Arny Krueger wrote:
"MD" wrote in message
...

I own a Behringer Unit that allows me make parametric DSP changes to each
of my room modes (all were measured by plotting individual tones - in 1hz
increments - not warble tones etc)

I love what the unit does and it's negatives are very small (a small
amount of noise added and the input has a hard time with high line level
inputs. I fixed this by changing the final gain stage of my DAC)

I have heard the Rives in a demo and liked it. Was never able to compare
it to the Behringer


I have never heard the Tact T or any other digital correction system


Here's my question - Why would I spend more than the $150 I spent on the
Behringer? I can digitally set freq (within 1hz) set bandwidth (within a
few hz) and set gain - all with a DSP that runs at 24 bit - 46khz 64/128
oversampling.


There's a new model that runs at 24/96 and handles more modes

http://www.behringer.com/FBQ2496/index.cfm?lang=ENG


It costs less than $90 more than the one you have.


If the answer is that the other units do this at a higher frequency -
would i be able to hear the difference (red book CDs) and I I could would
I pay thousands more? Now that Behringer has a new unit out that has
96khz sampling and is only $400 - wouldn't I buy that?


OK, you are ahead of me! ;-) In the U.S. The SRP of the new box is still
$200. The old 48 KHz model has a street price under $120.


And please - save me the answers where you assume that cheaper - pro-audio
gear is crap - unless you have heard it.


The problem I have with your proposed solution is more generalized. It is
generally agreed that acoustical problems like standing waves are better
addressed in the acoustical domain. For example, an equalizer is a potential
solution for acoustical modes that create peaks, but it is going to be a lot
less sucessful addressing deep nulls.

So, if you've got problems with room modes, I'd be more comfortable if you
were adressing them with products like these:

http://www.realtraps.com/


I don't like analog EQs because their center freq and bandwidth are
fixed and rarely coincide exactly with the center freq (and assoc
bandwidth) of the peaks and nulls one actually has in their room. For
instance I have peaks at 48, 68 and 130 hz - but a null at 52hz. Ana
analog EQ would not be able to deal with this unless in had a huge
amount of narrow bands

Passive room treatment for this (not reflections) seems also very
problematic to me because it's more indiscriminate than the analog EQ.
It will absorb anything in it's range (maybe not linearly) and absorb
the nulls as well.