home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Newsgroups: rec.music.synth
- Path: sparky!uunet!spool.mu.edu!uwm.edu!rpi!utcsri!geac!torsqnt!problem!intacc!zerobeat
- From: zerobeat@intacc.uucp (Ferenc Szabo)
- Subject: Re: Exciters, Enhancers, and Maximizers - Oh My!
- Message-ID: <1992Dec22.070837.13676@intacc.uucp>
- Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 07:08:37 GMT
- References: <1992Dec17.001044.27888@news.arc.nasa.gov> <queXVB1w165w@midiline.la.ca.us>
- Organization: Inter/Access' Matrix BBS
- Lines: 32
-
- In article <queXVB1w165w@midiline.la.ca.us> trog@midiline.la.ca.us (Ralph Stempel) writes:
- >glennd@pioneer.arc.nasa.gov (Glenn Deardorff GDP) writes:
- >
- >> Lets say my interest is in enhancing, er... maximizing Clarity and
- >> Definition of my mix (I'm not looking for Brilliance, per se). I
- >> know about the tricks of trying to achieve same by providing individual
- >> reverb/effects and/or frequency ranges to the tracks. What I want to know is
- >> which of the BBE line (or equivalent) of "aural improvers" would be best
- >> for strictly maximizing clarity of the mix. Comments welcome.
- >>
- > What you most likely want is a BBE 422A. The 422A is a stereo box that
- >deals with unbalanced input/output.
- > These things sound very good on a wide variety of program material.
- >Almost everything I run through one sounds better than the original
- >sound.
-
- The BBE is the best box I've ever heard. I used to detest what Aphex
- Aural Exciters did to sound and assumed every brand of 'aural enhancer'
- would be a variation on that same icky sound.
-
- NOT so with the BBE line. Without going into details, I learned electronically
- what the BBE did differently than the APHEX, and I'm not totally surprised
- at the great sound.
-
- I believe all the BBE Sonic Maximizers do the same thing, but they come
- in different configurations: Balanced, Unbalanced, Mono, Stereo. Does
- anybody out there know if BBE has improved their design since 1989? (that's
- when I bought mine)
-
- ferenc
-
-
-