Equalizer update - Page 2

I've heard of a lot of DIY'ers who are using behringer products for cheap active crossovers and equalization. This sounds pretty sweet. Maybe there's even a cheaper model that still has the important features...anyone know?

You can get this for about $180 - $200:

Review of Behringer DEQ8024

The reviewer obviously knows a lot more about it than I do, and it makes a very interesting read. Apparently it was selling for $600 - $900 dollars three years ago. Unlike the DEQ2496, it doesn't come with digital ins and outs, although you can pay extra for a digitial I/O add-on.

I'd strongly recommend the DEQ2496 for $120 more though, with digital ins and outs and a dizzying array of options. Obviously, 'cause that's what I opted for.

Great writeup and photos, gerG. Thanks for all the helpful info. Now I'm thinking I've gotta have one of these in front of the Grace 901 - just when I thought my wallet was safe for a while - thanks a lot

gerG helped convince me to by the DEQ (actually, I bought it solely bc he has good judgment and recommended it), and it's a knockout piece of gear! I've had it for a week or so, and it's amazing how much better my Senns sound when I eq them flat. Tight, deep bass helps me get deeper into recordings. There's a veil in the midrange, and gerG's eq settings fix that, plus they fix the highs. All in all, awesome stuff.

I can't wait to try the Grado SR-325s with the DEQ -- if the results are as good as they've been with the HD-600s and Ety 4Ps, I'll probably end up keeping them! (I was *really* about to dump those cans, and now they have a shot at redeeming themselves.)

Everybody who's reading this post, you owe it to yourself to try some good eq. And with a good return policy, it might not even damage your wallet. But I can't promise that, because you'll probably give the DEQ a permanent place in your system, like I have. And with the amount of gear I'm going through right now, that's a pretty big compliment.

Great, gerG! Now I'm conflicted over whether to get a tube preamp first and get rid of my passive preamp or to get this DEQ! Why is my life this difficult?!

Wow, I'm glad I opted for the DEQ2496 instead of the 8024!

gerG, have you explicitly posted your graphic EQ 1/3 octave settings for the HD580s (or HD600s), or would one be left just to infer from the graphs you have posted what the settings are?

I agree, the interface of the DEQ2496 is incredibly intuitive. You just have to get your hands on it to understand how brilliantly the controls are laid out.

After the kids went to sleep, I played with the DEQ2496 for about three hours straight last night. I ran opticals in and out in addition to the analog cables and used it both ways. I spent a good amount of time fiddling with my HD580s. It's amazing, after a while, I a/b'ed the results using the "bypass" feature, and I liked the sound of the EQ tweaking so much better, it was like, who would listen to THAT, when they could listen to THIS? But I guess that's inevitable when you are suiting to taste with really the only obstacle being the learning curve of understanding how to use an incredibly flexible equalizer with infinite possibilities at your disposal, and what the different frequency ranges do to the sound. It's a fascinating learning experience.

I also value highly what I use as the "crossfeed" (variable 10-step image compression that seems to be tonally neutral) too, I am finding it very rewarding. I notice if you want to get really hyper about it, this feature allows you to treat the bass frequencies differently than the upper frequencies in a second menu, because of differences in imaging of bass frequencies. I haven't gotten to that one yet, I kind of like it without messing with the bass management feature anyway, I think, and I'm not sure if the bass settings are meant for use with image compression as much as for use with the image expansion features.

gerG, I sort of stumbled on that main guideline of yours last night, I created bass and treble controls with the parametric shelving, and two broad (I think the setting was "2" or "3" octaves) symmetrical parametric bands centered at about 1 khz and at about 250 hertz, to smoothly heighten or lessen the midrange or midbass. These four adjustable parametric curves make only broad, smooth adjustments and seemed suited to improve the sound of most any headphone in my collection. I just used them like four tone controls. Obviously, the possibilities are limitless, so I just sort of had to jump in.

Anyway, I would be keenly interested in your general guidelines and in as specific settings as possible that you use for your HD580s or HD600s, as the case may be (I think this is probably the only headphone we have in common).

Edit: gerG, I also have the V6s, as you apparently do. Gradofan, I have the SR60s if you want to compare notes on Grado EQ'ing.

Double edit: I believe I have read in Bangraman's posts that he has and frequently uses a DEQ2496, and WmAx has recommended the DEQ2496 so he may have one as well (I came across their posts while I was researching whether to get one)...Their posts were in the headphones forum. They might not hang out in this part of Head-fi much and might not know about this thread. Perhaps we should invite them to party?

Just an update --

After playing with it some more, the "crossfeed" (image compression) on the DEQ2496 actually is very good and very flexible. You get eleven steps from no crossfeed to full mono. There's a bass setting, in case the imaging changes affect the perceived bass, of plus or minus 3 decibels. There's also another slider called "shuffle", that "intensifies" the image on a continuous scale, so you can have your crossfeed perfectly dry and pure or a little juiced up. There's also a slider with which you choose the frequency below which the changes in the bass take place. The manual recommends 600 to 700 hertz, but you can pretty much choose any frequency. Of course, this was all designed with speakers in mind, but it seems to work quite well as a headphone crossfeed.


Also, I jotted down some settings I like for my HD580. I've been using the parametric 10-band EQ because I find it easier to work with than the 30-band graphic EQ. So for my HD580s here's what I have, in frequency-gain-bw/oct format:

FREQ GAIN BW/OCT
44.8 : +3.0 : L 6db (increases bass progressively below 44.8 hertz)
251 : -3.5 : 3/2
1261 : +3.0 : 3
6036 : +2.5 : H 12db (increases treble progressively above 6036 hertz)
6039 : +1 : 1

This was done by ear and I'm sure there's room for improvement. Any comments, suggestions, etc., are welcome.

about this "crossfeed"... i would like to note, if it's a feature on your EQ piece, it's not the same as your headphone crossfeed. there is no signal being delayed to the other side, to give you a sense of depth. it is merely squashing the stereo image. so, essentially it's just putting things even close to the center of your head...

About the delay, that may be true, I've thought about that, probably way too much. Here's what I think. We just don't know exactly what it's doing. It has image expansion, too, it's all part of the same continuous "imaging" adjustments. Fact is, I'm more pleased with the DEQ2496 crossfeed than with my Corda HA-1 crossfeed, which I also like very much, mainly because the DEQ2496 features are so adjustable. OTOH, it could be a form of infatuation with my new gear. The HA-1 crossfeed is still ready and able and available.

With the DEQ2496 "crossfeed," you can optionally adjust the bass to be treated differently than the rest of the spectrum (I believe it creates relatively less or more crossfeed [depending on the other settings] in the bass to maintain a believable perception of the bass), and you can adjust the bass plus or minus one to three decibels depending on how the change in imaging affects your perception of the bass, and select the frequency below which you want these changes to occur. This is a problem better overcome by the DEQ2496 than by either the Meier crossfeed (no bass tweaking so bass can seem a little thin when it's crossfed, but the sound is objectively neutral and subjectively pristine) or the Headroom crossfeed (not adjustable and considerably too much extra bass and rolled off treble for my taste).

As to whether the image compression includes any delay, I just don't know -- certainly the unit has the ability to delay a signal, as demonstrated by other features. Further, with the image expansion, there is clearly more going on than just expanding the stereo separation -- this would be obvious to you if you gave it a listen. In fact, if you take the image expansion out past a certain level, you can hear some crossfeed being introduced even as the perceived image becomes wider and wider. Some people might like this, for me it's a bit too dramatic with headphones. So I really don't know what exactly goes on. Additionally, who knows exactly what the "shuffle" (what a weird name) feature does -- whether it includes adding a delay is anybody's guess. The manual says it intensifies the imaging, which might very well include some cross-channel delay to add a sense of depth, no? The shuffle feature is continuously adjustable in intensity, if I remember correctly.

The huge saving grace is it's very flexible and all in the digital domain, suit to taste or don't use it at all, using your ears. Hearing is believing. You can make a very subtle adjustment and it is an improvement to me, or you can make dramatic, even silly, changes.

All this to say, you could be right. It's something I've actually thought about and tried to figure out. Thanks for the feedback. Fun stuff.

i can almost guarantee you it doesn't delay. it's a stereo compression processor that's designed for live use probably. it has nothing to do with headphone use.

so, no, it's not a cross-feed, not the headphone type anyway.

a headphone crossfeed is designed to move the imaging ahead of you, so you don't get the "in your head" feeling as much. this doesn't do that at all, or shouldn't anyway.

there may be instances when setting up a PA system that you might want to push the stereo image in a bit, and that's probably what this function was designed for.

you can get the same effect on your mixer by having the panning pots turned a bit in from what would otherwise be hard-left and hard-right.

Stereo separation is dramatically exaggerated with headphones. This can get especially tiresome in recordings that already exaggerate separation. Unless you've had a few beers or whatnot. Then it's pretty cool.

In real life, and with speakers, nearly all of what goes to one ear, also gets heard by the other ear. The complete opposite occurs with headphones, the ears share no information. Thus, to me at least, a little left to right crossfeed makes things sound a lot more natural and is a lot more important than a very small delay. (A larger delay would sound goofy and would be highly unnatural -- sound travels very fast, as I'm sure you know, and the distance from one ear to another ear is not very far at all.)

Personally, I'm not too concerned about delay. A little delay can make the crossfeed less dry, IMHO (and Meier executes it beautifully and tastefully) but not much more. Meier also alters the frequency response of the cross-fed signal just a little, again, beautifully done, IMHO. The out-of-the head stuff seems a little far-fetched to me. That's more the realm of much more complex signal processing, don't you think? But we are both are admirers of the Meier crossfeed so there's not much to argue over in the end.

Of course the equalizer image compression is meant for speakers rather than headphones. But it's so flexible I am trying it out and I like it. I'll play with it some more tonight. The DEQ2496 lends itself to a myriad of unintended uses because it is so flexible.

All this to say, I think you are probably right that there is no delay. Especially when you compress it all the way to mono. You are probably entirely correct in your assertions. I'll check it out again tonight.

you ever try the meier cross feed or even the pinkfloyd version?--or the headroom version? i have the meier feed here, and it does pop that image in front. works well. the pinkfloyd one is very subtle, and you almost don't hear the difference, which is good for long-term listening. the headroom version is not as dramatic as the meier version, at least the one i heard, but it works too. you might want to check those out if you're getting good use out of the built in "crossfeed" on your EQ.

but yes, like you said, stereo separation is exaggerated when comparing to loudspeakers. though there used be a processor called "Q-Sound?" something like that.... it's incredible when you use it with your louspeaker monitors. wonder why it never got big... i once mixed a song i wrote with q-sound (if that's what it's called), and it's really cool hearing different sounds coming from outside the area of the speakers. really neat.