What is a BBE Sonic Maximiser

[rogeryu_ph]

It isn't for everybody. Boogdish has it right as far as the function. It works well for me...instead of thinning and processing the tone, it makes mine sound thicker and more pleasing to the eardrum. YMMV

As far as DIY-ing it, you can't do it perfectly. BBE has a clamp-down on the chip. You can only get it from them. However, there is a "workalike" called the BB&E from stm. Check it out. http://www.diystompboxes.com/smfforum/index.php?topic=49860.msg379816#msg379816

Edited to add: My experience is based on the stompbox version which BBE claims to be the exact circuit from the rack versions.

Hi cheeb,
That post by stm was 2 years ago, I already PM stm 2 days ago and asked permission to share me the project and still waiting for his reply maybe his busy.... I just want to verify his project through breadboard but have some question regarding to "time alignment" IC to be used, I think its another dual opamp. My question is by using just quad opamp for both is possible on his design.
BTW has someone tried it? is it workalike? I do have all the parts and pieces. I'll be using it with my GT10. I read so much good feedback and heard some video using this with GT10 and other MFX and of course even analog i'm sure would benefit from this. If in case your reading me out STM, this is not a doubt to your work but a great leap and contribution to the DIY community as well and I admire your such effort in doing it.

Roger       

[calpolyengineer]

I was interested in this project too. I have been looking around a bit to see if he had posted anything about the dynamic high frequency expansion too. He says it has 11 opamps or something, but if it works well it could be worthwhile.

-Joe

[DougH]

When I ran sound on a system using old peavey mark II speakers and some CS800 amps the maximizer was absolutely essential. After several attempts using it with my newer EV/QSC PA it was designated useless and sold.

A long time ago I used two amps separated with a dd5 on E/D mode where one amp was delayed by milliseconds. It made an enormous difference like a maximizer with tighter low-end and clearer highs but much better overall quality. It did smooth out the sound a little which could be good or bad.

30 yrs ago the sound man in my band got this device called a "dynamic expander". I'm not sure exactly what it was or what it did but it was a similar kind of product to the modern day BBE. The difference it made to the p.a. sound was night and day. It took a muddy, chaotic sounding mix that we could not get a handle on how to fix, and cleared it up clear as a bell. You could really hear everything beautifully when it was switched on. It was the closest thing to a "magic" box that I have ever heard wrt music gear. This kind of stuff is really useful for that sort of thing.

[stm]

...I already PM stm 2 days ago and asked permission to share me the project and still waiting for his reply maybe his busy...

Yes, been quite busy at work. Sorry for the late reply.

Allow me to point this older post that pretty much summarizes my findings on the subject:
http://www.diystompboxes.com/smfforum/index.php?topic=50498.msg378276#msg378276

I just want to verify his project through breadboard but have some question regarding to "time alignment" IC to be used, I think its another dual opamp. My question is by using just quad opamp for both is possible on his design.

Time delay opamps are any type, like TL072 or the like.  A quad opamp can be used, however you will find there is no need for the time delay section.

One last thing that would be good is to have separate controls for higs and lows. This weekend I'll post the dual control version, as the original circuit I posted was squeezed to one knob to fulfill the FX-X requirements.

[rogeryu_ph]

...I already PM stm 2 days ago and asked permission to share me the project and still waiting for his reply maybe his busy...

Yes, been quite busy at work. Sorry for the late reply.

Allow me to point this older post that pretty much summarizes my findings on the subject:
http://www.diystompboxes.com/smfforum/index.php?topic=50498.msg378276#msg378276

I just want to verify his project through breadboard but have some question regarding to "time alignment" IC to be used, I think its another dual opamp. My question is by using just quad opamp for both is possible on his design.

Time delay opamps are any type, like TL072 or the like.  A quad opamp can be used, however you will find there is no need for the time delay section.

One last thing that would be good is to have separate controls for higs and lows. This weekend I'll post the dual control version, as the original circuit I posted was squeezed to one knob to fulfill the FX-X requirements.

Hi stm,
I just so happen I read first your PM before reading your latest post here ........ A dual control version might be more ideal to start with. I'll wait for this version as you suggested. Thank you so much again.

Roger

[stm]

Check here for an implementation that follows the response of the NJM2150 BBE chip.  It includes both LO and HI boost controls, it has increased maximum boost capability, and its central frequency is tuned down a bit as this worked much better with guitar signals.

http://www.aronnelson.com/gallery/main.php/v/STMs-Circuit-Ideas/BBE/

[rogeryu_ph]

Great, thanks for the effort stm. I owe you one.
BTW, I built a DOWNWARD EXPANDER NOISEGATE using both TL071 and CA3080 http://www.diystompboxes.com/smfforum/index.php?topic=66277.0
I'm sure it's not the same, this is more of a NOISEGATE but they both have "EXPANDER" keyword on it
I'm still not sure of the SONIC MAXIMIZER but got some hint from video as well in many comments 
Anyway, I'll give you a feedback on this.

Roger

[ashcat_lt]

I can't hardly believe we got this far, and even through Mr Hammer's excellent reply without anybody correcting the big blunder in that early post.  The speed of sound is constant at a given temp/humidity/pressure.  Hi-freq sounds waves propagate exactly as fast as Low-freq waves.  The issue of phase smearing or delay comes mostly from a) poor crossover design and b) misalignment between tweeter and woofer. 

I haven't but skimmed the linked threads on this issue.  Is it any more than an all-pass filter/phase rotator?

[calpolyengineer]

The speed of sound is constant at a given temp/humidity/pressure.  Hi-freq sounds waves propagate exactly as fast as Low-freq waves.

While this doubtfully was recognized by BBE, the speed of sound is not exactly constant over the frequency spectrum. To quote from wikipedia, "The medium in which a sound wave is travelling does not always respond adiabatically, and as a result the speed of sound can vary with frequency."

Also found this, "The speed of sound is also slightly sensitive (a second-order effect) to the sound amplitude, which means that there are nonlinear propagation effects, such as the production of harmonics and mixed tones not present in the original sound (see parametric array)." Air distortion, yeah! 

But for all practical purposes, the speed of sound is not frequency dependent.

-Joe

[oldrocker]

I've used the BBE SM software plugin for mixing and mastering for years.  I've never heard any stand alone units like the rack mount or pedal versions.  I can say though that in some cases I've turned some muddy muffled sounding recordings into usable listenable music with it.  However this was in combination with other mastering tools.
Has anyone ever compared the plugin with the hardware versions?  I always wanted to take that plugin and put in a stompbox so I could use it anywhere.  I saw some schem versions in here at one time and was always thinking of building it.

[Mark Hammer]

Whatever coefficient of propagation one chooses or accepts, in a sound reinforcement situation what often counts a lot more is not the speed of frequencies beamed directly at you in a pure environment, but rather the effective arrival time.  Low frequencies tend to disperse much wider than high frequencies, with the result being that the harmonics you hear may well arrive earlier in time than the fundamental they are attached to (or need to be heard as attached to), simply because they beam out straight but the bass you hear bounced off of something and landed on your ear drum a wee bit later.

And while ashcat is quite correct that crossovers and misaligned drivers in 2 3, or 4-way speakers are classic recognized sources of group delay, they are apparently not the only ones.  This is why you will often see things like small-value caps placed in parallel with larger value ones when in series with the audio path.  The sheer number of potential sources of cumulative group delay is the very reason why something like the BBE units are so helpful in a sound reinforcement situation - because you never really know how many of those sources are at work and how much misalignment might be present at the moment.  You can buy or rent lease speakers that are famed for having exquisite alignment but that doesn't necessarily take care of the problem in a reliable way all the time.

Keep in mind that the problem to be solved is not one of what's on the scope, but rather one of what lands on the ear drum when.  All the electronic stuff is simply a potential source of things landing asynchronously, and the BBE process is simply a way of making sure that doesn't happen.

Again I will draw attention to the phrase "sound reinforcement situation".  There are plenty of circumstances where such correction adds little.  Moreover, sticking a BBE box between your instrument and amp is not guaranteed to address all subsequent sources of group delay, especially if the user tweaks the box's controls so that it sounds good to their ears through their amp (as opposed to the house PA).  I think we can agree, based on collective experience here, that the BBE process is a terrific little addition to the sound-processing arsenal.  At the same time I think we can also agree that it is not to be treated as snake oil that will fix any and every problem, nor even aspirin.  It needs to be a good fit to the context.

[rogeryu_ph]

stm hi,
Just finished breadboarding both the dual version enhancer part and the time alignment part. I tested the enhancer yesterday but not yet the time alignment this morning. I find the enhancer part more of an EQ and yes it definitely enhance the sound when tweaking both Hi and LO. Later i gonna try with the time alignment. Do you have the third part which is the dynamic hi frequency expansion schem?
I still can't compare the project to the real BBE sm co'z I'm still not well verse to the real BBE sound and yet there's no available or authorized dealer or music shop here in the Philippines carry the BBE as far I as I know. But I found this on youtube as well with the exciter comparision. Check it out.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8zuPOl6ZZU0

Mark hi,
I got the downward expander noisegate from you man and again thanks. Do you have an EXCITER schem or project to share? I browse on your hammer.ampage.org site but to no avail.

Thanks guy,
Roger

[frank_p]

He. he . he ... Just like describing wine...   But what does it do for real.  (equation wise ...) This topic got me curious of what the effect really is.

Reminds me of the description that some gave of the DOD FX85, but in a more subtile "bassy" and "surround" way.  I may be off the topic.  Any how, seems it could apply to various instruments.

Looks like it makes a guitar sound more like a Spanish harp...  More lows withs harmonic contents.   Sorry, I just let my imagination go...

Anyway, sound like I would not put that on my medieval Spanish harp, but more on a tele in a twin...
May be completely wrong...

[rogeryu_ph]

He. he . he ... Just like describing wine...   But what does it do for real.  (equation wise ...) This topic got me curious of what the effect really is.

Reminds me of the description that some gave of the DOD FX85, but in a more subtile "bassy" and "surround" way.  I may be off the topic.  Any how, seems it could apply to various instruments.

Looks like it makes a guitar sound more like a Spanish harp...  More lows withs harmonic contents.   Sorry, I just let my imagination go...

Anyway, sound like I would not put that on my medieval Spanish harp, but more on a tele in a twin...
May be completely wrong...

Just to give an example http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2XwWLEkpnD8
Though he never switched on/off in the demo to lets us hear the difference but i'm sure like the way it sound.. He did mentioned in his comment reply that he used the rack version not the stomp version. 

Roger

[frank_p]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JGRKRMvtImU&feature=related

Yes, I must admit it is prerry hard to describe what it does to the sound...
Not that it does nothing...

[Nasse]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xwCwOQ2EDnk Sorry I could not resist, going to sleep...

[Somicide]

IME, it'll sound great in bass applications.  I find it made my guitars sound a little thin, though.  Solid construction though.

[nordine]

IME, it'll sound great in bass applications.  I find it made my guitars sound a little thin, though.  Solid construction though.

true, if what are you looking for is "boomy" and a kind of modern sound

but for retro sound, woody bass tone, tends to not help there ....its what i've found anyways, gives you that 'active bass' sound

[CodeMonk]

...
Also, if you want your amp to sound like a blanket has been pulled from it, a better way to do it would be to upgrade your speakers. 

Thats the way I heard a few people describe it. Sounded like a close analogy to me.

I have the rack mount. I tried the stompbox one in GC and using a valvetronix amp, I tested it.
Couldn't really hear any difference.
But, since I'm such a pawn shop whore, and saw it in a pawn shop for $45 and offered them $25. I got it for $30 out the door. Could not resist the price.
I added an effects loop to my AD30VT, and ran it through there.
Then I could tell the difference.

[calpolyengineer]

...
Also, if you want your amp to sound like a blanket has been pulled from it, a better way to do it would be to upgrade your speakers. 

Thats the way I heard a few people describe it. Sounded like a close analogy to me.

I have the rack mount. I tried the stompbox one in GC and using a valvetronix amp, I tested it.
Couldn't really hear any difference.
But, since I'm such a pawn shop whore, and saw it in a pawn shop for $45 and offered them $25. I got it for $30 out the door. Could not resist the price.
I added an effects loop to my AD30VT, and ran it through there.
Then I could tell the difference.

Are you talking about the difference between off and on, or between the rackmount and stompbox? From what BBE says, the circuit in the stompbox is exactly the same as rack. Of course, thats whay they say.

-Joe