I have plans to get hold of the Behringer Ultracurve DEQ2496 and I'm looking for ideas/advice/discussion on ways it might be used.
My system:
* 2 way MTM TL speakers with Vifa P17 & D25AG - soon to have an active analogue crossover added (DIY)
* 2 x ~30L AE speakers AV12 subs - sealed
I intend to place the subs either side of the couch and cross at 60 - 80 Hz. This seems to get a fairly smooth response to start with. Then I can eq the whole system (before the signal goes to the active crossover).
Having looked further into the user manual, I find a very powerful set of options, on which I'd like some comments. These include:
* Dynamic EQ to protect drivers from overexcursion - I could set it up so that it's not possible to drive anything beyond xmax
* Dynamic EQ to reduce the impact of power compression - most subs tend to change the frequency response as you turn it up due to power compression - at a preset point I could cut back the midbass so the response stays the same
* Dynamic EQ to compensate for the changing sensitivity of the ear to LF at lower volumes
* Digital delay either to the tweeter, or the subs
* Widen stereo image (not sure if this would be gimmicky)
* Dynamics processors - compressor - reduces extreme dynamic range when it's too much for the system at high output; expander - reduces signals below a threshold (noise)
* EQ to get the bass response I want - previously I was boosting the overall sub level, but with an active xo this would raise the crossover point - by using eq the xo point is not messed up
* EQ to improve poor recording mix - I find a lot of recordings are objectionable - treble is overdone, bass is thin and lacking depth, midrange is glaring
* EQ to deal with room modes - I can reduce them by placement quite a lot, but don't have the option of room treatment at the moment
* EQ to suit preferences - BBC dip etc - in place of my tweeter pad which I have at the moment
Suggestions, comments, criticisms, and in particular shared experinces welcome
My system:
* 2 way MTM TL speakers with Vifa P17 & D25AG - soon to have an active analogue crossover added (DIY)
* 2 x ~30L AE speakers AV12 subs - sealed
I intend to place the subs either side of the couch and cross at 60 - 80 Hz. This seems to get a fairly smooth response to start with. Then I can eq the whole system (before the signal goes to the active crossover).
Having looked further into the user manual, I find a very powerful set of options, on which I'd like some comments. These include:
* Dynamic EQ to protect drivers from overexcursion - I could set it up so that it's not possible to drive anything beyond xmax
* Dynamic EQ to reduce the impact of power compression - most subs tend to change the frequency response as you turn it up due to power compression - at a preset point I could cut back the midbass so the response stays the same
* Dynamic EQ to compensate for the changing sensitivity of the ear to LF at lower volumes
* Digital delay either to the tweeter, or the subs
* Widen stereo image (not sure if this would be gimmicky)
* Dynamics processors - compressor - reduces extreme dynamic range when it's too much for the system at high output; expander - reduces signals below a threshold (noise)
* EQ to get the bass response I want - previously I was boosting the overall sub level, but with an active xo this would raise the crossover point - by using eq the xo point is not messed up
* EQ to improve poor recording mix - I find a lot of recordings are objectionable - treble is overdone, bass is thin and lacking depth, midrange is glaring
* EQ to deal with room modes - I can reduce them by placement quite a lot, but don't have the option of room treatment at the moment
* EQ to suit preferences - BBC dip etc - in place of my tweeter pad which I have at the moment
Suggestions, comments, criticisms, and in particular shared experinces welcome
Some background info
For those not familiar with what I'm talking about (and some who are) ...
Behringer Ultracurve DEQ2496
A review of Ultracurve's little brother by Thorsten Loesch
Here's what it looks like:
For those not familiar with what I'm talking about (and some who are) ...
Behringer Ultracurve DEQ2496
A review of Ultracurve's little brother by Thorsten Loesch
Here's what it looks like:
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
So far I've used only the auto-eq feature of my Ultra Curve extensively, it works rather nicely to help correct room problems (mostly for your listening spot, it won't EQ so the entire room is flat), especially when you are renting and have limited room treatment options. I have yet to use but am planning on using the dynamic limiter so as to protect my open baffle projects. I've left compressing/expanding alone for now. I've poked around with manually EQ'ing by ear but auto-eq works just fine. You can also set targets for the auto-eq meaning you don't have to target a flat response. If you want a tame high frequency, you can. Want to get bass crazy? You can. Want that $10,000 overpriced audiophile speaker at the local shop, boost up the treble (hehe cheap shot).
I'm pleased with the unit. It also serves as my DAC seeing as how I'm poor and can only afford a cheap DVD player and buying soley a high quality DAC is not economical. For equalizing a favorite listening spot, auto-eq works wonders. To an extent, baffle step problems because of room response and OB low frequency roll off can also be fixed.
Did I mention I also like to have the RTA on showing me a neat light show of the frequency domain of the music playing.
The only downfall is that I seem to incur digital clipping often if the EQ'ing requires a large boost in an area. Its most likely caused by the music I listen to being compressed and on the verge of digital clipping already, so its not all peaches and cream.
I'm pleased with the unit. It also serves as my DAC seeing as how I'm poor and can only afford a cheap DVD player and buying soley a high quality DAC is not economical. For equalizing a favorite listening spot, auto-eq works wonders. To an extent, baffle step problems because of room response and OB low frequency roll off can also be fixed.
Did I mention I also like to have the RTA on showing me a neat light show of the frequency domain of the music playing.
The only downfall is that I seem to incur digital clipping often if the EQ'ing requires a large boost in an area. Its most likely caused by the music I listen to being compressed and on the verge of digital clipping already, so its not all peaches and cream.
I spoke to a PA guy recently who thinks there is no worthwhile bass below 50 Hz. Yet when I heard his bandpass sub tuned at that point, I could tell he could gain a sense of depth and weight in the bass by going 10 Hz lower. I'd like to be able to demonstrate that I'm not insane in shooting for 20 - 25 Hz in room extension. IOW, I'm thinking RTA would be very handy, novelty factor aside.
Could you elaborate a little more on using it as a DAC? I'm not really clear on this, what exactly it means, what are the advantages, and how to do it.
I assume this means getting digital out from your source (hence bypassing the dvd/cd player DAC), then sending the analogue signal to the preamp. If so, how good is the DAC?
Question for the aussies:
Looks like I will start to need quite a lot of connections now that use XLR connections. Any suggestions on how to do this cheaply? My first thought is to get XLR - RCA adaptors but I wonder if there is a cheaper way. Suggestions for good cheap suppliers?
Could you elaborate a little more on using it as a DAC? I'm not really clear on this, what exactly it means, what are the advantages, and how to do it.
I assume this means getting digital out from your source (hence bypassing the dvd/cd player DAC), then sending the analogue signal to the preamp. If so, how good is the DAC?
Question for the aussies:
Looks like I will start to need quite a lot of connections now that use XLR connections. Any suggestions on how to do this cheaply? My first thought is to get XLR - RCA adaptors but I wonder if there is a cheaper way. Suggestions for good cheap suppliers?
Are you able to do any measurements on your room so you can tell exactly what is needed?
If so, I would use the parametric EQs to fix bass peaks, and then use the auto-EQ for more minor EQ of the whole system. You probably shouldn't use any of the compression or limiting options, they've designed for pro audio use. The dynamic EQ can be handy if you play your music really loud.
However, since you plan on doing an active crossover for your mains anyway, I can't help wondering if you wouldn't be better off with Behringer DCX 2496.
Then you can have one box that will give you your crossovers, allow you to EQ each driver (especially important for the subs), do delays and dynamic EQ if you want it. And the price is about the same.
For your situation the DCX would be a much finer tool, especially if you are going to have the subs so far away from your mains.
Cheers
Steve
If so, I would use the parametric EQs to fix bass peaks, and then use the auto-EQ for more minor EQ of the whole system. You probably shouldn't use any of the compression or limiting options, they've designed for pro audio use. The dynamic EQ can be handy if you play your music really loud.
However, since you plan on doing an active crossover for your mains anyway, I can't help wondering if you wouldn't be better off with Behringer DCX 2496.
Then you can have one box that will give you your crossovers, allow you to EQ each driver (especially important for the subs), do delays and dynamic EQ if you want it. And the price is about the same.
For your situation the DCX would be a much finer tool, especially if you are going to have the subs so far away from your mains.
Cheers
Steve
Konnichiwa,
I have written a moderatly complete set of notes, please look here (Yahoo subscription to my discussion group is forced by Yahoo, not by me):
Suggested target curves and setup techniques for Pro Audio Digital Equalisers in home systems for Room correction and general system EQ
I'd leave the dynamic EQ alone, too unpredictable as you will have a hard time know what to compensate, even with good basic measurement setups.
The second output is of much lower quality than the main one, use only for uncrittical stuff, so IMHO not the tweeter.
Works well if used the right way (eg. ONLY widen the LF stereo-base, not at high frequencies).
I found the dynamics to suffer from the problems as all single way compressor/expanders, not quite good enough. You can sometimes use the DEQ Expander to get dynamic range from compressed recodrings, but the time constant settings are tricky for an ex studio pro (eg me) to get right.
That you can do.
That too, and well.
Yes, this too can be made to work well.
I would see the DEQ primarily as room EQ and as "re-equaliser" for recording (eg re-mastering).
Sayonara
paulspencer said:
I have written a moderatly complete set of notes, please look here (Yahoo subscription to my discussion group is forced by Yahoo, not by me):
Suggested target curves and setup techniques for Pro Audio Digital Equalisers in home systems for Room correction and general system EQ
I'd leave the dynamic EQ alone, too unpredictable as you will have a hard time know what to compensate, even with good basic measurement setups.
paulspencer said:
The second output is of much lower quality than the main one, use only for uncrittical stuff, so IMHO not the tweeter.
paulspencer said:
Works well if used the right way (eg. ONLY widen the LF stereo-base, not at high frequencies).
paulspencer said:
I found the dynamics to suffer from the problems as all single way compressor/expanders, not quite good enough. You can sometimes use the DEQ Expander to get dynamic range from compressed recodrings, but the time constant settings are tricky for an ex studio pro (eg me) to get right.
paulspencer said:
That you can do.
paulspencer said:
That too, and well.
paulspencer said:
Yes, this too can be made to work well.
I would see the DEQ primarily as room EQ and as "re-equaliser" for recording (eg re-mastering).
Sayonara
Steve,
I have an opportunity to get the DEQ cheap, considerably more so than the DCX and it appears it will do things I want that DCX will not do. I'd like to add DCX later.
DCX is a crossover more than an eq unit. The DEQ is an eq unit, which is what I want as I can do an active xo very cheaply (although with less functionality and power). Ideally, I'd like to use both in the future. I will need to get a mic or borrow one to do this right.
It has previously been suggested to get the DCX, but for reasons I'd rather not go into, this isn't an option right now.
I have an opportunity to get the DEQ cheap, considerably more so than the DCX and it appears it will do things I want that DCX will not do. I'd like to add DCX later.
DCX is a crossover more than an eq unit. The DEQ is an eq unit, which is what I want as I can do an active xo very cheaply (although with less functionality and power). Ideally, I'd like to use both in the future. I will need to get a mic or borrow one to do this right.
It has previously been suggested to get the DCX, but for reasons I'd rather not go into, this isn't an option right now.
What else do I need with DEQ? ... I am contemplating a DIY mic, or the Behringer ECM8000 mic or an SPL meter. With the latter, I can also use it to get levels, which I would like to have.
The problem is, it's response is not flat. However, with the autoeq, I understand that I can set the target curve as the inverse of its response. This would then yield a flat response. I'm not sure if I can get around the response of the meter where it may be required to be flat for other uses, either with DEQ or measurement in general.
Is it possible to calibrate the response of an SPL meter in speaker workshop if I have the correction factors (say with the Radioshack analogue meter?)
The problem is, it's response is not flat. However, with the autoeq, I understand that I can set the target curve as the inverse of its response. This would then yield a flat response. I'm not sure if I can get around the response of the meter where it may be required to be flat for other uses, either with DEQ or measurement in general.
Is it possible to calibrate the response of an SPL meter in speaker workshop if I have the correction factors (say with the Radioshack analogue meter?)
KWY, what would you consider to be a low budget DVD? There are players that start at about AUD $100, they are certainly cheap. Then there are players for more like AUD $250 like a Pioneer unit. Then for about AUD $500 an entry level NAD/Denon/Marantz. Which would you say the DEQ is most likely comparable to?
Also regarding the aux output with the digital delay, is there anything that can be done to get the quality to match the main output? What is it that causes poor quality?
Also regarding the aux output with the digital delay, is there anything that can be done to get the quality to match the main output? What is it that causes poor quality?
dswiston said:
You need to reduce the input gain if you have a lot of positive EQ. Just lower the gain on the input menu 3-6dB and this will go away, and you will be much happier! Digital clipping sounds horrible.
1. I would buy the ECM8000, it is cheap, very flat, and there are calibration files available for Speaker Workshop, if you ever get into that.
2. The aux output has cheaper DACs. It would probably be relatively easy to fix, but you'd need to be able to either build your own tiny DAC and wire it up or find a drop-in replacement.
This output is fine for sub, I would guess it might be ok for a <300Hz woofer but I have not tried.
This would mean either only using it for bass eq or somehow widening the 2nd auxiliary output. Is the latter possible? Or is there another way to only widen the bass stereo image?
DISREGARD PREVIOUS: I HAVE JUST FOUND THE ANSWER - SHUFFLE FUNCTION WIDENS ONLY THE BASS TO A SELECTED FREQUENCY
Ah, just read the other thread. I won't try to nag you into the DCX.
My first experience of digital EQ was the 8024 that Thorsten reviewed. It made such a positive improvement that it lead me to TACTs and now my current setup. So I'm sure it will help your speakers.
I would get the Behringer ECM as soon as you can. The Auto-EQ of the DEQ won't be as accurate without it as they calibrated to work together. You can use the Tandy SPL, but the results will not be ideal. As mentioned above, the ECM is very accurate for the price, so you can use it for other measurement stuff afterwards, although you will need a preamp/phantom power source. Behringer's mixers like the 603 will do the trick, or their Shark.
Then, once you can measure your room accurately, I would still use the DEQs parametric EQs to fix the bass. The Auto-EQ is too coarse. Get the room as flat as possible with the parametric, and then use the graphic as Thorsten suggested.
As for using it as a DAC, I can't see why it would be any worse than any CD/DVD in common use. However, if you do a direct digital feed you'll need to find some way to control volume after the DEQ.
Cheers
Steve
My first experience of digital EQ was the 8024 that Thorsten reviewed. It made such a positive improvement that it lead me to TACTs and now my current setup. So I'm sure it will help your speakers.
I would get the Behringer ECM as soon as you can. The Auto-EQ of the DEQ won't be as accurate without it as they calibrated to work together. You can use the Tandy SPL, but the results will not be ideal. As mentioned above, the ECM is very accurate for the price, so you can use it for other measurement stuff afterwards, although you will need a preamp/phantom power source. Behringer's mixers like the 603 will do the trick, or their Shark.
Then, once you can measure your room accurately, I would still use the DEQs parametric EQs to fix the bass. The Auto-EQ is too coarse. Get the room as flat as possible with the parametric, and then use the graphic as Thorsten suggested.
As for using it as a DAC, I can't see why it would be any worse than any CD/DVD in common use. However, if you do a direct digital feed you'll need to find some way to control volume after the DEQ.
Cheers
Steve
Richard!
I have been meaning to talk to you about UC since you have both it and DCX!
If I get the ECM mic is there a way I can use it as an SPL meter? Can I get SPL figures from it?
Thanks!
Steve, what is your current setup. I have seen your site with your Bob speakers. What are you using now? DCX? dbx? (this could get confusing!)
I didn't realise it was incomplete. I have considered a diy mic, but thought this ECM would save me the time/effort. Is it suffient without anything else for the Ultracurve? Can I get SPL figures out of it - absolute levels?
I was going to use the RS SPL Meter as I thought I could use the inverse of its response (via correction factors) as the target curve. It's cheaper and will also act as an SPL meter.
I do have an electret capsule for a diy mic, so if I have to make a preamp anyway, I might as well do a diy mic, the only difference is I'd have to get a few more bits - mic case etc.
I have been meaning to talk to you about UC since you have both it and DCX!
If I get the ECM mic is there a way I can use it as an SPL meter? Can I get SPL figures from it?
Thanks!
Steve, what is your current setup. I have seen your site with your Bob speakers. What are you using now? DCX? dbx? (this could get confusing!)
I didn't realise it was incomplete. I have considered a diy mic, but thought this ECM would save me the time/effort. Is it suffient without anything else for the Ultracurve? Can I get SPL figures out of it - absolute levels?
I was going to use the RS SPL Meter as I thought I could use the inverse of its response (via correction factors) as the target curve. It's cheaper and will also act as an SPL meter.
I do have an electret capsule for a diy mic, so if I have to make a preamp anyway, I might as well do a diy mic, the only difference is I'd have to get a few more bits - mic case etc.
KWY,
Thanks for your clarifications. I have always found your posts in the threads that I've been involved in to e extremely helpful.
If I used the 2nd outputs for the subs, do you see any need to do anything to improve them? If I were to do this, are there any instructions anywhere? Is it a simple matter of doing things like replacing opamps. I'd be reluctant to get my soldering iron out and make significant changes. However, changing a few parts to better quality ones I'd consider doing if it was worthwhile.
Thanks for your clarifications. I have always found your posts in the threads that I've been involved in to e extremely helpful.
If I used the 2nd outputs for the subs, do you see any need to do anything to improve them? If I were to do this, are there any instructions anywhere? Is it a simple matter of doing things like replacing opamps. I'd be reluctant to get my soldering iron out and make significant changes. However, changing a few parts to better quality ones I'd consider doing if it was worthwhile.
Paul,
Yes you can use the DEQ to measure SPL levels, and also change the weighting. From sources in the US the meter & mic combination are fairly accurate, i.e. much more than your average SPL meter. Check page 16 of the DEQ manual.
The DEQ also has Phantom power available for the ECM 8000, so all you will need is the DEQ, ECM, and an XLR M-F lead.
If you can stretch your budget, a mic stand would be very handy as well these are around $40au up.
Yes you can use the DEQ to measure SPL levels, and also change the weighting. From sources in the US the meter & mic combination are fairly accurate, i.e. much more than your average SPL meter. Check page 16 of the DEQ manual.
The DEQ also has Phantom power available for the ECM 8000, so all you will need is the DEQ, ECM, and an XLR M-F lead.
If you can stretch your budget, a mic stand would be very handy as well these are around $40au up.
Richard,
Thanks for the clarification. I had a look at the manual, and I also had a look at the specs on the electret capsule I have. If the ECM doesn't have its own preamp, then it appears that it is just an electret with a case. For the time being, I could probably get by with soldering the electret I have up to an XLR, unless I'm missing something.
Thanks for the clarification. I had a look at the manual, and I also had a look at the specs on the electret capsule I have. If the ECM doesn't have its own preamp, then it appears that it is just an electret with a case. For the time being, I could probably get by with soldering the electret I have up to an XLR, unless I'm missing something.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.