# Best suggestion for EQ device for Room Correction (No Sub) that REW can control



## deezldub (Nov 4, 2011)

Looking to add a device to experiment with room correction, Have REW and its inputs and all taken care of, And looking to utilize REW to correct a room. 

Have previously used a DEQ2496 in room correction mode, and while interesting I wasn't completely thrilled, but after reading tons here in the last few days, I think its time to do more with REW and manually tweak to correct the system and being able to load the data to the eq via PC would facilitate the process (Im geeky too so that feeds the inner geek)

Im comparing mainly the DSP1124P (and its apparent equal/replacement the FBQ1000) and the FBQ2496, and the MiniDSP.

I have Midi control so that isnt a concern, and would really prefer a direct control from REW so am leaning toward the behringer products instead of the interim steps that the minidsp would require.

Is there any need for the 20 filters/channel and 10-44k of the FBQ2496 vs the 12 filters/channel and 20-20k of the DSP1124P/FBQ1000?

Is there a spec that I am missing that would make one a better fit over the other if the primary concern is full room correction and secondary desire of loading from REW direcly.

Price difference isnt a concern, so from that aspect they are all equal

Any sonic differences to be concerned about?

Thanks,

Steve


----------



## Wayne A. Pflughaupt (Apr 13, 2006)

Welcome to the Forum, Steve!

Aside from the ones you mentioned, I don’t know of many EQs that are MIDI controlled that aren’t higher-priced pro gear. But I would pass on the FBQ2496 or DSP1124. They are too noisy. I haven’t used a FBQ1000, but I still wouldn’t trust it, just based on the performance of its predecessor.

The Mini DSP has received good reviews, if you can get past its rather unfriendly connections scheme. 

But really, MIDI isn’t all that necessary, not when you can use REW’s RTA feature and tweak filters in real time. Passing on MIDI gives you a lot more hardware options. You might want to click back a page and take a look at the “BFD Alternatives” thread for more full-range options.




> Is there any need for the 20 filters/channel and 10-44k of the FBQ2496 vs the 12 filters/channel and 20-20k of the DSP1124P/FBQ1000?


Probably not. Typically in the sub range only a few filters are needed, typically less than six. In the upper frequencies (above ~100 Hz) you don’t need a lot of filters either, as you are only using broad filters to address general trends in response, not all the little ripples. 

For instance, in the graph below the blue and green traces could use a broad lift in the 3 kHz range, and in the 250 Hz range. So in this case a couple of filters are all that would be needed to get an audible improvement in sound quality.










So, the only way any appreciable amount of the 12 or 20 filters would be needed would be if a single EQ was being used full range, for both the main speakers and the subwoofer. But that’s an unusual scenario. More typically the sub and mains have dedicated equalizers, so typically 6 filters or less (per EQ) is all that is needed.

Regards,
Wayne


----------



## deezldub (Nov 4, 2011)

I guess I was enamored with the tweak and load of the midi to behringer device.

So in relation to your suggestion, the MiniDsp is capable of doing a full spectrum correction, as in it has sufficient filter choices, adjustement abilities and range for full correction? I guess that I am lost on the "mini" part of minidsp. TIme to do more reading...


----------



## KalaniP (Dec 17, 2008)

Wayne A. Pflughaupt said:


> Aside from the ones you mentioned, I don’t know of many EQs that are MIDI controlled that aren’t higher-priced pro gear. But I would pass on the FBQ2496 or DSP1124. They are too noisy. I haven’t used a FBQ1000, but I still wouldn’t trust it, just based on the performance of its predecessor.
> 
> The Mini DSP has received good reviews, if you can get past its rather unfriendly connections scheme.
> 
> But really, MIDI isn’t all that necessary, not when you can use REW’s RTA feature and tweak filters in real time. Passing on MIDI gives you a lot more hardware options. You might want to click back a page and take a look at the “BFD Alternatives” thread for more full-range options.


Sorry to piggy back on this post, but it's relevant to one I was preparing to make as well as my needs and the OPs seem similar. Any chance I can convince you to boil down the BFD alternatives thread to a few reasonably-priced (let's say, no more than $300, preferably price-comparable to the BFD) devices that would be cleaner than the BFD but otherwise provide similar flexibility? I've read over the thread, but there's not a huge amount there outside of the discontinued product recommendations.  Just looking for sub EQ. I don't have Midi so that's definitely not a requirement.

Edit: Reading up a bit, the MiniDSP looked like a great option, right up until I read the part about needing a "Basic understanding of the biquad filter programming"... :unbelievable:


----------



## Wayne A. Pflughaupt (Apr 13, 2006)

> Just looking for sub EQ.


In that case, why not just stick with the BFD? “Clean” isn’t really relevant with subwoofers and you won't find anything cheaper.

Regards,
Wayne


----------



## KalaniP (Dec 17, 2008)

Wayne A. Pflughaupt said:


> In that case, why not just stick with the BFD? “Clean” isn’t really relevant with subwoofers and you won't find anything cheaper.
> 
> Regards,
> Wayne


That's fine, I was more responding to your comment above that "They [the BFDs] are too noisy."

Are you saying they are just too noisy for full room correction (which is something I would not want to entirely rule out), but not sub EQ?

I don't need something cheaper than the BFD, I just don't want to pay a LOT more. Is there something in the $300 and under range that would be more suitable to room correction (and sub EQ also, of course)?


----------



## deezldub (Nov 4, 2011)

Ok, so MiniDSP, a AC to USB adaptor to keep it powered, and appropriate cabling. The Mini Digi if I wish to keep it all digital and avoid the A/D D/A conversion. THat covers the hardware, but which plugin if I am NOT going to use it as a crossover? I read that the advanced plugins, but does that imply that ANY of the advanced ones will work and ignore the crossover settings? Is there one that is more appropriate for room correction if I am NOT wishing to use as a crossover or not merely correct a sub but run for whole room response?


----------



## Wayne A. Pflughaupt (Apr 13, 2006)

KalaniP said:


> That's fine, I was more responding to your comment above that "They [the BFDs] are too noisy."
> 
> Are you saying they are just too noisy for full room correction (which is something I would not want to entirely rule out), but not sub EQ?


Yes, it’s fine for subs, but for full range it’s kinda noisy with the rear switch in the +4 setting. It’s reasonably quiet in the -10 position, but it probably won’t be hard to drive it into clipping with the switch in that position. I once connected the BFD to my mains to compare it to a higher-end EQ, and it wasn’t working for me. Strangely, I couldn’t really put my finger on why I didn’t like it (usually I have no trouble identifying something that’s gritty or harsh, lacking in the high end, etc.), but I felt my other EQ had the edge in sound quality.




> I don't need something cheaper than the BFD, I just don't want to pay a LOT more. Is there something in the $300 and under range that would be more suitable to room correction (and sub EQ also, of course)?


 With EQ functions in pro audio increasingly being rolled into digital speaker processors and even digital mixing consoles, the outboard equalizer, both digital and analog, is going the way of the dinosaur. So used, retired products are where you’re going to find the biggest selection of them.

That said, it’s hard to beat the BFD for “bang for the buck” for equalizing subwoofers. An analog EQ can dial in more precise filters, since they can hit any frequency or bandwidth, while a digital EQ by necessity has pre-programmed “stops” or “steps” at only certain frequencies. As far as digital EQs go, the BFD has 1/60-octave resolution, which means it has 60 frequency “stops” for each octave. I don’t know of another digital EQ with resolution as fine as that (although naturally I’m not familiar with every digital EQ that’s ever been offered). Digital EQs also have the same “stops” when dialing in bandwidth settings.

If you want something that’s clean enough for full-range, you might check the Yamaha YDP2006 parametric. It’s a high end EQ that listed for about $2000 when they were new, but if you’re patient you can get them on eBay these days for around $150 or even less. (You want one that was in a permanent installation, not one that was in touring rack or from a gear rental department.) They don’t have the resolution the BFD has – they’re about 1/25-octave, IIR – but I’ve had no problems EQing my sub with one. They have more features than the BFD, they’re dead quiet, and actually look pretty decent in a home rack (assuming you have black equipment). You can find a few links with more information on the YDP2006 in the “BFD Alternatives” sticky thread.

Regards,
Wayne


----------



## KalaniP (Dec 17, 2008)

Thanks! :T


----------

