Why do you guys love these so much???

[M4rk_23]

I need an EQ for my sub setup I'm running just 1 CSS SDX15 right now but will eventually have 2 in stereo and I can easily power 4 with my QSC PLX 3602 yes I may be insane So anyway I've known about these feedback destroyers for quite some time and I sorta just don't get why there so well liked. I know your basically just using them for the EQ but it seems like alot of trouble to set one up compared to just an EQ. Is it that they are just a good EQ for the money and thats what makes them worth the incovenience of the extra setup compared to say a Rane or art analog EQ? I've skimmed over the whole setup process and it just seems like alot of work?

Thanks -Mark

[brucek]

it seems like alot of trouble to set one up compared to just an EQ

What is the EQ you refer to. Do you mean graphic equalizer or parametric equalizer? The BFD is a parametric equalizer. It's no more difficult than any other parametric equalizer.

Can you elaborate?

brucek

[M4rk_23]

Any analog EQ. I just mean that it's intended purpose is to destroy feedback and it so happens to have an EQ and you have to shut off all the feedback destroying elements because they don't apply. The way you interface with it just seems a bit complicated to get it to do what you want it to. Not that I couldn't do it cause I certainly could but it just seems like more work and the reason it's so well like is because of the low cost. I would be using any EQ in analog with RCA preouts also so the digital side doesn't really appeal to me, I don't have any digital preouts on my receiver (marantz sr-8000) I'm not opposed to the unit or Behringer as a brand in any way I'm just wondering why it seems to be preferred over units that are specifically just EQ's?

[brucek]

it's intended purpose is to destroy feedback and it so happens to have an EQ and you have to shut off all the feedback destroying elements because they don't apply.

Well, I could have shut the feedback destroy features off in the time it took you to read this line. Once they're off, that's it.

The way you interface with it just seems a bit complicated to get it to do what you want it to.

RCA cables in and out like any other device with a cheap adapter on the one end. That isn't complicated.

I would be using any EQ in analog with RCA preouts also so the digital side doesn't really appeal to me, I don't have any digital preouts on my receiver (marantz sr-8000)

You may be confused. The BFD only uses analog input and ouputs. There is no digital connections on it at all.

brucek

[Otto]

Hi mark, and welcome to the Shack!

Yeah, the BFD device is rather advertised as a "feedback destroyer," but that functionality is really just a set of adaptive parametric filters. It's easy to disable the feedback destroyer part of each filter -- it's just a button push.

There's not really that much set up with the BFD if you don't want there to be. The only necessity to connect the BFD to the PC is for MIDI communication of the filter settings, and that is absolutely not necessary.

The BFD actually does NOT have any digital I/O; it's strictly an analog I/O device, although it does perform its filtering in the digital domain.

I agree that, at first glance, the BFD isn't necessarily as intiuitive as an equalizer with sliders and knobs for each filter. Those are rather easy to see exactly what's going on (although, for a parametric EQ, you'd still have a lot going on). Yes, it is necessary to scroll through each button's usage in order to enter the proper parameters, but it comes rather quickly once you get going (assuming you know what parametric values you wish to enter). So many devices have buttons that are assigned multiple usages. Think of a modern car stereo where you have to hold a button for five seconds for it to do something different, or where you hit a button to turn on selections, a wheel to scroll through the selections and then a button to choose the selection. Some people would prefer the good ol' analog dial car radio from the 1960's. And grandpa used to turn the TV to black and white whenever he came over. Nothing wrong with that!

Now if, by chance, any of the EQs that you've used in the past are simple graphic EQs, then they just won't work. You absolutely need adjustable bandwidth (Q) and assignable center frequencies for this to work with a sub.

The BFD is also easily found for well under $100, so it's affordable by most home enthusiasts.

Now, I will agree that there is some setup involved to get REW working. The BFD is totally independent of REW, so that added complexity isn't really necessary, but they work so nicely together. REW is the room measurement tool, of course. Even if you're going to be using some other type of EQ (parametric or not), you'll want to know your room's frequency response in order to properly address it. So, you'd need REW either way, and it's the more challenging thing to get going.

I think that's most of it! Try one out; they work very well...

[M4rk_23]

I see like I said I really just skimed over the whole setup process and it's not like I found it intimidating but it just seemed like a bit more time to setup. I've never really setup an EQ before though well at least not the proper way so I don't really have something to compare it to. My current sub amp has only a 1 band (Dayton Hpsa1000r) and it just doesn't seem to be pushing my 15 what it should be in a sealed enclosure. I'm sold I was going to buy one a while ago but never did sense my amp has a little EQ and decided to wait till I went with separates which is what I'm doing now. I'm gonna use a Paradigm X-30 for my preamp then one of these for my EQ and run them into my QSC PLX 3602 should give me a pretty nice setup. Now I need to figure out which BFD to buy more reading ahead.

Thnaks -Mark

[Sonnie]

It's a little bit time consuming to start with... just getting familiar with everything, but once you kind of get the hang of things, it becomes second nature then. For some though, it is overwhelming... most folks would rather have plug and play... little to no reading manuals, etc. The BFD and REW are for those who are willing to do a little extra and want to have some fun doing it.

[Otto]

M4rk_23 wrote:

Now I need to figure out which BFD to buy more reading ahead.

Thnaks -Mark

Yeah, Mark, you've got it! It is some work, but it's worth it. As to which one to buy, I'd recommend just going with the BFD1124P. It's cheap, widely available (many Guitar Centers and eBay) and the most broadly supported.

Good luck and have a good day!

[OvalNut]

My first subwoofer EQ was an ART351 1/3 octave graphic EQ. It worked well and did an 85%+ job, but I was always futzing with it. Just when I would think that I had it set the way I liked it, I would hear or not hear something that would prompt me to go back to futzing with it some more. In retrospect I realize that this was because I just couldn't QUITE dial in the cuts to the right frequencies and widths. There were tradeoffs. And being an analog device, once you make a change, you can never quite get back to exactly where you were before, even if you do take meticulous notes of where each slider was before you made your changes.

Then I tried a Behringer FBQ2496. Once I got it dialed in over the course of a week or so, I have not had any need to touch it since then, not once. My in-room response is now near ruler flat, within literally +/- 1 db of the target line from 16hz - 85hz, and the bass jumps more. It's an interesting dichotomy that to expose more of your system's dynamic range, you tune it flat, so to speak.

And if you do decide to make/test changes to the filters, you can very easily get them back to exactly where they were before with little effort and no futzing.

All in all, parametric EQ's like the Behringer DSP1124P / FBQ2496 units are the right tools for the job.


Tim

[warnerwh]

They're not only the right tools for the job but excellent bargains as well. I've used a DEQ 2496 and just started dialing in our sub with an 1124. For a hundred bucks IMO it's the best deal to dial in speakers. Other people make stuff but it's not only way more expensive but not as versatile.

The reason you want one of these is acoustics, expecially bass modes. Assuming you have walls you have these modes too. After using a 2496 to dial in a very nice high end stereo I didn't hesitate to get the 1124.

The improvement in sound is considerable. If you get rid of the bad peaks you'll be able to turn up your sub. Your bass will obviously sound much better. After you build one of these serious duty subs a 100 bucks to get rid of bad modes is dirt cheap. Everyone with a sub that we would consider decent should have at least the 1124.

[warnerwh]

I forgot to mention you don't HAVE to have REW. I just posted a free cd that is recorded in 1hz increments. If you have a decibel meter it will get you where you want to go with the 1124.

REW is far more involved but I know will be much more fun also. If you don't care to deal with REW download that cd from realtraps.com then download some graph paper. It's easy. 1/3 or 1/6 octaves is not worth much as you can and more than likely do have problems in between those settings. You definitely want 1hz increments.

[M4rk_23]

I have a rat shack spl and a Hz cd but I'll probably try out this rew software. My stereo is in my bedroom right by my desktop but I also have a laptop anyway. So for a stereo subs setup the 1124p is the way to go then?

[Jerm357]

Take a look at this. This is what I used to get familiar with my BFD 1124p. I could not ask for anything easier. Its a step by step guide that pretty much explains everything. It may make much more sence once you have your BFD 1124p in your hands though.


http://home.comcast.net/~thomasw-2/S...ndEQpage6.html

[Otto]

M4rk_23 wrote:

I have a rat shack spl and a Hz cd but I'll probably try out this rew software. My stereo is in my bedroom right by my desktop but I also have a laptop anyway. So for a stereo subs setup the 1124p is the way to go then?

Yeah, if you're at all interested in measuring the room response, REW is the way to go.

When using stereo subs, you can EQ each separetely or both together. The BFD has two channels, so you can assign different filters for each sub if you wish. You can also split the output of one BFD channel, and send that to both subs, or you can assign the same filters to both channels and then one to each sub.

There are lots of opinions on using two subs. In the past, I used three subs, and equalized them all differently. I've also equalized them all using one channel. Results were good both ways. You can experiment quite a bit. I think many people would recommend to EQ both subs using the same set of filters. That's because they will interact with each other in the when they are both in play, so if you EQ the first one flat, and the second one flat, it doesn't necessarily mean that both of them together will be flat (or whatever house curve you want).

Anyway, yeah, you can EQ them both differently or both the same using a single BFD.

[Tiny]

Otto wrote:

The BFD is also easily found for well under $100, so it's affordable by most home enthusiasts.

I was surprised by this as well when I started looking into them as well some time back, I saw how much some guys were paying for theirs in other forums, then my wife looked up how much they were on Ebay and I quote her on this, "... Ah, ain't that cute your friends are paying retail and bragging about like a bunch of rich b*t**s with more money than brains."

Also look for BFD's at any pawn shop that services lots of musicians and DJ's, you will find a lot of them there as well for cheap.

I still haven't done bought one so I haven't looked into them as much as I will when I build my IB. So I would like to ask this question on setup, for a sub do they go between the sub and the amp or the source and the amp? Also does anyone use them for other speaker sets?

[evan]

I have one for sale in the classified sections