[keiron99]

My headphone rig is PC (Apple lossless files), via Itunes, into Airport Express, into a Perpetual Technologies DAC and then Stax SRM3 enersgiser/Lambda Pro Sig earspeakers. Very nice it sounds too.

I do however enjoy tweaking the sound using the Itunes equalizer, primarily giving the bass a bit of lift. It's got me thinking about the Behringer 2496 which I know gets good reports from Headfiers. I know it is considerably more flexible than the simple Itunes EQ (in fact, having looked at the manual for it, it looks a bit daunting unless you have some knowledge of these things), so would it be overkill for me? Should I just stick witht the simple EQ facility on Itunes?

 

[carlosgp]

The Behringer DEQ 24/96 is great toy

. Is more complicated than the usual equalizer, and therefore you will need to do a bit of learning before you can get the most of it. If you only want to lift the bass a bit, yes, is a overkill

. But is not very expensive, so...

 

[utep10]

I agree with carlosgp on the DEQ2496 being a great toy. The best part of this equalizer is that it is all in the digital domain AFAIK. I bought the Behringer microphone as well to do the response curves on my headphone and speaker system. I'm trying to get as flat a response as possible but the key word is "trying". I'm probably only using about 20% of it's capabilities but still feel it was worth it.
The DAC in the unit is not bad either if you need it. Balanced outputs, etc.

But it was not plug and play for me. I'm pretty dense but some have said it is pretty intuitive. It just took me awhile to figure some things out.

 

[Yikes]

I bought one for my HE speaker rig. It sucked. In no way would I classify it as having good sound. I'll be selling it after I move next week.

It adds veils on top of veils. Possibly the least transparent piece of equipment that I have ever heard. A great idea, but built to an astonishingly low level. I was not expecting much seeing how inexpensive the thing is, and it didn't even meet my modest expectations.

 

[carlosgp]

I've not observed this character using it in the digital domain only (graphic and parametric equalizer modules). But maybe my hearing is not good enough...

 

[utep10]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yikes I bought one for my HE speaker rig. It sucked. In no way would I classify it as having good sound. I'll be selling it after I move next week. It adds veils on top of veils. Possibly the least transparent piece of equipment that I have ever heard. A great idea, but built to an astonishingly low level. I was not expecting much seeing how inexpensive the thing is, and it didn't even meet my modest expectations.

Yikes,

I have not heard this problem in my system but then again, maybe my hearing is not so good.

For the OP'er, if you looking for something to just boost the bass, this is definitely overkill.

 

[Yikes]

Quote:

Originally Posted by utep10 Yikes, I have not heard this problem in my system but then again, maybe my hearing is not so good. For the OP'er, if you looking for something to just boost the bass, this is definitely overkill.

In the average high end system (even the above average) the issues that I had may not be audible. At the point that I tried it my system was stupid expensive and exceptionally good. It had a synergy thing going. I miss that system dreadfully. I got rid of most of it when I realized that it retailed for significantly more than my house. It is one prime reason why I got into headphones. A killer headphone rig can be had for fractions of what a killer stereo costs.

My point was that the DEQ 24/96 is not a "High End" piece. It is mid-fi, and in a mid fi system it probably works well.

 

[NeilPeart]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yikes In the average high end system (even the above average) the issues that I had may not be audible. At the point that I tried it my system was stupid expensive and exceptionally good. It had a synergy thing going. I miss that system dreadfully. I got rid of most of it when I realized that it retailed for significantly more than my house. It is one prime reason why I got into headphones. A killer headphone rig can be had for fractions of what a killer stereo costs. My point was that the DEQ 24/96 is not a "High End" piece. It is mid-fi, and in a mid fi system it probably works well.

For the price how could one assume it was high end? In that regard the TaCT devices are suitable and preferred (and priced in the high-end region). However, as a digital EQ using AES XLR cabling I find it nearly transparent, but since I only have the DAC1 my system is still of mid-fi composition...If used properly and the signal kept in the digital domain the DEQ is transparent.

 

[Oliver :)]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Yikes In the average high end system (even the above average) the issues that I had may not be audible. At the point that I tried it my system was stupid expensive and exceptionally good. It had a synergy thing going. I miss that system dreadfully. I got rid of most of it when I realized that it retailed for significantly more than my house.

Yikes, I'm on the floor, LMAO!

 

[Yikes]

[size=large]Home Sweet Home[/size]

 

[nicknameless]

I was going to get one for a DAC and a EQ in my new sound system. Now I am not sure. It was going to be A/V - 1, LM3875 chip amp and the DEQ. Now I am starting to think I should go with the Presonus Firebox. Also what exactly do you mean by transparent?

 

[NeilPeart]

By transparent I mean when used as an EQ in the digital domain - I never use the DEQ as a DAC.

 

[bjackson]

In my low?-fi system, I perfer the DEQ dac to my SB2s DAC or Onkyo's DAC....

 

[nicknameless]

I am going to get a DEQ 2496. I don't know if mine is mid or low fi. A/v - 1 and a LM3875 chip amp. So it is probably low fi but after I get more money for a really good dac or I start to build one I can use it's dac adn then use it as a EQ.