Behringer B2031 vs B2031A

[gilwe]

What are the differences between the two ?

 

[chessrock]

One has an "A" at the end of it.

.

 

[sushi-mon]

B2031 is the discontinued active monitor, here are the specs:

Extremely linear frequency response from 50 Hz to 21 kHz
Two high-power amps with 150 and 75 Watts
8 3 /4 " long-throw polycarbonate woofer
1" HF driver with ferrofluid-cooled aluminum dome
Integrated 2-band limiter for effective overload protection
Phase-optimized wave guide for controlled dispersion pattern and extremely large sweet spot
Flexible frequency and room acoustics adaptation
Full electromagnetic shielding
Sold in hand-matched pairs

B2031A is the current model, here are the specs:

Ultra-linear frequency response from 50 Hz to 21 kHz with individual frequency diagrams
Built-in 150- and 75-Watt power amps with enormous power reserve
Ultra high-resolution ferrofluid-cooled tweeter
Long-throw 8 ¾" woofer with special polypropylene diaphragm and deformation-resistant aluminum die-cast chassis
Controlled dispersion characteristics and extremely large “sweet spot” owing to the unique BEHRINGER wave guide technology
Active crossover network with 4th order Linkwitz-Riley filters
Adjustable to a wide range of acoustic conditions and subwoofer operation
Separately controlled limiter for low and high frequency overload protection
Automatic standby mode (defeatable)
Magnetic shielding allows placement near computer monitors
Delivered as “matched pairs” with individual frequency diagrams
Low-vibration and environment-friendly E1 MDF cabinet
Servo-balanced inputs with XLR and ¼” TRS connectors
Conceived and designed by BEHRINGER Germany

Seems pretty similar. To actually find out what changes were made, would take more investigation. Print out the manuals for each one from their website, and maybe you can get more info. Could be the drivers used, maybe a different cross-over, or improved circuitry.

 

[gilwe]

Thanks,

I understand that the woofer diaphragm on the B2031 is made of polycarbonate while the one on the B2031A is made of polypropelene...

How do you think this change may affect the sound ?

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

I understand that the woofer diaphragm on the B2031 is made of polycarbonate while the one on the B2031A is made of polypropelene...

How do you think this change may affect the sound ?

That, in and of itself, should have a minimal effect on the sound, if any. They are both fairly stiff polymers. When compared with other potential variables in the loudspeaker design, the choice of material between those two is a relatively minor variable.

G.

 

[sushi-mon]

Well the B2031 is discontinued. What are you trying to decide on between the two ? Price ? Used vs. New ?

I tend to go with a simple rule that new versions are usually being better. This is obviously not always the case, i.e., the 60's Mustangs vs. the 70's Mustangs, New Coke vs. Coke Classic, etc.

But especially if something gets discontinued by the manufacturer, that is not a particularly good sign IMO.

 

[gecko zzed]

I don't know whether either one or the other is discontinued.

The essential difference is that one is a passive speaker, the other is active (hence the 'A'), i.e. it has its own inbuilt power amp

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

I tend to go with a simple rule that new versions are usually being better.

I admire your unjaded faith . However, please allow me to temper that with my version of the simple rule:

New versions are usually designed as ways to increase the company's profits.

As an increase in quality is only one of about a half-dozen other, more efficient ways in which they can acheive that goal by releasing a new version, I'm a bit more agnostic when it comes to new versions; they have to prove themselves to me first.

G.

 

[sushi-mon]

I don't know whether either one or the other is discontinued.

The essential difference is that one is a passive speaker, the other is active (hence the 'A'), i.e. it has its own inbuilt power amp

The B2031 is self-powered, as is the newer B2031A. The
B2031P is the passive version.

The Behringer website lists the B2031 model as discontinued.

P.S. Although I want you all to think I am a true and blue Behringer fanatic, all this info IS on their website...

 

[sushi-mon]

I admire your unjaded faith . However, please allow me to temper that with my version of the simple rule:

New versions are usually designed as ways to increase the company's profits.

As an increase in quality is only one of about a half-dozen other, more efficient ways in which they can acheive that goal by releasing a new version, I'm a bit more agnostic when it comes to new versions; they have to prove themselves to me first.

G.

So you obviously never got suckered into buying a 70's Mustang. A very wise and patient man indeed !

From all the "arghhh" I have read about Behringer, going with them is ALL about faith. "Behringer, The New Religion in Audio !"

 

[VSProductions]

i really cant knock behringer... i have a bass stack and a mixer from them, and im pretty content. the amp is cool, has some great features. the mixer is cool, it has direct outputs on the first 8 channels so it was flexible for recording, i only use it to get a couple additional pre's.

 

[SouthSIDE Glen]

So you obviously never got suckered into buying a 70's Mustang. A very wise and patient man indeed !

I still want to buy - or at least drive - an authentic '68 Shelby before I die.

Nah, my story is that I am a perhaps jaded old man that has worked for enough companys, large and small, in all areas from sales and support to manufacturing and management to know that more often than not, new product line decisions are made with actual quality and improvement decisions made only in two situations; if it doesn't cut into gross profits or revenues, or if it's necessary because the original product was a piece of crap.

The problem is, if someone has a quality product that can't really be signifigantly improved upon without increasing it's cost through more expensive materials or development costs/processes, what's a company to do? If they keep the same model for more than a couple of years, sales flatten out because they get out-marketed by all the "new" competition. So they have to develop "new and improved" models themselves.

They have three choices at that point; create a better and more expensive version for the reasons given above, or create new version at the same price point by lowering developemnt or manufacturing costs though corner-cutting on the new version, or create a version tha's no better or worse, but just looks different and then sell the shit out of it via a saturation marketing campaign.

Now it's different if the original product had room for improvement at it's price point, but once a product is "good enough", "new and improved" models after that become a dubious proposition.

G.

 

[gilwe]

I personally like the 2031 in particular, after trying many other mid-level monitors. I have a couple in my everyday job and like them a lot. I finally decided to go for a new pair as I can get them quite cheap (450$), selling my Samson 65a at about the same price. I only wonder if the 2031 and the 2031A do sound any different, so I don't get the wrong ones. I'm familiar with the 2031 but not with the 2031A...

 

[gecko zzed]

of course, Sushi Mon is right. I jumped into a thicket of brain fade!

 

[sushi-mon]

I still want to buy - or at least drive - an authentic '68 Shelby before I die.

Nah, my story is that I am a perhaps jaded old man that has worked for enough companys, large and small, in all areas from sales and support to manufacturing and management to know that more often than not, new product line decisions are made with actual quality and improvement decisions made only in two situations; if it doesn't cut into gross profits or revenues, or if it's necessary because the original product was a piece of crap.

The problem is, if someone has a quality product that can't really be signifigantly improved upon without increasing it's cost through more expensive materials or development costs/processes, what's a company to do? If they keep the same model for more than a couple of years, sales flatten out because they get out-marketed by all the "new" competition. So they have to develop "new and improved" models themselves.

They have three choices at that point; create a better and more expensive version for the reasons given above, or create new version at the same price point by lowering developemnt or manufacturing costs though corner-cutting on the new version, or create a version tha's no better or worse, but just looks different and then sell the shit out of it via a saturation marketing campaign.

Now it's different if the original product had room for improvement at it's price point, but once a product is "good enough", "new and improved" models after that become a dubious proposition.

G.

Well said, and obviously you have been on the other side, the "Dark" side

 

[Boo Razz]

I believe their is a misunderstanding about the Behringer Truths. People, their is a difference between the Original B2031 and the B2031a's that are on the market today. They quit making the original B2031's in 2001 because of the close simularities to the Genelecs and the Mackie hr824's and didn't want any legal issues so, they changed the design and changed the model number to B2031a. They are both active monitors.

 

[Jim Lad]

You're getting closer.
This thread was last visited 5 years ago.

 

[leaningpine]

Why are there threads that are 10 years old on this site? They should be moved to an archive section. Nothing in the main discussion threads any older than a year old should be allowed. Just my opinion.