Aphex Aural Exciter vs. Sonic Maximizer

[teejay]

So I'm looking into moving a lot of equipment from pedals to racks. I'm looking into rackmount eqs. I'm trying to decide between the Sonic Maximizer which a ton of people use and have great things to say about. Or the Aphex Aural Exciter which on paper sounds amazing, but I have never been able to find anything about anyone using them for guitar applications, just PA use.

Any of you fine ladies and gentlemen of SS.org have an opinion one way or the other? It would be greatly appreciated. Thanks guys!

 

[Duosphere]

No matter whatever companies say those aural exciters are just low/high boosters, I already saw a lot of electronic engineers showing their circuits and proving it.
Just pump lows around 80Hz and highs above 6KHZ and results will be the same.
They make middy mixes sound less nasal and more open but any eq could do the same.
Better getting a good graphic equalizer cause you'd have control on frequencies you want/need to cut/boost.

 

[Alphanumeric]

Glorified EQ pedals.

Unless you have to dial in mids on 10 for your tone and have the bass/gain on 0.5 for that modern "sounds like a bandpass on that guitar" djent tone, there's no point.

 

[teejay]

I dont play djent so no worries there. but I do use an eq pedal, and as i stated before i want to move my pedals from my board to rackmount to save space.

 

[Duosphere]

There are rackmount graphic equalizers since.............forever.

 

[teejay]

i know man, but im not a huge fan of the graphic eqs. i'd rather have a parametric just because its easier to mess with

 

[mesaboogie6l6]

I've used the Aphex aural exciter, big bottom (the red one) designed specifically for electric guitar and they are awesome, it's a foot pedal and I know you are looking for rack mounts, the one you are thinking of is used for live sound.

 

[MetalDaze]

I have one of the older blue BBE rackmount ones and I like it. They don't get a lot of love on SSO, but it works for me

 

[Leveebreaks]

I used to own a BBE, and it did define the bass end better(slightly) at the cost of making everything sound very odd, overcompressed and digital. Even if you hate 10 band eqs they are still better than the BBE though, and way more flexible if you change from active > passive pups etc

 

[TheDepthsWillRise]

I used to run a sonic maximizer on my dual rec, and ended up ditching it because it sounded harsh and wasnt terribly flexible. I've also used an aural exciter on the mesa rig, a rockerverb rig, and engl rig and always liked the sound in moderation. Granted, it may be just an EQ, but it's an EQ I find very intuitive to use.

 

[Duosphere]

i know man, but im not a huge fan of the graphic eqs. i'd rather have a parametric just because its easier to mess with

Easier?
Dude a graphic equalizer has different pots with frequencies names, you just choose a frequency then cut/boost it, how could something be easier than that?

 

[teejay]

yes you can define your sound more with a graphic eq if you know what you're doing, but i dont feel like messing with 15 different slider knobs everytime i decide to try and mess with my tone. a parametric i can adjust a few knobs and be good.

 

[GizmoGardens]

I'd get a parametric EQ before I got another Maximizer. I've had good results with Ashly gear, so the PQX571 might be something you could look into.

 

[GunpointMetal]

Every band we've played with where the guitarist uses a Sonic Maximizer the guitars disappear in the band. Sounds awesome on its own, but basically all the boosting it does goes away with bass and cymbals, leaving you with a shell of defined midrange with no cut or nuts.

 

[mcleanab]

I have an Aphex 204 with the Optical Big Bottom. I took it out of my guitar rig and use it on just drum tracks and synth tracks and it's awesome.

When I had my two 2x12's, it was great at adding the low end thump that the cabs themselves couldn't achieve (they were two Gallien Krueger 212gs's loaded with Swamp Thangs and Governor/Wizard). It was great for that, but I also wasn't playing with a band.

 

[Elric]

No matter whatever companies say those aural exciters are just low/high boosters, I already saw a lot of electronic engineers showing their circuits and proving it.
Just pump lows around 80Hz and highs above 6KHZ and results will be the same.
They make middy mixes sound less nasal and more open but any eq could do the same.
Better getting a good graphic equalizer cause you'd have control on frequencies you want/need to cut/boost.

This. Times a billion. Get a good paramteric EQ if possible. Otherwise, a graphic. Either way you have a much more precise and useful tool. Maximizers/Exciters are not useful for guitar in general, IMHO.

 

[iron blast]

I have both a Aphex and a 31 band eq and the Aphex is a entirely different beast. I entirely disagree with the people making claims that it does the same thing.

 

[FILTHnFEAR]

Every band we've played with where the guitarist uses a Sonic Maximizer the guitars disappear in the band. Sounds awesome on its own, but basically all the boosting it does goes away with bass and cymbals, leaving you with a shell of defined midrange with no cut or nuts.

^^^Truth.

I used to use a Sonic Maximizer. I thought my tone was great by itself but play with my band and it went bye-bye. Very frustrating. Don't waste your time and money having a nice rig just to rape it with a Maximizer, like I did.

I don't even wanna hear my rig without my graphic eq in the chain.

 

[Given To Fly]

Do guitarists use parametric EQ's in their live rigs? I mean, a good parametric EQ costs more than pretty much any piece of guitar equipment?

 

[PF Chang]

I prefer an EQ, but a sonic maximizer after a cab sim into the PA sounds good.