Behringer products: reliability???

[guitarharv52]

Not to try to come to their defense too much, but if they sell ten times as much stuff as another company, and quility is identical, and they refurb the same percentage of returns as another company, they will have ten times as many refurbs. Behringer sells a TON of stuff.

 

 

That is true.It would be interesting to know the percentage of returns of Behringer versus Peavey or Yamaha who both offer gear in that price range.

[W. M. Hellinger]

I'm just going on how much of it I actually see being used. Of course, that is anecdotal.

 

Good word "anecdotal".

 

So... I enjoy an occasional cigar (ok, maybe a little more than ocasssionally). The #1 selling brand of cigar in this region is/are Swisher Sweets. IMO, Swisher Sweets are the bottom of the barrel, and depending on where you buy, they are far from the best bang for the buck (cause you can't hardly smoke more than a third of one before gagging and pitching it in the wood stove)... and any buzz is more like getting sick from spinning around on a bar stool too fast and too long, but they do enjoy extremely wide spread and high profile marketing at retail outlets in this area.

[agedhorse]

damn... anybody know how to get solder out of the fabric of their jeans?

Yeah but you don't want to be wearing them when you do it! Solder wick and a little liquid flux works wonders provided the leg isn't installed in the jeans during the operation.

[aw_dee_o]

W.M. Hellinger: Not to sidetrack the thread, but what kind of performance attributes do EAW speakers have over any other "generic" speakers outside of potentially higher power handling and potentially higher maximum spl capacity? They won't image or "soundstage" for {censored}, their cabinets suffer from diffractional losses and less than optimal driver mounting, they are severely bandwidth limited, they use relatively "generic" internal crossover parts and wiring, have two huge impedance peaks at resonance, etc... In effect, they are nothing special what so ever when looking at the grander scheme of things, especially for the prices that they charge.

On top of that, you wanted to conduct the speaker cabling test using some cheap switching amplifier as a point of reference. Anybody that knows anything about audio electronics and has ever seen one of these types of amps on a spectrum analyzer or audio analyzer knows what a piece of crap that they are. Then again, unless one has actually heard a truly well designed Class A or very richly biased Class AB amp, they might not know the difference. I know that i didn't for many years and it was a real eye / ear / thought process awakening for me.

Like i said, i would have rather seen someone volunteer to perform this test with reasonably well set up "mid-fi" stereo gear than the "professional" gear that you wanted to use. I'm quite certain that the "mid-fi" stereo gear would not only sound more natural playing a wider variety of music, but also be more revealing. It just wouldn't play as loud for as long of a period of time as the lower resolution "pro" gear.

Outside of that, i've already explained why i have the interest in certain Behringer models that i do. Had you taken the time to read all of the thread, or even just my specific posts in the thread, you would have known why.

Now, can we get back on subject??? Sean

[agedhorse]

Like i said, i would have rather seen someone volunteer to perform this test with reasonably well set up "mid-fi" stereo gear than the "professional" gear that you wanted to use. I'm quite certain that the "mid-fi" stereo gear would not only sound more natural playing a wider variety of music, but also be more revealing. It just wouldn't play as loud for as long of a period of time as the lower resolution "pro" gear.

 

 

This is a PRO AUDIO forum. I wouldn't suggest testing a pick-up truck against the tractor-trailer rig in a long-haul forum... the pickup just wouldn't cut pulling a 40 ton load regardless of it's smooth ride and plush interior.

[W. M. Hellinger]

There are differences between US and Euro units, as they use different mains power.

 

 

On some models, I believe there is a possibility that the only difference in the mains power is the shape of the cord end.

 

Which might allude to the reported differences in performance... since I'm thinking the units running on 117v would draw twice the current as the units running on 220v, and therefore, if the amperage capacity of the components were right on the ragged edge for 117v operation, they would possibly enjoy greater longevity operating on 220v?

 

Maybe Andy can offer some insight on this?

[agedhorse]

There are a couple of possible and common differences between 115 and 230 volt units (with linear supplies), the first and most noticeable being that many 230 volt countries operate at 50Hz, which increases the demands on the transformer's core. 50Hz operation also increases the amount (depth) and frequency (period) of the ripple since there is approx. 20% less recharges per second, so the rails will discharge (fall) deeper at 50Hz. Power supplies must take this into account.

On small transformers, often only one primary winding will be used for 115 volt operation, so the primary losses will be 4x when operated this way (current doubles and there's the squared factor involved) so this must be taken into account as well.

Other differences are the primary fuse size, spark killer capacitor across the power switch (if used), and safety clearances. Then there's the agency approvals like UL, CE, CSA, C-Tick and FCC (oh wait a minute here... FCC was ignored on THOSE products).

[W. M. Hellinger]

W.M. Hellinger: Not to sidetrack the thread, but what kind of performance attributes do EAW speakers have over any other "generic" speakers outside of potentially higher power handling and potentially higher maximum spl capacity? They won't image or "soundstage" for {censored}, their cabinets suffer from diffractional losses and less than optimal driver mounting, they are severely bandwidth limited, they use relatively "generic" internal crossover parts and wiring, have two huge impedance peaks at resonance, etc... In effect, they are nothing special what so ever when looking at the grander scheme of things, especially for the prices that they charge. On top of that, you wanted to conduct the speaker cabling test using some cheap switching amplifier as a point of reference. Anybody that knows anything about audio electronics and has ever seen one of these types of amps on a spectrum analyzer or audio analyzer knows what a piece of crap that they are. Then again, unless one has actually heard a truly well designed Class A or very richly biased Class AB amp, they might not know the difference. I know that i didn't for many years and it was a real eye / ear / thought process awakening for me. Like i said, i would have rather seen someone volunteer to perform this test with reasonably well set up "mid-fi" stereo gear than the "professional" gear that you wanted to use. I'm quite certain that the "mid-fi" stereo gear would not only sound more natural playing a wider variety of music, but also be more revealing. It just wouldn't play as loud for as long of a period of time as the lower resolution "pro" gear. Outside of that, i've already explained why i have the interest in certain Behringer models that i do. Had you taken the time to read all of the thread, or even just my specific posts in the thread, you would have known why. Now, can we get back on subject??? Sean

 

Easy there partner.

 

Your Behringer post sent mixed messages considering some of your previous posts. Maybe you can hook the right cable, and right isolation transformer to Behringer gear and show us all up... I dunno. I'm not completely blind yet, so obviously I haven't seen everything yet.

 

I believe life it too difficult and short to hamstring yourself with cheap tools. As a contractor, you are judged by the tools you bring to the job. But, I understand suitability for the job at-hand. My main tool box is 90%+ Snap-on, but I have a double rack of Harbor Freight 1 1/2" to 3" combination end-wrenches hanging on the wall. Why the discrepency? Cause, the Snap-on's are suitable (IMO) for the job they do, and the Harbor Freight tools are suitable (IMO) for the job they do. Both nameplates have proven to be cost effective for their relative applications. If I needed Snap-on 1 1/2" to 3" combination end-wrenches to do the job, that is what would be hanging on my wall... but I don't... hence the Harbor Freight wrenches.

 

I own 3 ea. Magliner handtrucks @ approx. $250 ea. I also own 8 ea. Cosco handtrucks @ approx. $35 ea. Why? Cause each type of tool seems best suited to the job, and have proven to be the most cost effective for the application.

 

I could go on and on. The point is: As a contractor you've gotta use cost effective tools... and do a cost effective job that meets (preferrably exceeds) the customer's expectations. That's the name of the game.

 

I don't own ANY Behringer gear. I've owned a few Behringer pieces over the years, and I've worked with quite a bit of Behringer gear. IMO: Here's the issues I have with Behringer gear in general:

 

1) Behringer's MO of "steal it and deal it". I just don't like that. I don't mind that one manufacture emulates another manufacture's good design. Hey, there's lot's of manufactures making screwdrivers. Blatent copying of the tradedress and stove-piping the guts is just wrong. Besides that... the whole Squire of Gotheos thing, where they get the visual right, but lacking in the functional substance is just lame.

 

2) Behringer shoves literally piles of gear out into the marketplace. I believe Behringer debuted 70+ new products at the 2005 Namm show alone. Were years of concept, design, refinement, testing, and blood, sweat, and tears put into these products before marketing? I generally don't think so. I believe the promo literature possibly proceeds production runs by months. I have a better feeling about manufactures who do fewer well thought-out and refined products than manufactures who seem hell bent on offering every conceivable flavor imaginable. I prefer vanilla done well than 735 flavors done mediocre. But, that's just me. I'm a meat and potatoes guy. No doubt there's a market for the 3 isles of cold cereal at the local grocery store.

 

3) Behringer gear is generally loaded with features, but lacks in functional art IMO. I'd rather have 1/10th the features, but what's there is exactly what I need to do the job, rather than loaded with features that I'll doubtfully use, and just encumber getting the job done. I don't like electric windows either, cause it's just more stuff to go wrong. But I like a mechanical wing window.

 

4) Behringer's product support is lackluster IMO.

 

I run a lot of Meyer, Harmon, EAW (and EWI of-course:) ) products. Why? Cause they seem to be the tools for the job... they do it cost effectively, and they deliver the performance that meets my personal standards. And... reflecting on that: I've been doing what I do for about 3 decades... without taking a prolonged hiatus. I doubt that would have been the case if I'd been working with tools that frustrated me, or didn't prove to be up to the task year after year... across the spectrum of jobs I've been involved with.

 

If I read you right, your impression is that basically most, if not all SR application products are far from... well... audiophile first cabin standards... so if it's all crap anyway, I guess it makes sense to consider the seemingly widely sold crap. As a contractor, I doubt you'll find the Behringer nameplate will be an assett. However, I do believe Behringer makes some of the better low purchase price paraprofessional/conusmer oriented products on the market. I believe "that" is Behringer's intent. The purchase price and features are attractive... no doubt about it. And, I gotta give Uli credit: At least the stuff he's selling is produced in his factory (TMU: To My Understanding)... and he isn't just putting his name of something flowing off somebody else's conveyor belt. And... I believe Uli is actually taking a leading role in his company. He is a musician and he does perform... and I suspect he could probably walk up to any piece of gear his company produces and push the right buttons, and twirl the knobs in a manner that is suitable for the situation. Based on that, Behinger is a tick (or many ticks) above other nameplates I can think of.

[Craig Vecchione]

 

W.M. Hellinger: Not to sidetrack the thread, but what kind of performance attributes do EAW speakers have over any other "generic" speakers outside of potentially higher power handling and potentially higher maximum spl capacity? They won't image or "soundstage" for {censored}, their cabinets suffer from diffractional losses and less than optimal driver mounting, they are severely bandwidth limited, they use relatively "generic" internal crossover parts and wiring, have two huge impedance peaks at resonance, etc... In effect, they are nothing special what so ever when looking at the grander scheme of things, especially for the prices that they charge. On top of that, you wanted to conduct the speaker cabling test using some cheap switching amplifier as a point of reference. Anybody that knows anything about audio electronics and has ever seen one of these types of amps on a spectrum analyzer or audio analyzer knows what a piece of crap that they are. Then again, unless one has actually heard a truly well designed Class A or very richly biased Class AB amp, they might not know the difference. I know that i didn't for many years and it was a real eye / ear / thought process awakening for me. Like i said, i would have rather seen someone volunteer to perform this test with reasonably well set up "mid-fi" stereo gear than the "professional" gear that you wanted to use. I'm quite certain that the "mid-fi" stereo gear would not only sound more natural playing a wider variety of music, but also be more revealing. It just wouldn't play as loud for as long of a period of time as the lower resolution "pro" gear. Outside of that, i've already explained why i have the interest in certain Behringer models that i do. Had you taken the time to read all of the thread, or even just my specific posts in the thread, you would have known why. Now, can we get back on subject??? Sean >

 

 

 

So.....what SR speakers *do* you like????

[W. M. Hellinger]

So.....what SR speakers *do* you like????

*that* is what I've been thinking all along.

Well... that... plus all the other stuff that goes along with *that*.

This old dog is open to new tricks. Show me better, faster, cheaper.

[W. M. Hellinger]

So.....what SR speakers *do* you like????

Maybe Behringer?

This all seems really contridictory to me.

[Craig Vecchione]

You're getting that vibe too????

[Craig Vecchione]

 

On some models, I believe there is a possibility that the only difference in the mains power is the shape of the cord end. Which might allude to the reported differences in performance... since I'm thinking the units running on 117v would draw twice the current as the units running on 220v, and therefore, if the amperage capacity of the components were right on the ragged edge for 117v operation, they would possibly enjoy greater longevity operating on 220v? Maybe Andy can offer some insight on this?

 

 

Actually my thoughts were more along lines of the fact that the two different markets require different power, it would mean the company has to inventory two different model numbers...each would ostensibly have otherwise identical devices that ostensibly varied only in power supply. However, since Uli has demonstrated willingness to risk lawsuits from the US, even FCC fines, it seems reasonable to think he'd have little or no problem with saving money by shortcutting the US models' QC and parts quality. A guy who can't be bothered paying the relatively paltry sum to get FCC certs on US devices doesn't strike me as someone who'd think twice about cutting corners on parts or QC for a given (large) market.

[W. M. Hellinger]

Actually my thoughts were more along lines of the fact that the two different markets require different power, it would mean the company has to inventory two different model numbers...each would ostensibly have otherwise identical devices that ostensibly varied only in power supply. However, since Uli has demonstrated willingness to risk lawsuits from the US, even FCC fines, it seems reasonable to think he'd have little or no problem with saving money by shortcutting the US models' QC and parts quality. A guy who can't be bothered paying the relatively paltry sum to get FCC certs on US devices doesn't strike me as someone who'd think twice about cutting corners on parts or QC for a given (large) market.

 

uh... I dunno 'bout all of that, but what I was alluding to is that a more robust power supply and stuff is needed to operate off-a 117v AC as compaired to 220v AC... heavier gauge wire, higher wattage resistors, heavier traces, etc... Ok... so I'm sitting in the pencil pusher's chair... looking at costs and engineer's calculations. 220v stuff is serious business... 117v is less serious... and those darn American's are stuck on this 117v AC stuff... why don't they get with the program and get some real power? 7/8th's of the world operates on 220v, while those darn Americans (and a few other back-water countries) run on 117v... but those darn Americans are the #1 economy in the world... uh.... Ok, we can meet a nice world pricing point operating this stuff on 220v by using what the engineers recommend... but stepping up to the plate to do what's needed for 117v operation is gonna cost more $$$$$$.$$... and there goes the neighborhood... and the Corenthiean Leather seats on my new Beemer. Ok... let's get the engineers in here... "Look guys... can't we trim that wattage rating on the 100 million resistors we're gonna use for the 117v operation stuff just a bit... say yes, ok? uh... the traces have gotta be this fat to do 117v as well as 220v... uh... well crap, that's gonna cost some real money to guss it up to 117 capabilities, and we don't want to run production on two sets of boards... cause there goes the neighborhood again... can we meet 1/2 way in between? Trust me, everything's gonna be ok." (hot seat engineering is different than climate controlled engineering).

 

That's just my gut feeling.

[aw_dee_o]

I don't really know of any commercially produced SR speakers that i really like or have a great amount of respect for. As mentioned and in my opinion, even the EAW's, which many seem to worship, are pretty poorly designed when looking at the big picture. Given the designs of some of their smaller, simpler models, i can't see them doing all that well with their larger models. If you look at their spec's, they pretty much confirm my suspicions.

http://www.musicgoround.com/gear/inventorydetails.asp?id=530784

With all of that in mind, i do have some old custom made Rudy Bozak mid column's that work pretty well for what they are. Then again, Rudy was an "audiophile" by nature and had relatively good ears, so it is not strange that i might like his products and design philosophy. Even so, i'm probably going to gut the cabinets that i have and use the drivers in an array that is more to my liking. They should work even better when i'm done with them. I intend to improve their dispersion characteristics, reduce diffraction, flatten their power bandwidth and improve their transient response. While this may sound like i'm going to re-design the entire speaker, i'm really only re-designing the cabinet and the way that the drivers are mounted / configured. As previously mentioned, most SR speakers SUCK in those regards !!!

Here's a link discussing some of the old Bozak stuff. Most people, even many Pro's, aren't familiar with this gear. As previously mentioned, Rudy Bozak spent most of his time catering to audiophiles and the small segment of Sound Reinforcement profession that was more concerned with quality over quantity. If you dig further back in the link provided, the guys are actually talking about Bozak's home systems and somehow ended up talking about their professional models.

http://www.live-audio.com/messages/archive2/34881.html

As discussed in this thread, Bozak's were the main speakers used at Ravinia for all their large scale Orchestral reproductions and were also to be found at the Hollywood Bowl and the NY Philharmonic / Metropolitan Opera. According to this person, 12 of the cabinets being discussed were enough to cover 24 acres of outdoor venue with good volume and exceptional sound quality when run in tri-amped mode.

The mid-woofer columns described in that thread had six 8" mid-woofers per cabinet. The columns that i have make use of eight of the same aluminum coned neoprene coated mid-woofers. Rudy chose aluminum for the low mass / high rigidity factor, but he didn't like how much aluminum cones "rang" once excited. As such, he took to coating the cones with neoprene, which not only weatherproofed the aluminum and kept it from pitting, but also acted as an acoustic damper. This reduced the ringing to a controllable level without adding a ton of cone mass, which would have slowed the drivers down and reduced their transient capabilities.

I was told that the cabinets that i have actually came from Ravinia. As such, either the gentleman in that thread is mistaken on the driver count or i was lied to. Given the scarcity of these cabinets i.e. they were all hand built special order items, and the fact that i live only a short distance from Ravinia, leads me to believe that these were Ravinia's old units. Either way, i don't care where they came from, all i know is that they sound kick-ass and that i got a TREMENDOUS deal on them.

I would tend to agree with the comments in that thread about needing subs. I only run these to about 150 - 200 Hz, as this improves their transient response, power handling and cleans up the upper mids a bit. I do not have the aforementioned Bozak upper midrange or HF sections, only the mid-woofer sections. As such, i can't comment on how the higher frequency cabinets worked, but from what i know about dispersion characteristics, transient response and cone break-up, i would venture to say that they probably sounded pretty damn good. I guess that's why they were able to use them for Orchestral reproduction where there are vast differences in dynamic range, transients and a much wider than average frequency response is required.

As far as Behringer speakers go, i don't think that i would be interested in any of them. That is, unless they were next to free Sean