Aural Exciter

  • Thread starter Thread starter fiveironfriend
  • Start date Start date
F

fiveironfriend

New member
So i just bought an aural exciter off the net, my question is where does it go in the mix, do i run my final product \threw it.. or do i route it threw the individual peices when imrecording?
 
You use it on what ever needs it. Why did you buy it if you don't know how to use it or what it does?
 
Farview said:
You use it on what ever needs it.
Which should be basically "never" if you're doing everything else right.
 
I absolutely love these threads. This is a product that is scorned here while almost all the pro studios I have been to have them and use them mostly for guitar and vocal tracks. Then, they deny it. Even the coveted Abbey Road studios use them.

Funny.
 
fraserhutch said:
But *we* know better, don't we :)

Jeez, I hope not. Take a look around the web. It is surprising how many pro studios (like Abbey Road) use them. HR.com seems to be above all these "pros" I guess. So, it is nice that people who are rank amatures think they know best based on a few that diss the devices. I don't care either way myself.
 
In The Dark

Okay...don't throw anything at me but what exactly does an aural exciter do?
 
lovegoodsoul73 said:
Okay...don't throw anything at me but what exactly does an aural exciter do?

It adds upper harmonic content to the signal thereby increasing the brightness or "sheen" of a recording.

They're ok...I've used them in the past. Don't use them much anymore although I still own one and a BBE to boot. Haven't seen fit to get rid of em just yet. :cool:
 
Doesn't it delay the upper frequencies to line them up with the lower frequencies so that they are in synch when they reach the listener's ear. Overall, it's supposed to make things sound punchier and tighter.
Sound about right?
 
David Katauskas said:
Doesn't it delay the upper frequencies to line them up with the lower frequencies so that they are in synch when they reach the listener's ear. Overall, it's supposed to make things sound punchier and tighter.
Sound about right?

I think that's the theory behind the sonic maximizer. Problem is, it doesn't translate equally to all speaker systems.
 
acorec said:
Jeez, I hope not. Take a look around the web. It is surprising how many pro studios (like Abbey Road) use them. HR.com seems to be above all these "pros" I guess. So, it is nice that people who are rank amatures think they know best based on a few that diss the devices. I don't care either way myself.
When used properly, they are just another tool in the arsenal.... I "diss" them only when used by novices as an excuse for poor recording technique....
 
acorec said:
Jeez, I hope not. Take a look around the web. It is surprising how many pro studios (like Abbey Road) use them. HR.com seems to be above all these "pros" I guess. So, it is nice that people who are rank amatures think they know best based on a few that diss the devices. I don't care either way myself.

It was light sarcasm :) lol

FWIW, I remember back in the 80's they were pretty much a must-have in moststudios I frequented. I don't recall ever using one though.
 
Grow up

What a friendly bunch of assmasters some of you are, I appreciate those of you who decided to treat a newbie to recording like me with some respect, and to those of you who forget that they didnt always know everything about recording, lick my balls. Everything you use in yoru studio is a tool to make it sound better, preamps, condensers .. why not get the best possiblegear that you can. To me a recordrd peice of music is about putting something together thats amazing to the ear, im gonna do whatever i can to get that done, even if it means buying a 100$ peice of equipment.
 
fiveironfriend said:
What a friendly bunch of assmasters some of you are, I appreciate those of you who decided to treat a newbie to recording like me with some respect, and to those of you who forget that they didnt always know everything about recording, lick my balls. Everything you use in yoru studio is a tool to make it sound better, preamps, condensers .. why not get the best possiblegear that you can. To me a recordrd peice of music is about putting something together thats amazing to the ear, im gonna do whatever i can to get that done, even if it means buying a 100$ peice of equipment.
Just calm down. If you plan on hanging around here at all, you're gonna have to get used to this kind of thing. Everyone has made quite valid points so far.

Farview was right that you only use it on what you need, and asked a VERY good question on why you bought something you don't know how to use.

Massive Mastering was right that proper tracking mixing, and mastering can make exciters unnecessary.

Acorec was right that many studios have them. I'm sure many studio just hang onto gear that they almost never use, just because there might be that one case where they need it.

BlueBear was right that they are another tool when used properly, and that they suck when used improperly.

So just chill, listen, and learn.
 
Blue Bear Sound said:
When used properly, they are just another tool in the arsenal.... I "diss" them only when used by novices as an excuse for poor recording technique....

Absolutely. The Bear is right on. I have a tough time around sometimes here trying to understand some of the logic.

BBE, Aural Exciter = effects.
Reverb, delay = effects.

Both overused/applide to cover up bad micing are standards to some. But, you never hear people say " Oh, reverb, useless device. Re-record your stuff right"

These are both used for effect. The parroting of misinformation becomes tiring after a while. And, to top the cake, some around here who have a whole ton of experience should know this, but still diss the BBE and AE.

On a properly recorded good vocal track, an Aural Exciter can be a great effect depending on the mix. It has been just the right thing on some of my tracks.
And let's not even get into the religion of analog vs. digital...............
 
scrubs said:
I think that's the theory behind the sonic maximizer.

so whats the difference between the aural exciter and the sonic maximizer? i know about the sonic maximizer, i own one. I use it sparingly, but there are situations where it is helpful, often times making my $100 mics sound like nicer mics. i use it only when i absolutely have to though.
 
David Katauskas said:
Doesn't it delay the upper frequencies to line them up with the lower frequencies so that they are in synch when they reach the listener's ear. Overall, it's supposed to make things sound punchier and tighter.
Sound about right?

It's important to remember that the Aphex Aural Exciter and BBE Sonic Maximizer are two very different processes. What you are describing is basically the BBE unit.

As has been said, used properly these kinds of units are just another tool in the arsenal. I personally think they are best suited to use on individual tracks or busses, not whole mixes.

What happens too often is that someone gets a dead sounding dull mix and wants to add some life or excitement to it and then slaps on a bunch of BBe or Aural Exciter. This is not the ideal use of these units in my opinion.

The BBE can be useful in getting vocals or guitars to jump out of a mix. And the Aphex can add some high end sheen where it is missing or needed. But both are best used sparingly, or in just the right circumstances.
 
acorec said:
And let's not even get into the religion of analog vs. digital...............
Shusssh! You'll wake Beck and his religious zealots! :eek:

:p :p
 
What I want to know is how the hell an anal exciter is supposed to help the sound??!! :confused:
























:eek: Wait!











...ohhhhh, never mind :o

:D

-mr moon
 
id rather not stick around thanks. Next time someone new comes around how about you talk to them instead of talk at them. How many world famous records have y'all produced? im guessing not too many. Im off to find a forum with people who are willing to to help people learn without judging them.
 
Back
Top