Behringer B2030P Studio Monitor Review

[Lbstyling]

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.

Can confirm. was using this in 2007 or 2006. Was a huge jump over MLISSA or others of old and for free! It has since become MUCH easier to use. I still use REW with the galaxy CM140 and soundblaster external sound card. Its still proving itself accurate.

Back then, the general population of forums seamed to agree on far less about what made good sound. Many (most?) people didn't think measurement was of much (if any) value to evaluate a speaker. Especially as crossovers and speakers were such a 'dark art'. Vance Dickason, REW and Toole et al had a considerable impact on this changing, but there was a lot of push back on the 'value' of sticking to provable measurable things particularly surprising from prominent designers like Lynn Olson.

It is very interesting to read back through the 'Beyond the Ariel' thread on DIYAudio now considering all we know. It is easy to look on the past with rose tinted glasses.

 

[jlo]

Some time ago, I did MMM measurements of B2030A in 9 different rooms at distances between 2 and 3m. LF switch was at -2dB and HF switch at -4dB.

This was to verify how Moving Mic Measurement gives a good picture of a loudspeaker above certain frequencies.
We can see that above 800Hz, we get a nice similarity between curves with a slope depending on distance and room absorption.
It is slightly different to the measurements and EQ published by Amir, maybe because it is here the activ version of B2030.
Above 800Hz, just 3 parametric EQ should be fine plus other parametrics under 300Hz depending on room and position.

 

[MerlinGS]

The Behringer B2031A first gained some notoriety with some audiophiles about 10 yrs ago. At the time, Linkwitz issued a challenge "to find the optimum radiation pattern and placement of stereo loudspeakers in a room for the creation of phantom sources and simultaneous masking of real sources". Dave Clark and others took up Linkwitz's challenge, and organised a blind test comparing the Linkwtiz Orion with the Bheringer, and a DIY design.

The report of the comparison can be read here: https://www.scribd.com/document/103...60149026&medium=affiliate&source=hp_affiliate

In the blind comparison the Behringer outperformed the Orion in the above noted context. Linkwitz was sufficiently impressed by the outcome of the test that he investigated the performance of the Behringer further.

http://linkwitzlab.com/frontiers_6.htm#Z -

For the money, with a sub and some dsp, the user could achieve a pretty decent sound for little money.

 

[Lbstyling]

Here is where I got to a few years ago:

The behringer truth monitors are just about the best bang for buck going when used for a surround setup.

1)Due to the measurements here for the 2030 and the ones I posted in my last post from Dr geddes for the 2031a, we know the off axis for this and the 2031a/p are both excellent.

2) we know from the 'Noaudiophile' pages that we can smooth the top end out considerably by removing the shield front he tweeter. (Raising the ASR score)

3) we know distortion in the bass for the 6 inch passive version (2030p) is a limiting factor in performance (audibility arguements aside). Having said that, it's almost all 2nd order (linear) rather than 3rd or other, so this is arguably much less important to perceived SQ.

4) we know the 2031 has double the radiating area for the bass driver over the 2030. And so can make a reasonable leap to suggest the distortion level would halve for the same SPL if the cause of the distortion is the driver itself assuming the motor is of the same design simply with a larger basket and cone. Geddes et al have reasonable evidence that distortion under the room tradition Freq (circa 400hz) is far less audiable anyway, so we could bear that in mind.

If the cause is not the driver itself we stand a decent chance of reduce/removing it if it's either a port resonance or a box resonance. We also know that used with a sub crossed at say 120hz -160hz (2nd order LR) with a sub that is located close, we can remove much of this distortion too, even some at 500hz if the crossover is not too steep.

As the 2031a has robust active amps on board, this could really end up being somthing impressive for the money when combined with a PC front end using JRiver.

Use a atom based PC with 5.2 out and you have a player, DAC, EQ, Constant directivity setup with amps, low distortion and high SPL capability for £900 (UK) (+subs of choice), that would best 99% of the systems out there.

 

[dasdoing]

It is a shame that we were not around years ago to add a vote of confidence to this speaker and keep its production going.

they were Behringers. I remeber it well. most wouldn't even give them a chance because they were Behringers.
and then there was KRK Rokit with a much better name in the same price range

 

[Lbstyling]

Looks like I've got a pair of 2031a speakers coming...time for some tests!

 

[altefrau]

I bought a pair of 3031A with ribbon tweeters about 11 or 12 years ago after comparing them to a huge bunch of other active Monitor speakers with my own songs.
They were quite good for the money and were used as my main PC speakers for some years. Right now they are stored away as my monitor upgrades needed the space and I‘m using headphones most of the time anyways.
But I‘m going to get them back out as soon as I have a bigger table.

 

[Hifisound]

Looks like I've got a pair of 2031a speakers coming...time for some tests!

Did you get a chance to measure them ?

 

[puffreis]

I had once tested the following speakers:

Behringer B2031, JBL LSR305, Yamaha HS50M and Yamaha HS80M

http://www.hifi-forum.de/index.php?...0&thread=13717&hl=puffreis&postID=31709#31709

 

[jcebedo11]

I had once tested the following speakers:

Behringer B2031, JBL LSR305, Yamaha HS50M and Yamaha HS80M

http://www.hifi-forum.de/index.php?...0&thread=13717&hl=puffreis&postID=31709#31709

very nice! thanks!

 

[dasdoing]

Some time ago, I did MMM measurements of B2030A in 9 different rooms at distances between 2 and 3m. LF switch was at -2dB and HF switch at -4dB.

This was to verify how Moving Mic Measurement gives a good picture of a loudspeaker above certain frequencies.
We can see that above 800Hz, we get a nice similarity between curves with a slope depending on distance and room absorption.
It is slightly different to the measurements and EQ published by Amir, maybe because it is here the activ version of B2030.
Above 800Hz, just 3 parametric EQ should be fine plus other parametrics under 300Hz depending on room and position.

wow, din't know OHL owner was here. you website has some great stuff.

about the graph: do you know if those rooms meassureing brighter realy sounded brighter?

 

[Alchemist_]

I wonder if B1031 is better than B2031?
After all, the b1031 range is declared from 35hz.
But the 2031 has a bigger speaker.

 

[asailleau]

Hi ! My pair b2030a (active) have problems with their amp. I want to transform them to passive.
Can someone help me get a photo of the crossover or values of the components ? I can't find it anywhere.
At the end i will EQ them with convolution for the little peak and dips in the response and i think they will be better then my boston acoustic cs26 for desktop use. Don't you think ?

 

[pma]

I heard this speaker years ago and I sincerely hated the sound. It sounded like a plastic wash basin.

 

[test1223]

@Maiky76 can you please run your eq magic on this speaker? I think it would benefit a lot.

 

[Maiky76]

@Maiky76 can you please run your eq magic on this speaker? I think it would benefit a lot.

@Maiky76 can you please run your eq magic on this speaker? I think it would benefit a lot.

There you go:

The raw data with corrected ER and PIR:

Score no EQ: 3.04
With Sub: 6.04

Spinorama with no EQ:

• Not as Flat as i would expect
• HF a bit messy when comparing ON vs LW
• LF tuned for Active version that can benefit from boost?
• Port resonance?

Directivity:
Better stay at tweeter height
Horizontally, better toe-in the speakers by 10/20deg and have the axis crossing in front of the listening location, might help dosing the upper range.

EQ design:
I have generated two EQs. The APO config files are attached.

• The first one, labelled, LW is targeted at making the LW flat
• The second, labelled Score, starts with the first one and adds the score as an optimization variable.
• The EQs are designed in the context of regular stereo use i.e. domestic environment, no warranty is provided for a near field use in a studio environment although the LW might be better suited for this purpose.

Score EQ LW: 5.52
with sub: 7.71

Score EQ Score: 5.98
with sub: 8.17

Behringer B2030p APO EQ LW 96000Hz
April012021-094351

Preamp: -3.1 dB

Filter 1: ON HPQ Fc 47.7 Hz Gain 0 dB Q 1.35
Filter 2: ON PK Fc 149 Hz Gain -3 dB Q 2.26
Filter 3: ON PK Fc 284.5 Hz Gain -2 dB Q 7.08
Filter 4: ON PK Fc 794 Hz Gain -3.9 dB Q 4.4
Filter 5: ON PK Fc 938 Hz Gain -1.76 dB Q 6.57
Filter 6: ON PK Fc 1478 Hz Gain -1.45 dB Q 4.27
Filter 7: ON PK Fc 2028 Hz Gain -1.64 dB Q 4.15
Filter 8: ON PK Fc 3679 Hz Gain -2.11 dB Q 5.21
Filter 9: ON PK Fc 8051 Hz Gain -1.9 dB Q 1.2

Behringer B2030p APO EQ Score 96000Hz
April012021-093547

Preamp: -3 dB

Filter 1: ON HPQ Fc 47.2 Hz Gain 0 dB Q 1.35
Filter 2: ON PK Fc 149 Hz Gain -2.75 dB Q 1.56
Filter 3: ON PK Fc 281 Hz Gain -2 dB Q 7.08
Filter 4: ON PK Fc 788 Hz Gain -3.9 dB Q 4.4
Filter 5: ON PK Fc 941 Hz Gain -1.88 dB Q 7.57
Filter 6: ON PK Fc 1481 Hz Gain -1.45 dB Q 5.86
Filter 7: ON PK Fc 1977 Hz Gain -1.22 dB Q 4.15
Filter 8: ON PK Fc 3744 Hz Gain -2.05 dB Q 8.21
Filter 9: ON PK Fc 8204 Hz Gain -2.82 dB Q 1.1

Spinorama EQ LW

Spinorama EQ Score

Zoom PIR-LW-ON

Regression - Tonal

Radar no EQ vs EQ score
Big improvements

The rest of the plots is attached.

 

[test1223]

Thank you

The improvement of the score is quite high. With this eq it should be a very good speaker for the money.

 

[krabapple]

Amir, am I misunderstanding or is there a mistake in the PEQ part of your review?
It appears you naturally tried to pull down the 800Hz hump, and wrote about that too:

The speaker responded very well to Band 3 which pulled down that resonance. Directivity is very good there so we are correcting the total response of the speaker (on and off axis).

And then tried to address that 220 Hz peak but opted instead to fill in the small dip before it.

I then tried to pull down the smaller peak around 220 Hz. That resulted in reduced bass performance which I did not like. So I decided to fill in the dip before it. We want more bass than highs anyway. That worked well and seemingly reduced distortion and made the sound fuller as well. A winner in my book.

However, the red text next to PEQ bands in the image show this:

Shouldn't Band 3 be "Take down peak' and Band 4 be "Fill in dip"?

 

[amirm]

Amir, am I misunderstanding or is there a mistake in the PEQ part of your review?
It appears you naturally tried to pull down the 800Hz hump, and wrote about that too:



And then tried to address that 220 Hz peak but opted instead to fill in the small dip before it.



However, the red text next to PEQ bands in the image show this:

View attachment 129435

Shouldn't Band 3 be "Take down peak' and Band 4 be "Fill in dip"?

Yes, the labels are swapped in the descriptions in red. Thanks for catching that.

 

[Deleted member 12642]

Hi ! My pair b2030a (active) have problems with their amp. I want to transform them to passive.
Can someone help me get a photo of the crossover or values of the components ? I can't find it anywhere.
At the end i will EQ them with convolution for the little peak and dips in the response and i think they will be better then my boston acoustic cs26 for desktop use. Don't you think ?

If you're still interested I have the crossovers here and can share them with you.