ScienceOne
New member
Which is better, the 2200 or the older 2100?
Behringer Composer 2100 vs. Composer Pro 2200
- Thread starter ScienceOne
- Start date
Rossi
New member
I've recently searched the web for opinions and found that people disagree about which of the two is better. I've got two 2100 models and one even older MDX 2000. I never had a 2200 Composer pro, though. I like my 2100 models a lot, they sound warm and full to me and are very ruggedly built. The older 2000 model is basicly the same, but has a few minor maladies, so I wouldn't recommend that one. The Pro series including the MDX 2000 is built using surface mount sub miniature technology; it is much lighter weight. On the other hand the Composer Pro has a few useful features that the older doesn't have like switching between hard and soft compression or swichable low cut on the sidechain, which is a cool thing to have for processing complex signals. Bottom line is: 2100 more rugged - 2200 more features. It's also rumored that the 2100 has faster attack than the Pro.
Rossi
New member
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
They both really suck! No point in spending your money on crap like the Composers........
Your ears deserve better! Amund
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ever used one?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
They both really suck! No point in spending your money on crap like the Composers........
Your ears deserve better! Amund
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ever used one?
I agree w/ Chess... Composer Pro 2200 is a REALLY good deal. It could be the poor-mans RNC (how much cheaper in $$ can you get).
They are built very well (ever handled one?) and are have very flexible features. For $99, you just can't beat that.
I use mine (although not as often as my '69 Merc RNC).
Bowisc
They are built very well (ever handled one?) and are have very flexible features. For $99, you just can't beat that.
I use mine (although not as often as my '69 Merc RNC).
Bowisc
Rossi said:
A lot! And how some of you can claim it`s one of Behringers few good products is unblievable to my ears........
I do use some Behringer stuff: V-AMP, for practicing at home and for quick demos.
ECM 8000 mic, great deal!
Edison : for creating cool "more than stereo" BG vocals
But I would never , ever put a carefully recorded track through a Composer!!!!!
Amund
Rossi
New member
Well, I don't know what you did to your composers, but they work fine. There's hardly a track I record that doesn't pass through a composer before it goes on tape. Even some pros use'em despite the availability of more expensive gear. I bought one of my composers from Harald Grosskopf, a drummer and electronic musician who worked with Klaus Schulze among others. I don't see why they should be unusable for home recording. You see them a lot in live racks, too. I'm not crazy about the V-Amp, though.
MISTERQCUE
Not Just Anutha Brutha
Re: Re: Behringer Composer 2100 vs. Composer Pro 2200
You are entitled to your opinion and that's all it is: YOUR OPINION!!!
Neve said:
You are entitled to your opinion and that's all it is: YOUR OPINION!!!
MISTERQCUE
Not Just Anutha Brutha
Re: Re: Behringer Composer 2100 vs. Composer Pro 2200
You are entitled to your opinion and that's all it is: YOUR OPINION!!!
I've compared it to my DBX and RNC and while not as transparent as the aforementioned, in the area's of peak limiting and subtle
comping it performs admirably!
And that's MY OPINION!!!!!
Neve said:
You are entitled to your opinion and that's all it is: YOUR OPINION!!!
I've compared it to my DBX and RNC and while not as transparent as the aforementioned, in the area's of peak limiting and subtle
comping it performs admirably!
And that's MY OPINION!!!!!
TexRoadkill
Audio Bum
Q, I'm getting tired of you always pimping Behringer gear. 
Re: Re: Re: Behringer Composer 2100 vs. Composer Pro 2200
Ok, we are dealing with home recording here, I forget that sometimes. If you don`t hear what it does to the sound, there is nothing I can say to make you change your mind.
But I suspect something in your signal chain is masking something, it should be pretty obvious to hear how it shrinks the source sound.
Amund
MISTERQCUE said:
Ok, we are dealing with home recording here, I forget that sometimes. If you don`t hear what it does to the sound, there is nothing I can say to make you change your mind.
But I suspect something in your signal chain is masking something, it should be pretty obvious to hear how it shrinks the source sound.
Amund
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Behringer Composer 2100 vs. Composer Pro 2200
No, it`s supposed to reduce the dynamic range, not the percieved "size" of the sound. I know you know that....
But it seems like Behringer didn`t understand that!
A good compressor(1176, LA2A ect..) can give the impression of making a sound larger.
Amund
chessrock said:
No, it`s supposed to reduce the dynamic range, not the percieved "size" of the sound. I know you know that....
But it seems like Behringer didn`t understand that!
A good compressor(1176, LA2A ect..) can give the impression of making a sound larger.
Amund
Rossi
New member
Well Amund, never mind your preference for 1176s and LA2As, but that's not the kind of gear people on this forum tend to buy for obvious reasons. Which is to say, by dropping those names we're entering the realm of myths and religion. Bowing and kneeling before distant gods is not my cup of tea. I'm interested in gear I can afford. The Composers I have (older models) are excellent, and I never had the impression they "shrink" my sounds. In fact, the effect a composer can have on certain guitar tones, for instance, is almost magical and magnifies it rather than shrink. I think a composer 2100 (can't speak for the newer models as I don't have any of those) is about the best buy in that price range (and a good deal beyond). If they don't work for you, maybe you don't work'em right.
Neve, (or can I call you Telefunken for short?):
I don't own any composers, so i have no axe to grind one way or the other.
But a few years back (pre-RNC), a number of engineers whom I greatly respect recommended the composer as a nice inexpensive option if you needed a couple of extra channels of compression.
Does that mean they were putting them in the class of an LA2A or a Distressor? No, of course not. Does it mean they are garbage (as in the 3630) like you claim? It seems maybe not.
So this leaves the following possibilities:
•The recommended units were older models that may have been superior to the ones you tried. (Not out of the realm of possibility - a good example of that is the original Aphex Expressor vs. the "tubessence" version).
•The engineers who recommended them to me were clowns and morons with severe hearing disabilities. (I doubt it - I've heard their work.)
•You never quite learned the way to make them work for you. Hey, it happens to all of us from time to time!
•You are consciously or sub-consciously swayed by both the low price tag and the Behringer "reputation". Which is certainly understandable.
Anyway, it all comes down to personal opinion in the end. I probably just have a personal aversion to sweeping dogmatic statements (e.g.see CJ's comments on the TLM103 thread). Although I do consider the source. If a Neve named Rupert said it I might give it more credence than a Neve named Amund... or at least until Amund showed me some indication that he was a close blood relative.
I don't own any composers, so i have no axe to grind one way or the other.
But a few years back (pre-RNC), a number of engineers whom I greatly respect recommended the composer as a nice inexpensive option if you needed a couple of extra channels of compression.
Does that mean they were putting them in the class of an LA2A or a Distressor? No, of course not. Does it mean they are garbage (as in the 3630) like you claim? It seems maybe not.
So this leaves the following possibilities:
•The recommended units were older models that may have been superior to the ones you tried. (Not out of the realm of possibility - a good example of that is the original Aphex Expressor vs. the "tubessence" version).
•The engineers who recommended them to me were clowns and morons with severe hearing disabilities. (I doubt it - I've heard their work.)
•You never quite learned the way to make them work for you. Hey, it happens to all of us from time to time!
•You are consciously or sub-consciously swayed by both the low price tag and the Behringer "reputation". Which is certainly understandable.
Anyway, it all comes down to personal opinion in the end. I probably just have a personal aversion to sweeping dogmatic statements (e.g.see CJ's comments on the TLM103 thread). Although I do consider the source. If a Neve named Rupert said it I might give it more credence than a Neve named Amund... or at least until Amund showed me some indication that he was a close blood relative.
littledog said:
This has actually been covered a number of times. The earlier models were pretty much direct reverse-engineered Drawmers. (http://www.drawmer.com/products/smx30.jpg) So much so that Drawmer took legal action. Apparently the courts ruled in Drawmer's favor, and the mighty B was forced to change a few things in their later versions. The extent of the changes, from what I've heard, were slight, but it's possible that a difference exists between the earlier and later models.
MISTERQCUE
Not Just Anutha Brutha
And.............................................
..........at $75 brand-spanking new, you can't simply go wrong!!
Again, if I may, I must give props to it's Peak Limiter function which provides more than adequate level adjustment!
..........at $75 brand-spanking new, you can't simply go wrong!!
Again, if I may, I must give props to it's Peak Limiter function which provides more than adequate level adjustment!