Audio "Exciters"??

G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Can Some one Tell me who makes a good Brand of Audio Exciter??
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

>From: stressmane@aol.com (Stressmane)
>Date: 11/8/04 11:39 PM Eastern Standard Time
>Message-id: <20041108233918.06500.00000165@mb-m22.aol.com>
>
>Can Some one Tell me who makes a good Brand of Audio Exciter??
>
>

Aphex Aural Exciter is a good one.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On 09 Nov 2004 05:18:46 GMT, bruwhaha58097238@aol.com (Raymond) wrote:

>>From: stressmane@aol.com (Stressmane)
>>Date: 11/8/04 11:39 PM Eastern Standard Time
>>Message-id: <20041108233918.06500.00000165@mb-m22.aol.com>
>>
>>Can Some one Tell me who makes a good Brand of Audio Exciter??
>>
>>
>
>Aphex Aural Exciter is a good one.

Aural exciters: Handjobs for the audio inept.



http://liondogmusic.com
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Rick Ruskin" <liondog@isomedia.com> wrote in message
news:uhl0p0hm3iar6vsr68q91loc659iah27ja@4ax.com...
> On 09 Nov 2004 05:18:46 GMT, bruwhaha58097238@aol.com (Raymond) wrote:
>
> >>From: stressmane@aol.com (Stressmane)
> >>Date: 11/8/04 11:39 PM Eastern Standard Time
> >>Message-id: <20041108233918.06500.00000165@mb-m22.aol.com>
> >>
> >>Can Some one Tell me who makes a good Brand of Audio Exciter??
> >>
> >>
> >
> >Aphex Aural Exciter is a good one.
>
> Aural exciters: Handjobs for the audio inept.
>


i have a love/hate relationship with a bbe "sonic maximizer".
 

Bryson

Distinguished
Aug 11, 2004
66
0
18,580
0
Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Rick Ruskin wrote:

> On 09 Nov 2004 05:18:46 GMT, bruwhaha58097238@aol.com (Raymond) wrote:
>
>
>>>From: stressmane@aol.com (Stressmane)
>>>Date: 11/8/04 11:39 PM Eastern Standard Time
>>>Message-id: <20041108233918.06500.00000165@mb-m22.aol.com>
>>>
>>>Can Some one Tell me who makes a good Brand of Audio Exciter??
>>>
>>>
>>
>>Aphex Aural Exciter is a good one.
>
>
> Aural exciters: Handjobs for the audio inept.
>
>
>
> http://liondogmusic.com

And sometimes a handjob's just the ticket.
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Stressmane" <stressmane@aol.com> wrote in message news:20041108233918.06500.00000165@mb-m22.aol.com...

> Can Some one Tell me who makes a good Brand of Audio Exciter??


For the sake of simplicity, the Aphex "Type B" exciter is a cool tool to
have around for giving life to poorly recorded tracks. The "Type C" is
a POS (IMHO), and the BBE line is a very different beast in operating
principle - ok for more of a 'time-alignment' thing when dealing with
synth tracks and sampled sounds.

Probably the most usable of the lot is the Aphex Type III... almost as
long out of production as the Type B, but a lot more bells & whistles
and can be used for light noise reduction as well.

The best 'exciter' is a well recorded track and a well balanced mix.


--
David Morgan (MAMS)
http://www.m-a-m-s DOT com
Morgan Audio Media Service
Dallas, Texas (214) 662-9901
_______________________________________
http://www.artisan-recordingstudio.com
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <20041108233918.06500.00000165@mb-m22.aol.com>,
Stressmane <stressmane@aol.com> wrote:
>Can Some one Tell me who makes a good Brand of Audio Exciter??

I don't think such a thing really exists.

The two big ones are the BBE and the Aphex, both of which have very different
spectra. For salvaging poorly-made recordings, I think they are both about
par although they do sound different.

Everyone and his brother are making these things now, though. Rolls makes
one. There is even a module available from ADT that goes into their V700
racks.

I think any one of them is probably useful for salvage work, and that's really
about all the exciter is useful for.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Stressmane wrote:
> Can Some one Tell me who makes a good Brand of Audio Exciter??

* Prosoniq mixCiter [1]
* Steinberg Spectralizer
* BBE [2] also has a DirectX version

Of these three, I liked the mixCiter most. Spectralizer may sound a bit
harsh.

[1]
<http://products.prosoniq.com/cgi-bin/register?service=showdetail&refno=3>
[2] <http://www.bbesound.com>

Johann
--
Hint: Netzkultur und Umgangsformen sind Thema.
(*Tönnes in <cc3b3o$i57$00$1@news.t-online.com>)
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <419099dc$0$20943$9b4e6d93@newsread2.arcor-online.net>,
johannburkard@nexgo.de says...
> Of these three, I liked the mixCiter most. Spectralizer may sound a bit
> harsh.

The Oxford Inflator plugin (available on PowerCore and ProTools) is also
in essence an exciter, though it's not marketed that way. It worked
really well for me yesterday to make the lead vocal cut through a busy
a cappella mix.

--
Jay Levitt |
Wellesley, MA | Hi!
Faster: jay at jay dot eff-em | Where are we going?
http://www.jay.fm | Why am I in this handbasket?
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Scott Dorsey" <kludge@panix.com> wrote in message news:cmqle2>

> I think any one of them is probably useful for salvage work, and that's
> really
> about all the exciter is useful for.



Exciters can help salvage a dull and unrepeatable track. But it's better to
get the tone /life you want in teh recording stage.

Routine exclusive use is tiresome, and to be avoided.

geoff

PS Remember when Winelight came out, and the cover notes enthused about the
recording made extensive use of the then-new Aphex Aural Exciter ? Whatever
happened to Grover ?

PPS I prefer Oral Exciters .....
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Geoff Wood" <geoff@paf.co.nz-nospam> wrote in message
news:awikd.723$3U4.61952@news02.tsnz.net...
>
> "Scott Dorsey" <kludge@panix.com> wrote in message news:cmqle2>
>
>> I think any one of them is probably useful for salvage work, and that's
>> really
>> about all the exciter is useful for.
>
>
>
> Exciters can help salvage a dull and unrepeatable track. But it's better
> to get the tone /life you want in teh recording stage.
>
> Routine exclusive use is tiresome, and to be avoided.
>
> geoff
>
> PS Remember when Winelight came out, and the cover notes enthused about
> the recording made extensive use of the then-new Aphex Aural Exciter ?
> Whatever happened to Grover ?

For awhile there, that was part of the licensing/use agreement - you had to
credit it on the album.

Neil Henderson
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Neil Henderson" <neil.henderson@sbcglobal.netNOSPAM> wrote in message news:Tbpkd.26122$Al3.5739@newssvr30.news.prodigy.com...

> For awhile there, that was part of the licensing/use agreement - you had to
> credit it on the album.
>
> Neil Henderson


Careful there... you're showing your age... How about a hundred bucks
per running minute to use the 'exciter' on your mastering edit ?


--
David Morgan (MAMS)
http://www.m-a-m-s DOT com
Morgan Audio Media Service
Dallas, Texas (214) 662-9901
_______________________________________
http://www.artisan-recordingstudio.com
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 11:06:38 -0500, David Morgan \(MAMS\) wrote
(in article <i0rkd.3098$2h7.1448@trnddc03>):

>
> "Neil Henderson" <neil.henderson@sbcglobal.netNOSPAM> wrote in message
> news:Tbpkd.26122$Al3.5739@newssvr30.news.prodigy.com...
>
>> For awhile there, that was part of the licensing/use agreement - you had to
>> credit it on the album.
>>
>> Neil Henderson
>
>
> Careful there... you're showing your age... How about a hundred bucks
> per running minute to use the 'exciter' on your mastering edit ?
>
>
>

And to add to that bit of history....

DIDJA know that the aural exciter was the result of a bad chip in a monitor
amp circuit? Something sounded nasty during a mix session. They tracked it
down to a bad piece of circuitry that was spewing harmonics on one channel.
When they combined to mono, (reducing the amount of effect) they sort of
liked what it did. The rest is history.

Regards,

Ty Ford



-- Ty Ford's equipment reviews, audio samples, rates and other audiocentric
stuff are at www.tyford.com
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

"Ty Ford" <tyreeford@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:5tadnV9c5rt5Fg7cRVn-qw@comcast.com...

> And to add to that bit of history....
>
> DIDJA know that the aural exciter was the result of a bad chip in a
monitor
> amp circuit? Something sounded nasty during a mix session. They tracked it
> down to a bad piece of circuitry that was spewing harmonics on one
channel.
> When they combined to mono, (reducing the amount of effect) they sort of
> liked what it did. The rest is history.

That's interesting, because the folks at Aphex have also told a very
different story: the founder of the company said he built a Dynakit tubed
power amp (I think a Mark III) and miswired it. He said he liked the result
so much that...

The fact that they're telling two wildly divergent stories about how the
idea got started leads me to suspect that both of them are bullshit. I
suspect the founder read Russell Hamm's famous article in JAES and decided a
distortion generator would be just the ticket.

Peace,
Paul
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

In article <Z7Okd.7869$7i4.4509@bgtnsc05-news.ops.worldnet.att.net>,
"Paul Stamler" <pstamlerhell@pobox.com> wrote:

> "Ty Ford" <tyreeford@comcast.net> wrote in message
> news:5tadnV9c5rt5Fg7cRVn-qw@comcast.com...
>
> > And to add to that bit of history....
> >
> > DIDJA know that the aural exciter was the result of a bad chip in a
> monitor
> > amp circuit? Something sounded nasty during a mix session. They tracked it
> > down to a bad piece of circuitry that was spewing harmonics on one
> channel.
> > When they combined to mono, (reducing the amount of effect) they sort of
> > liked what it did. The rest is history.
>
> That's interesting, because the folks at Aphex have also told a very
> different story: the founder of the company said he built a Dynakit tubed
> power amp (I think a Mark III) and miswired it. He said he liked the result
> so much that...
>
> The fact that they're telling two wildly divergent stories about how the
> idea got started leads me to suspect that both of them are bullshit. I
> suspect the founder read Russell Hamm's famous article in JAES and decided a
> distortion generator would be just the ticket.
>
> Peace,
> Paul



I thought it was a Dyna preamp, but, same idea.

Anyway, I'm amazed they ever got a patent on this at all.

Somewhere in my pile of papers, I have a copy of a patent that predates
the Aphex patent by many years, and yet the circuit concept is
essentialy identical.

Didn't Aphex sue Behringer for stealing their "idea"? I found that to be
darkly humorous...

-bruce seifried
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

bruce seifried <vze2qwtg@verizon.net> wrote:
>
>Anyway, I'm amazed they ever got a patent on this at all.
>
>Somewhere in my pile of papers, I have a copy of a patent that predates
>the Aphex patent by many years, and yet the circuit concept is
>essentialy identical.

That's okay, there have been plenty of folks patenting the same system
since then too. TDS is one of the more interesting ones. For some
serious amusement, check out patent 5,361,304. The circuit isn't the
same (and in fact the circuit does not function the way the patent says
it does.... the effect produced is the result of overshoot and ringing
in the coil), but the overall results are quite similar.

>Didn't Aphex sue Behringer for stealing their "idea"? I found that to be
>darkly humorous...

No, Aphex sued Behringer for stealing their circuit design and their PC
board layout, to the point that the Aphex logo was still on the Behringer
boards.
--scott
--
"C'est un Nagra. C'est suisse, et tres, tres precis."
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

>No, Aphex sued Behringer for stealing their circuit design and their PC
>board layout, to the point that the Aphex logo was still on the Behringer
>boards.

Not to open old wounds, but did anybody actually see one of the Behringer
circuit boards with Aphex written on it? Or is that another Urban Legend?

I'm told the owner's manual was a very close rip off, and I have no doubt that
the circuit was very similar too. As I understand it, Uli worked for Aphex at
one time, so I can understand how circuit ideas "migrate." But the logo?
 

Mike

Distinguished
Apr 1, 2004
979
0
18,930
0
Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

Rick Ruskin <liondog@isomedia.com> wrote in message news:<uhl0p0hm3iar6vsr68q91loc659iah27ja@4ax.com>...

> >
> >Aphex Aural Exciter is a good one.
>
> Aural exciters: Handjobs for the audio inept.
>
>
>
> http://liondogmusic.com

My analogy of audio exciters/BBE thingys is they are a lot like eating
cotton candy. When you start out they taste great. By the time you are
done you have a bad taste in your mouth and your hands are all sticky.

Mike http://www.mmeproductions.com
 
G

Guest

Guest
Archived from groups: rec.audio.pro (More info?)

chuxgarage@aol.com (ChuxGarage) wrote in message news:<20041112102355.21770.00000501@mb-m14.aol.com>...
> >No, Aphex sued Behringer for stealing their circuit design and their PC
> >board layout, to the point that the Aphex logo was still on the Behringer
> >boards.
>
> Not to open old wounds, but did anybody actually see one of the Behringer
> circuit boards with Aphex written on it? Or is that another Urban Legend?
>
> I'm told the owner's manual was a very close rip off, and I have no doubt that
> the circuit was very similar too. As I understand it, Uli worked for Aphex at
> one time, so I can understand how circuit ideas "migrate." But the logo?

I wouldn't believe it for a second. It's just too preposterous a deed
to have been committed by any sane person and, say what you like about
him, Uli Behringer is clearly not unhinged.

The venom spewed forth against Behringer in this group and elsewhere
is extraordinary (though it seems to have abated of late), no doubt
once fuelled by an effective whispering campaign by the company's
indignant competitors.

Let us not forget that the revered Jim Marshall took his first step on
the road to fame and riches by stealing Fender's amplifier designs.
And wasn't Gibson's humbucker patented? Not aware that anybody has
ever paid royalties on their stolen versions of the design. And what
about PRS, anybody? Paul has just been *proved* by a court of law to
be a thief. Yes, an absurd finding, I agree, but no doubt every bit as
valid as the possibly apocryphal case that establishes Behringer in
the popular mythology as a coven of rogues.

Raglan
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
tophatclay Audio 0
B Audio 0
DeadlyBFB Audio 0
readbeancass Audio 2
jdip13 Audio 1
A Audio 2
IntrepidBongos Audio 0
C Audio 4
dylcn Audio 0
I Audio 0
pROYductions Audio 1
jessitokki Audio 0
filthyspoons Audio 1
M Audio 1
KaygeVS Audio 1
L Audio 1
ET5115 Audio 1
D Audio 2
Kemalmohd Audio 0
R Audio 1

ASK THE COMMUNITY