In the 11R facebook group we recently discussed the use of BBE Sonic Maximizers and/or Exciters in combination with the 11R. Here's a quick review of my test yesterday. Oh, and some more stuff...
1. BBE Sonic Maximizer
I used a BBE Sonic Maximizer 882 (the biggest model, stereo and XLR-connectors) in serial connection with the 11R (stereo XLR out of 11R into XLR in of the BBE, then out to the board. Listening to it with my studio nearfield monitors, I was impressed at first glance. Not so much by the "process" controls, which merely add presence and "bite" or "shimmer" on the top end. That seemed too much for me, even when dialing it in just a little bit. But more with the lo-end control which really adds "thump" and push in the bass frequencies. Besides that there is a peculiar improvement, that's hard to describe. The entire signal sounds more "well-organized" and "cleared up". I don't know how to describe it otherwise. But when listening to it for a longer period of time I thought: hm, let's see how far we get with the parametric EQ instead of the BBE. And I discovered during continuous a/b-switching that I can in fact add some of the low-end punch with the EQ, but the BBE-processed version always loses some midrange punch compared to the pure 11R tone. There is a midrange edge to the sound that makes it cut through that gets a little lost when using the BBE. It's subtle and it may just be relative in perception because the bass and treble are more dominant with the BBE, but it's there. After an hour of switching it in and out I came to the conclusion that I'd rather dial in some extra low-end on the EQ than use the BBE. Which is a good unit, and may be very helpful on dull or flat signals or to emphasize vocals. It just doesnt' seem worth the effort and additional rack space for me.
2. Behringer Edison
But then I ran a second test with another unit. And boys, you'll be surprised. I bought a cheap psycho-acoustic processor last week that you may be frightened by. A Behringer Edison. That's an old Behringer unit designed to broaden the stereo field. See here:
http://www.behringer.com/EN/Products/EX1.aspxIt splits up the signal into the stereo part and the center part and gives you controls for the width of the stereo part, the width of the low-mid-frequencies in particular and for the stereo position (l/r) and volume of the center part of the signal. So you can make your stereo effects wider and adjust the volume/nearness/distance of the center part. Since all this affects the perceived volume it does have an output volume control additionally.
Boy. This does make a difference to stereo delays. Am I impressed! I dialed in my favourite Lukather sound (with ping-pong delays) as well as my U2-style delay sound and was able to make it huuuuuge. Even after correcting the perceived loudness it sounded way thicker, wider, more stereo, 3-dimensional. Just better. It doesn't do anything if you feed it with a mono signal, i.e. a blackface clean-sound with no modulation sounds the same. Except maybe that ambience and room effects appear louder, so you might want to dial back the reverb a tad. Then when you switch to the big stereo sounds (clean or distorted) you'll get the impression of a big wet/dry/wet system.
This one's definitely a keeper. I'm afraid our sound guy will ask me not to dominate the entire band „wink“-Emoticon but it is really impressive. Plus you can always move back if you overdid and quickly revert the signal to a more mono-style, centered sound. Very easy to use, good s/n ratio, no affection of dynamics. Didn't expect that from a Behringer unit. Maybe it's because it is one of their early ones. Get one if you find it, they're ridiculously cheap and worth a try!
3. Focusrite Saffire Pro 14
In a german forum there's been some discussion about how modelers can gain in quality by using better a/d converters. This idea of course requires a few prerequisits: the modeler needs to have digital inputs (that's true for the 11R, although they're mostly being used for recording/reamping) and the interface needs to have hi-z instrument input and digital outputs.
I started to look around for an interface with these features and a reasonable price point (I didn't want to opt for the cheap stuff since I thought the converters should definitely be superior to those of the 11R). I ended up getting a Focusrite Saffire Pro 14 - it's relatively new, works with the same specs as the 11R and sports both hi-z input and digital output (S-PDIF). I got an S-PDIF suitable cable and was good to go.
Setting things up was easy: the Focusrite needed to be switched to hi-z using the Mac app available as a free download, the 11R needed to be set to "Rig Input: digital" and off we went.
I was surprised to find out that the fundamental sound quality was much better from the 11R's own converters than from the Focusrite. I guess a lot has to do with the appraised "True-Z" input. The signal was brighter, more transparent and more "present" than the one from the Focusrite interface. I could not notice any improvement in dynamics nor transparency or latency.
I might dig into comparing deeper in the coming days, but for now I can see: either the entire approach is not feasable or you really need to go for a much better (and much more expensive...) interface to hear a difference. Which makes the entire thing questionable: would it make sense to spend as much money on an interface plus some bucks for an 11R if you can get a Kemper profiler for less? I doubt it.
Luckily I can use money-back on the Focusrite, so it hasn't been a risky thing for me. Lesson learned: the converters of the 11R seem to stand the test against today's interfaces, at least the budget ones.
If anybody of you has a suggestion of an interface that might really be superior, please let me know. I might try that one as well.
For now, I think my rack for the coming months will contain the 11R, the Behringer Edison and the Logidy EPSi. Curious to checking that out live!
Previous Topic
Index