Help choosing an eq

[Inu_Yasha]

I'm now starting to look for an eq for my sub that I'm almost done building. The main contenders right now are the FBD1124 or the FBQ2496. I'm leaning a little more towards the FBD right now mainly bc of price, but if the FBQ is much better then I'll get that instead.

I also stumbled across an eq made by Shure, the DFR11EQ4, that looks pretty interesting and was wondering if that is any good. I'm up for suggestions at this point!

[dyazdani]

I'm not sure that there is a major difference (in terms of quality) between the two Behringer models. Mostly around features, number of filters, etc.

I bought the 2496 because they had discontinued the 1124 at the time. I'm not sure that the extra $50 gets you a lot, maybe the others can tell you more.

[ThomasW]

Read this...

http://www.htguide.com/forum/showthread.php4?p=227456#post227456

Many prosound companies make devices like this. The ones from Shure, QSC, etc require a PC to setup and run the device. If that's what you want fine. I prefer the ability run the device without having to boot up a PC to make changes in the settings

[brucemck2]

I've used a 2496 in several systems. Works well as a subwoofer EQ. It's really convenient to work from a front panel rather than a PC based download process. (Would not recommend it for mains unless it's heavily modded, as the stock units have a bit of a "tizzy mp3 compression" quality at higher frequencies.)

[ThomasW]

If the choice is limited to the Behringers, the 1124P gives fewer filters and a more limited bandwidth for the filters but it has multiple memories. This means there can be one setting for HT, another for music and on and on... The FBQ has only one memory, it has 20 filters and greater flexibility in the setting of the filter bandwidths. It's also slightly easier to program.

[jonathanb3478]

This means there can be one setting for HT, another for music and on and on...

Now, Thomas...

You know there are only two response curves, flat (right) and not-flat (wrong). So why does he need "one setting for HT, another for music..."? Flat is flat.

Now, if someone is always snagging the sweetspot seating area, he could make some "flat in the sweetspot, flat in the cloth recliner, flat in the leather recliner..." presets.

That is my plan for the presets in the SMS-1, which I will have at some point. ;x(

[Inu_Yasha]

Read this...

http://www.htguide.com/forum/showthread.php4?p=227456#post227456

Many prosound companies make devices like this. The ones from Shure, QSC, etc require a PC to setup and run the device. If that's what you want fine. I prefer the ability run the device without having to boot up a PC to make changes in the settings

I was actually thinking that by using a pc to set it up it would be easier, but what you're saying also makes some sense. Also, isn't the shure only 10 bands as opposed to 12 or 20 for the BFD or BFQ respectively?

[dyazdani]

Now, Thomas...

You know there are only two response curves, flat (right) and not-flat (wrong). So why does he need "one setting for HT, another for music..."? Flat is flat.

Yes, but that assumes that you WANT it flat in all cases... maybe a user would want to some LF boost in the HT case? :huh:

[idw]

Are there any Eqs out there that go below 20Hz? Will the LT capability in the 2496 extend below 20Hz? I don't have the inclination to learn to build an LT circuit...but if I must...I must.

[ThomasW]

Are there any Eqs out there that go below 20Hz? Will the LT capability in the 2496 extend below 20Hz? I don't have the inclination to learn to build an LT circuit...but if I must...I must.

Not that anyone can afford.

I have a pair of mono analog Symetrix 551's parametric EQ's, their lowest hinge point is 10Hz. They're a pain to set accurately and can't be set accurately without test equipment.

It takes a Behringer DEQ2496 (not the FBQ2496) to really make a proper LT circuit.

You know there are only two response curves, flat (right) and not-flat (wrong). So why does he need "one setting for HT, another for music..."? Flat is flat.

Who uses flat? Not me, I find flat boring...

I change both the output level and the amount of boost for movies vs music.

[Dennis H]

Not that anyone can afford.

I have a pair of mono analog Symetrix 551's parametric EQ's, their lowest hinge point is 10Hz. They're a pain to set accurately and can't be set accurately without test equipment.

It takes a Behringer DEQ2496 (not the FBQ2496) to really make a proper LT circuit.

Just to clarify what Thomas said, the DEQ will work below 20 Hz but you can't set a corner frequency lower than that. But that's just an ease-of-use problem not a functional problem. To boost the lows below 20 Hz, use a 12 dB/octave high-shelving filter set to your sub's in-room F3 and cut the highs however much you need to get the extension however far you want below 20 Hz. It's just kind of a backwards way of looking at the problem (I'm known for looking at things backwards ) -- cut the highs instead of boosting the lows.

[DS-21]

Interesting thread, especially since I was planning to ask the same initial question after searching and digging up this interesting thread. My follow-up question is, for those of you using the Behringer devices, how many bands do you actually use? Is 12 per sub generally enough, or would that be a limiting factor? Also, does one (or either) have a line driver function? I'll finish with question that might just be too stupid to ask but I'm going to do so anyway. Can I come off of an RCA output with an XLR adapter and then run balanced cables to my amps from there, or do I need to "reconvert" the output to single-ended. (The amps can accept either XLR or RCA input.)

My situation is as follows. I've recently upgraded my subs from twin JBL 2235H's in this alignment to a Tannoy B475 (18" driver with 8mm of xmax, 6 cubic foot or so cabinet, tuned much lower than the typical "pro" sub) in the corner and soon enough a vented Oaudio (TC2+) 15 in about five cubes, give or take. (The woofer is on my desk right now, but I haven't built the box yet, and have yet to see if I can skip that step by finding Sonotube at a close enough distance that I can buy one and belt it to the passenger seat of my Miata without having to go 80mph with the top down.) The B475 is in a room (and house) corner, and the TC2+ will be wherever it expands the "good sounding bass" window in the room most, within reason. I'm going to use two NHT A1 monoblocs (200W/8ohms, 300W/4ohms) for now, though in the future higher power is a definite possibility.

I'm not worried about learning to use the thing. Nor the number of memories; my system is used much more for music than for movies, and sub EQ won't do much for BBC World News or the Daily Show anyway. Likewise, the difference between $100 or so and $150 or so does not seem excessive if the extra $50 buys me useful features. And neither one seems tunable by Mac, so any computer connection is irrelevant to me. I'm also less concerned about bringing up the bottom octave than I am more interested in using the EQ to smooth response in the 40-80Hz octave than anything else.

[ThomasW]

For the limited passband you're talking about 40Hz-80Hz you should only need a few filters unless there are significant room issues.

The number of bands used depends entirely on the installation and the goals. Many people use a 'house curve' This is just a custom setting to one's liking. The usual thing is to start out getting the flattest plot possible then dial in boost to taste.

You can go single ended in to the Behringer and use it's XLR out to your amp's XLR input.

[Inu_Yasha]

It takes a Behringer DEQ2496 (not the FBQ2496) to really make a proper LT circuit.

What exactly is a LT circuit?

The main reason I was looking at the shure is because I was looking on the website and it said that it could boost weak signals. Right now I have to have my reciever set to +12db to the sub bc I have a really weak signal. Would the Shure or the BFD really help me in that case?

Also, could someone explain exactly how the filters work. I was assuming that the more the filters, the more the frequency spectrum would be divided. Kinda like an equilizer. Am I wrong?

[dyazdani]

And neither one seems tunable by Mac, so any computer connection is irrelevant to me.

They have a version of RoomEQ Wizard that works on the Mac. It can interface with the BFDs using a MIDI cable. I haven't actually tried it as I've been content to dial in the filters by hand and thus haven't purchased a MIDI cable.

[ThomasW]

What exactly is a LT circuit?

Google 'Linkwitz Transform circuit'

The main reason I was looking at the shure is because I was looking on the website and it said that it could boost weak signals. Right now I have to have my reciever set to +12db to the sub bc I have a really weak signal. Would the Shure or the BFD really help me in that case?

If you want to raise the level of the signal going to the power amp then you can use a line level shifter. Read section #4 on this webpage

http://home.comcast.net/~thomasw-2/SubwooferSetupandEQpage7.html

Also, could someone explain exactly how the filters work. I was assuming that the more the filters, the more the frequency spectrum would be divided. Kinda like an equilizer. Am I wrong?

http://home.comcast.net/~thomasw-2/S...ndEQpage5.html

[Inu_Yasha]

Thank you sooo much Thomas!

[Inu_Yasha]

Ok, what about the FBQ3102 by Behringer? Would this also do feedback destroying? Sorry to bring this from the dead, I just saw a decent local deal for one and was thinking of picking it up.

[ThomasW]

No one uses any of these to destroy feedback (microphone squeal)

And no you don't want a graphic EQ you want a parametic EQ.

If you reread the link I posted you'll know why...

http://home.comcast.net/~thomasw-2/SubwooferSetupandEQpage5.html