Re: EQ ot

[SoundFNR@aol.com]

>       He had a Behringer GEQ3102 on sale for $140, $10 less than 
>Musician's 
>  This is your basic dual channel 31 band EQ.  
>    Question: 
>  Will they destroy the otherwise pristine studio sound 
>  that I currently have?

If it's pristine now then why fix it?
Graphic EQs are primarily for sorting out problems.
The cheaper units won't even have a pristine bypass 
 
>       Second question:  He also has the Behringer Ultra Q Tube Processor 
>(T 
> 1951) for sale at $189
>  parametric EQ with Sovtek tubes.  How quiet is it?  Do the tubes 
> need to be upgraded to
>  other ones to improve the overall sound?  I noticed on Harmony Central 
that 
> some people were
>  complaining about the tubes on another Behringer unit (the T1952 Tube 
> Composer) saying that the
>  tubes were under powered (>100v) at less than their optimal working 
voltage (
> circa 300v).  Do
>  tubes need to be run at full power to work well?  Or is that only for 
>some 
> applications and not
>  others?

I have the Behringer Ultragain preamp/EQ, (with tube) the EQ is OK,
especially if you keep to a lower Q factor. I guess it's basically 
the same circuit.
...but not comparable to a top quality studio EQ
Behringer Tube stuff is just their non-tube stuff with a tube in
the signal path. You wouldn't know it was connected unless the tube 
malfunctioned.
Running the tubes at a lower voltage is fine, I don't think it
matters unless they're power amp tubes.
At low voltage the tubes last much longer.
If you look closely at the Behringer tubes you'll
see that the "tube-glow"  is actually produced by LEDS, which
the clever folks at Behringer have even given a "warm up" time.
  
>       I have steered away from Behringer in the past mainly due to the 
lower 
> sonic quality of their
>  mixers compared to Mackie.

last time I checked Mackies had rough sounding pre-amps,
and I didn't like the EQ.
Has anyone actually AB'ed Behringer/Mackie properly? 

>  They have some pretty incredible prices on a lot 
> of gear and I can't
>  help but think that there are some serious compromises in sonic quality 
>to 
> be made.  Perhaps this
>  is true on some of their gear and not others?

Their stuff is somewhat variable in quality.
...but compare Roland/Yamaha who tend to save a few pence
here and there on chips regardless of sound. 
I wouldn't trust that the new models sound better than the old.

andy butler