• 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 freeLog in
    Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.

Sonic Maximizer/Compressor Question

I have been running a BBE Sonic Maximizer in our PA's rack into a Yamaha EMX5000 powered mixer with good results for quite a while. It is run thru the entire board, not just certain channels. I just bought a BBE MaxCom Compressor that has a Sonic Maximizer in it. Should I leave the current Maximizer in place and add the Maxcom( which is going to compress 2 vocal channels) or is there a way to use the MaxCom to replace the current Maximizer and get the compression benefits for vocals AND the Sonic Maximizer properties of the Maxcom for the entire board?
 
get the compression benefits for vocals AND the Sonic Maximizer properties of the Maxcom for the entire board?

it looks like no.

There's only one input and output (per channel). The compressor and the Maximizer are connected within that channel. It looks like there is a switch to bypass the maximizer part, but there would need to be separate I/O's for each function, to do what you are asking.


The two channels could be run independently mono, or stereo linked. But I would assume you need those two channels for board left and right already.
 
If you are going to use the Maxcom's compression on just the vocals, then use the aux sends of your mixer on each of their two channels. You do not need a Y cable, unless you mean an insert cable for a mixer that just has one TRS patch point for both send and return.
 
The older SM manual on hand recommends not using Aux sends / returns. Mains / channel inserts are a better choice. I had a similar situation and somebody (forget who) suggested re-assigning both vocal channels to a shared single subgroup and then using that subgroup's insert for introducing outboard processors.

Honestly, I would go with separate dedicated units for the task at hand. Use the two compressor channels sans SM processing and, if really needed, a second used SM (cheap!) in the left / right main inserts. Or some variation thereof.

Packaging the two products together is like putting salt and pepper in the same shaker.

Riis
 
The older SM manual on hand recommends not using Aux sends / returns. Mains / channel inserts are a better choice. I had a similar situation and somebody (forget who) suggested re-assigning both vocal channels to a shared single subgroup and then using that subgroup's insert for introducing outboard processors.

Honestly, I would go with separate dedicated units for the task at hand. Use the two compressor channels sans SM processing and, if really needed, a second used SM (cheap!) in the left / right main inserts. Or some variation thereof.

Packaging the two products together is like putting salt and pepper in the same shaker.

Riis

Thank you. That is exactly what I needed to know.
 
The older SM manual on hand recommends not using Aux sends / returns.
For "Sonic Maximizing" by itself, that is right. Compression of individual channels or submixes is a different story (I know you know that Zoober, just clarifying for jtc).
Honestly, I would go with separate dedicated units for the task at hand. Use the two compressor channels sans SM processing and, if really needed, a second used SM (cheap!) in the left / right main inserts.
Yes, that's how I'd run it too, in this case.
Packaging the two products together is like putting salt and pepper in the same shaker.
It was a good idea for overall processing of stereo mixes. E.g. if you have some home recordings that sound dull, and have inconsistent levels, then the MaxCom is a handy one-box solution.
 
IME the best use for a Maximizer is as a doorstop. I've never heard one fail to degrade the sound of a system.

this.

it's the well-worn salt analogy: if the meal stinks, you can choke it down with enough salt. dumping salt on good cooking ruins it.
 

Latest posts