Bass EQ - alternatives to BFD? (1 Viewer)

[Ken Woodrow]

I realize many here are apologists of the Behringer Feedback Destroyer, but I'm looking for an alternative that's easier to set up and configure.

I only need one or two filters (ideally parametric with adjustable Q) that I can set and forget.

I have the ETF software and a microphone, so I can measure in-room response accurately.

Any suggestions?

TIA,
Ken

 

[Wayne A. Pflughaupt]

An analog parametric EQ – Ashly PQX-571, Rane PE-17, Symetrix 551, etc. However, any of these will cost more used than the BFD does new.

If you only need a couple filters, I have “cheap and dirty” idea I’ve been kicking for a while, but haven’t pursued. You can pick up Alpine 3401 or 3402 car audio parametric EQs on e-bay, often for $100 or less.

They have fixed-range bandwidth filters, so they are not a flexible as the models mentioned above. However, if you daisy-chain the front and rear channels you would have three filters available in the operating range for most home subs.

You could power it with a 9-to-12v AC adapter of the proper amperage (use the fuse rating for a guideline). Just watch out for polarity and operating (i.e., under-load) voltage; most adapters put out more than their rated voltage.

Regards,
Wayne A. Pflughaupt

 

[Chris Tsutsui]

I suggest researching room treatments such as "bass traps" and helmholtz resonators. These can help EQ the bass response throughout the entire room unlike equalizers.
Also, I recommend reading the "white papers" on bass over at http://www.harman.com/ to learn how to position loud speakers to cancel standing waves. Think about it, if you cancel out the standing waves there'd be no need for a parametric EQ.
At my site I have a room mode calculator, and response graph worksheet for download. You can also see how I built some acoustic dampening panels if you wish.

 

[Ken Woodrow]

Thank you both for the excellent suggestions. Chris, your site is full of information that will take me some time to digest. I guess I never seriously considered using acoustic panels instead of EQ due to overriding WAF concerns. By the same token, given the small size of my room (10' x 17' with 7'5" ceilings), I don't have much flexibility in sub placement. But reading your site has convinced me to at least experiment with different placement options and perhaps with acoustic treatment.

Chris, you have a PM, btw.

Thanks -
Ken

 

[Kevin C Brown]

I personally don't think that a BFD is that hard to set up, and I believe that it's a lot more "precise" than the Rane and Symetrix units, for example.

The Rane and Symetrix units have knobs, which have terrible resolution, i.e., a little twiddle on the knob and you just changed your target freq by 5 - 10 Hz. (Although you can use a discrete test tone CD to fine tune it.)

On the BFD, you pick the exact freq, you pick the the amount of attentuation, and you pick the exact width of the effect around the target freq.

And, you can get a BFD for $119. The Rane at least, goes for $300 or so.

There's also the ART 351 (?), but I'm not as familiar with that one...

 

[Chris Carswell]

I've got the ART 351. Very easy to use. I'm just now getting around to setting it up so I'll get back to you or you can email me later.
-Chris

 

[Geoff L]

The BFD is simply the best deal going for EQ-ing a sub. It can seem complicated at first but is really very easy to use. There is a page someware that one of the members put up dealing with a step by step walk through to it's use. Others here also contributed to this page. It's excellent and had wished I found it when I got my BFD.

The eq's mentioned can help but are more difficult to dial in correctly and are nowhere a precise as the BFD. Not saying their bad products by any means!

Ebay is a good place to pick up a parametric with a few or many filters but many times a nice unit will in the end cost nearly what the BFD dose to begin with. Also the analoge parametrics with knobs or slides can be frustrating to dial exact freq, width, gain and or cut as I've just recently found out with an very nice older parametric model I just recently picked up.

Long storie short, I prefer the BFD. But having active software allowing you to see whats happing as you dial in could make the others much easier to use. I don't have this, and measurments have to be taken the hard way and makes for a long job. This where the BFD wins hands down. Exact freq, width, gain or cut can be dialed in....No guessing.


Wayne P.
Thanks for your help Wyane, your idea & help is working like a charm!

Geoff

 

[Warren_Sc]

Why would someone apologize for the BFD? I thought it was supposed tp be a good product?

Thanks,