Conference napalm::commusic_v1

    Not to long ago, Electronic Musician ran an article on how to build
    a $10 "harmonic sweetener".
    
    Aphex jumped all over them screaming 'patent infringement'...
    
    Hmmmmm....
    
    Edd

    
    re .1
    
    What issue?  What issue?  
    
    ralph
    
    

    Don't know the month.... sometime around last spring.
    
    Edd

    I'd love to get a copy of the schematic. Can anyone assist in this
    endevor?

						Jens

    
    The circuit, believe it or not, looks a lot like a fuzz box.  The
    signal passes through a distortion stage which generates new harmonic
    overtones which are then mixed back in with the original signal.
    
    And just think that people used to rent Aphex units in the 70s for
    hundreds of bucks a day to "sweeten" the sound.  They could have
    just used a Big Muff  8^)  8^)  8^)
    
    

    Don't have the literature here in front of me at work, but I don't
    think Alesis uses the term exciter.  This is good, since their
    description of how it works doesn't sound like an exciter.
    
    It's really a dynamic eq, not a non-linear animal like an exciter.
    It looks at the signal and if there is a signal above the noise
    threshold in the treble band, it applies a boost.  I forget how
    elaborate the curve of the dynamic response is, and what the applied
    eq curve is.
    
    My MicroGate came with the one manual for the MicroGate, MicroLimiter
    and MicroEnhancer, (yeah, that's what they call it).  No real meat to
    this manual. It probably didn't cover any real details.
    
    BTW, although I am skeptical about this box, I LOVE my MicroVerb and
    MicroGate.  I almost want to "collect the entire set."  They are really
    rugged, nicely made, very quiet, etc.  None of the physical quality
    problems that Alesis has had with the MT-8 and HR-16.
    
    	Eirikur
    

    
    Re: .6
    
    Along similar lines, the Barcus-Berry BBE units supposedly are also
    not exciters like Aphex.  The BBEs supposedlay actually enhance
    the slew rate, to restore the "punch" to transients.  
    
    As an engineer, I'm not sure how you can do that but I've heard
    the BBE and it does clean up dull sounding tapes without that Aphex
    "edge" that makes me reach for the tone controls.

    A few questions are in line here. First off, what does an Exciter
    d and hwhat would an electric guitar/keyboard player use one for?
    
    Second, what issue of Electronic Musician was this home brew exciter
    project in?
    
    Thanx for any info and help.
    
    Brad
     

    The exciter schematic was printed in the September '87 issue of
    Electronic Musician.
    
    Edd

    
    the Aphex Aural Exciter and the BBE unit (Maxie, 802) are trying
    to achieve similar results but go about it in completely different
    ways.
    
    You guys have pretty much figured out the Aphex, it synthesizes
    harmonic overtones and mixes them in dynamically with the input.
    The Type C does this primarily for the midrange.
    
    The BBE is a different beast. It doesn't generate any harmonics
    at all. What it does is split the frequency spectrum into three
    bands (lo, mid, high...what a concept), and then applies a delay
    to the high and low bands, in varying, dynamic amounts. This puts
    the mids 'in phase' and varies the phase of the lows and highs.
    This creates a 'psychoacoustic' effect of clearer mids. The lows
    are delayed quite a bit, so there's an eq built in to allow you
    to boost the lows to compensate for the aggressive mids and highs.
    That's about how I think it sounds...aggressive. You have to use
    it *very* sparingly or you'll trash the sound. Some people love
    'em, others don't like them at all. I'm in the latter catagory.
    
    CdH
    

    
    re 1..                        
    
    
    I have the Microenhancer and also had the Aphex out on loan from
    the shop. The enhancer works well I use it in the prescibed way.
    I.E. om mixes and for brightening up individual instruments. I noticed
    with the Aphex that if you were not carefull extra hiss could be
    picked up from the source and "excited". The Enhancer seems to work
    on a principal of only adding the Highs or Enhancement when the
    higher frequencies are present. Consequently no hiss on the quiet
    bits.
    
    Great for sizzly hihats and Cymbals and accoustic guitars..
                             
    					Paul.
      

    Given a choice which would you buy, the alesis micro or the Aphex?
      
    dbii

    
    Didn't I just explain that.
    
    I had them both on loan and kept the alessis .
    
   Saved 50 pounds also.
    
    					Paul  

    Paul, It wasn't clear to me in what order you tried/bought them...
    
    excuse me
    
    dbii

    For my own twisted reasons, I'd like to build a version of the circuit
    in the EM article, but I don't think I have it because of recent
    purges (the peril of living in finite space).   Anybody got that issue?
    
    It reminds me that I meant a long time ago to play around with simple
    processing circuits.  
    
    	Eirikur
    

me too (article on building...)

Chad

    The "twisted reasons" wouldn't perchance have to do with that ProCo
    distortion box hooked up to your Clavinette, would it?
    
    Or were you going to build it into the Clavinette?
    
    	-Bill
    

I found a copy of the article. Send me mail at CSGDEC::ROACH and I'll send you 
a copy, unless someone knows of a central distribution point. 

I have 0 knowledge of how to build a circuit, so if this is good and it works, 
it would be nice to get one built?? 

As we say in marketing, let's make a deal?

Geoff

    Lest anyone be mistaken, remember, this unit is NOT a $10 Aphex
    unit you can build yourself, but some of the circuitry apparently
    does come close...
    
    Edd

    
    
    Sorry it took so long to reply to DBII...
    
    I tried the aphex and the enhancer at the same time.  I found the
    result to be not dissimilar(sp). Other than the Aphex was permanently
    switched in, and added some noise to the circuit, the alessis only
    seems to add the effect when it is required and is therefore quiet
    most of the time. I did read a report on the alessis that said they
    didn't think it worked at all and the xouldn't hear any difference.
    
    I certainly can.
    
    					Paul.
    
                                     
    
    			
    
    
    

    Has anyone tried out the Barcus Berry Sonic Maximizers (enhancer).
    I heard that its model 822 is the type used in most studios, but
    they also offer a model 422 which is the the $300 price range.
    These units offer a phase correction operation on the high frequencys.
    This is done without adding harmonics. They use detector circuitry
    that make amplitude changes to high frequency bands, which pass
    through a VCA.
    
    Has anybody compared with this unit??
    
    Mike____

    wjb of guitar notesfile fame told me he felt the BB units were the
    best on the market for under $1K....where is he today....
                           
    dbii

    
    Re: .21
    
    see .10
    
    CdH
    

    
    Re:.10,.21
    
    Also, the BBE people claim that the device can be used in live
    applications to make up for the time alignment differences between
    drivers in a 2 (or more) way speaker system.  
    
    It sounds good on paper because phase alignment, both in live and
    tape situations is the biggest culprit in trashing the high end
    and "openness" of the sound.
    
    I've use a 402 with a cheap (like garage band) PA setup and it made
    a *big* difference there.  In a better system I can see where it
    might get a bit extreme.

    
    I've only used it in top shelf systems. I've also used it when duping
    cassettes between two very good decks, and the results were similar.
    I just don't like the effect, but many engineers do.
    
    As for correcting time alignment between drivers, that is very much
    a function of the front end of the system and it's components. It
    might help out with driver alignment, but the only way to really
    dial it in is to have seperate delays for each frequency band. In
    a multi-way system, you know the frequency bands of each part of
    the system, and can adjust the delay appropriately. A good way to
    do that is with pink noise. You adjust the delays at the crossover
    points to yield even response thru the crossover region. How do
    you do this with the BBE? You'd be varying the effect throughout
    the spectrum. The only adjustments are effect level and low frequency
    compensation. It sounds like a marketing claim to me.
    
    CdH
    

    I spoke with Shane at Prodfound last night and Reid at East coast
    soudn last night also....here's what they had to say abotu enhancers
    
    Shane feels that the 3 most popular enhancers go in this range
    
    Aphex  fair
    Alesis better
    Barcus berry best
    
    Shane is blowing out Barcus berry 402's for $209 (these are end of life
    but he claims they are still something to rave about, he's got the
    BArcus 422 for $239 (enhanced (yuk yuk) slightly with more headroom
    and who knows what else)
     
    Reid claims the 422 blows the 402 away hands down. (they don't have
    any 402's so this may be why....) East coast sound has 422's for
    $219....Reid concurs with Shane's opinions of the performance of
    the three enhancers...
    
    dbii

    I was directed to a review in the November issue of Home & Studio
    Recording Magzine, they have great praise for the 422. They claim
    the new version 422 is better than the 402 becase of better LED
    readouts,graduated knobs, and better quiter chips.
    
    mc

    Well, someone was kind enought to send me the schematic for the
    '$10.00 harmonic sweetner'. I built it out of radio Shack parts for
    around $60.00 for a sterio version in a nice box with power supply 
    (these cost nearly as much as the rest of the stuff does). It works
    very well, but I did change the gain on the stage after the stage that
    adds the high frequency distortion (sizzle). For those of you with
    the schematic, this involved changing R15 from 10K ohms to 4.7K ohms.
    The problem was that there was an area of maybe 1/16th of a turn that
    was where you would want use the effect & it was hard to adjust it in
    very close. Changing the level of the signal improved the range. I also
    added another 4.7 K ohm resistor between pin 12 of IC 2d and the 10K
    potentiometer, again allowing for better adjustment range.

    If you are interested in what parts to get, I used 3 LM324 quad op amps
    (be aware that the pin outs are all different from the ones suggested),
    ceramic .0047 uf caps and all of my electrolytic caps were 10 uf (C1
    and C6 on the schematic). Most of the resistors can be obtained by
    buying one of the 100 pack of 5% 1/4 watt resistors (all except the
    22K's). I also used a plus/minus 12 volt supply instead of the
    plus/minus 15 that they suggested. It should also work on 2 9 volt
    batteries.

    It sounds very similar to the Ahpex C unit that I tried out few months
    ago (that was too expensive for me), except it is touchier to adjust
    (the changes that I listed help quite a bit, but ain't perfect). I used
    linear taper Potentiometers, maybe audio taper would have helped some.

    My COMMUSIC VI submission was sent in before I built this, so I haven't
    used it on anything yet, but you can bet that I will.

							 Jens

    The circuit was lifted by the author from an Apex unit, Apex has
    more to it than just this circuit but this is the heart of the unit.
    Apex took action against EM to stop publication (after the fact)
    as the circuit is proprietary.  
    
    interesting to hear that it works...
    
    dbii

>    < Note 1773.29 by DNEAST::BOTTOM_DAVID "Everyday I got the blues" >
>    The circuit was lifted by the author from an Apex unit, 

    The claim was that the author independently discovered the same
    principle.. 

I too received the article (THANKS!!) but have not built it.  It doesn't
seem to complex a thing (the principle is simple) so I doubt that legally
Aphex could so anything as long as he didn't actually open one up or
use an APhex schematic or anything.

CHad

    The Harmonic Sweetener circuit sure works wonders on microphones &
    guitars into my Porta-studio (an old model 144). It gets those highs
    added without tossing in much of any hiss that I would normally add
    when going thru a graphics equalizer. I don't like what it does to a
    distortion box & guitar however. It seems to work best to record the
    guitar/distortion onto the tape deck, then when mixing down the whole
    mess, put the exciter on the sterio output of the Porta-studio (that
    way you can adjust the added highs better). This thing is addictive!!

	Jens_with_another_indispensible_toy_that_he_never_knew_he_needed_
	until_he_got_one_(why_does_this_always_seem_to_be_the_case???)