Behringer EP2500 Stereo Amplifier Review

[Waxx]

The specs are ok for such a amp, but in my epxerience it's very unreliable, especially for subwoofer duties. A cheap crown or qsc works almost always and is not much more expensive, Behringer, especially this series breaks down a lot when you push them hard. I would not use them anymore for subwoofer duties in a high power envirroment. The ones i know were used for big dj rigs on (mostly not so legal) underground electronic music parties. It was chosen because it's cheap and the gouverment sometimes seizes soundsystems on such parties, so it's not a good id to use expensive equipment for those.

 

[Old_School_Brad]

It looks very similar to my eyes. It’s mirrored and arrangement is different however I see same amount of parts here.

The boards have entirely different designs, layouts, and components. Behringer uses surface-mounted components, while t.amp features a more traditional, discrete design.

These are two distinct designs, with not much indication that they should be alike.

Spoiler: Behringer KM750

Spoiler: t.amp E400

 

[Hipster Doofus]

Might be a good choice for vinyl and reel to reel. Just kidding

Do enjoy the off beat product reviews. At least there is still inclusion happening here.

 

[Bob101]

Class D? Tons of crossover-like looking distortion, dead zone if class D. Horrible.

Could you please explain in real English what what you mean by 'crossover-like looking' distortion, and 'dead zone'?

 

[martin900]

Well, the EP is a cheap power brute with linear PSU and it does what it says, they are good on subs and dirt cheap used.
The long wiring probably kills the distortion values.

Behringer likes making cheaper clones of more expensive brands and the EP kinda reminds me of QSC RMX (850) inside.

 

[Jonas_h]

Do any of you know how closely the Behringer copies the original QSC RMX 2450a? Should we expect same level of performance from the QSC or do they use better quality parts?

Looking at the spec-sheet, it should provide cleaner results compared to the Behringer (especially distortion). If I recall correctly, the QSC DCA tested here lived up to the specifications.

 

[RigorDude]

This is a review and detailed measurements of the Behringer EP2500 "pro" stereo amplifier. It was purchased used and kindly sent to me for testing. It is discontinued but seems to go for $300 or so used.
View attachment 429558
I like the front panel gain controls which I set to about 22 dB for the review. Clipping indicators are very nice to have and as you see later, are accurate. Same with signal detection. On the negative front, the amplifier is loud, very loud. Even at idle I can hear it from 10 meters/30 feet away. So don't even think about running it in the same room or finding a way to quiet it down. The amp is also very heavy at 36 pounds for a professional amp which these days are quite light by using switching technologies.

Back panel shows nice set of switches which enable the limiter or selection of two different high pass filters:
View attachment 429559
I disliked the cover over binding posts as it made it almost impossible to turn the speakon plugs to lock and unlock.

If you are not familiar with my amplifier measurements, please watch this tutorial:

Behringer EP2500 Amplifier Measurements
As usual we start with our 5 watt dashboard:
View attachment 429560
Typical of amplifiers in this class, distortion is high compared to consumer amplifiers. The causes SINAD to be dominated by it and underperform the average tested amplifier by whopping 20 dB. Noise performance is reasonable:
View attachment 429563

Back to distortion, it naturally rises with frequency:
View attachment 429564
View attachment 429565

Frequency response shows some drooping but not end of the world:
View attachment 429566

Crosstalk is one of the worst I have measured:
View attachment 429567

Power output is very healthy but distortion is ever present:
View attachment 429568
View attachment 429569
It also meets spec at 1 kHz:
View attachment 429570

Testing at 40 Hz shows same level of output:
View attachment 429571

I tried to run my 1% THD power sweep. It ran fine from 20,000 down to a few hundred hertz but then tripped the breaker in my industry power strip! We can see that it is very capable at lower frequencies:

View attachment 429573

For this reason, I did not attempt to test it with my reactive load. I am confident that in a fight with that load, the amp would win!

The amp is stable on power up:
View attachment 429574

There are not one, but two nasty power up pops:
View attachment 429575

Conclusions
The EP2500 delivers on what one expects from a professional amplifier: tons of power and mid 60s SINAD, comprised of distortion. It also does that in the form of noise. For the typical subwoofer duty, it would do well and very low cost but you would need to find a way to quiet it, and the pop it generates.

Personally I would pay a lot more and get a quiet amp but I know others want the price performance. To the extent you don't mind shopping used, the Behringer EP2500 does the job.

------------
As always, questions, comments, recommendations, etc. are welcome.

Any donations are much appreciated using: https://www.audiosciencereview.com/forum/index.php?threads/how-to-support-audio-science-review.8150/

Does a “gain control” on an amplifier such as this one actually alter the amplifier’s gain, or is it actually a level control that affects the level of the signal that is fed to the gain stage?

 

[restorer-john]

Does a “gain control” on an amplifier such as this one actually alter the amplifier’s gain, or is it actually a level control that affects the level of the signal that is fed to the gain stage?

They are really just attenuators up front of the fixed gain power stage in all but a few cases.

As most people look at an amplifier as a "black box", those attenuators can set the overall gain of the aforementioned box as a whole.

It gets complicated when manufacturers have switchable gain ranges up front AND attenuators. Call them what you like, it doesn't really matter.

 

[lewdish]

Other than power it has nothing really going for it

 

[Old_School_Brad]

Do any of you know how closely the Behringer copies the original QSC RMX 2450a? Should we expect same level of performance from the QSC or do they use better quality parts?

Looking at the spec-sheet, it should provide cleaner results compared to the Behringer (especially distortion). If I recall correctly, the QSC DCA tested here lived up to the specifications.

Just because a product is reverse-engineered or "inspired" by another doesn’t mean it’s the same as the original. It might look similar, but that doesn’t guarantee it performs the same way. You can’t just compare board layouts or count components and assume they deliver identical results.

You can even find a “Accuphase A-75” from China for $1050. It might look like the real deal, but that doesn’t make it one.

It’s a bit like the “uncanny valley” effect -something looks almost right, but there’s just enough off about it to know it’s not quite the real thing.

 

[Jonas_h]

Just because a product is reverse-engineered or "inspired" by another doesn’t mean it’s the same as the original. It might look similar, but that doesn’t guarantee it performs the same way. You can’t just compare board layouts or count components and assume they deliver identical results.

... which is why I am asking if anyone knows how they differ in performance. If I assumed identical results, I wouldn't need to ask.

 

[Old_School_Brad]

... which is why I am asking if anyone knows how they differ in performance. If I assumed identical results, I wouldn't need to ask.

I’d choose QSC over Behringer any day. They’re a reliable company with specs you can actually trust -especially the older models, before before peak and burst power ratings were the main thing.

 

[tamagaba]

This is not a hifi product - sports hall speakerphone for example

 

[Ktacos]

The specs are ok for such a amp, but in my epxerience it's very unreliable, especially for subwoofer duties.

Mine were fine, I used six to power various subs for about 10 years and afaik they're still running in the church I sold them to. I hired my rig of twelve tham15 + tops almost exclusively to electronic events and the amps were run really hard in and outdoors and worked great.

 

[Waxx]

Mine were fine, I used six to power various subs for about 10 years and afaik they're still running in the church I sold them to. I hired my rig of twelve tham15 + tops almost exclusively to electronic events and the amps were run really hard in and outdoors and worked great.

for electronic rave and dub music, both quiet demanding for subbass amps, they went down all the time while QSC may start pumping, but will keep going as long as you don't overdrive the input to distortion (but that you limit with dsp in my case). We used behringer dsp at that time, but for amps we mostly used QSC, sometimes cheaper crowns (more for tops).

 

[Hipster Doofus]

To hear or not hear. ... differences. That is the question. Here's a blind test with, among other things, a Behringer A500 amp. I won't spoil their results, you can read about them in the link below. The result was at least what I suspected it would be:
View attachment 429602View attachment 429603

Matrix HiFi --> Blind testing high end full equipments

Boy that Berlinger looks pretty cool in the grainy photo

 

[Old_School_Brad]

Boy that Berlinger looks pretty cool in the grainy photo

Do you think so? -I think it looks like a cheap, plasticky toy. Taste is subjective, huh?

 

[DanielT]

Boy that Berlinger looks pretty cool in the grainy photo

Do you think so? -I think it looks like a cheap, plasticky toy. Taste is subjective, huh?

Butt ugly if you ask me, like most other PA amps. But on the other hand, they are not designed to win any beauty contest.
If the beauty criteria are something like these amps that is:

Most aesthetically pleasing amplifiers

Not what is usually discussed, but everything out of the equation, what in your eyes is the best looking amplifier and why?

audiosciencereview.com

(vintage and VU meters seem to be seem to be a common theme)

Incidentally, I like to have PA amps in my home HiFi solution. That is as long as you change the fans in them to silent ones and/or throw them in a sensibly ventilated cabinet cabinet so you don't have to see them.

 

[Hipster Doofus]

Butt ugly if you ask me, like most other PA amps. But on the other hand, they are not designed to win any beauty contest.
If the beauty criteria are something like these amps that is:

Most aesthetically pleasing amplifiers

Not what is usually discussed, but everything out of the equation, what in your eyes is the best looking amplifier and why?

audiosciencereview.com

(vintage and VU meters seem to be seem to be a common theme)

Incidentally, I like to have PA amps in my home HiFi solution. That is as long as you change the fans in them to silent ones and/or throw them in a sensibly ventilated cabinet cabinet so you don't have to see them.

​

No no not this Behringer the one in the blind posting link

A500​

 

[DanielT]

​

No no not this Behringer the one in the blind posting link

A500​

View attachment 430546

The one in the picture, the Behringer A500, was the one I intended, but the Behringer EP2500 won't win any beauty contests either.
No beauty my t.amp either for that matter:


Here are my two silent fans that the previous owner put in my t.amp. It works well with the cooling and fan noise. Noise level about the same as a computer fan.


A quick noise test on the fans.In a small bedroom. With a dB app, take it with a grain of salt. First without the t.amp off:

Turned on. The door to the bedroom closed on both measured occasions. Measured at the same position, two meters from the amp:


Maybe I should have measured a few more minutes to get a fairer average, but even so, maybe it says something?