Essentially, no. But they've got a good marketing angle.
Processing? -Well processing is getting cheaper and cheaper, while growing more powerful than ever before, and the best value is mass-production, so the Behringer unit can outperform every single 'classic' Lexicon unit out there.
The only thing which it really does which 'ONLY' Lexicon does, is the "crossover delay" which is a multiple delay with bandpass on each band, and individual regen, delay etc... it was a program first implemented on the 224X I think... and a program which almost NOBODY ever used... -the ONLY exception which I can think of was on "Margarita" by 'the traveling wilburys'...
YOUTUBE LINK
-It's the 'arpeggio' sound at the very beginning and at the very end... it has to sit RIGHT back for most of the tune, because it gets RIGHT in the way, and there are musical clashes when the chords change...
Anyhow, it's pretty gimmicky and mostly useless...
The reverb is mostly their own algorithm, though there are commonalities of approach... -it's impossible not to build a reverb without standing on the shoulders of those who've built reverbs before you...
...But when I use a PCM70 or 224XL, I so idiosynchratoc things like moving the crossover all the way up, (the classic lexicon uses different densities for LF and HF... low-density HF tends to 'flutter' or 'scatter', and high-density LF tends to sound bass-light and 'thin'... so they do this dual-density approach, and allow the user to select the 'xover' point between the two processes...
THIS IS NOT PRESENT IN THE BEHRINGER UNIT. -Unless someone has seen something which I haven't.
Without that fundamental architectural premise, you CANNOT do what the Lexicon does. -Big lows and smooth highs.
There are other things which Lexicon always did which aren't in there... the inside-recursion pitch modulation, for example... which could make an average upright piano into a shimmering, glossy pop masterpiece... best example
check out the very last chord of "Mary's Prayer" by Danny Wilson (Mixed and produced by Dave Bascombe... at the time when he used to INSIST upon several Lexicon 224XLs for EVERY mix!).
Trust me on this, they can say things like "using algorithms inspired and developed from classic units like old Lexicons" if they like, and it would be technically true... but give me sixty seconds with a PCM70 or a 224XL, and I'll give you a reverb setting which you can NEVER duplicate with the Behringer... I guarantee it.
Even Altiverb -on their own website- specifically re-state that the impulse response/convolution method cannot recreate something which changes over time, which is precisely what the PCM70 and 224XL do.
Later units such as the PCM80, PCM90 and the majority of software revisions of the 480L have no inside-recursion pitch modulation (most have no modulation at all) and guess what? -They're the 'ordinary' sounding units. -They DO however have the bandsplit dual-density architecture, and a lot of the time the modulation sounds too artificial for use... -classical music is a great example.
...But to answer the question: -Does this mimic well the Lexicon reverberators? -No.
It doesn't even begin.
This is NOT a slam on Behringer. This is a VERY capable unit, and I'm contemplating buying one myself. -But it DOES NOT copy the stuff that people WANT from the older Lexicon gear, and they don't ACTUALLY claim that it does... they use weasel-words and let users 'mould' their meaning to suit their expectations.
...But anyone who
knows the old Lexicon gear will know that this doesn't do it.
Cannot do it. -And anyone who thinks that it can is simply delusional.
EDIT:
Better link for Danny wilson "Mary's prayer" -It's in stereo on their myspace page: it seems that YouTube is reducing most non-corporate (i.e. non-official record company) stuff to mono... the 'size' of the effect of the Lexicon is MUCH more noticeable in stereo... and you can hear it being muted at the end of the intro, and hear how the piano gets about 80% smaller...
Keith