BBE Sonic Maximizer: Still the best exciter?

[dalor]

After downloading BBE Sonic Maximizer's demo, i've found that 4Front Countour Max sounds the same (to me!)?! I've tried the same settings on different sounds and i get the same result using each plugin - try it for yourself.

I own Spectralive V2 and 4Front Mastering Bundle. I was first very excited about Spectralive, but after a while i realised Spectralive changes the stereo width (for e.g. everything has suddenly stereo, even if the Stereo fader is set to 0 and source was mono). Using Spectralive on every track is a bad idea, it makes mixing alot harder and everything sounds to start muddy. 4Front Countour Max gives you much more cleaner control.

But in generell, i prefer these days using VoxengoSpan and boost or limit frequencies to 'excite the sound' using a simple eq and my ears, simply unbeatable (for me)

[Frippertronix]

Well I went ahead and yanked it out of my rack and I'm in agreement that, at least with the h/w 462 model, there are some serious problem issues in the high frequency range. So much so that I think I will have to do without BBE unless there is a higher end or older h/w model that does a better job in this area.

At the risk of starting the flamewar anew, though, on my speakers (1978 Pioneer HPM 100's), I can hear a loss of low midrange/mid bass articulation with BBE out, and it is not simply a psychoacoustic side effect of not having the highs boosted or excited in some way. No amount of traditional (phase warped or phase linear) high frequency boosting or mid/low frequency cutting gets rid of it, it just compensates for the effect while not eliminating or counteracting it in the way the 462 can. Simply put, the speakers are back to being "in the way" of the sound by creating their own phase muddiness when I don't use my 462.

With BBE on and the process knob 3/4 of the way up or higher, much of this muddiness is gone, though at the expense of really shrill and unnatural sounding highs. IMO, digital high frequency reproduction is hard enough on the ears to begin with, so I think I'm going to start redoing all my EQ schemes in order to do without BBE for now. The phase muddiness from the speakers can be compensated for in large part with very careful low/mid/high EQ work.

With BBE, the lows and low mids sound more "hi-fi" to me, and without it, my speakers start sounding more like "speakers" (i.e. you can hear the speaker affecting the sound more actively, as in a guitar amp cabinet, and there is less low/mid transparency). But there is no way around the shrill highs. Turning up the process enough to clean up the lows and mids automatically introduces the harsher highs effect.

If anyone can tell me about something (Kingston already mentioned one) that at least attempts to counteract the phase problems coming from speakers, but can do it without harsh side effects, I'd like to know.

I got a bright idea last night about asking David McClain from Refined Audiometrics (who do PLParEQ) if this is something he has thought about and might like to try to tackle at some point, since he is clearly an audiophile and has already put a lot of thought and work into the issue of phase related problems in audio processing.

BTW, all of what I said above is YYMV enabled, since I only have one set of speakers, and they are hi-fi from the '70's, not modern flat studio monitors, so the positive effect BBE has on my system may not show up at all on yours.

[Kingston]

If anyone can tell me about something (Kingston already mentioned one) that at least attempts to counteract the phase problems coming from speakers, but can do it without harsh side effects, I'd like to know.

I honestly haven't heard of anything that could counteract the speaker cone excursion effect. I doubt it would be even possible to have a one size fits all solution as there are not even two speakers models that are the same.

If it ever was a problem in my work environment, I'd start looking for new monitors... Sure hifi speakers from the seventies can sound good, but they are hardly reference quality. Unless yours are especially good ones?

[The Chase]

If it ever was a problem in my work environment, I'd start looking for new monitors... Sure hifi speakers from the seventies can sound good, but they are hardly reference quality. Unless yours are especially good ones?

Pioneer made some GREAT speakers in the 70's

[Kingston]

Pioneer made some GREAT speakers in the 70's

yeah, for their time, just like the ns10. We're not talking "vintage goodness" in the same terms as mixers, mics and other outboard from that time. Speaker technology is the one area where MASSIVE improvements have been made since.

It's also good to remember that monitors are the most important tool in any music studio, apart from the ears of the artist. It's your window to the music, and you probably don't want it to be all smudgy and tainted.

[kritikon]

With BBE on and the process knob 3/4 of the way up or higher, much of this muddiness is gone, though at the expense of really shrill and unnatural sounding highs.

I'm a BBE fan, and even I think that's a tad too much. I don't think I've ever gone over 50% and that's pushing it on a subgroup. On a mix, I'd have 33% max...usually less. That high and the delays become noticeable, and that "syrupy" sound starts to happen. At 3/4 process, no wonder the highs start to sound a bit odd.

If you need to push your BBE that much, maybe it's time to start thinking about better speakers? TBH, I don't even know why BBE have a knob that goes that high...I fully admit it's not a nice effect when pushed hard (but then, no other enhancers are either - in fact most Eqs aren't).

[Barbarossa]

With BBE on and the process knob 3/4 of the way up or higher, much of this muddiness is gone, though at the expense of really shrill and unnatural sounding highs.

3/4?!
Here is the frequency response with 3/4 process-settings: http://img519.imageshack.us/img519/331/ ... cnt0zs.jpg

With BBE, the lows and low mids sound more "hi-fi" to me, and without it, my speakers start sounding more like "speakers" (i.e. you can hear the speaker affecting the sound more actively, as in a guitar amp cabinet, and there is less low/mid transparency). But there is no way around the shrill highs.

Just don't use the process-knob?

Turning up the process enough to clean up the lows and mids automatically introduces the harsher highs effect.

Sorry, but turning it up that much hast absolutely nothing to do with cleaning up anything, nor is it called eqing.

If anyone can tell me about something (Kingston already mentioned one) that at least attempts to counteract the phase problems coming from speakers, but can do it without harsh side effects, I'd like to know.

Your problems can't be solved by any gear, as long as you don't know how to use eqs.

BTW, all of what I said above is YYMV enabled, since I only have one set of speakers, and they are hi-fi from the '70's, not modern flat studio monitors, so the positive effect BBE has on my system may not show up at all on yours.

Throw them immediately away, if they let you turn the process-knob 3/4 up without hurting your ears.

[PeterL]

IMO, still the best exciter (old, but good):
DSPFX Aural Activator

[zimba]

Personally I like to use SpectraLive2 and Valvetone together to get that "cleaned out the last of the muddiness and added some sparkle" effect.

[bduffy]

IMO, still the best exciter (old, but good):
DSPFX Aural Activator

God, why don't those guys update their products? Looking seriously '95, there guys!

[PeterL]

IMO, still the best exciter (old, but good):
DSPFX Aural Activator

God, why don't those guys update their products? Looking seriously '95, there guys!

I fully agree. Although the plugins are rock-stable, but DX- and standalone-only version. Time to switch to VST.

[bduffy]

IMO, still the best exciter (old, but good):
DSPFX Aural Activator

God, why don't those guys update their products? Looking seriously '95, there guys!

I fully agree. Although the plugins are rock-stable, but DX- and standalone-only version. Time to switch to VST.

Yeah, and discover GRADIENTS.

[mammath]

OK...how about David McClain's CLAS, from Refined Audiometrics? I opened a new thread to inform you guys (if you hadn't known). And though it's been viewed, noone responded. Here's the thread

http://www.kvraudio.com/forum/viewtopic ... 2fcfffa002

From Refined Audiometrics' site:

CLAS (Compressive Loudness Audio Shaping) is a tool that provides both progressive phase compensation for bass frequencies, and psychoacoustic bass and/or treble enhancement. We use CLAS most often when listening to track edits on the master channel, purely for our pleasure.

The effect is similar to BBE treatment, but without being "in your face!". Psychoacoustic compression is similar to many classic compression curves, producing the most boost at low sound levels, and progressively tapering off to no-boost at extreme loud levels. This is more pleasing to listen to than typical linear compression, and accounts for the appeal of many classic analog compressors. The effect, in CLAS, is much like dynamic Loudness Contouring.

http://refinedaudiometrics.com/pages/20/index.htm

[The Chase]

The compression threshold is fixed at -30 dBFS, and so even at maximum boosts of +12 dB, music never approaches the clipping level as a result of these boosts. Attack time is 25 ms and release is 250 ms, with a 15 ms hold, sufficient to avoid pumping even at 30 Hz.

What is it? CLAS is simply the mix of your audio sent in parallel through a 2-pole Lowpass filter tuned to 725 Hz, and a 2-pole Highpass filter tuned also to 725 Hz. The Q of each filter is 0.2.

WHy aren't these parameters tweakable via the interface? Is this thing gonna cost $1000, too?

[shamann]

WHy aren't these parameters tweakable via the interface? Is this thing gonna cost $1000, too?

Nope. Free:

Send us a note for your copy of this Windows/VST plugin. Enjoy some quality listening!

info@refined-audiometrics.com

Having donated for the 3-band EQ, I already got it sent to me. Haven't tried it yet, though.