BBE Maximizer???

[sucram]

I've only heard great things about them, but most of the users were guitar players. Can anyone offer a reason to not buy one for a computer music setup? I think I really need to maximize my sonics.

Also, does anyone know of any deals on these (the 482)? I've seen them for around $190.

Thanks for any help!

-marcus

[MISTERQCUE]

Their also basically used for "live" applications for enhancing the sonic clarity in amplification. I'm not sure what it would do for you
and you pc, but their are plenty of software plug-ins that assist you in achieving the sound you want!

[Blue Bear Sound]

Following proper recording techniques, watching your signal chain, appropriate use of EQ and effects, and having a decent monitoring chain will cause you NOT TO NEED sonic maximizing.

They might be good in a live guitar rig, but have limited use in a studio if you've paid attention to the above. About the only real use I can see is as a salvage tool for badly-recorded tracks. (But it's not an excuse for laying down a mediocre track so that you can "sonic maximize fix it"!!)

Bruce

[sucram]

What plug-ins could take the place of one? (i strongly support the free kind!) The only comparable stuff I've seen would be EQs and enhancers, but I was under the impression that the BBE was *not* an equalizer, but rather shifted the timing of frequencies input into it. Why would this improve the sound of guitars and playback on PAs (and in home theaters too, where they're also used), but not to a studio??? What is the difference when it's just sound that's processed, be it a soft synth or a guitar?

I don't suppose someone knows of an Acoustic Mirror that could model one (or someone who has a BBE and can make an impulse available). I've recently been messing around with Mirrors of vintage gear with mixed results in Sound Forge. I guess first I have to know what it is i'm doing with the impulses :-)

Thanks in advance!

-marcus

[Tom Hicks]

This magic box is such a joke!Sucram is correct that the sonic maximizer "time alligns" the bass and treble frequencies to "cure" the supposed phase differences between the placement (distance from your ear) of the voice coil of the two speakers.
Visualise how the woofer goes deeper into the speaker box than the tweeter does,perhaps even a 5 or 6 inch difference in distance from your ear.
The BBE uses a crossover to split the signal and a digital delay to supposedly time allign them.That's it in a nutshell.But look at the product literature and they clain to "tighten" the sound and other such puffery.
My band had one we used live for a year (over my objections,it belonged to the rhythm guitar) and all I noticed is how the PA fed back at much lower levels!Not exactly what we wanted so we quit using it altogether.

Tom

[moelar2]

What is meant by "time align?" I was also under the impression that it was merely shelving Eq... The Behringer Ultraflex seems to reinforce this - could it be that it is NOT a maximizer and indeed an eq [behringer]?

[MISTERQCUE]

Hmmmmm!

[Tom Hicks]

Bruce's comments were right on line.Solid techniques with even ordinary gear can produce good sounding recordings.

Tom

[BBB]

Yeah. The maximizer tends to make everything sound "sonically maximized." Once you have used one for a while, you can identify its sonic signature on mixes. Hence, it begins to become sterile and generic. It is a tool, but it should definitely be used in moderation, if at all.


Matt

[Sonixx]

i can't stay out of the line of fire any longer...

STEP UP ON SOAPBOX...

oh please.

i've read all these post blasting the BBE, blasting the POD, blasting this-that and another. these are all just tools, some help more than others, some hurt if taken too far, even the most expensive.

EQ's do anything but Equalize if taken to far.

Compressors can actually make a recording sound compressed, if taken too far, and, we use both on bad takes and on great takes, sometimes and sometimes not.

Exciters and actually make recording sound excited, if taken to far

but, they all have a purpose and place.


somehow the notion that most properly tracked takes won't need this stuff. bull... if this is the case, then why do studios stock thousands of dollars of processing gear. it's not to fix badly recorded takes; it's to alter the take, regardless of quality. the stuff is used on takes of all kinds: the good - the bad and the ugly...

why do Mastering Houses stock 10's of thousands of dollars of processing gear. it's not to always fix badly mixed recordings, although they get their share, it's to process the sound, TO ALTER THE SOUND.

that's what all this is about ALTERING THE SOUND. each processor has it's own characteristic sound, which alters the sound. each device has a purpose and place. but somehow this notion that these deviced are solely for fixing the sound, BULL...

why do quite a lot of you blast the devices. yea some suck, a lot don't. it's not all about quality, it's also about sounds and differing sounds and unique sounds. new and unique sounds define quality.

STEP DOWN FROM SOAPBOX...

regards,
-kp-

[Blue Bear Sound]

MY TURN ON THE SOAPBOX

I'll tell you why I dump on them -- for your arguments to be valid, you have to be talking about engineers who already know proper technique and are now in a position to make a knowledgeable decision on whether to use a processor or not for it particular application and color.

This is very different from a novice cutting a vocal track with a bad mic in a bad position thru a bad pre, then feeling the need to use a sonic maximizer to resurrect a track that should have died a quick death! Same goes for color, EQ, or any other processing. Technique HAS to come before the color!

Once someone has the necessary ear experience and technique in place, they can then move on to using processors the way they were intended.

NEXT UP!



Bruce

[Sonixx]

as expected, you both missed the point...i didn't advocate any gear.

let me say it this way, I read here a lot more than I write, and there are a few participants that spend a lot of time dumping on gear. maybe a touch of gear snobbery

[Blue Bear Sound]

ON your implication of snobbery (I'm not sure who you were directing that at) but let me assure you, my studio is well-equipped for MY needs, but its gear list hardly smacks of "snobbery"!

I mean, if I was equipped with SSLs, Neve's, etc... you *might* be able to accuse me......

I was not talking about gear specifics, I was talking about technique over "fix it later"... you also missed a big reason the "big boys" studios have all that kind of "fix-up" processing such as Maximizers. It has less to do with them using it regularly than the fact that they have to be prepared to deal with all kinds of situations in terms of track quality, so they need to have the tools to handle it. Unlike the novice who is essentially using it to compensate for poor recording technique.

The reasons a major studio will reach for those processors is completely different than the reasons rookies will reach for it.

Sonixx, it seems like you missed my point completely - that, or you're simply not "listening."

Bruce

[Blue Bear Sound]

ON your implication of snobbery (I'm not sure who you were directing that at) but let me assure you, my studio is well-equipped for MY needs, but its gear list hardly smacks of "snobbery"!

I mean, if I was equipped with SSLs, Neve's, etc... you *might* be able to accuse me...... but.......

I was not talking about gear specifics either. My point concerns all the processors - comp, maximizers, even reverb.

I was talking about proper technique at tracking instead of "attempt to fix it in the mix later"...

You also missed a big reason the "big boys" studios have all that kind of "fix-up" processing such as Maximizers anyways. It has less to do with them using it regularly than the fact that they have to be prepared to deal with all kinds of situations in terms of track quality, so they need to have the tools to handle it. Unlike the novice who is essentially using it to compensate for poor recording technique.

The reasons a major studio will reach for those processors is completely different than the reasons rookies will reach for it.

Sonixx, it seems like you missed my point completely - that, or you're simply not "listening."

Bruce

[Sonixx]

that's it... i'm just not listening...

[Blue Bear Sound]

Well there ya go! I knew there was something wrong somewhere.............




Bruce

[Sonixx]

WOW, maybe now i can finally straighten out my recordings. i need to be a better listener.

there's nothing like good communication...

thanks...

[Blue Bear Sound]

heh-heh... glad I could help!

Cheers Sonixx!



Bruce

[BBB]

Originally posted by Blue Bear Sound
The reasons a major studio will reach for those processors is completely different than the reasons rookies will reach for it.

Yeah. That's a good point in the sens that it can be useful, but rookies should watch out for WHY they're using it.

I remember using it a bit a long time ago on a mushy mix. I wanted to add punch and sparkle. Well, I ended up with punchy, sparkley mush. The song had to be remixed with parts rerecorded.

After dinking around with the BBE, I ended up getting sick of it.

Sure, it's a tool, but people have to learn how to use it for the right reasons. Unfortunately, it is often overused or misused.


Matt

[lemonsucker]

Originally posted by Tom Hicks
This magic box is such a joke!Sucram is correct that the sonic maximizer "time alligns" the bass and treble frequencies to "cure" the supposed phase differences between the placement (distance from your ear) of the voice coil of the two speakers.
Visualise how the woofer goes deeper into the speaker box than the tweeter does,perhaps even a 5 or 6 inch difference in distance from your ear.
The BBE uses a crossover to split the signal and a digital delay to supposedly time allign them.That's it in a nutshell.But look at the product literature and they clain to "tighten" the sound and other such puffery.
My band had one we used live for a year (over my objections,it belonged to the rhythm guitar) and all I noticed is how the PA fed back at much lower levels!Not exactly what we wanted so we quit using it altogether.

Tom

ahhh, i don't know if it really does such a thing, but to me the BBE just scoops some mid out.
i would never use it on a full mix, yet it gives a "pro" feel to guitars and some strings. but to my ears it's just a mid scooping eq with fancy graphics.
i must say that i've only tried the direct-x plugin version of it and not the hardware thing but i guess it's the same...