evils of the behringher DEQ 2496

[Andysu]

is the behringer DEQ 2496 evil ?

issues levels and noise
between the x3 of them in my rack they don't sine wave measure level correctly when looking at the meter display they should have identical sine wave tone signal
also one of them and this maybe due to power regulator supply that has possible capacitors that need replacing as one of the units produces a scratchy like low level noise that suspiciously sounds like a capacitor issue ?

analog vs digital ?
digital is all fine it can compact two channels EQ into single 1U frame , where's two channel analog 31 band 1/3 EQ will be typical 2U frame taking up extra rack space but may have less of the digital issues or then again , electronics are electronics end of the day and both have trade on's and trade off's

i got these DEQ 2496 cheap no years ago so doesn't bother me just disappointing that behringer with their claim they listen to their loyal customers but who is in the marketing that sends over relative questions and the ones that are angry and have been loyal for years , their comments may not even make it to the board room where to make some improvements in current products , like the DEQ 2496 which i feel and think has some glitchy gremlin bugs that have not all been ironed out so the units pass flawlessly m instead flaws is all that i'm noticing ?

i may uninstall the units and see if i can find way of installing some vintage/analog 1/3 EQ for the five screen channels as long as the filters do the task , even thou i prefer 20,2000 filter bands per channel , i doubt that will happen yet in the digital form ?

okay bit of rambling honest rant , i am loyal behringer customer i don't have to use everything they make in my rack now ? i guess some where wouldn't touch behringer with a barge pole lol

so anyone here like to start with postive vibes or slagging the DEQ 2496 off ?

 

[Wayne A. Pflughaupt]

I used the DSP11124 for a while, but didn’t care for the silver face since all my other gear is black. I’ve been using the vintage Yamaha YDP2006 digital parametric for 15 years or so. Absolutely stellar piece of gear. I’m currently using four in my main system. You can find a review in my signature.

Regards,
Wayne A. Pflughaupt

 

[egellings]

I have one and it failed on me shortly after getting it, so it sits, forever to be unused, in a closet.

 

[Waxx]

The dsp itself is quiet good, but the analog parts (the convertors) are noisy i think. But it has its uses, that's true.

But for twice the price you got a MiniDSP Flex that is way better than this, and it's more reliable also. And the almost equal priced DBX PA2 is also better i think (altough also not so low noise). It's surely a lot more reliable.

It's not that Behringer makes all crap (it never was actually) but this is certainly not their best. They also got a lot better convertors in their range in some of the latest soundcards. So it's not that they can't do it right, but in this device it's not right.

 

[Andysu]

I used the DSP11124 for a while, but didn’t care for the silver face since all my other gear is black. I’ve been using the vintage Yamaha YDP2006 digital parametric for 15 years or so. Absolutely stellar piece of gear. I’m currently using four in my main system. You can find a review in my signature.

Regards,
Wayne A. Pflughaupt

customization , black spray paint

 

[phoenixdogfan]

Used to own one in the early '00's. Took me all of about 30 seconds to see the analog portion was trash, but the digital eq was great. That was back when I was literally spending kilobucks for phono cartridges, so getting a $200 unit that was only half functional seemed like a bargain. Probably still is if you are able to use the EQ properly to tame something like the standing waves of your subwoofer and find it for a bargain price used (like maybe $100).

 

[Rednaxela]

Is there any other digital in/out DEQ with 2x10 band PEQ that does not need anything external to configure?

 

[Looneybomber]

I’ve been using my DEQ2496 as a subwoofer pre/pro for years. I think I use one band of EQ and a shelf filter (sealed sub) and that’s it. Complete waste of all of its functions. Oh well. It works great for my needs. A MiniDSP would also work great but it didn’t exist when I bought the Behringer.

 

[Keith_W]

Time to send one to Amir for review!

 

[fatoldgit]

Have one I used for a while before moving to a DEQX HPD-4.

Got it modded by a British Bloke (with a good rep. had measurements and all) who upgrades the power supply (the failure rate of the stock PS is high) plus some tweaks to the digital side.

Only used it in the digital domain although the British Bloke also had upgrades for that as well.

Peter

 

[BDWoody]

Time to send one to Amir for review!

Behringer DEQ2496 Ultracurve Pro DSP Review

This is a review and detailed measurements of the Behringer DEQ2496 Ultracurve "2-channel Equalizer and Mastering Processor." It was kindly loaned to me for testing from a member and has a retail cost of US $645 but I see it discounted to US $429. For those of you frustrated with my lead...

audiosciencereview.com

 

[Paffi]

Have one I used for a while before moving to a DEQX HPD-4.

How satisfied are you with the HDP-4? Just came across this (due to your posting). Its kind of old but still seems a good product, when bought used. Is there some information, how the calibration interface looks like and which options it has? Hard to find detailed information online.

 

[Rednaxela]

DEQ2496 digital performance:

Quick measurements of Behringer Ultracurve DEQ2496

DEQ2496 is a very complex device with many features and functions. It can work in digital domain entirely, or convert between digital and analog for both, inputs and outputs. First up is digital performance. This is measured using optical input and output, so the signal never leaves digital...

www.audiosciencereview.com

 

[Waxx]

The measurements confirm what i was thinking, analog part is so so (not a disaster, but not good enough), the digital part is exellent (when using optical in like i used it for a while), I never used the AES altough.

And Behringer always had good dsp software, it's the analog part where it was not so good. I've used the Ultracurve DSP 8024 (1999) for years in dj rigs used at (often illigal) raves where it was a blessing to protect my sound (password locked with limiters) against the dj's and tune the sound to the spaces where it was played. That device was noisy (but so were the amps and speakers we used, low budget it was) but very durable. It survived a lot, and it seems that it's still for sale even. But the analog part was also then the problem of the device, and the psu also lacked (but was easy to mod to good, ours was modded). To today standards it's probally a very noisy dsp, but 25 years ago, it was what we could afford, as most others where very expensive. We used it fully analog I/O (it was stil the vinyl dj days then).

 

[fatoldgit]

How satisfied are you with the HDP-4? Just came across this (due to your posting). Its kind of old but still seems a good product, when bought used. Is there some information, how the calibration interface looks like and which options it has? Hard to find detailed information online.

https://www.deqx.com/wp-content/uploads/pdf/DEQX-User-Manual.pdf

This covers all the previous models.

There is also this review of the Premate (same engine as the HDP-4) by Kalman Rubinson (with JA measurements). JA had no real issues with it. This is what put me onto the HDP-4.

DEQX PreMate D/A processor/digital equalizer

www.stereophile.com

The first thing is it is internally 96k/32bit and PCM only so if you are into say 192k PCM it will down sample. And DSD is a no go. Also as per JA's review, it uses a minimum-phase characteristic filter so if you are religious with regard to this, take note.

It's a complex device to configure. They have this extra (optional) step where you measure your speakers close up/in isolation (i.e. no room influence) so they add speaker characteristics compensation into the mix (part of their secret sauce).

The HDP-4 is purely a DAC/PRE/PEQ device but if you are into Roon, other models of the same generation are Roon certified (or were a while back..not sure if they have to retest against each Roon release).

USB input is not Linux compatible (and they don't claim it is) but I got it to work by using PC's with older EHCI USB controllers AND hacking/building my own Linux kernel that removed the XHCI USB stack cause my PC's have both EHCI and XHCI controllers (or you can go for really old PC's that only have a EHCI USB controllers and avoid the kernel hack).

The issue is the DEQX USB input crashes/drops the connection when it passes through a XHCI USB controller hosted on Linux (issue is probably on the Linux side).

Note that there is no info on how to remove the XHCI USB stack from Linux on the web (who would want to!!!) but as luck would have it I have decades of experience with Unix/Linux systems level programming so managed to work it out.

I tested windows/usb connectivity and that works fine but Windows is the work of the Devil and has no place in my life (along with any other OS that isnt Unix [Solaris/AIX/HPUX] or Linux!!!!)

If you pipe analogue sources through it they will undergo an ADC BUT (at least to my ears) it is transperant. I plugged my high end turntable/arm/cartridge/phono amp into it and it sound fine noting I am 100% digital file playback now, dropped vinyl and silver discs 2 years ago.

With regard to digital playback, all my source files are 44.1/16 but I do upsample inside my PC to 48/24 so the DEQX only has to do integer based resampling to 96/32. It's not that I dont trust it to do 44.1/16->96/32 well... its just an old habit.

I aint going to talk about blacker blacks, veils lifted etc when comparing it to other DAC's I have had.... I aint that type of guy but as per JA's measurements its transperant so thats all we need to know.

I have never had a software glitch with it and I drive my amps direct from it (i.e. no risk of volume going 100% and destroying stuff)

It has RCA and XLR outputs labeled "low","mid","high" (to match a typical use case) but the software allows these to be whatever you want (labelling obviously helps you work out whats what when cabling it in).

The one "issue" with the connectors is that unlike most equipment I have used, the Left/Right location of the outputs are as viewed from the back and not the front so I really had to think carefully when hooking up cables.

Remote is OK.

Summary: despite its age it's still the real deal but be prepared to invest a lot of time in configuring it.

Peter

PS. If serious about getting one I would maybe check with them about spares for these older models and service "close" to your location.

OZ (aussie) is a long way from anywhere except where I am in NZ (new zealand)

 

[Paffi]

Thank you for your detailed response! I've just downloaded the manual yesterday and read the most of it. It says it can also do linear phase not only minimal phase, but what wasn't clear to me: can it do the room correction without the speaker correction first? In the manual it's in the order first speaker than room, but I don't want to correct the speaker. And I have four subwoofer, the outputs and the manual only mentions the maximum of two - but as you say, maybe two of the other outputs can also be used for subs.

The only thing is, it's pretty old but on the other hand, there isn't much competition. Minidsp HT or Trinnov ST2 / Nova.

 

[fatoldgit]

can it do the room correction without the speaker correction first?

yes..thats how I run it..couldnt be arsed first up to do that part and never returned to try it

And I have four subwoofer, the outputs and the manual only mentions the maximum of two

It has six outputs and each can be configured (filters, cutoffs, delays etc) as you want. So that covers your use case: two for main L+R and four for the subs.

Its been a while since I configured it and maybe the measuring templates are limited to main L+R and two subs (when setting up for subs) so you could measure/configure in that template mode (using say the outputs labeled "high" [for main L+R] and "mid" [for one pair of subs]..remember these are just nominal labels) and once that's done, manually configure the "low" outputs for the final two subs.

Tune these by ear and/or use say REW to confirm you inroom response as you tweak the DEQX filters.

It will do what you want, you just need to work within its measurement template constraints. Or dont use the templates, just configure manually and use REW to validate.. you dont have to use the DEQX to measure.

My use case with it also doesnt fit its measurement templates but no issue... I picked the closest one, tweaked as needed and used REW to confirm.

Also note that via the remote, you can switch between 4 or 5 profiles..can't remember the exact number.

So let say you aren't quite sure which config is best. You save your different configs as say "p0", "p1" and then can switch between them as you work out whats best. Then clone in the GUI say "p1" to "p2" (which has a different tweak) and work your way to the best setup.

This also means you can use different profiles for different genres etc. Want more slam for the likes of MegaDeath... select "p0", want something else for Jazz, select "p1"

Bottom line... if you are OCD... this might not be the product for you...you will spend the rest of your life down a rabbit hole trying different stuff!!!

Peter