Which Digital processor/equalizer ?

Rodman99999...
Are you sure you are looking at the right box:-) And, I suppose you know that the RIVES CD has tracks which are, supposedly, compensated for the RS meter.

Since you referenced the plot printed on the ECM8000 box, something objective we can talk about, I took another close look at it. It shows a broad rise of about +1 dB peak over the range from 200 to 50 Hz. Nothing like what you describe. From 200 to something like 14 KHz it's flat +/- 1 dB. There is a rise of about 2 dB at 20 KHz, and then it rolls off. How the mic actually performs is another matter, but you are dead wrong about the plot.

Of course what's printed on the box, or posted on this website is irrelevant. I have had excellent results with the Behringer DEQ2496, and so have many others. The cost is so low that anyone who won't give it a try is foolish.

RE: The ECM8000 box's printed curve(which I'm holding in my hand). Where did you learn to read a response curve? Did you happen to notice the annotation that says, "Proximity Effect"? That means the three curves plotted(BELOW 1kHz) are at different distances from the source. Regarding these three curves: The red curve is at 2cm, and the rise is 12db above the average at 1000hz. The green curve represents 10cm(mic less than 4" from source) and has a broad 5db rise above average. At 1m(the black line)the response begins to roll off at 300Hz, and is 5db down at 70Hz, the curve's cut-off(not the 50hz as stated earier-my bad). Just continuing the same attenuation rate, the response would be -10db at 25Hz. Again- the black curve represents the response at 1m(about 3ft). I doubt anyone's listening position will be that close to their speakers, and the bass response of the mic will be much more attenuated at say 3 to 4m. The mic is flat between 200hz and 2kHz +/- 1db. Above that freq. there is a broad rise to +6 out to about 12kHz then dropping to +3db at 15kHz(where the curve ends). Of course- That's just a curve typical of these mics, and some ECM8000s will be better, some worse. The 6th octave RTA function alone makes the cost of the Behringer DEQ2496/ECM8000 a bargain, and I always try to have them on hand for my cheaper pro-sound customers. BUT- To think that one can accurately adjust one's in-room bass response, without first determining the mic's roll off at the listening position(and compensating for it in your calculations) is purely delusional. That's why the operations manual advises against even having the bands below 100Hz activated during the AEQ function. Behringer know's the combination's limitations. I'm certain many will be satisfied with the results of a DEQ2496 in their system(Look how big Stereo Review's circulation was over the years). Again- If you're happy.........

Rodman99999...Your box is not the same as mine, which shows only one plot.
Use of the Rives CD in conjunction with the ECM8000 suggests to me that the mic is nowhere near as bad as you suggest. For whatever reason, it and the DEQ2496 make a great improvement to my two systems.

But I agree with you that the RTA is worth the price. I bought the thing for the RTA to back up the Rives CD/RS meter approach. The benefit of room correction was a pleasant suprise. I have suggested that people buy it for the RTA, and discover room eq for themselves.

I use the Behringer's RTA readings to back up the TacT correction in my (very difficult-bordering on accoustic nightmare) listening room, via the TacT's parametric EQ(the DEQ2496 stays out of the system). The Tact 2.2X using it's FFT "clicks" and RCS algorithms, the DEQ2496 using the pink noise track on 'Irrational, But Efficacious!', and my ECM8000(correcting for it's response). Between the clicks(which are sampled before any reflections can reach the mic), the steady state sampling(which includes resonances/reflections), and a bit of Sabine Math tossed in(helps me keep my head in the sweet spot)- My bass sounds/feels quite authentic. The 'Sheffield Drum and Track Disc' and my son playing his drum kit make great references. BTW: That particular mic, and of course- it's box, were purchased about 5 months ago.

My bass sounds/feels quite authentic. The 'Sheffield
Drum and Track Disc' and my son playing his drum kit make great references.
BTW: That particular mic, and of course- it's box, were purchased about 5
months ago.

I use the Behringer PEQ below 90 Hz only - I used a Ratshack meter and
manual measurements to get a plot and then adjusted by ear to get the
desired response. I don't allow any PEQ processed signal to go to my mains -
so it ONLY goes to the sub (even though it is digital and should not affect
phase I worry about filter ringing etc. - I don't want to risk any detrimental
stuff to the midrange or mid bass)

I think if you use these kind of cheap devices conservatively and do not try to
get "flat" but simply make small "tweaks" to smooth
things out (tame peaks) then I have only GOOD things to say about Behringer
as it is great value.

I'd be wary of any computerized solution but I guess I am old fashioned - I
like to see the plots myself and see the difference I get over a wide area - and
my ears play final judge and jury - to my ears the least adjustment necessary
is usually better (the room is the room and it is real and it is there - so a
certain small amount of room modal effect is "natural" and preferred to my
way of thinking).

Drums are a great reference - it is the hardest thing to reproduce
realistically.

It would help if you supplied a "virtual system" - a picture says a
thousand words - digital cameras come in Kellogg's Frosties packets these
days - there is no reason not to.