Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
BBE Sonic Maximizer- the horses mouth
- Thread starter judd levison
- Start date
Tom,
Thanks for your insights.
I would love to hear your feedback once you've had the chance to check out these new units. They are about as dis-similar to one another (the 383 and the BMAX') as a Bajo Sexto is to a Pedulla.
The DI on the BMAX-T is the circuit from our new DI-1000 Direct Box. And the BMAX uses the circuit from our new DI-100X Direct box. Really very nice. The inspiration for our new DI's being Radial's JDI and JV48.
We set up the compressor a little differently. Everyone has such mixed emotions about compressors that it's hard to give you something other than "i think it sounds just peachy". It works nicely as a basic leveller but a dedicated compressor will obviously give you much more versatility. The Presonus is a great choice.
Materials-wise, I'm pretty anal about that kind of stuff. My background is as a recording studio guy in L.A. and the Valley for a number years in the 80's. The first thing I do with any new piece of gear is pop the top to see what's really going on. I would certainly encourage you to do that. We went to the extent of using teflon-coated silver wire for wiring the tube socket to the PCB in the BMAX-T (it's the only "fly-wired" component in the unit).
I honestly believe in the BMAX' and everyone that hears them is pretty amazed at good they are.
My ramblings for your ramblings.
Peace out
Thanks for your insights.
I would love to hear your feedback once you've had the chance to check out these new units. They are about as dis-similar to one another (the 383 and the BMAX') as a Bajo Sexto is to a Pedulla.
The DI on the BMAX-T is the circuit from our new DI-1000 Direct Box. And the BMAX uses the circuit from our new DI-100X Direct box. Really very nice. The inspiration for our new DI's being Radial's JDI and JV48.
We set up the compressor a little differently. Everyone has such mixed emotions about compressors that it's hard to give you something other than "i think it sounds just peachy". It works nicely as a basic leveller but a dedicated compressor will obviously give you much more versatility. The Presonus is a great choice.
Materials-wise, I'm pretty anal about that kind of stuff. My background is as a recording studio guy in L.A. and the Valley for a number years in the 80's. The first thing I do with any new piece of gear is pop the top to see what's really going on. I would certainly encourage you to do that. We went to the extent of using teflon-coated silver wire for wiring the tube socket to the PCB in the BMAX-T (it's the only "fly-wired" component in the unit).
I honestly believe in the BMAX' and everyone that hears them is pretty amazed at good they are.
My ramblings for your ramblings.
Peace out
JD,
The solid state BMAX is equal to the "T" in this regard.
The bottom-end on both is rippin'.
Thanks so much for your interest
The solid state BMAX is equal to the "T" in this regard.
The bottom-end on both is rippin'.
Thanks so much for your interest
DJ,
There's also a couple of posts here you might want to reply to (toward the end--by jokerjkny & jivetkr).
Other BBE BMAX thread
- Apr 3, 2003
- 35,516
- 19,951
- Disclosures
- Editor-in-Chief, Bass Gear Magazine
I, for one, would be very interested to hear these new preamps run through the wringer by the Basstasters!
DJ, I appreciate your involvement here, and laud your for (quite successful) efforts to remain informative and un-biased. Please stay involved.
One question I would have for you would be if I already have a preamp that I am quite happy with (say, an Eden Navigator
), but I would like to add some BBE process to my signal path, what unit would you recommend, and where would you place it? On the Navigator, I have options like pre or post EQ effects loops, individual effects loops for stereo or biamping, and a side chain effects loop.
Thanks again, Tom.
DJ, I appreciate your involvement here, and laud your for (quite successful) efforts to remain informative and un-biased. Please stay involved.
One question I would have for you would be if I already have a preamp that I am quite happy with (say, an Eden Navigator
), but I would like to add some BBE process to my signal path, what unit would you recommend, and where would you place it? On the Navigator, I have options like pre or post EQ effects loops, individual effects loops for stereo or biamping, and a side chain effects loop.Thanks again, Tom.
hi tom,
definitely the 482i would be the unit.
the BBE Process works best as far downstream as you can get it before the power amp.
if you have a look at the block diagram of your Navigator you can probably suss out which of the various loops is closer to the final output of your preamp section. optimally it should go right between the premap out and power amp in.
hope this helps.
definitely the 482i would be the unit.
the BBE Process works best as far downstream as you can get it before the power amp.
if you have a look at the block diagram of your Navigator you can probably suss out which of the various loops is closer to the final output of your preamp section. optimally it should go right between the premap out and power amp in.
hope this helps.
- Apr 3, 2003
- 35,516
- 19,951
- Disclosures
- Editor-in-Chief, Bass Gear Magazine
DJ,
Is it possible to have too much process? I use a 482i in my bass rack. The bass is fed into the mixer where there's another bbe, a 362 model. Is that ok? Thanks.
Jay
Is it possible to have too much process? I use a 482i in my bass rack. The bass is fed into the mixer where there's another bbe, a 362 model. Is that ok? Thanks.
Jay
Jay,
you always need to let your ears be the judge...
there will be benefit from having BBE's in both locations.
the one in the p.a. rack is sort of doing a different job than the one in your bass rack.
thanks
you always need to let your ears be the judge...
there will be benefit from having BBE's in both locations.
the one in the p.a. rack is sort of doing a different job than the one in your bass rack.
thanks
Judd,
I used a 362 in my rig for many years with great success. I then changed to the 482 (the original, not the "i" variant) to gain independent dual channel control. I didn't find the effect to be nearly as pleasing as the original 362 (sorry I sold it for the 482).
Is the 482i back up to snuff? What happend between the the 362 and the 482?
I used a 362 in my rig for many years with great success. I then changed to the 482 (the original, not the "i" variant) to gain independent dual channel control. I didn't find the effect to be nearly as pleasing as the original 362 (sorry I sold it for the 482).
Is the 482i back up to snuff? What happend between the the 362 and the 482?
hi Eric,
regarding your 362 vs. 482 conundrum, this is why i always say that we need to let our ears be the judge.
the 362 has much less headroom than either of the 482's, we consider the chip in the 362 to be "semi-pro"...but, hey, the most famous drummers in the world are recorded with SM57's on their toms and snare!
maybe if you could quantify a little better what the differences are between them, to your ears, i can understand what you're hearing.
the 482i and 882i (they are identical with the 482i sans balanced outputs) are built the best we can build something: 1% all-metal film resistors, phenolic circuit boards, really wide fat traces on the circuit board and the Sonic Maximizer chip.
the older 462's and 422's were a little too scooped-out in the midrange and this was corrected in the 482 versions...maybe this is still the case with the 362 and is what you are hearing...
we'll keep trying to make them better.
thanks for the input.
regarding your 362 vs. 482 conundrum, this is why i always say that we need to let our ears be the judge.
the 362 has much less headroom than either of the 482's, we consider the chip in the 362 to be "semi-pro"...but, hey, the most famous drummers in the world are recorded with SM57's on their toms and snare!
maybe if you could quantify a little better what the differences are between them, to your ears, i can understand what you're hearing.
the 482i and 882i (they are identical with the 482i sans balanced outputs) are built the best we can build something: 1% all-metal film resistors, phenolic circuit boards, really wide fat traces on the circuit board and the Sonic Maximizer chip.
the older 462's and 422's were a little too scooped-out in the midrange and this was corrected in the 482 versions...maybe this is still the case with the 362 and is what you are hearing...
we'll keep trying to make them better.
thanks for the input.
Judd, thanks for your thoughtful reply.
It's been awhile and I don't have either unit available anymore so I'm failing to remember enough to provide descriptive words. Maybe it was the difference in the mids.
It's been awhile and I don't have either unit available anymore so I'm failing to remember enough to provide descriptive words. Maybe it was the difference in the mids.
I asked Eden about this as I had the same question. The reply was try it and see what you like best. I was looking for more of a technical response based on the location in the different gain stages.
My experience has been that the post tone stereo loop works the best for most things (I only run one channel though). Less ambient noise then the pre tone loop. And the parallel loop does really weird things.
I'm thinking the best place may be between the pre and the power amp. I haven't tried it.
- Apr 3, 2003
- 35,516
- 19,951
- Disclosures
- Editor-in-Chief, Bass Gear Magazine
You're probably right, there, but seeing as how the Navigator has XLR outs, and my PLX 3002 has XLR ins, the balanced 882i might be the ticket.
Tom.
Hey Judd, there's a big typo in yer TB banner ad. "The best bass preamp every made?" Can I have some free gear for saving your ad campaign? 
(kidding)
(kidding)
heya Jon... welcome to TB
I don't have any questions for you, just thought I should let you know that a 462 I bought about 3 years ago is the only thing in my rig that doesn't change... heads, cabs, effects, they all go in circles, but the 482 is always there! I also have one of the little 264s that I use with home audio stuff... I am assuming that the 264 doesn't have the guts of the 462, correct?
P@
edited for brainfarts
I don't have any questions for you, just thought I should let you know that a 462 I bought about 3 years ago is the only thing in my rig that doesn't change... heads, cabs, effects, they all go in circles, but the 482 is always there! I also have one of the little 264s that I use with home audio stuff... I am assuming that the 264 doesn't have the guts of the 462, correct?
P@
edited for brainfarts
Originally posted by jondog
Hey Judd, there's a big typo in yer TB banner ad. "The best bass preamp every made?" Can I have some free gear for saving your ad campaign?
Maybe their Chief Designer's last name is "EVERY".
How cool is this? Thanks for dropping in Judd.
I've been using BBE for many years, I still have one of the original BBE Stinger pedals in a box somewhere...
Upgraded from that to a 462 which is still in my rack, one of those "I don't play without it" boxes.
But lately I've stopped using it. I'd like to tell you why and get your feedback on these points.
First, (and this is an old problem) is gain matching. The 462 sounds best when I run it from preamp out back to power amp in, but the signal there is way too hot for the 462 and drives into clipping much too easily. On the other hand, when I put it in the "buffered" effects loop on my amp the signal isn't hot enough to drive the BBE higher than about -20db on the LED panel. I've learned to live with it there, figuring it's better than clipping - but it still doesn't sound as good. I understand this problem has a lot to do with the amp I'm using, but my question is do the newer BBE processors handle gain matching any better? If so, how? And why is there still no input gain control to do the matching yourself?
Second - Monster cables. Since I converted my whole rig over to Performer 500 Bass cables, I get buckets of more clear low end than I sometimes know what to do with. I certainly don't need the low contour on the BBE anymore, that just sounds muddy in comparison to the added lows I get from the Monster cables. If I use it at all, it's to cut the lows. The other thing about Monster cables is they claim to time-shift/phase-align the frequencies to accomplish what sounds like the same thing the BBE process is doing. My ears tell me it's definitely doing *something*, and although the BBE also does *something* in this regard, my question is can the phase alignment be over-corrected? If a signal is already phase-aligned when it hits the BBE, what happens? If you can, please shed some light on the BBE/Monster Bass interaction.
Lastly, I've found that when I use distortion my 462 just cleans up the distortion sound too much. Is this related to the overly-scooped mids on the 462 generation chips? Are the new generation BBE chips any more distortion-friendly?
Thanks for reading this, looking forward to your reply.
I've been using BBE for many years, I still have one of the original BBE Stinger pedals in a box somewhere...
Upgraded from that to a 462 which is still in my rack, one of those "I don't play without it" boxes. But lately I've stopped using it. I'd like to tell you why and get your feedback on these points.
First, (and this is an old problem) is gain matching. The 462 sounds best when I run it from preamp out back to power amp in, but the signal there is way too hot for the 462 and drives into clipping much too easily. On the other hand, when I put it in the "buffered" effects loop on my amp the signal isn't hot enough to drive the BBE higher than about -20db on the LED panel. I've learned to live with it there, figuring it's better than clipping - but it still doesn't sound as good. I understand this problem has a lot to do with the amp I'm using, but my question is do the newer BBE processors handle gain matching any better? If so, how? And why is there still no input gain control to do the matching yourself?
Second - Monster cables. Since I converted my whole rig over to Performer 500 Bass cables, I get buckets of more clear low end than I sometimes know what to do with. I certainly don't need the low contour on the BBE anymore, that just sounds muddy in comparison to the added lows I get from the Monster cables. If I use it at all, it's to cut the lows. The other thing about Monster cables is they claim to time-shift/phase-align the frequencies to accomplish what sounds like the same thing the BBE process is doing. My ears tell me it's definitely doing *something*, and although the BBE also does *something* in this regard, my question is can the phase alignment be over-corrected? If a signal is already phase-aligned when it hits the BBE, what happens? If you can, please shed some light on the BBE/Monster Bass interaction.
Lastly, I've found that when I use distortion my 462 just cleans up the distortion sound too much. Is this related to the overly-scooped mids on the 462 generation chips? Are the new generation BBE chips any more distortion-friendly?
Thanks for reading this, looking forward to your reply.
