ for a pair of 2031Ps and something like 149€ for the 2030Ps? A crossover mod was developed for the 2031P with good results, not aware of any for the 2030P though.