# Thoughts on Behringer Studio Monitors (2030 and others), active and passive



## eugovector

Here's the dicussion so far, starting in PM. Thanks to lsiberian.



lsiberian said:


> eugovector said:
> 
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> Do you have firsthand experience with the Behringer 2030 or similar? I'm toying around buying a set of their active monitors, and I've had great experience with their mixers, microphones, and other products, but have never used their speakers.
> 
> Thoughts?
> 
> Thanks in advance,
> Marshall
> 
> 
> 
> You want to avoid the active monitors like the plague. Behringer is a hit or miss company. Either they have a great product or a lousy one.
> 
> http://www.linaeum.com/productinfo/other/behringer_2030P/fr_waterfall_detail_offaxis_1M.gif
> is the waterfall graph Wmax measured of them. He's a speaker mad scientist. He's the type that builds with concrete and oak.
> 
> You can see from the graph the off-axis response is lacking. Still the waterfall is insanely good for 130 dollar a pair speaker. I've not seen anything close to that on any other speaker in the price range. I realize folks around here aren't familiar with them, but from a speaker builder's viewpoint they are the best value at the price.
> 
> http://www.ascendacoustics.com/pages/products/speakers/cbm170/cbm170meas.html
> 
> Is the best home theater speaker pair I've seen under 300 measurement wise. You can see how close the behringer is.
> 
> This is the waterfall measurement of the B&W 802D gotten from stereophile. This is best commercial speaker I'm aware of.
Click to expand...


----------



## JerryLove

I generally don't have an issue with active monitors: but cannot say I've personal experience with the 2030A.

I second the recommendation that the Behringer 2030p is the best speaker available anywhere near its price range. I've heard that the 2031p is not nearly as good and believe this statement.


----------



## eugovector

So, I'm leaning towards trying to find an active speaker (simplicity's sake) for my office setup (5 identical for surround is my eventual goal). Mostly music/movie listening, but some mixing as well.

What is it about the active Behringers that should be avoided like the plague? Are the built in amps unreliable or inaccurate? What if the passive 2030 were paired with a Behringer A500 amp?

I'm looking at the KRK RockitG2 and M-Audio BX5a Deluxe as well. Any other budget active monitor suggestions (<$400/Pair)?


----------



## eugovector

JerryLove said:


> I've heard that the 2031p is not nearly as good and believe this statement.


I've heard that as well, that the 2031 has better lowend extension, but sacrifices accuracy across the spectrum for it. I have a sub that I will use for the low-end.


----------



## Jungle Jack

Hello,
The Active Speakers that I wish were still made were Paradigms. They used to make an Active 20 and a Active 40. These were based on the Studio 20 and Studio 40. These Speakers have achieved cult like status with many pairs passing hands for more than they originally retailed for.

I have not listened to the active Behringer Model. Most of the Active Monitors I have listened to are fairly expensive by HT standards. One of my best friends uses Focal Professional SM-11's and Solo 6 Be's and they almost made me sell my Martin Logan rig. Then again the SM-11 go for 14 thousand Dollars. The Solo 6 Be's are actually nicely priced at 3000 a pair.
Cheers,
JJ


----------



## JerryLove

Jungle Jack said:


> Hello,
> The Active Speakers that I wish were still made were Paradigms. They used to make an Active 20 and a Active 40. These were based on the Studio 20 and Studio 40. These Speakers have achieved cult like status with many pairs passing hands for more than they originally retailed for.


 You could by a pair of amps and cut a hole in a passive 20 and attach the thing.

, you could program an active crossover and dual amp if you can find a source for one (I know they are out there). That should do a lot of good for the sound. While you are in there: add more bracing. 

You are out of luck on a 40v5: I believe they stopped making them.


----------



## Jungle Jack

Hello,
Jerry, for sure you could go the DIY route, but the original versions sounded amazing. I owned 20's and 40's that I should have held on to. This was the Version 2 of Paradigm's Studio Reference Speakers circa 2001. They have not made Active Speakers since and they really were special.

I am not denying that someone cannot make their own quasi version, but Paradigm really did something magical with the Active 20 and 40.
Cheers,
JJ


----------



## lsiberian

The active versions are known to have defective amps. I'd avoid the active version for that reason.


----------



## JerryLove

lsiberian said:


> The active versions are known to have defective amps. I'd avoid the active version for that reason.


 I'm 90% sure this comment is about the behringers.


----------



## eugovector

Yes, Behringers.

I've been scouring the web, and found a few mentions of blown fuses, the occasional non-working amp, but nothing that sounds chronic. If it's reliability, and not performance that is the issue, I may take my chances...though...

I've got a really good price on the KRKs lined up, so I'm torn between those and the passive 2030s with an A500. Oh well, I'm still a few months away from really needing them, so I'll sit tight for now, and let you all know what I end up with when the time comes.

Thanks,
Marshall


----------



## smbear

i dont have any experiance with the speakers you are looking at but just to give you some support i run 3 - jbl lsr6332 across the front of my set up that replaced some dynaudios . good luck


----------



## Jungle Jack

smbear said:


> i dont have any experiance with the speakers you are looking at but just to give you some support i run 3 - jbl lsr6332 across the front of my set up that replaced some dynaudios . good luck


Hello,
Especially with the Dynaudio's, you are talking about Monitors which cost a great deal more than the Behringers. That being said, JBL makes some fantastic Studio Monitors.
Cheers,
JJ


----------



## smbear

oops i ment dynaudio home speakers not monitors .


----------



## JCD

I know that they cost a little bit more than the Behringers, but I've heard nothing but praise for the Mackie Active monitors like the 624 and, even more, the 824.


----------



## Jungle Jack

Hello,
In truth, many in Pro Audio are not huge fans of Behringer. I am talking more about Studio Owners and the like. Many of them are turned off by the fact that Behringer has been sued multiple times for Copyright Infringement for cloning designs and building them with less expensive components in China.

That is not to say they do not offer amazing value. Nor does it mean they do not offer excellent performance because they often do. The price/performance ratio is off the charts with their offerings.
Cheers,
JJ


----------



## eugovector

Oh, behringer's cloning is pretty blatant, especially with the guitar effects pedals. However, as a consumer, I can't argue with their price/performance ratio. Maybe I should be more principled in supporting the RD of companies like Mackie, Boss, and others, but I can't afford to.


----------



## eugovector

Just an update, I got a killer deal on the 2031a that I couldn't pass up, despite reservations listed in this thread. After the dust settles (we're finally closing on a house next week, and I need to restart a podcast), I may attempt some of the mods for the 203p listed in this thread:

http://www.hometheatershack.com/forums/diy-speakers/28117-wmaxs-behringer-2030p-mod-list.html

I'll post my initial impressions after I get the 2031a setup.


----------



## a1161979

eugovector said:


> Just an update, I got a killer deal on the 2031a that I couldn't pass up, despite reservations listed in this thread. After the dust settles (we're finally closing on a house next week, and I need to restart a podcast), I may attempt some of the mods for the 203p listed in this thread:
> 
> http://www.hometheatershack.com/forums/diy-speakers/28117-wmaxs-behringer-2030p-mod-list.html
> 
> I'll post my initial impressions after I get the 2031a setup.


I do not think you will be disapointed, i have been listening to mine in a bed room computer system for close on 2 years and i really enjoy them :T

Im building some stands for them at the moment to to get that tweeter up at ear level.


















Im very interested to hear your thought on them


----------



## eugovector

They look great, planning a paint or lacquer finish? I'm not sure if this is already in the works, but I'd plan on cutting a rubber mat to decoupled them and kill any potential vibrations between the speakers and the stands. Mouse pads work pretty well, IMHO.


----------



## Ricci

Eugovector,

I have no less than 10 B2031A's and I've had them for many years. I have only had one problem and it was a defective amp on one speaker, but it did not work when I received it. It wasn't like it just quit one day. Otherwise they've been flawless. I prefer them to the passive version's personally. They are an incredible value IMHO passive or active. 

Also in the first post of this thread it was noted that the off axis response is not that great and i beg to differ. The measurement posted shows what looks to be very good performance at up to 90deg off axis due to the waveguide. It does degrade significantly from there, but you have to ask yourself if you plan on listening to these from that far off. Most people don't. 

Anyway. My 2 cents.


----------



## eugovector

Thanks for the reply, they're supposed to be here on Monday, and though I won't have a chance to open them for another few weeks (moving day next week), I'm excited to give them a listen.

I'm also definitely going to try out the $20 mods listed here: http://www.hometheatershack.com/forums/diy-speakers/28117-wmaxs-behringer-2030p-mod-list.html

Now I just need to find someone to sell me a single sheet of OC 705.


----------



## lsiberian

Ricci said:


> Eugovector,
> 
> I have no less than 10 B2031A's and I've had them for many years. I have only had one problem and it was a defective amp on one speaker, but it did not work when I received it. It wasn't like it just quit one day. Otherwise they've been flawless. I prefer them to the passive version's personally. They are an incredible value IMHO passive or active.
> 
> Also in the first post of this thread it was noted that the off axis response is not that great and i beg to differ. The measurement posted shows what looks to be very good performance at up to 90deg off axis due to the waveguide. It does degrade significantly from there, but you have to ask yourself if you plan on listening to these from that far off. Most people don't.
> 
> Anyway. My 2 cents.


yeah they certainly do have good off-axis response.


----------



## lsiberian

eugovector said:


> Thanks for the reply, they're supposed to be here on Monday, and though I won't have a chance to open them for another few weeks (moving day next week), I'm excited to give them a listen.
> 
> I'm also definitely going to try out the $20 mods listed here: http://www.hometheatershack.com/forums/diy-speakers/28117-wmaxs-behringer-2030p-mod-list.html
> 
> Now I just need to find someone to sell me a single sheet of OC 705.


You can use rockwool as well. 

http://www.atsacoustics.com/item--Roxul-Rockboard-60-Case-of-6--RB60.html will do the trick.

http://www.atsacoustics.com/item--Roxul-Rockboard-60--RB60-S.html single pieces. 

Do use gloves. It's not fiber, but it's still not fun to get all over your hands.


----------



## eugovector

Rumor has it there's an SPI in Portland, but I haven't visited yet. I'll probably be hitting them up for 12 pieces of 703 for some acoustic panels or bass traps once I need a new project, and while I doubt they'll want to sell me a single piece of 705 or equiv, it can't hurt to ask. Maybe they'll have some broken or damaged boards.

And yes, I'll definitely do gloves and mask while cutting, and probably wrap the pieces in polyfill to keep the fibers from coming out the ports.


----------



## a1161979

Did they arrive?

Im currently trying to decide between 2031p on some nice stands for the living room or Dali Concept 6's. Interested to hear opinions on the choice between the two 

On and eugovector im planning a simple matt black finish for the stands, if i get the 2031P over the concept 6's then ill be building some 600mm high versions. A photo of how im currently using the 2031A's in my bedroom computer system.


----------



## eugovector

They are supposed to arrive today, but they are getting shipped to my Mother-in-laws while we move. Probably won't get to them for another few weeks, unfortunately. More pressing matters at hand.


----------



## Lucky7!

Any comments would be appreciated from those who have heard/owned both the active and passive. Which is the better sounding and why? Which plays better loud, assuming a decent amp for the passive?
Price locally is $A250/pr and $A439/pr passive and active respectively from a store just near work.

Reason I'm asking is I've been playing with some prototypes that will become my 4 surrounds and I think with the HE JBL 10" mid, CDs + WGs, they're overkill with the modest room dimensions and neighbour respecting levels I can use (typically no more than about -10 to 15dB). I can recycle them into later projects.

A quick test with my old KEF K140 sitting on the JBL2225 6th order ported box with the same 300Hz active xover cleaned them up a lot and sounded very good at reasonable levels. Yesterday my thoughts were drifting towards some B&C 6MD38 and SB29 tweeters but the B's might be a more cost effective solution.

Sides are about 1.5m and rears 2.5m and I've tried dipoles and omnis in my previous place (slightly bigger room) and didn't like them as much as monopoles.

I have enough amps and DCX's on hand to triamp everything and drive a wodge of subs already.

Sorry for rambling, but I have a monstrous migraine and it shuffles thoughts a bit.


----------



## Ricci

I personally think that the active's sound a little better. It's something in the upper midrange around the crossover point most likely, but that could just be my imagination. With a stout amp (not a reciever) the passives should be able to go a little louder, but I'm not sure how much more power you'd really want the drivers to absorb.


----------



## lsiberian

eugovector said:


> Rumor has it there's an SPI in Portland, but I haven't visited yet. I'll probably be hitting them up for 12 pieces of 703 for some acoustic panels or bass traps once I need a new project, and while I doubt they'll want to sell me a single piece of 705 or equiv, it can't hurt to ask. Maybe they'll have some broken or damaged boards.
> 
> And yes, I'll definitely do gloves and mask while cutting, and probably wrap the pieces in polyfill to keep the fibers from coming out the ports.


703 would work fine.


----------



## eugovector

I thought it might, has to be better than what they typically use.

B2031As delivered yesterday and sitting in the mother-in-laws garage 1.5 hours north. Moving day is this weekend, so I'm sure it will be a couple weeks before I even get them, and several months before I start on mods, but it will be fun when I get around to them. Thanks for your help, and I'll be sure to post a video of the process as well as my before/after opinions (need to see if I can get up to speed with some objective testing before then).

Anyone who is in the Salem, OR area and wants some first hand experience with them, just let me know.


----------



## lsiberian

A9X said:


> Any comments would be appreciated from those who have heard/owned both the active and passive. Which is the better sounding and why? Which plays better loud, assuming a decent amp for the passive?


I'd base the decision on something else. If you drive these speakers with a really good amp . I don't think it will matter too much. Do add dampening. 

http://www.silcom.com/~aludwig/images/panelvibes.gif 

Blue is what a properly damped speaker looks like Red is what an undamped one looks like.


----------



## a1161979

Here are some more photos, i know the stands are not painted but i should get a chance this weekend. Finsih will just be a flat black.

















Also A9X, i have a pair of 2030p's and 2031p's on order so i will be able to compair the 6 and 8 passive versions with the 8 active pair that i currently have, they are on order and not due for a few weeks but as soon as i get the chance i will compair the 3 and post my findings for you :T


----------



## Mika75

I'll be looking forward to ur impressions Sam, & thank you for posting the pics.


----------



## Lucky7!

a1161979 said:


> Also A9X, i have a pair of 2030p's and 2031p's on order so i will be able to compair the 6 and 8 passive versions with the 8 active pair that i currently have, they are on order and not due for a few weeks but as soon as i get the chance i will compair the 3 and post my findings for you :T


Thanks, I'll look forward to it.


----------



## Ricci

Wow someone with more of these than me. :coocoo:


----------



## a1161979

Ha ha Ricci, no quite

The 6 Pair are for a friends 21st Bday, i thought they would make a nice gift for him and a real upgrade from an all in one plastic hifi system.

The 8 passives are for my living room, did not want to spend much money so i decided to take a chance, either way ill post my results as soon as i have the chance to listen.


----------



## doveman

Hi 

First post here. I've been out of the game for a while and had to sell off some audio equipment a few years ago to help pay off my debts, but I'm a bit more solvent now and looking to get some decent equipment again.

I've been looking at the KRK Rokit Powered 5 G2s (£250/pair) for home studio monitors and would be interested to know how people think they would compare to:

1) a pair of B2030Ps with a Cambridge Audio A1 V3 amp £190
2) a pair of B2030Ps with a SONY STRDH500 receiver £250
3) a pair of B2030As £260
4) a pair of B2031As £274

Cheers.


----------



## doveman

I should've included a pair of B2031Ps with either of the amps in 1) or 2) in that list for completeness.

Although, having done some more reading it seems these speakers aren't really flat/accurate enough for monitoring purposes and I might get a pair of Wharfedale Diamond 8.2 passives instead.


----------



## a1161979

Ok time to post some quick impressions on the B2031A's against the B2030P's.

I have not had time to compair the 2030P's with the 2031P's but i will get around to some more detailed comparisions when i have built some decent stands.

First thing to note is they are very different speakers in terms of size and sound. (the B2030P and B2031A)

The 2030's have a 0.75 tweeter in a shallow wave guide, the 2031's have a larger 1 tweeter in a much larger and deeper wave guide. There is also a considerable difference in the physical size of the speakers. (Ill post up some detailed photos some time this week)

I have only compaired the passive 6's with the active 8's but the sound is very different. The passive 6's standout if the midrange when compaired with the larger 8's. The main difference being subtle details in acoustic recording which jumped out as a big point of difference. For example the slides of a guitar, there were times with the 6's where you could hear the finer details of different slides, while with the 8's a slide was just a slide at times. A/Bing between the two on a chapman stick album i have this did jump right out. 

Now the largest point of difference is in the bass. I was not prepaired for how poor the bottom end on the B2030P really is, in my room there was simply no output bellow 100Hz. Now to be honest my room is fairly large and the speakers are 1 meter out from the back wall and 1 meter in from the sides so there is little boundry gain to be had. The B2031A's have no problem in the same position, even without the sub running they were musical and provided good output even on tracks with considerable low frequency information (such as Massive Attack Unfinished Sympathy). The B2030P's however were really lacking from 100hz down, even playing piano pieces there was a real lack of weight, very thin sounding. The B2031A's however did a much more convincing job with lower notes on a piano having more weight. 

So i know what your all thinking which is duh you need a sub for the B2030P's, so i had a play with a few different subwoofer that i have around the place including the Behringer active studio sub (which is a truely shocking subwoofer) as well as some different DIY subwoofers. Maybe its just my ears but i could not get a sub to play cleanly high enough to take over from the monitors, with the B2030P's there was a gap so to speak from sub crossover (70ish Hz) up to about 100hz where the monitors start to get going. This could be a reflection of my subwoofers but it was still a disapointment never the less. Biggest shortcoming was faster kickdrum, i found it really hard to get the snap so to speak with the 2030P's and a subwoofer. The B2031A's crossovered to a sub at 60hz on the other hand was sounding great, not as much midrange detail or clarity but over all a much more rewarding and enjoyable sound.

I think its important to note that following this i decided to do some listening on a desk nearfield and the B2030P's performed much better, they just seemed to get lost in my living room system.

Interestingly i could not notice any real difference between the 1 and 0.75 tweeter.

Ill post much more detailed impressions when i play properly with the 2031P's but between the 2030P's and 2031A's the clear winner for me was the larger version, maybe not as clean in the mids but a warmer sound that sounded to my ears a little more balanced.


----------



## a1161979

doveman said:


> I should've included a pair of B2031Ps with either of the amps in 1) or 2) in that list for completeness.
> 
> Although, having done some more reading it seems these speakers aren't really flat/accurate enough for monitoring purposes and I might get a pair of Wharfedale Diamond 8.2 passives instead.


Funny you should say that but the response graph for the 2030P is ruller flat from 120Hz up to 20hz when on axis, id be very supprised if the Wharfedales were even close to the Behringers frequency response. Soundonsound mag reviewed the Behringers reasonalbe favourably. i would say that they are flat/accurate enough for monitoring purposes. Maybe not if your Hans Zimmer but its all relative...

For a desktop system where you get some gain from the desk the B2030P's are unbeatable for the money, if your more into hiphop or electronic music the larger B2031's are a smarter buy in my opinion. I have not listened to the B2031P's yet but if they perform like the active version i think they are a great speaker and you certainly get a lot for your money.


----------



## a1161979

Here is the Graph from the first post.


----------



## eugovector

My 2031a are still in the Mother-in-laws garage as we didn't have any room in the truck this weekend (really, it was that full of dressers, TV stands, end tables...). By next Monday, I should have them in my possession finally,and can fire them up.

I'm sorry to hear the midrange wasn't as good with the 2031As, but I do plan on running mine without a sub, so the added lowend will be nice. I wonder if the midrange can be improved with the added insulation described in the posted tweaks and mods?


----------



## Ricci

I like the midrange of them. It is not the best I've ever heard of course, but still very good for the money. I think if there is an area of weakness compared to the 6" model it'd be close to the top of the 8" drivers range before it hands off to the tweeter. Perhaps a little bit of distortion from a cone breakup, an enclosure resonance or something, since the off axis response plots and general FR looks very good. I like the added bass extension and headroom for dynamics that the larger tweeter and 8" woofer provide. To me it has superior midbass and low midrange 80-400hz.


----------



## a1161979

eugovector said:


> I'm sorry to hear the midrange wasn't as good with the 2031As, but I do plan on running mine without a sub, so the added lowend will be nice. I wonder if the midrange can be improved with the added insulation described in the posted tweaks and mods?


Its not that the midrange is bad, infact as Ricci has mentioned comapiring the other budget speaker i have heard it is still good however its just not as detailed as the B2030. I also think the B2031's have a little bit more lower midrange than the B2030's, combined with the better bass response and its a warmer sound which i prefer. Without a sub there is no question that the B2031's are the way to go, there is simply hardly any output bellow 100hz from the B2030s in free space.


----------



## lsiberian

Ricci said:


> I like the midrange of them. It is not the best I've ever heard of course, but still very good for the money. I think if there is an area of weakness compared to the 6" model it'd be close to the top of the 8" drivers range before it hands off to the tweeter. Perhaps a little bit of distortion from a cone breakup, an enclosure resonance or something, since the off axis response plots and general FR looks very good. I like the added bass extension and headroom for dynamics that the larger tweeter and 8" woofer provide. To me it has superior midbass and low midrange 80-400hz.


If I'd known how good the speakers were when I started this hobby. I'd probably have avoided the DIY bug for speakers. With a few mods they really sound nice. It's not gonna best a well designed 3-way, but with a few mods it can hold it's own with 2-ways. Chris is very meticulous in his evaluations and he loves these speakers.


----------



## doveman

It sounds like the B2031s would be good music listening speakers, with a warmer sound and better bass, but the B2030s (with a sub) would be better monitors, with their flatter response and more accurate midrange. So I don't think I'd use the B2031s as monitors. If I had the money, I'd probably rather get a decent 8" speaker, such as the KRK RP8 or Yamaha HS80, than the B2030s and sub, but I don't

I can't say I put a lot of stock in graphs as I don't know how they were produced, so I prefer to listen to people's impressions of how accurate a speaker is. I don't know about the Diamond 8.2 passives, but I know a lot of people were very impressed by the accuracy and imaging of the 8.2 actives and chose to use them as monitors. The 8.2 passives aren't so easy to come by these days, so I was looking at the 9.1s, but I've not really read any recommendations about using them as monitors, so they aren't on the list anymore, although I might get a pair as listening speakers.


----------



## eugovector

I'd say I'd have to trust mics over ears when judging frequency response and "accuracy".


----------



## Ricci

The thing with monitors is not how perfectly flat their response is (Although I like to keep it in the ballpark). It is picking something and then learning exactly how music sounds on those speakers in that room, so that you know them intimately and know how a good recording of the typical genre you work with should sound through them. Familiarity is key with mixing. Lots of great albums were mixed on Yamaha NS10's which are not the best speakers. 2031's are perfectly fine for monitoring.


----------



## Guest

doveman said:


> I can't say I put a lot of stock in graphs as I don't know how they were produced, so I prefer to listen to people's impressions of how accurate a speaker is.


Most people I know like extra bass and when they hear a proper speaker, they think its too bright. Opinions very so much, its pretty much impossible to get an accurate impression by other peoples views.

I'm leaning to the B2030P for HT speakers. I just want good and I sounds like these will do. Anyone near Indianapolis, IN have a set I could demo?


----------



## doveman

I meant I listen to the views of people who know what to look for in a monitor speaker, not the average consumer.


----------



## doveman

Ricci said:


> The thing with monitors is not how perfectly flat their response is (Although I like to keep it in the ballpark). It is picking something and then learning exactly how music sounds on those speakers in that room, so that you know them intimately and know how a good recording of the typical genre you work with should sound through them. Familiarity is key with mixing. Lots of great albums were mixed on Yamaha NS10's which are not the best speakers. 2031's are perfectly fine for monitoring.


All good points, but you still want speakers that allow you to hear everything so that you don't find stuff appearing when you play your mixes elsewhere.


----------



## Ricci

doveman said:


> All good points, but you still want speakers that allow you to hear everything so that you don't find stuff appearing when you play your mixes elsewhere.


Obviously. These Behringers easily do this from 50-20khz. The problem is not with the monitors it's when you play the mixes elsewhere the quality of that system is never known and is usually much less (car systems, radio's, older inferior speakers, boomboxes, bad room acoustics, etc..) All can push forward or recede various frequency bands in the overall mix. 

Without getting too far off topic... I trust to measurements much more than anyone's ears. Which is not to say that their aren't some people's opinions I would trust, but many times the sound that is preferred is technically less accurate to the original signal prior to the speaker producing it and the room influencing the radiation.


----------



## doveman

Ricci said:


> Obviously. These Behringers easily do this from 50-20khz.


I take it you're referring to the 2031s, as it seems the 2030s apparently don't really go below 100hz.



> The problem is not with the monitors it's when you play the mixes elsewhere the quality of that system is never known and is usually much less (car systems, radio's, older inferior speakers, boomboxes, bad room acoustics, etc..) All can push forward or recede various frequency bands in the overall mix.


True, but equally you don't really want monitors that 'recede' certain frequencies, so that you aren't able to hear things that are present and then pop-out at you when listening elsewhere. I guess if you couldn't get a flat monitor, one that overemphasized certain frequencies would be preferable to the opposite, as then at least you'd be hearing stuff and could perhaps EQ it down or just learn that's how the speakers are and allow for that.



> Without getting too far off topic... I trust to measurements much more than anyone's ears. Which is not to say that their aren't some people's opinions I would trust, but many times the sound that is preferred is technically less accurate to the original signal prior to the speaker producing it and the room influencing the radiation.


I'm not saying measurements aren't useful, but without knowing exactly how they were made I can't put too much trust in them, as graphs can be made to show whatever you like, by for example using extra room treatment to compensate for the speaker's flaws. Hell, someone could just mock one up in photoshop or the like for that matter.


----------



## eugovector

doveman said:


> I'm not saying measurements aren't useful, but without knowing exactly how they were made I can't put too much trust in them, as graphs can be made to show whatever you like, by for example using extra room treatment to compensate for the speaker's flaws. Hell, someone could just mock one up in photoshop or the like for that matter.


Well, what you're talking about is just pure fraud. Measurements should be accompanied by a description of how they were conducted. Obviously photoshopping is a huge no-no, but if a measurement is done under non-anechoic conditions, a reputable manufacturer should make that known.


----------



## Ricci

eugovector said:


> Well, what you're talking about is just pure fraud. Measurements should be accompanied by a description of how they were conducted. Obviously photoshopping is a huge no-no, but if a measurement is done under non-anechoic conditions, a reputable manufacturer should make that known.


Right.

FWIW the Behringers come in matched pairs with a response measurement for both speakers individually. They are very flat. This has been independently measured and confirmed by a couple of users as well. There are other aspects of a speaker worth looking at but a relatively flat FR and good off axis response are good places to start. Also any serious monitoring system should have a sub system to extend the bass response, which can be turned on or off to simulate LF bandwidth limited systems.


----------



## lsiberian

The measurements in this topic were done in probably the most treated room on planet earth. The guy who did the measurement is one of the top two experts in the DIY speaker area I know. The other guy specializes in TL designs so I wouldn't expect him to evaluate the speakers. Couple that with Ricci's endorsement and I don't see why anyone would argue against these things. On top of that I got a list of folks that use and love these things. 

80hz and below can be easily handled by a Subwoofer so I see no reason not to use these in monitoring. They are after all built for that purpose. Everything above 100hz is most of the music anyway.


----------



## DanTheMan

OK, here's some gated measurements to remove first room reflection of the B2031P. You make your own conclusions.

Polar response: mic 2ft 6" away gated to 3msec unsmoothed, but not high frequency resolution d/t gating from on center axis out to 90 degrees off axis in 11.25 degree steps. 








Near field response at high resolution on axis confirms the on axis graph. Very impressive for this price point. I mean extremely impressive.


This is the overlay of every impulse response from the graph about. Bar none the best I've measured.









This is the average of the 11.25 degrees off axis to 90 degrees off axis responses:









Windows/Internet Explorer user can see another look and confirmation of my data at http://www.gedlee.com/Loudspeakers.htm
Go to "Preview Data Program", download it and check out the Behringer measurements.

Nice:T

Dan

One more thing:
Just for a comparison, here's a popular, highly regarded in the community, DIY speaker with a 10" woofer and dome tweeter under exact same conditions.


----------



## eugovector

After a spell, I've finally gotten my B2031A up and running. No pro measurements like above, but I've been enjoying them immensely. Even with the larger woofer, you will want a sub, even for music. My SPL meters are still packed up somewhere, but to ear, they start to drop between 50 and 40HZ, to much less output at 30HZ. Included graph shows down about 10db from 40 to 30.

Overall, I've been very pleased. They image really well, have tight, punchy bass, and the highs are clear (though I still prefer my JBLs which I'm sure a lot of people would consider overly-bright). The amp section seems pretty low-noise and hasn't given me any fits so far.

I'm pretty thrilled, and can't wait to try some of the mods mentioned. I definitely wouldn't hesitate to put the 2030P out there as a fantastically inexpensive home theater speaker, though the 2031 will likely be too large for most.

That's all I have this late at night, just was loving the graphs and had to chime in.


----------



## DanTheMan

Cool, glad you like the graphs. You've got great speakers! These things are a steal. I think I still prefer my homemade speakers, but they cost a lot more and are an ever evolving work and it's probably just Proud Pappa Syndrome, the distance I listen at(the narrower directivity prevents room influences to some degree), and the higher efficiency. If I had it to do over again I'd have just bought these. I could live with either. The 2030 model looks interesting as well. No matter what you'll needs subs.
My polar graph looks like this:









I didn't do the others with my own yet and will have to get around to it at some point.

Good on you Mr. Eugo!

Dan


----------



## eugovector

DanTheMan said:


> Cool, glad you like the graphs. You've got great speakers! These things are a steal. I think I still prefer my homemade speakers, but they cost a lot more and are an ever evolving work and it's probably just Proud Pappa Syndrome, the distance I listen at(the narrower directivity prevents room influences to some degree), and the higher efficiency. If I had it to do over again I'd have just bought these. I could live with either. The 2030 model looks interesting as well. No matter what you'll needs subs.
> My polar graph looks like this:
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> I didn't do the others with my own yet and will have to get around to it at some point.
> 
> Good on you Mr. Eugo!
> 
> Dan


Were the previous graphs done by you as well?


----------



## DanTheMan

Yes indeed. Thanks to REW, Cross-Spectrum Labs, EMU, my measurement rig and my MacBook.

That's why I gave the link to Gedlee. Dr. Geddes also measured a small Behringer 2 way and they graphs look close to identical. So the odds of my measurements being off are very low.

IOW, I wouldn't hesitate to recommend these to anyone.

The measurements in the beginning of this thread looked like they had room reflections not gated out. After seeing what Dr. Geddes measured, I had to do some myself. His statement about these speakers is also very telling. When he's impressed, there is good reason. I believe he measured the active versions, but I thought at first he said passive so I can't be sure. Either way, I'd bet they are great speakers.

Dan


----------



## eugovector

Looks like we have a new budget fave.


----------



## Ricci

I've been recommending these for years. A lot of people scoff at the price and the brand name or have some subjective comments to make about some deleterious defect in their sound compared to some other more expensive models, but the fact is the measurements speak for themselves. They are about as neutral as it gets in this price range. I just wish they had a slightly larger more powerful model with about 10db more headroom.


----------



## DanTheMan

It should be anyway. Reading some of the subjective reviews of the speaker are all over the map. The data looks good. Some people describe muddy bass, but that's dominated by the room and placement. Other people have described a bright sound with tight bass. The dispersion is fairly wide on these and very early reflections could well be the problem here. Also, a prior speaker's colorations which a person has become accustomed to will influence their subjective review. The data looks good--well excellent actually and from different sources and data from a different speaker of either the same or a very similar model. The same drivers anyway. IOW, it looks hard to go wrong with these unless you need extreme output. Even then, many subjective reviews brag about how loud these things are capable of playing--"they can do house parties w/o failure". I certainly didn't want to test max output prior to destruction, but they play loud enough for me to enjoy. I doubt they could do house parties like a speaker designed for the purpose. Of course even "house party" can mean different things to different people.

They get my :T for my purpose and they should reasonably be a budget favorite.

Edit: Ricci posted while I was typing. I just wanted to add that I totally agree with you.

Dan


----------



## DanTheMan

BTW, in the Impulse graphs, you'll see the height of the other speaker cause the first reflection to come later than in the Behringer one. I windowed both the same as to keep the comparison more similar.


----------



## Lucky7!

Does anyone know if it's possible to take the baffle section of the 2030 off so it could be re-mounted in another enclosure without cutting?


----------



## eugovector

I had assumed that's how people were getting into the enclosure to do the mods, but I haven't tried taking a hex-wrench to mine yet. (edit: make that a philips, according to the pics posted at behringer.com)


----------



## DanTheMan

Was there a link to these mods?


----------



## eugovector

Linked in post 17, or right here: http://www.hometheatershack.com/forums/diy-speakers/28117-wmaxs-behringer-2030p-mod-list.html


----------



## DanTheMan

Thanks Eugo. Those mods are interesting. I have to wonder if Behringer hasn't addressed these issues already. I really didn't see any issues in the measurements that could be ascribed to the faults those mods would fix. I also listened to the speaker at some pretty high volumes for a few hours. Nothing I could hear that sounded off.

Guess I wouldn't know until I tried or someone else does with pictures and graphs.

Dan


----------



## eugovector

I'm sure, like a lot of tweaks, the effort won't doesn't exactly create an equal improvement, but more like every little bit counts, and when you have so little invested in the monitors, and the mods themselves are so inexpensive, it can't hurt.

I think I'm going to try modding one of mine at a time, then listening to both the modded/unmodded in a single blind. Or maybe I'll just sit back and enjoy them as they are.


----------



## DanTheMan

It would be interesting to hear your impressions of any changes. Of course I much prefer data, but a stated audible difference would give me incentive to try and get data. I've got a pair of these on the way so I'll take a look at them ASAP. Maybe that 1k dip might indicate an underdamped box. I've seen similar things in underdamped boxes around 450-1000Hz. I've never seen it as smooth as that though, but I've also never measured pp cones before.

I'm thinking about getting an active one for a center channel.

Dan


----------



## eugovector

I also prefer data, I'm just afraid I'm not technically knowledgeable enough to collect. Which pair do you have on the way? You already have a pair of the 2031p, correct? Isn't that would you measured, or did those belong to a friend?


----------



## Mika75

A9X said:


> Does anyone know if it's possible to take the baffle section of the 2030 off so it could be re-mounted in another enclosure without cutting?


Yes it's possible, as shown here - *Behringer Mod Assistance @ Audioholics forum*

I believe all praise must be forwarded to WmAx, who is the originator of the said mods, he has also stated they would make very good inwall speakers because of this easy removal of the front baffle/waveguide.


----------



## DanTheMan

The measurements were of a friends B2031P. That's the pair I have on the way. I was so shocked by the performance, I had to buy a pair just for fun. It's ridiculous to get that performance for that money. I feel like I'm robbing someone. Makes you wonder what some of the Mackie or high end whatever monitors measure like. Studio monitors may well be where it's at. I saw measurements on the high end Genelec 8260A, excellent, but not worlds away from this Behringer. Perhaps a bit better however and excellent vertical pattern as well d/t the coax MT/WG. It's a crazy cool speaker, but very expensive. 

anyway, those are my thoughts,

Dan


----------



## Lucky7!

Mika75 said:


> Yes it's possible, as shown here - *Behringer Mod Assistance @ Audioholics forum*
> 
> I believe all praise must be forwarded to WmAx, who is the originator of the said mods, he has also stated they would make very good inwall speakers because of this easy removal of the front baffle/waveguide.


Cheers. I was thinking they would be good in my surrounds with a JBL2225 6th order ported below with an active 300Hz or so xover to relieve them of even less midbass duty. Performance everywhere else looks good and I'm at around 2-2.5m distance from them.

Saves me a pair of stereo amps (already have them and can be used elsewhere) and at $A220/pr not much more than the cost of the 6.5" pro drivers I planned to use, and no need to buy the tweeters too. I have everything else to hand and can even sell some other bits, so net cost might be around zero.


----------



## Ricci

Dan,

I saw measurements of Mackie's original HR824's somewhere years back and they were very good as well. Stereophile? :scratch: I had a pair of the Mackie's but sold them to a friend when I was in a pinch. they were better than the Behri's but it wasn't a monumental difference. Small things like clarity at high volumes, a little more output, a little more bass extension, a little better constructed, etc. Other than that it was pretty close to my ears. They were better but $700 better? :dontknow:


A9x,

I drive my 2031A pair at the practice area pretty hard usually. It's a 9000cu ft space with high levels of background noise and we are usually probably 12-20ft away from them. In that type of environment a little more oomph could be used, but in a quieter setting, in a room half the size and in much closer proximity to them they are usually more than enough except for the very loudest movie dynamics. 

They hit their limits first in the bass and midbass. If you throw a steep 24db 100hz or even 120hz hpf on them they open up with considerably more dynamic headroom.


----------



## Lucky7!

Ricci said:


> A9x,
> 
> I drive my 2031A pair at the practice area pretty hard usually. It's a 9000cu ft space with high levels of background noise and we are usually probably 12-20ft away from them. In that type of environment a little more oomph could be used, but in a quieter setting, in a room half the size and in much closer proximity to them they are usually more than enough except for the very loudest movie dynamics.
> 
> They hit their limits first in the bass and midbass. If you throw a steep 24db 100hz or even 120hz hpf on them they open up with considerably more dynamic headroom.


Thanks, useful datapoint. I was looking at the 2030P so assuming a ~ 150Hz HPF maybe my LAB12 sealed in 40L or so would make a good pairing. I'll pick up a pair and try them with both as I have the drivers DCX's and amps and 2 different rough enclosures that would suit each for testing.


----------



## DanTheMan

Thanks Gents for the input. I just paid $158 for the pair of the Behris shipped. For that money, I have no right to complain about any faults they have. Though one day I wouldn't be surprised if I had a set of those Mackies or Genelecs on the chopping block. The Genes are nearly $6,000 each! The Mackies $650 each, but active(looks like they may use the same drivers as the B2031). The B2031 Active is $180 each.

Interesting,

Dan


----------



## DanTheMan

This looks to be another bargain:
http://www.soundstagenetwork.com/measurements/speakers/infinity_primus_p162/









The 500-1kHz ripplie looks like insufficient cabinet damping. A little fiberglass insulation should smooth that right out.

Here's a graph of 2 same model speakers. One in a damped box, the other not.









Looks familiar,

Dan


----------



## lsiberian

Mika75 said:


> Yes it's possible, as shown here - *Behringer Mod Assistance @ Audioholics forum*
> 
> I believe all praise must be forwarded to WmAx, who is the originator of the said mods, he has also stated they would make very good inwall speakers because of this easy removal of the front baffle/waveguide.


He is mentioned in my PM and he is the guy who taught me how to brace and dampen speakers. If you see advice from me you can know that his knowledge along with TLSGuy are the primary sources of my DIY education.


----------



## DanTheMan

Well, my 2031Ps came in. Wow! I do mean WOW! Just great speakers. For the money, these are insane. For double the price, these are like nothing I've heard and I go to HiFi shops every couple months. Even for triple the money I haven't found anything to compare. I hate saying things like this, but I can't lie and I want other to know that there are great, affordable speakers available. I only wish I had known about these sooner. Many experiments and hours reading/learning about loudspeakers led me to build some that I thought were great--and they are compared to many others. Had I heard these I wouldn't have built anything. I would have just enjoyed my music and movies. I think I want an active one for the center channel. Don't really know why other than the fact that they are so cheap and sound great. My next speakers will be some sort of monitor I'm sure, but it will be a while before I think more about speakers. It's funny, I listened to everything they had at Guitar Center and never heard their equal. I'm betting the room is at least part of the problem. In a room set up for sound, these won't disappoint any reasonable person. That much I'm sure of. For HT on a working man's budget, look no further unless you need a lot of output and have a lot of space in the HT. Then that probably means your not a working man.

Anyway, thanks to all in this thread. You really helped me find what I have been looking for.

Dan

OK, back to the burgers and beer.:R


----------



## a1161979

A9X said:


> Any comments would be appreciated from those who have heard/owned both the active and passive. Which is the better sounding and why? Which plays better loud, assuming a decent amp for the passive?
> Price locally is $A250/pr and $A439/pr passive and active respectively from a store just near work.


Wow a lot has been happening in here in the last few months.

I am organizing a listening day for a group of audio friends to compare the B2030P, 2031P and 2031A, ill be sure to post up photos and any Adelaide members here are welcome to attend too (just PM me)

I built some solid stands and we will use material that most are common with :T


























Stay tuned guys, should be good fun to have a listening day to compare all 3 with a few different subwoofers thrown in too


----------



## DanTheMan

To show them at their best(the 2031), the tweeter should be at or slightly below ear level. Check out the vertical polar plots. Rotation the speaker toward the woofer from the on axis, the 11.25 degrees beneath and the 22.5 degrees beneath the woofer/tweeter center:








Vertical polars toward the tweeter from midway between the woofer/tweeter rotating in 11.25 degree steps to 45 degrees:









he sweet zone for this speaker would be to have them toed in roughly 45 degrees, give or take, and with the tweeter at the listener's ear height or slightly beneath it.

Just to recap the horizontal polars:









Hope that helps and repost back,

Dan


----------



## Ricci

Thanks for the measurements Dan. :R


----------



## lsiberian

DanTheMan said:


> Well, my 2031Ps came in. Wow! I do mean WOW! Just great speakers. For the money, these are insane. For double the price, these are like nothing I've heard and I go to HiFi shops every couple months. Even for triple the money I haven't found anything to compare. I hate saying things like this, but I can't lie and I want other to know that there are great, affordable speakers available.


I keep telling people this, but they never believe that a speaker this cheap can be this good. Buy you a sheet of rockwool and some grill cloth Remove the lining in there and put in the rockwool with 3m-77. The speakers will get even better.


----------



## DanTheMan

3M-77. I've got 2 pair of these. I'll modify one and post before and after graphs, but it will be a while.

Thanks,

Dan


----------



## eugovector

lsiberian said:


> Buy you a sheet of rockwool and some grill cloth


What's the speaker cloth for, just to wrap around the rockwool to keep the fibers from getting loose? If so, a thin poly batting from a fabric store might be cheaper/easier to come by.


----------



## Mika75

a1161979 said:


> I am organizing a listening day for a group of audio friends to compare the B2030P, 2031P and 2031A, ill be sure to post up photos and any Adelaide members here are welcome to attend too (just PM me)
> 
> 
> Stay tuned guys, should be good fun to have a listening day to compare all 3 with a few different subwoofers thrown in too


If only I lived closer Sam, either way make sure to post relative comments from the day, I'm very interested :sneeky:

-and thank u for the measurements Dan !


----------



## lsiberian

eugovector said:


> What's the speaker cloth for, just to wrap around the rockwool to keep the fibers from getting loose? If so, a thin poly batting from a fabric store might be cheaper/easier to come by.


You can use burlap as well, I just prefer speaker grill cloth because it's got less acoustical properties than fabric normally does. It's also pretty cheap for me. You could also use fiberglass inplace of rockwool. You get less bass absorption, but it's still very effective.


----------



## eugovector

fiberglass vs rockwool, here's the coefficients for anyone interested: http://www.bobgolds.com/AbsorptionCoefficients.htm

Looks like Rockwool is about 1.5x as effective at 125hz at similar densities.

I actually like the idea of polybatting because it is not 100% acoustically transparent, my understanding is that it, on it's own, has very mild absorption properties (also per Bob Gold's in the discussion of "Porous Absorbers" at the bottom of the page.)


----------



## lsiberian

eugovector said:


> fiberglass vs rockwool, here's the coefficients for anyone interested: http://www.bobgolds.com/AbsorptionCoefficients.htm
> 
> Looks like Rockwool is about 1.5x as effective at 125hz at similar densities.
> 
> I actually like the idea of polybatting because it is not 100% acoustically transparent, my understanding is that it, on it's own, has very mild absorption properties (also per Bob Gold's in the discussion of "Porous Absorbers" at the bottom of the page.)


Just remember we are talking 2" of rockwool so the difference isn't too large. A difference of .15 is required for statistical significance and even a roll of R8 is a huge step up from the lining in their currently. Fiber like 10 bucks a role at home depot. For 10 bucks you could upgrade almost any speakers. That's not a bad deal if you think about it. This mod can be used on any speaker to improve performance.


----------



## eugovector

For the roll of R8, would you go thicker than 2", for instance, filling the entire interior cavity of the speaker?


----------



## DanTheMan

Anyone know how this will effect the bass tuning?


----------



## lsiberian

eugovector said:


> For the roll of R8, would you go thicker than 2", for instance, filling the entire interior cavity of the speaker?


I wouldn't, but Wmax would. He'd also concrete, and metal brace the thing. He does his treatment in such a way the speaker almost becomes an infinite baffle.


----------



## lsiberian

DanTheMan said:


> Anyone know how this will effect the bass tuning?


It depends on what you do and how far you go. Swapping your liner for 2" of wool or fiber would give you more positives than negatives though. It decreases distortion significantly.


----------



## ACE23

How do these compare against say the Polk audio tsi200 bookshelf speakers? I only ask because I was at bestbuy and the guy was playing them through a pioneer elite receiver on 140w per channel. They had a dts eagles audio cd in and to my virgin home audio ears it sounded ridiculously good in my expierence limited opinion. Can these behringers be wall mounted? If not I guess I will buy wall shelves that install on studs to mount them.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## Mika75

DanTheMan said:


> Anyone know how this will effect the bass tuning?


This is what WmAx has to say:


> Effect's caused by a 'super' absorber like 4-8# rockwool board. The material has such a high co-efficient, that if you use too much, it will critically dampen the LF response. That is, it will actually cause the LF to roll off radically, and very smoothly, replicating the sort of response one would expect from an infinite volume of air behind the driver. So, use just enough of the material to provide maximum mid-range absorption, but no so much that is actually removes much LF response, unless you have an electronic means of correction (such as a parametric equalizer) available to compensate the response loss.


----------



## DanTheMan

Thank you guys. Now I know what to look for.

Dan


----------



## lsiberian

Mika75 said:


> This is what WmAx has to say:


Yes that is precisely what happens, but 2" to 4" of lining on the back won't critically dampen the speaker. 

I'd not add more to a speaker though. Absorbing on the back wall is sufficient IMO for the desired effect. I suggest rockwool since it is easier to handle than fiber glass. It does alter tuning and in ported designs too much treatment kills internal resonance.


----------



## DanTheMan

OK, so I went a little wild today on making graphs. I used my own B2031P speakers and another's that just came in. Both are claimed to be matched pairs. Well, let's just see.
First "matched pair":
A) average response:








B) average response:









A)polar response:








B)polar response:









That's closer than any 2 I've built.

Next "matched pair"
C) avg response:








D) avg response:









C) polar response:








D) polar response:









Maybe not perfect, but you can tell they are making an earnest effort. Pretty impressive really.

Dan

Edit: looks like I may have screwed up the C and D avg response. That looks like the D avg twice.


----------



## DanTheMan

Corrected avg for C:








and again for D:









Here's what one of these polar responses would look like with 1/3 octave smoothing like you'd see from one axis in a brochure:









Supposedly some say this more closely represents what we hear.:dontknow:

Dan


----------



## lsiberian

DanTheMan said:


> Supposedly some say this more closely represents what we hear.:dontknow:
> 
> Dan


Well your ears aren't linear devices they are spacial so how you perceive sound is spacial. Because LFE reflects more than HFE you will see an upward curve from the reinforcing reflections. This is why treating reflection points is often counter productive. I must say it's an impressive graph.


----------



## DanTheMan

Yes indeed. All thanks to Behringer. Now I really want to measure the 2030 and 3030.

Dan


----------



## DanTheMan

OK, so I took some shots of the innards today. I'll get some stuff to do modifications and see if it makes a measurable difference. I'm going to try and generate some plots using the new REW so we can get a better look at resonance issues. The crossover looks like a minimalist WGed 2-way with just a cap and resistor in the tweeter with a 2nd order low pass. That's why you can see the woofer's break up creep into the tweeter's range of the response. The active version should do much better in this regard even though there's not a huge problem in the passive version. We see poly caps, an iron core inductor, and a wirewound resistor. The baffle is stout on the woofer half, but thinner on the tweeter. Enclosure damping is certainly less than I've ever used. That may be where we could best improve the design.
































Any last minute ideas?

Dan


----------



## DanTheMan

OK, no suggestions so I went out on my own. I bought some of the pink stuff(well actually yellow) and beefed up the cabinet lining. So I'll post the results of response and impulse changes. First will be prior to stuffing, the second will be after the stuffing.

















































OK, nothing to really get excited about there. My guess is that the slight improvement in the treble has something to do with cabinet vibration or something. I was bummed by the results, but I also wanted to test my diffraction theory with the ports next to the tweeter. So I got some cotton balls from the wife's "stuff" drawer and filled the front of those ports with white cotton balls!:yikes: Well, the results are something to see:

























No need for a side by side.:boxer:

Dan


----------



## DanTheMan

OK, let's also look at the cotton stuffed ports graph 1/3 oct smoothed vs. the added stuffing material's graph 1/3 octave smoothed:
















Can you tell which is which?

Dan


----------



## lsiberian

You aren't doing the right measurements for box resonance. You will want to make a waterfall graph to see what's really going on. Go -40db. For treatments you will want to use 2 or 4" wrapped rockwool.


----------



## DanTheMan

I know, but I didn't do it in the first place so I had nothing to compare to. The next one's I'll do it all.

Here's what happened on the low end. One line is with no fiberglass stuffing added, one is with additional fiberglass, and then the one that's about a dB higher is with the cotton added. Not that in all actuality it is not louder, it was just so the different lines wouldn't get confusing.









Dan


----------



## eugovector

Did you do them both or just one? You could do waterfalls with the untreated one vs. the treated.

Also, how did plugging the ports affect bass response? Got a picture of your cotton ball application?


----------



## DanTheMan

I did both, but I still have another pair here.

Did no one see the diffraction graphs?:nerd:

Dan


----------



## eugovector

Didn't notice that last graph went down to 20hz. Looks like the real story, from my perspective, is how plugging the ports with cotton seems to smooth and extend bass response.

Got a picture or technique writeup?


----------



## eugovector

DanTheMan said:


> I know, but I didn't do it in the first place so I had nothing to compare to. The next one's I'll do it all.
> 
> Here's what happened on the low end. One line is with no fiberglass stuffing added, one is with additional fiberglass, and then the one that's about a dB higher is with the cotton added. Not that in all actuality it is not louder, it was just so the different lines wouldn't get confusing.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Dan


Noting your measurement times, why is there only 4 minutes between w/fiberglass stuffing, and without? Did it really only take you four minutes to complete the mod and take the measurements?

Also, did you complete the other mods as well, caulking the tweeter and sealing the woofer w/ superglue?


----------



## DanTheMan

I only added the fiberglass and did no other mods until stuffing the ports with cotton. It only took a couple minutes thanks to the cordless drill and precut fiberglass I had since I had already taken the other apart and I made duplicates of every piece. I wish I had done the other mods, but I was in a hurry to get some measurements done before the next refrigerator/freezer cycle and just wanted to see what changes would happen with minimal difference in measuring conditions. I was thinking about using some dynamat or some other fancier vibration damping materials at a later date as well as the rockwool.

Check out the differences in the spectrographs before and after the cotton in the ports. Not that they tell us anything new, but a new look at an old solution. Sorry about the extra noise in the ones with cotton. As you can see from the impulse, the first reflection is a bit sooner.


----------



## DanTheMan

I organized my photo bucket and that low end graph got moved so I'll post it again:









Oh yea, the cottoned ports have the more extended bass. All I did was grab some cotton balls and stuffed them in the face of the ports. There's like 6 or 8 in each and they're partly sticking out for ease of removal. Another 2 minute tweak.

There we go.

Dan


----------



## eugovector

I still think the low-end is the more impressive thing here. We're looking at a 10db jump at 30db with no obvious side effects. Can you post pictures or details of what you did? Was it really just stuffing cotton balls in the ports? Anyone with speaker building knowledge that could comment on why the result was so drastic? Could you remeasure at some point in the future, both with and without cotton to make sure the change isn't a fluke/mic placement/speaker placement issue?


----------



## DanTheMan

I was shocked by the lack of obvious side effects with the port stuffing. It really was just as simple as stuffing cotton in the front of the ports. I'f I do more measurements today I'll redo them just to make sure. Strangely to my ear it sounds like less bass, but the graph says more. I'll do them at the same level next time. 

The diffraction reduction was the bigger difference to me. These things aren't exactly pumping out the bass no matter what. Of course for their size and all, they ain't bad there either.


----------



## DanTheMan

OK. bass measurement again:









This time the other speaker.

I'm going to try just measuring near the port now.

Dan


----------



## eugovector

red is with cotton and pink is without?

Seems to me that plugging the ports gives much better bass response, but I'm thinking that the opposite should be true. Can any speaker designers speak to this? Is it because it's just cotton, which probably isn't an air-tight seal?


----------



## DanTheMan

OK, this is by the port:









But I had to turn the volume up to get the graph to work. My best guess is that the near the cone the port and the speaker are out of phase enough to cause the cancelation in the previous graphs.

Here's a graph of each 2 feet away. The stuffed ports are red, the blue is just straight ported.









Dan


----------



## DanTheMan

Yep, in that graph the red is with cotton and the pink is without. I wish I could explain why this is happening exactly, but I can't with any great confidence or certainty.

Dan


----------



## eugovector

Aha, so at listening distance, the bass response is reduced by plugging the ports. Wish I knew enough about the science of speaker design and the physics of waves to make sense of this.

Looks like it's still of minor benefit to increase the absorption material on the inside, the effects of the other mods are unknown (but I'm sure would be beneficial), and stuffing the ports is a wash, at least down low.


----------



## DanTheMan

There may well be more of a benefit to stuffing the insides than what my graphs show. I think damping the out of everything is a good idea as it just lowers speaker self noise. Stuffing the ports is a big plus--not because of any bass things. I have subs for that. The treble just seems a touch clearer. I wish they had placed those ports elsewhere.

Dan


----------



## DanTheMan

Measurements on the 1030A:
















Toward woofer:








Toward tweeter:

























This one seems to have amp troubles as the tweeter can get scratchy when the treble boost is engaged. I'm going to check it on another source though.

Edit: It was the source apparently. It's not doing it now through my receiver.

Dan


----------



## DanTheMan

OK, never mind. The internal amp is at fault. It does it sporadically, but mostly if the treble boost is engaged. 
Edit: Sorry, it actually wasn't the 1030A's amp. It seems it's actually a part of the recordings and can be heard on other speakers, but no where near as prominent. I guess that means the 1030A is actually more revealing than anything else I've listened to. Amazing really for $100/ea at most places selling them.

Dan


----------



## DanTheMan

Here's a shootout that the 2030P was involved in: http://www.audioholics.com/reviews/...-2009/bookshelf-speaker-face-off-2009-results

None too shabby.

Dan


----------



## DanTheMan

OK, one last thing of interest. The exploded polar view:

















































Just threw the Mackie in there for comparison with something a bit more expensive--like $480/ea. So $960 vs. $152 for the B2031P (plus amp) or $200 for the 1031A.

Dan


----------



## 1scienceguy

Would someone mind summarizing the differences (set-up, usage, info, etc.) on the 2030P vs. 2031P?

Many Thanks


----------



## eugovector

2031 is better if you're not using a subwoofer, but at 4ohms, might be a hard load for a consumer amp to drive. Also more expensive.

2030 is best for use with a sub, is easy to drive at 8ohms, and is smaller and less expensive making the best choice for a home theater application.


----------



## 1scienceguy

Sweet! Thanks for the info. 

What about sound reproduction? Frequency response lineararity?

Any side by side comparison in the forums?


----------



## Lucky7!

Haven't these just been superseded? I looked at some again last week and I had trouble finding them in stock in Sydney, and one of the dealers told me a new model was coming so no more stock on these.


----------



## eugovector

A9X said:


> Haven't these just been superseded? I looked at some again last week and I had trouble finding them in stock in Sydney, and one of the dealers told me a new model was coming so no more stock on these.


Still showing active on their site: http://www.behringer.com/EN/Products/B2030P.aspx


----------



## eugovector

1scienceguy said:


> Sweet! Thanks for the info.
> 
> What about sound reproduction? Frequency response lineararity?
> 
> Any side by side comparison in the forums?


Specs can be found on the product site, and each speaker comes with a printout of their individual frequency test. I bought two singles, not a matched pair, but both show flat across their spec'd freq response. 

As for tonal differences between the 2030 and 2031, they should be minimal considering the design and parts are similar, except for the lower freq extension of the 2031 due to a larger driver. Some folks in the forums are mentioning "tighter" midrange on the 2030 due to a smaller woofer (both models have the same crossover point). I don't know that this "tighter" midrange has even been measured.


----------



## DanTheMan

If there were a "tighter" MR, Wmax's measurements don't seem to show it. They should be very similar except where Eugovector already mentioned--impedance and ultimate bass output. It wouldn't be too hard to imagine perceiving a clearer MR d/t less bass compared side-by-side. Less things to pay attention to. Not saying that's really the case. For the money get both and see, then report back!  Send me the ones you don't like. BTW, I have 2 matched pairs of passives and they haven't come with a calibration curve. The one active I have measured had one. Each pair was very closely matched.

Dan


----------



## Prof.

A9X said:


> Haven't these just been superseded? I looked at some again last week and I had trouble finding them in stock in Sydney, and one of the dealers told me a new model was coming so no more stock on these.


You can still get the 2030p's online from Bavas Music..On special at the moment for $224.00!


----------



## Lucky7!

Prof. said:


> You can still get the 2030p's online from Bavas Music..On special at the moment for $224.00!


Cheers for that - as I am a VIP member, I get them for $222 woohoo!.


----------



## 1scienceguy

Here is my conflict - I own a pair of Paradigm mini monitors and a pair of JBL HLS610. Both sound great! Am I really going to find that the Behringer's "sound" that much better?


----------



## eugovector

1scienceguy said:


> Here is my conflict - I own a pair of Paradigm mini monitors and a pair of JBL HLS610. Both sound great! Am I really going to find that the Behringer's "sound" that much better?


Why are you looking to change speakers?


----------



## 1scienceguy

Great question. 

Isn't that part of the bain of our hobby.?.? Always looking for something that reproduces music closer to the original.?.? 

I have heard "flat" response speakers that sounded like an underwater orchestra and I have heard high end, inexpensive that sounds pretty good. Just seeing if these are the next pure sound that all if us are striving for.


----------



## eugovector

Only your ears will be able to tell you what sounds better, we won't be able to help you there. Both the paradigm and jbl are fine speakers, with that model of paradigm being more highly regarded than the jbl, I believe, but that doesn't mean you will like the behringers better or worse. 

From the tests, the behringers are very flat and accurate, sp if that sounds good to you, the behringers will be a good choice.


----------



## DanTheMan

The diminutive Behringers take down the mighty Orion: http://home.provide.net/~djcarlst/SLReport10.05.pdf

Dan


----------



## looneybomber

So has anyone done a comparison between the 3031's and the 2031's (active or passive)? I'm on the fence if the ribbon tweeter is worth it or not.


----------



## DanTheMan

Personally I'd say wait for the 1031A to become available depending on what exactly your goals are. The 3031 will still have the diffraction issues of the 2030 series--the ribbon won't fix it and the 1030 just aren't big enough for HT mains.

Dan


----------



## looneybomber

Well, these would be used as 2ch music listening on the computer. From looking at the graphs above, diffraction doesn't seem to be too bad with the b2031 compared to the 1030, but the 1030 does have a bit more of a BBC dip, which is something I perfer. 

I'm curious how they'd compare to a similar item like the KRK RP8G2? I don't know anything about KRK, but I see that name thrown around in forums when talking about Behringer monitors.


----------



## DanTheMan

B2031P:
















vs. the 1030A

















There is a significant difference in diffraction and it's audible. The cotton in the ports will help it and I'd bet it could be further improved but I haven't really tried. The 4 dB difference in the depth of the spectrogram was just to keep reflections out. The wider dispersion causes the reflections to enter in the graph earlier.

Edit: the 2030 measurements I've seen look essentially the same as the 2031 above.

Just a thought.

Dan


----------



## eugovector

Dan, can you edit your post above to specify what Models the graphs are measuring? The 1030a is obvious, but what's the model above it? 2030a?


----------



## DanTheMan

It's the 2031P. The 2030 measures the same essentially from what I've seen. It's the diffraction/reflection problem caused by the ports and the normal stuff caused by the baffle edge. the 1030 series has a sculpted baffle which greatly reduces diffraction as shown in the graphs. The 1030 also has a much wider dispersion and all the effects stated in Dr. Toole's book that comes with that--wider source, more envelopment, greater perceived clarity, etc... It's more of an audiophile sounding speaker as opposed to pro sound type of thing. The only problem I had listening to the 1030 was the fact that all types of flaws that are in recordings become more obvious. I thought my sample was broken until I was able to hear the flaws on other speakers. They were there the whole time, just nearly impossible to hear. It's a double edge sword with more detail revealing speakers. The 1030 is also limited wrt bass response and ultimate output. That's why I said wait until the 1031 comes to America. It should fix the 1030's shortcomings and still have it's advantages I hope. It may not be as good as far as advantages go d/t the larger woofer's narrower dispersion in the likely crossover region. If they can reduce the crossover frequency, it will retain the advantages. We'll just have to wait and see--or hear rather.

Dan


----------



## looneybomber

DanTheMan said:


> There is a significant difference in diffraction and it's audible.


Yeah, the off-axis isn't pretty but I was primarily concerned with the on-axis, so I wouldn't feel like I had been robbed of quality if I purchased the 2031's. However, the 1031's, from what I've seen online, should be around the same price and I won't have to worry about any diffraction issues. I'll probably just wait till I can get the 1031a's.


----------



## DanTheMan

You won't be able to avoid the off axis response completely as you'll be putting them in a room that is echoic. It becomes the "second look" that causes the improved detail discrimination. In fact it will play heavily on what you perceive of the tonality of the speaker--See Dr. Toole's book. I do absorb my first ipsilateral reflection and it's a HUGE help with reduce the audible effects of the diffraction that still remains post modding the baffles' ports. The 1030 still sounds smoother than the modified version of the 2031. Unfortunately you will hear deeper into the recording with them--or perhaps fortunately. Seems a lot of music I like isn't particularly well recorded.

Dan


----------



## Mika75

DanTheMan said:


> The 1030 is also limited wrt bass response and ultimate output. That's why I said wait until the 1031 comes to America. It should fix the 1030's shortcomings and still have it's advantages I hope. It may not be as good as far as advantages go d/t the larger woofer's narrower dispersion in the likely crossover region. If they can reduce the crossover frequency, it will retain the advantages. We'll just have to wait and see--or hear rather.



1031A 8" version has 113db max spl, and uses a 2.5khz crossover, 35hz - 20Khz response * $374.25

1030A 6" version has 110db max spl, and uses a 4.3khz crossover, 50hz - 20khz response * $299.00

*Current Best Price here in Australia

Enjoying this thread :T


----------



## DanTheMan

Check out the vertical polars:


















It doesn't graph like a 4.3k crossover unless there's something I'm not getting:foottap:, But those are impressive verticals! Best I've measured. Can't wait to try the 1031! The really kicked down the crossover according to their data.

I have little faith in manufacturer's specs especially if conditions are not described in detail. They tend to be optimistic.

Thanks for the info though,

Dan


----------



## DanTheMan

Is anyone planning on buying the B1031A? I'm certainly thinking about it just based on their other designs. It never hurts to have too many great speakers around.

Dan


----------



## eugovector

I'm a sucker for a bargain, so I'll probably pick up a set if I get a steal like I did with the 2031, but right now, I have more speakers than I know what to do with.


----------



## Mika75

DanTheMan said:


> Is anyone planning on buying the B1031A?


I'm considering it atm. 

Question, Dan - have u ran the 1030's crossed over to subs or just alone?

If so in sub-sat configuration did u see/measure more spl/dynamics in the sense they would be capable to do HT justice?


----------



## DanTheMan

Unfortunately just alone. Sub/sat they'd probably be alright, but I'd be a little nervous when T-Rex rears his ugly head. I'd be fine in a small room or with the B1031A I'd bet. My Grandma always said "you pay a lot for a little piece of mind." I really hope they don't screw them up. I don't know why I'm nervous, the rest of their line is great. Can't imagine they are looking to change. I'm pretty sure I'll pick up a pair just to see. What if I like them better than my pricey Mackie? Then what do I do........

For better verticals: http://www.parts-express.com/cbt36/

Dan


----------



## eugovector

You don't think the 1030/2030 could hit 105db in a typical room?


----------



## looneybomber

DanTheMan said:


> Is anyone planning on buying the B1031A? I'm certainly thinking about it just based on their other designs. It never hurts to have too many great speakers around.
> 
> Dan


Yeah I'm thinking about it. I'm in need of a compact audio system (meaning no external amp/reciever, sub, and minimal amount of wires) that will be used primarily for on-axis nearfield listening (2ft away or so). Powered speakers are my only choice.


----------



## DanTheMan

Eugo, I'd bet they could 'hit' it given a number of qualifiers. That's not really a typical HT goal. BBC LS3/5a or the Yammy NS10 start falling apart, sounding compressed and muddied around 90-95dBs. This design is not radically different and I wouldn't expect more than that from them. That certainly doesn't make it a bad design.

Dan


----------



## Ype

Looneybomber, I've only been able to hear the b2031A and b3031A side by side in a shop and I preferred the b3031A. Even with the obvious diffraction issues that I expected from the design, the stereo field seemed wider with the b3031A. I ended up ordering the b3030A and stuffed the ports.
So to me, the ribbon tweeters and kevlar woofers where worth it. However, by the looks of the b1030A measurements that Dan made for us they are fine speakers indeed. I wouldn't be able to place them properly on my desk due to the rear ported design, still, it is a shame I couldn't audition them at the time, something I will surely rectify in the future.

-Ype


----------



## DanTheMan

Thanks Ype. 

The thing is, the B1031A has a lot of promise. That's why I'd wait. Who knows if they'll live up to it, but we have no reason to think they won't. The frequencies the ports are playing at, radiation is omni anyways. 50Hz is nearly 7 meters or over 22ft--many times the size of an enclosure. They may load slightly better there--slightly--but they should have a switch on the back for that. The 1030 does.

Just something to think about,

Dan


----------



## Ype

I definitely agree it's better to wait Dan. I am still curious how the B3030A would measure up to the B1030A, as well as how the B1030A sounds.

Thank you for explaining the radiation pattern of the ports. My desk is against the wall with the left speaker next to a window and the right speaker against the side of a closet, so placing the deeper and rear ported B1030A would be a bit problematic. I would have no problem cutting down the low bass a bit though, just as I did by stuffing the ports of my B3030, so I would love to try them in my room and see if I can get the bass response sounding about right.

On a final note, at the moment I have the ports of my B3030 stuffed with cotton and only a little bit of air is escaping. What would be a good material to make a more permanent, yet removable, bassport plug with?

With kind regards,

-Ype


----------



## DanTheMan

Looneybomber, for nearfield, I can't see where the 1030 would be a bad idea. The 1031 might be even better though.

Ype,
There should be a 'bass cut' switch on the back of your speakers for placing them near the wall. In the 2031, you only loose about 1dB of bass by stuffing the ports.







I wouldn't think their would be too much difference with the 3030, but you never know until you measure. Subjectively, I did think he bass was reduced more than it graphed, but I didn't miss what I perceived in the sine sweep at all when listening to music. Don't ask me what that's about, but I think graphing ported boxes is not so simple. That's from a few ft away to reduce the amount of error in ultimate output. My ear was much closer to the box than the mic.

The little air coming out shouldn't be a problem--in fact, some might consider it an advantage with this alignment. 'Aperiodic" used to be(and still is) considered a great thing d/t its impedance smoothing.

I've been thinking about a more permanents and perhaps higher performance port stuffing, but haven't gotten too carried away with it. I'm not worried about the air leaking at all, but further diffraction reduction would be sweet. I was thinking about the open cell foam that is used for weather stripping, but essentially filling the area beside/above and a bit below the tweeter with it. If just stuffing the ports can take this:








And turn it into this:









Could filling the whole space improve it further?onder: I would think it would reduce output(undesired) a bit and smooth the response more, but I haven't tried yet. Next time I go to a hardware store I'll pick some up and see. I'll be mad if it is a decided improvement and could have been done a long time ago.:doh:

Dan


----------



## Ype

Thanks for posting the measurements again Dan. Seeing as the B3030A are the only speakers I own at the moment, I'm sure I'll find the time to mod them one way or the other. I certainly wouldn't mind sacrificing some bass and maximum SPL for a smoother response curve. Unfortunately, I cannot measure them, nor am I trained listener, so I'll wait for your graphs before I would consider doing anything more permanent.

Keep up the great work,

-Ype


----------



## DanTheMan

Looking round online it seems the 1031A won't be here in the States until next year!

Dan


----------



## looneybomber

I'm expanding my choices to KRK and M-audio. I'll keep scanning ebay for a good deal.


----------



## DanTheMan

You got a measurement rig out there in Topeka?:bigsmile:

Dan


----------



## looneybomber

DanTheMan said:


> You got a measurement rig out there in Topeka?:bigsmile:
> 
> Dan


Nope, no rig. Need an audio card compatible with REW and get my Beri mic calibrated.


----------



## DanTheMan

Does that mean you are planning on getting it done?

Dan


----------



## looneybomber

The audio card yes. The calibrating of the mic, not for a while. I guess I could measure a speaker of who's frequency response I already know and come up with rudimentary values of my own, but I figured why go through the trouble?

I presume you want me to get some measurements of whatever speakers I buy? I'm all for it, but I'm not going to be home till July, hence the reason I need some good, but not super expensive monitors to get me by.


----------



## DanTheMan

That's exactly what I was hoping for. I wish we could build an archive of loudspeaker polar responses. That would give people a nice database from which to make decisions.

Dan


----------



## DanTheMan

They're here: http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/672860-REG/Behringer_B1031A_Truth_B1031A_150W_8.html

Hmmm,

Dan


----------



## Ype

Thanks for the heads up Dan, has anyone in this thread ordered them yet? 
I am still amazed by the price/performace of my B3030A and don't have room for bigger monitor speakers at the moment, so I won't be getting them.

-Ype


----------



## DanTheMan

Look at this p to p: http://www.parts-express.com/pe/showdetl.cfm?Partnumber=248-6042

WOW!

Dan


----------



## eugovector

Fantastic price if your amp can handle 4ohms.


----------



## tcarcio

I was thinking about a pair of either the 2030p's or the 31p's for front heights. Anyone think one would be better then the other or is it a wash. Plus why is the 31 cheaper then the older 30?


----------



## DanTheMan

It's just a great sale. 

The 30s would be lighter...........

Dan


----------



## eugovector

The b2030p is not "older", it's smaller, lighter with a smaller driver, reduced frequency range at the low-end, and 8ohm resistance. Not sure about max output, but the 2030 would be the better choice for most .1 HT systems. Too bad they aren't $70.


----------



## doveman

I was wondering if anyone could say how the Diamond 9.1s compare to these? I can recall where now, but I do remember reading somewhere that people found the 9.1s quite flat and thus suitable to be used as reference monitors, but I'd be interested to know if anyone has any thoughts/experience on that. The 9.1s are around £99 and the best I could probably find the 2031Ps for is around £150 (or maybe even £170).


----------



## windjammer

After reading all the positive reports about the 2031p speakers I have decided to buy them .I want to use them in a 5.1 configuration.
Can I use a pioneer vsx 521 k av receiver with these speakers?:help:


----------



## Jungle Jack

windjammer said:


> After reading all the positive reports about the 2031p speakers I have decided to buy them .I want to use them in a 5.1 configuration.
> Can I use a pioneer vsx 521 k av receiver with these speakers?:help:


Hello,
Welcome to HTS. Unfortunately, you cannot use them as your AVR lacks Preamp Outputs. Preamp Outputs appear on the VSX-1121 and models upmarket of it. You can use the non Active Behringers, but I am not sure the 521 has enough power to drive them to their full potential.
Cheers,
JJ


----------



## DeuceTrinal

Actually, the 2031P model is passive speaker. However, it is also a 4 ohm speaker, and the VSX521k is only rated for 6 ohm speakers. That means it would probably work, but you'd risk overheating or damaging the receiver (or just going into protect mode), especially at higher volumes. Not a recommended combo. Look for speakers that are 6 or 8 ohms instead.


----------



## windjammer

I did not buy the receiver yet so still time enough to look for one that can work with the 2031P.
How about the Pioneer VSX-1020-K ? I can get one for a good price.
Or can someone recommend a (inexpensive) av receiver that i can use


----------



## Matt34

I would stick with the B2030P when using the lower teir receivers and supplement them with a sub when you can.


----------



## windjammer

after reading a lot on the net i think i will buy the 2031 active speakers. i already have a set of active speakers(linkwitz pluto) and the behringers could be good for a 5.1 set up as rear speakers.


----------



## Danny Richie

For what it is worth. There is a thread on the passive version of these over in my forum. 

http://www.hometheatershack.com/for...ire-capacitors-resistors-make-difference.html

If you read the thread you will see that there is a pair being offered up for a free demo. They were used as a test bed for comparing the quality of crossover parts. And the demo was set up to allow people to hear for themselves what type of differences can be had from higher quality parts.


----------



## windjammer

Great initiative, too bad i live in Thailand . Shipping (and tax) would cost too much.


----------



## DieselPowered

I had some behringer pro audio gear in the past. The pmx2000 pieered mixer sounded good, but lacked in the amplifier department. No bottom end sound compared to some others I used. I would also point out that getting into an Atmos setup with discreet ceiling speakers is money well spent. I was a professional DJ for ten years, and I've been into home theatre since stereo/before surround sound. I can truly say Atmos is the first thing that has impressed me since the inception of 5.1. Seriously; 5.1.2. Is far better than 7.1 or anything before it. You can get a pioneer VSX1131 for under $300 on eBay. Do that then get speakers to go with it. I would also point you in the direction of JBL Northridge, or studio series stuff. You can get it cheap used, and they sound great. Hope this helps

Sent from my XT1254 using Tapatalk


----------

