I picked up a huge used rack at a pawnshop and got about $2500 worth of stuff for $350. In the rack was an Aphex 204 which I left sit for the last 2 months. I imagine this is basically like a BBE or other items. I'm off work for 2 weeks on vacation messing with all my gear so I decided to run that in the loop of the RM100. Well, now I can't even turn it off or I think the Randall sounds like total ***. I always hated to way the randall's presence structure was because you couldn't get the tight sizzle I wanted. That Exciter sure fixes it up, and it sounds like a completely different amp. I'm sure a BBE sonic maximizer does close to the same thing. I know not why some people can't live without them. It absolutely sounds like the Randall with a whole new output section. The thing adds sizzle and a huge openness to the amp. I'm a gain head and it makes every single module rage now and I have the hugeness of my Mesa now. The only bad thing obout it now is when I disconnect it I get the old randall tone I thought I was somewhat happy with and now I think the amp sounds terrible. I guess the I'll have this thing forever.
Randall+Aphex Aural Exciter 204=GREATNESS
- Thread starter schlagdog
- Start date
Help Support Synergy/MTS Forum:
m0jo
Well-known member
This is what these exciters do.
Do you play in a band?
Because from what I've heard they do make your sound less present (like scooping a lot .. sounds way better alone, not so good in the mix)
Do you play in a band?
Because from what I've heard they do make your sound less present (like scooping a lot .. sounds way better alone, not so good in the mix)
Be careful with the exciter. It may sound great alone, but in the context of a mix it might be too scooped. As a test for overdoing it, if you bypass it and feel something is missing, your ears are probably stunned. Just back off the settings a little bit and you'll be fine.
crankyrayhanky
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 8, 2008
- Messages
- 3,426
- Reaction score
- 1
people seem to have a love affair quickly followed by a hate affair with this type of units...I have a BBE in my closet collecting dust, maybe I'll bust it out again today
Julia
Well-known member
I have a BBE. It's in a box in the closet. I also have the plugin for my DAW. I don't use it either. I use the harmonic exciter in iZotope's Ozone during the mastering process, and a little goes a long way. I use the Ozone HE to add a touch of sheen to a finished product -- it's also multi-band unlike these units.
These units when used live, I agree shock the ears. Too much and you get a very processed and tiring sound. Thing is after you get used to them, you need more.
Where these are good --
* a lot of people play only at home.
* they buy 100W tube amps or 50, or heck even 15W.
* they find these sound good only cranked loud
* these amps need to be turned up loud to get the tubes cooking.
* so they've got a $2000 amp and now spend another $800 on the more boutique style attenuators because they are told those don't color the tone -- they all do.
* there are Loudness-Contour curves
* there are room resonances -- ever move your head a couple inches and the sound changes?
* So now they have this 100W amp putting out about 75W and the attenuator steps that down to about 1W or less.
* Sometimes 1W is too loud out a 412 because the neighbors still complain, or their family complains
* So these exciters do a good job at getting rid of that pesky psychoacoustic midrange spike at low volumes.
I would not play a gig or use it when recording.
I need to hear how something sounds in a mix when I'm writing stuff, so I use a POD HD for that so I can hear the exact sound that gets recorded.
These units when used live, I agree shock the ears. Too much and you get a very processed and tiring sound. Thing is after you get used to them, you need more.
Where these are good --
* a lot of people play only at home.
* they buy 100W tube amps or 50, or heck even 15W.
* they find these sound good only cranked loud
* these amps need to be turned up loud to get the tubes cooking.
* so they've got a $2000 amp and now spend another $800 on the more boutique style attenuators because they are told those don't color the tone -- they all do.
* there are Loudness-Contour curves
* there are room resonances -- ever move your head a couple inches and the sound changes?
* So now they have this 100W amp putting out about 75W and the attenuator steps that down to about 1W or less.
* Sometimes 1W is too loud out a 412 because the neighbors still complain, or their family complains
* So these exciters do a good job at getting rid of that pesky psychoacoustic midrange spike at low volumes.
I would not play a gig or use it when recording.
I need to hear how something sounds in a mix when I'm writing stuff, so I use a POD HD for that so I can hear the exact sound that gets recorded.
crankyrayhanky
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 8, 2008
- Messages
- 3,426
- Reaction score
- 1
you know where they kick ***? I had a drum machine and it made the kick HUGE. I never tried it on real drums or loops...i imagine it may make a keyboard sound good too- and that's sort of the tone it gives a guitar, that artificiallly enhanced sheen
Units like the Aphex and BBE exciters or "psycho-acoustic analyzers" were great back in the days of tape, analog and digital drum machines and synths.
Since that time, digital synthesis, convolution and digital recording are all readily available, so a unit in which the primary focus is to increase loudness and clarity is rarely needed in today's environment, especially if the vocal and instrumentation have been properly recorded.
But back in the days of Tascam portastudios, these units were lifesavers. Today? Not so much.
Since that time, digital synthesis, convolution and digital recording are all readily available, so a unit in which the primary focus is to increase loudness and clarity is rarely needed in today's environment, especially if the vocal and instrumentation have been properly recorded.
But back in the days of Tascam portastudios, these units were lifesavers. Today? Not so much.
I had the BBE 482i. At 1st it was the ****. after awhile it seemed like I liked my tone more without it. It definately colored my tone while off. I think if I were ever to get some home recording stuff put together, I might get one again, but I don't see me getting one for the guitar rig.
Mattfig
Well-known member
Wow...I don't know how I feel on this one....I don't use a BBE...Used to but no longer...However, both my live rig (RM100 w/mini rack of delight) and studio rig (3 Rm4s and RT2/50) have a Rocktron Pro-Q....It makes EVERY bit of difference to me...I play in a few bands and my tone is flexible for a reason...Giving each module its own EQ is awesome and gives you the chance to tweak each module to perfection....
It isn't a BBE but it's close and I love it....
It isn't a BBE but it's close and I love it....
audiomidijace
Well-known member
Well, I guess I have to reply now. Guess what? I work for Aphex! I'm never going to try and push our products on this forum, but I'm happy to answer any questions that you might have. I would like to say that the way BBE does their processing is VERY different from what Aphex does.
BBE
1. Processes the entire signal
2. Is based on "time alignment" of fundamental frequencies.
3. Uses EQ to cut/boost high and low frequencies.
Aphex
1. Processes in a side chain-you decide how much processing gets added to your signal.
2. We generate even order harmonics based on frequencies above a high pass filter value.
3. We optically compress signals below a low pass filter value.
4. You decide which frequencies are processed and how much processing is added to your input signal.
Personally I prefer using the Xciter pedal as the last pedal before my amp input rather then using a 204/Exciter in the FX loop. But to each their own! There's no right or wrong way to use these.
Lastly, even though the Aural Exciter was released in 1975 and the Optical Big Bottom was released in 1992, these products are still EXTREMELY relevant. Give me a 24-bit/192kHz wav file and I'll make it sound better running through these processors.
The processors don't do any cutting, only boosting. So it doesn't remove any midrange frequencies. In fact the low pass filter can be set as high as 200Hz and the high pass filter can be set as low as 600Hz. So you can process and boost midrange frequencies if you wish.
These are the current versions of the product:
http://www.aphex.com/products/exciter/
http://www.aphex.com/products/xciter/
Cheers,
Jace
BBE
1. Processes the entire signal
2. Is based on "time alignment" of fundamental frequencies.
3. Uses EQ to cut/boost high and low frequencies.
Aphex
1. Processes in a side chain-you decide how much processing gets added to your signal.
2. We generate even order harmonics based on frequencies above a high pass filter value.
3. We optically compress signals below a low pass filter value.
4. You decide which frequencies are processed and how much processing is added to your input signal.
Personally I prefer using the Xciter pedal as the last pedal before my amp input rather then using a 204/Exciter in the FX loop. But to each their own! There's no right or wrong way to use these.
Lastly, even though the Aural Exciter was released in 1975 and the Optical Big Bottom was released in 1992, these products are still EXTREMELY relevant. Give me a 24-bit/192kHz wav file and I'll make it sound better running through these processors.
The processors don't do any cutting, only boosting. So it doesn't remove any midrange frequencies. In fact the low pass filter can be set as high as 200Hz and the high pass filter can be set as low as 600Hz. So you can process and boost midrange frequencies if you wish.
These are the current versions of the product:
http://www.aphex.com/products/exciter/
http://www.aphex.com/products/xciter/
Cheers,
Jace
Julia
Well-known member
Aren't these types of products better suited for the mastering engineer than at recording time or live?
audiomidijace
Well-known member
Not at all. You can certainly use them in the mastering process though. You can insert them on a channel or a buss in the mixing console and/or on the main output signal for live performance. The Big Bottom and Aural Exciter each have their own "amount" or "mix" knob, so you can turn one all the way down and just use Big Bottom "OR" Aural Exciter. For example, I probably wouldn't want to enhance the bass frequencies on a pair of overhead drum mics.
As for recording, I use our Channel tube mic pre that includes a compressor, Big Bottom, Mid parametric EQ and Aural Exciter on almost all of my tracks. The D.I. bass tracks that I record with this thing are just insane! I use Channel with my Miktek CV4 tube mic with it to record vocals and acoustic guitar as well. For electric guitar I bypass all of the processing as I'm already using an Xciter and Punch Factory pedal to feed my amps.
I've also been using Channel for all of my voice over work for the Aphex videos I'm working on. This thing just sounds fabulous.
As for recording, I use our Channel tube mic pre that includes a compressor, Big Bottom, Mid parametric EQ and Aural Exciter on almost all of my tracks. The D.I. bass tracks that I record with this thing are just insane! I use Channel with my Miktek CV4 tube mic with it to record vocals and acoustic guitar as well. For electric guitar I bypass all of the processing as I'm already using an Xciter and Punch Factory pedal to feed my amps.
I've also been using Channel for all of my voice over work for the Aphex videos I'm working on. This thing just sounds fabulous.
Julia
Well-known member
Reason I was asking is that at mastering time I use a:
* 5 band parametric EQ
* multi-band compressor (if needed)
* harmonic exciter to add a little sheen
* multi-band imager
* mastering limiter
Check for clipping at each step.
I was looking at the Waves Aphex Aural Exciter plugin. I currently use Ozone. My experience using exciters is less is best -- nothing to make a huge difference but enough to make a subtle difference.
Also note, I'm not the same market as most of the guys on this forum. I don't play much rock. More jazz, blues, and then go into industrial/techno.
* 5 band parametric EQ
* multi-band compressor (if needed)
* harmonic exciter to add a little sheen
* multi-band imager
* mastering limiter
Check for clipping at each step.
I was looking at the Waves Aphex Aural Exciter plugin. I currently use Ozone. My experience using exciters is less is best -- nothing to make a huge difference but enough to make a subtle difference.
Also note, I'm not the same market as most of the guys on this forum. I don't play much rock. More jazz, blues, and then go into industrial/techno.
audiomidijace
Well-known member
You are correct. A little goes a long with the Exciter.
I actually haven't had a chance to listen to the Waves plug-in.
But Waves modeled the original tube Aural Exciter from 1975.
I haven't heard that either!
But there's no Big Bottom in that plug-in as it didn't come along until 1992.
Ozone is wonderful.
I actually haven't had a chance to listen to the Waves plug-in.
But Waves modeled the original tube Aural Exciter from 1975.
I haven't heard that either!
But there's no Big Bottom in that plug-in as it didn't come along until 1992.
Ozone is wonderful.
