Behringer DEQ2496 Ultracurve Pro DSP Review

[LTig]

Nope, it's just gone electrically leaky (low parallel resistance, indicative of dielectric layer degradation). Unless you spotted a puddle of electrolyte as well, that is.

That's what I meant and the ESR70 displayed (leaky).

Possibly the latter. (The company has been called Vishay Roederstein since like 1993, and I don't think their electrolytics have been very common since then. I'm guessing their were hit hard by the collapse of German consumer electronics manufacturing.) I might suggest gentle reforming at nominal rated voltage prior to use. EKM is a "General purpose, 105°C" cap according to the replacement table. 40 mOhms seems a pretty good ESR value for a 1000µ/25V though.

Good to know.

I hope you noticed that your C15 is also looking a bit puffy.

No I didn't - good catch.

BTW, was the original a 1000µ/6.3?

I can't remember, but it was smaller and did have less voltage. I just had no proper replacement at hand.

The general rule of thumb for such filter caps is not to use a cap rated at more than 3 times the actual sustained voltage. The dielectric layer may not regenerate properly. That would be even more of a problem with these NOS caps that have been gathering dust forever.

I didn't know that. Thanks a lot.

 

[Scoox]

Does anybody know if the DEQ2496 has been discontinued? I ordered one last year to be used for integrating bass shakers into my system and it's still out of stock —everywhere. I'm holding onto my order because I it was a good price but my dealer keeps bumping the delivery date, which is a way of saying "we don't really know when we'll have stock".

 

[Tragic 15K Rolloff]

Does anybody know if the DEQ2496 has been discontinued? I ordered one last year to be used for integrating bass shakers into my system and it's still out of stock —everywhere. I'm holding onto my order because I it was a good price but my dealer keeps bumping the delivery date, which is a way of saying "we don't really know when we'll have stock".

...Sigh... Yeah, sorta seems they're no longer available new, which is an incredible shame; I have 3 of them. Go for used? Pivoting, are you sure it's the deq2496 you want, and not a crossover?

 

[Scoox]

...Sigh... Yeah, sorta seems they're no longer available new, which is an incredible shame; I have 3 of them. Go for used? Pivoting, are you sure it's the deq2496 you want, and not a crossover?

The DEQ2496 is a Swiss army knife. It can be a crossover but it can be many other things. I needed its parametric EQ to correct a couple of resonances in the shakers. It also features a delay that can be use to use to time-align the shakers and the monitors. The other important feature was it has digital I/O. My interface's analogue I/O is already being used for other duties and this box would have been perfect. I'm not cancelling my order just yet but I won't hold my breath.

 

[GM3]

The DEQ2496 is a Swiss army knife. It can be a crossover but it can be many other things. I needed its parametric EQ to correct a couple of resonances in the shakers. It also features a delay that can be use to use to time-align the shakers and the monitors. The other important feature was it has digital I/O. My interface's analogue I/O is already being used for other duties and this box would have been perfect. I'm not cancelling my order just yet but I won't hold my breath.

I'd be wary... Mine crapped out just laying on a shelf; seems to be a cap that blew up in the power section, and I'm not the 1st person who's had similar issues with Beh. Behringer is 'good' because it's cheap and works fairly well, but the unavailability of the unit might be a blessing in disguise. Sweetwater shows "$349.00", and I don't recall it mine being that expensive, but I think I might have gotten mine used...

Have you looked into miniDSP? https://www.minidsp.com/products/minidsp-in-a-box/minidsp-2x4-hd looks like it can do delay, it has TOSLINK input, so if you can use that, I'd personally go for that over a DEQ! Much smaller, I'd wager more reliable, probably also more powerful in terms of EQ. Lack direct interface/control, anyhow! There may even be cheaper devices that fit the bill?

 

[Scoox]

I'd be wary... Mine crapped out just laying on a shelf; seems to be a cap that blew up in the power section, and I'm not the 1st person who's had similar issues with Beh. Behringer is 'good' because it's cheap and works fairly well, but the unavailability of the unit might be a blessing in disguise. Sweetwater shows "$349.00", and I don't recall it mine being that expensive, but I think I might have gotten mine used...

Have you looked into mindDSP? https://www.minidsp.com/products/minidsp-in-a-box/minidsp-2x4-hd looks like it can do delay, it has TOSLINK input, so if you can use that, I'd personally go for that over a DEQ! Much smaller, I'd wager more reliable, probably also more powerful in terms of EQ. Lack direct interface/control, anyhow!

That's exactly how I feel about the DEQ2496. I hadn't looked into miniDSP but thanks for the heads-up. My Genelec system uses AES/EBU straight out of my RME interface and I want to keep it that way. Since I need to delay the monitor's audio by about 15 ms (because the shakers lag behind), that means I need to route the raw audio into the miniDSP, delay it there, and then route it back to the interface and then to the AES/EBU outs. Ideally I'd like to do this without any AD/DA conversion, and the DEQ makes that possible since it has digital ins and outs, which the miniDSP 2x4 doesn't. The more expensive miniDSP Flex has digital inps and outs, so that might work. One thing I prefer about the DEQ is that it doesn't need a piece of software to work (every function is accessible from the hardware front panel). If the worst scenario is a blown capacitor I can fix that.

 

[SpaceMonkey]

The DEQ2496 is a Swiss army knife. It can be a crossover but it can be many other things. I needed its parametric EQ to correct a couple of resonances in the shakers. It also features a delay that can be use to use to time-align the shakers and the monitors. The other important feature was it has digital I/O. My interface's analogue I/O is already being used for other duties and this box would have been perfect. I'm not cancelling my order just yet but I won't hold my breath.

Honest question, how can it be a crossover?

 

[Scoox]

Honest question, how can it be a crossover?

You are right and strictly speaking it's not a crossover —you would need two of these units to implement a crossover, since it only has one EQ stage that is applied to either one or both of the Main and Aux outputs. In other words, you can't have two separate curves one for each pair of outputs.

That said, for integrating bass shakers it is perfectly adequate, since all I want it to do is low-pass the signal going into the bass shakers and tame a couple of unruly peaks hear and there. The signal going into my Genelec system is full-spectrum, and the crossover between the subs and the monitors is taken care of by GLM.

 

[LTig]

You are right and strictly speaking it's not a crossover —you would need two of these units to implement a crossover, since it only has one EQ stage that is applied to either one or both of the Main and Aux outputs. In other words, you can't have two separate curves one for each pair of outputs.

AFAIK you can use it as crossover for one speaker if you disengage the stereo link. Then both channels can be set individually.

 

[SpaceMonkey]

You are right and strictly speaking it's not a crossover —you would need two of these units to implement a crossover, since it only has one EQ stage that is applied to either one or both of the Main and Aux outputs. In other words, you can't have two separate curves one for each pair of outputs.

That said, for integrating bass shakers it is perfectly adequate, since all I want it to do is low-pass the signal going into the bass shakers and tame a couple of unruly peaks hear and there. The signal going into my Genelec system is full-spectrum, and the crossover between the subs and the monitors is taken care of by GLM.

ok, this works. I was hoping that there is maybe a way to push unequalised output via one of the outputs. this way equalised can go to speaker and unequalised to sub or something

AFAIK you can use it as crossover for one speaker if you disengage the stereo link. Then both channels can be set individually.

true, as well. DCX2496 is much more easy for this though

 

[Scoox]

I was hoping that there is maybe a way to push unequalised output via one of the outputs. this way equalised can go to speaker and unequalised to sub or something

Yes you can do that, that's exactly how I was planning to use it. You would get the equalised audio on the Main outs and in the routing section you would set the Aux out to tap the signal before the EQ module, so you'd get the unequalised signal. Of course, a proper crossover usually low-passes the sub signal and high-passes the satellites signal, therefore you would need two separate EQs one for each.

 

[Scoox]

AFAIK you can use it as crossover for one speaker if you disengage the stereo link. Then both channels can be set individually.

You can but who wants mono?

 

[LTig]

You can but who wants mono?

@amirm for his speaker auditions?

 

[G|force]

In the mid 2000's I used a pair of DCX2496 dual mono as a 2x6 front end. Never had any problems with them but I ended up swapping them for a BSS Blu-160 anyway.

 

[Decebel]

Good afternoon! Please tell me why, when choosing the XLR AES digital input, the signal continues to come from the toslink input? Now an optical TV is connected to my deq2496 and I wanted to additionally connect a bluetooth transmitter via XLR AES and it turned out that when switching the XLR AES and Optical inputs there is NO DIFFERENCE, the sound still passes through the optics, even if XLR AES is selected. Why is that?

 

[SharpEars]

Does anyone know how much latency the Deq2496 introduces when used analog to analog?

 

[MRC01]

Good afternoon! Please tell me why, when choosing the XLR AES digital input, the signal continues to come from the toslink input? Now an optical TV is connected to my deq2496 and I wanted to additionally connect a bluetooth transmitter via XLR AES and it turned out that when switching the XLR AES and Optical inputs there is NO DIFFERENCE, the sound still passes through the optics, even if XLR AES is selected. Why is that?

The picture you posted shows the digital input selected. On that screen you can turn the dial to select a different input, such as XLR.

 

[Decebel]

On that screen you can turn the dial to select a different input, such as XLR.

This is the problem, when I turn the encoder and press it while making a selection on dig in xlr, the music stops and continues to play again with optical, not xlr, although xlr is already selected on the screen at that moment.

 

[MRC01]

This is the problem, when I turn the encoder and press it while making a selection on dig in xlr, the music stops and continues to play again with optical, not xlr, although xlr is already selected on the screen at that moment.

Does the screen show the input you changed - it shows analog XLR connected as input?

 

[Decebel]

Does the screen show the input you changed - it shows analog XLR connected as input?

No, the dig xlr selection is displayed, but the sound continues to play from the optics. At this point, I wondered if the 2496 really has digital inputs independent of each other, or is it just different physical connectors, and there is only one virtual digital channel? Please conduct an experiment: physically disconnect the cord from the xlr input, physically connect the optics cord and select dig xlr from the input menu - you will be surprised, but the music will start playing despite the empty dig xlr connector