Behringer SU9920 Sonic Ultramizer - Page 3 - Home Theater Forum and Systems -

Thread Tools
post #21 of 22 Old 07-08-08, 02:49 AM
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Hertfordshire, England
Posts: 11
Re: Behringer SU9920 Sonic Ultramizer

That's interesting that you use a DEQX. I know it has more possibilities, like cross-overs and being able to use more channels; is that the reason you use it in preference to the Berhringer? At the risk of hi-jacking this thread, did you notice a sonic improvement between the Behringer and DEQX?

My dealer, whose original impetus caused me to investigate digital equalizers, as well as room treatment (I use Auralex foam), was so impressed when he heard the results of the Behringer that he immediately went out and bought one. Unfortunately he doesn't use it as he finds it annoyingly complicated. It may be worse for him as, being a dealer, he has access to a range of speakers, both for himelf and for demonstration purposes, and so would have to go through the whole procedure with the Behringer for each one. I'm sure even that would be worth it for him. I suppose the problem would be that people who hear his set ups would be disapointed when they got home, be informed of the part the Behringer played and expect him to set it up for them, at no cost to him of course.

I think in fact that that is the biggest problem. Most people are not willing to spend the time setting the thing up.

It is the way forward, though. Much better then endless cable upgrades etc.. My speaker manufacturer, VMPS, have recently offered an option of electronic crossovers using the Behringer DCX (whch also has a digital equalizer on board). They will set up the DCX and put in some settings for various situations to help customers.

Salk speakers had already done something like this, using the DEQX. In fact he offers a whole package including 6 channel amp.

With Lyngdorf and Tact making digital amps incorporating equalizers at reasonable prices, maybe this area will take off, a bit anyway.
Hipper is offline  
Sponsored Links
post #22 of 22 Old 07-08-08, 05:05 AM
Senior Shackster
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: bathurst nsw australia
Posts: 509
Re: Behringer SU9920 Sonic Ultramizer

Hipper wrote: View Post
That's interesting that you use a DEQX. I know it has more possibilities, like cross-overs and being able to use more channels; is that the reason you use it in preference to the Berhringer? At the risk of hi-jacking this thread, did you notice a sonic improvement between the Behringer and DEQX?
My speakers (DIY) have always been active, never had a passive network in them, designed from the start for active.

For maybe three or four years I used the dcx 2496, then switched to the deqx. I also have a deq as mentioned before, which is one of the bargains in the hi fi world. So you won't find me bagging behringer and the like.

Having said that, there is no comparison at all. Chalk and cheese. The behringer (and similar pro gear) is a Hyundai to the mercedes deqx. Both will get you to the next city but....There are many companies that use the deqx in their top of the line stuff, overkill is in the UK. Many others.

Hipper wrote: View Post
My dealer,
stereo we hope heh heh

Hipper wrote: View Post

I think in fact that that is the biggest problem. Most people are not willing to spend the time setting the thing up.
that is the biggie. people are used to and often expect plug and play. the deqx and behringer gear are not plug and play, maybe not a problem on a forum like this by it's very nature tho.

The results you get are entirely dependant on the work you do. Is it possible for the deqx to sound rubbish? for sure, but the first logical question to ask is 'was it done correctly?' before concluding the deqx hardware/software is no good. (only mentioning deqx as it was the topic under discussion, and that it is the only one I am familiar with. the same would apply to lyngdorf/tact and of course the behringer you mentioned)

that was brought home to me with a bang. I had my system set up with the deqx and had it sounding 'pretty' good. had certain x-over points selected etc etc. but was a bit harsh when driven hard, and a few other things noticed.

Mind you still very much improved over the behringer.

I had the great fortune that the tech guy from deqx came out for a social visit (we've become good friends) and natch he remeasured and recalibrated my speakers. Not only did he get better measurements (which all the computation is done on) he also changed the x-over points.

No point in blathering on, you would have had to have been here to comprehend the improvements. Point(s) I'm making? the results are only as good as the measurements, and due to the power of the unit, don't bring 'old' baggage and thoughts about x-overs into the new world. Traditional x-over think would have a 48 db/octave slope as about the steepest realistically possible. Not that you would use it often, the deqx can do 300 db/slope as an example. These new methods throw out the old 'safe' x-over points, which is what happened to mine. The tweeter now crosses at 1600 hz, unthinkable in the old days, unachievable with the dbx or behringer. (from memory I have 70 db slope or something on it)

crossing the tweeter that low meant (by implication) that the mid did not go as high as before...bye bye the harshness mentioned. Crossing the tweeter that low, bang dispersion thru the roof and the soundstage opened up and I have a 180 degree soundfield (not exagerating)..the soundfield passes thru my head in a complete 'sphere' (wrong geometry but you get my drift) with the stage dead centre in front.

That is on the recordings that contain those cues, it does not artificially add the expanded field to everything. BUT what surprised me is how well most cds (the ones we all bag for being compressed etc) actually are!

Not being a salesman to you, but explaining (I hope) the difference in technology. X-over points sum flat (linear phase filters) unlike LR or butterworth filters. (tho you can use them in the deqx if you wish, it has them as well)

The reason I have a coherent and enormous sound field is (I think) because it is all perfectly in phase...I've heard that phase issues are what destroys ambience. (dunno if that's true, but what I use mentally ATM) The deqx is able to do this because not only are the x-overs phase coherent (unlike all the others), additionall the deqx corrects the native response of the individual drivers themselves, and makes them perfectly flat and phase correct.

That is an important point, as we are no longer talking about the different performance at the crossover points.

The most dramatic and revealing demonstration of the driver correction was with a small full range (single driver) speaker. As there were NO x-overs used (single driver) we could hear the difference made by only making the driver itself 'perfect'. I know the wrong word, but again you get my drift.

The difference was stunning. In one profile you could store the natural driver response, and in another the corrected response, and by flicking between them evaluate them.

When you want to compare differences, you want to use the same track, or same section of track right? I mean no good hearing the verse on one setting, and the (totally different) chorus on the other, rather want to compare apples to apples.

So I press the button, and curse my luck. "gee, what are the odds that my pressing the button exactly coincided with a complete change in the music?'' Dargone it. So I wait and press the button again. , how did I change the button exactly with a complete change in the character of the music yet again?

Anyway, you guessed it. (I'd not heard the music before) I soon realised that I hadnt magically coincided with a complete change in the music, but the changes were so amazingly dramatic I thought the music had completely changed each time! Same music, totally different speaker. I mean not just a change in character of some description, it was as if you had whipped the old one out and put a completely different speaker in in a microsecond.

Look, the behringer is great stuff, esp the deq (and anyone reading this, please take the gamble with it..does everything the FBDs discussed here do, and way way more. bargain), but they are not even in the same city let alone the ballpark when discussing the deqx (and I assume tact/lyngdorf, or even some of the exotic PC based dsp software available)

It is a new world, and few have experienced it.
terry j is offline  


behringer , sonic , su9920 , ultramizer

Quick Reply

Register Now



Confirm Password
Email Address
Confirm Email Address
Random Question
Random Question #2

User Name:
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.


Confirm Password:
Email Address



Activation requires you reply to an email we will send you after you register... if you do not reply to this email, you will not be able to view certain areas of the forum or certain images... nor will you be able download software.


See our banned email list here: Banned Email List

We DO NOT respond to spamcop, boxtrapper and spamblocker emails... please add @hometheatershack DOT com to your whitelist prior to registering or you will get nowhere on your registration.

Email Address:


Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML is not allowed!
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome