The Aphex 204 Exciter/Big Bottom

[bobby_z]

Hididdelyho!

Does anyone around here have any info they'd like to share on this piece of hardware here?

http://www.aphex.com/204.htm

It's not something I'm thinking of getting ATM, but I can see myself getting something similar happening somewhere down the road.


Pieces,
Bobby

[jazzius II]

i've never been very impressed with all these big arse/fat bottom boxes.......i'd rather just pump in some quality sub low with something like the Ibis......doing the old pultec trick....cut and boost.......maybe next week i'll love them.......crazy world......actually, maybe the BBE one is quite useful.......hmmmmm

[MASSIVE Master]

I had a 204 in here for a while... Yeah, the "big bottom" thing is pretty worthless.

The highs on the other hand, as much as I hate to say this, had a reasonably Pultec-like quality to them IF the use was very subtle - Similar to the sound of just turning a Pultec "ON" and leaving all the knobs down.

Past that point, I didn't care for it.

[hourglass]

Right now in my control room are both a BBE 482 and an Aphex with "Big Bottom."

But -- they're each in separate guitar rigs.

As such, run thru the effect loop, they're great for tightening up dirt guitars. The one rig has the BBE bypassed when switching to clean settings...

I never found much use for 'em in a mix situation, but that's just me...

ryan

[NeoVXR]

nice to have one!
but when you use it in an audible way, esp. in the sum output, you get a very typical "vintage" like sound, which was over-used e.g. in 80ies disco or glam-rock productions. IMO it fits to vinyl sound best.
new models are more subtle and have better S/N ratio, but still remain pretty non-linear and work with "intelligent" distorton.
it can be a great effect with instruments or mic chains.

a BBE is much different.

today there are newer principles to enhance the ends of the spectrum.
you might listen through a number of exciters, enhancers, revivers and the like, to feel where the aphex is located.
also, such devices have always been used to overcome limited quality of gear, tape and quick'n dirty mixes. in the business, this is quite a point, there are many big hits out there like that.

btw aphex mic preamps and FM radio mastering units look brilliant in their tech specs!

[Ruphus]

I have a modern Aphex 204 ( they must be varying depending on the time of build, newer being better ). I have used it once on a mix which I had done with not so great gear.

Aphex says that their patented method would NOT envolve distortion, but it seems to me that it does. One has to be very conservative in measures when using it.

I used it to fatten up the kick which it pretty much did, but it also made it fuzzy. And on the mix I used the HF section to give it some shine.

The result seemed good and bad to me in the same time. Admittedly that thing gives the mix some glue and added some swing to the high female voices in there.

However the brittleness of the convertors used was emphasized as well by what I would think to be distortion.

Made me wonder how this thing could apply to mixes recorded with better gear. Can´t tell though, because that thing broke down after maybe 2 hours of use and since the time that it has come back from repair months ago I havn´t even opened the package.

I´m keeping it for who knows maybe some use some day. Might be results could be much better on material tracked with my new front chain. However, I am almost sure that the day when I could be having a good EQ the 204 might appear less of sense.

And for glueing I have heard a certain plugging which can do so great ...
Might be the 550 Euros once paid for the 204 to have been waisted money.

( Also have a BBE BMax-T which has an enhancer build in, but not tried yet, because havn´t come to get me a bass to plug in as other things like new mics ate the budget until now. )

Ruphus

[NeoVXR]

it's not exactly distortion but kind of self-correlation or multiplying the signal by itself. the logic and settings decide when and how and what bandwith, part of it is a high-pass...

[JohnMcD]

To be honest, if the Aphex is used in the right way, it is much safer than EQ. Equalization boost "raises" the volume level on the track or mix. Aphex doesn't, at least in moderate settings.

On the 204, you gotta watch the green light to see how much sustain is being added when working with the optical big bottom. If the green light is fading slowly or is staying lit between bass notes, then it is mud. If you see it punching in and out on notes, like a kick drum for example, then you are getting "impact". This thing can go low if you push it.

As for the highs, everyone has different opinions. An interesting thing to think about. Has anyone heard of the exciting compressor? Motown trick I believe. Well, that is what the Aphex is supposed to "sound" like if used correctly. Don't know how I got this information, so don't take my word for it.

The highs do get brittle, but only after a lot of processing. It's not designed for sparkle. It is to "cut" through the material and take its own space when applied. So don't bother trying to use it for gloss.

Aphex exciters were most likely used for tape because of obvious reasons. But in broadcasting, it was probably a good "pre-emphasis" before transmitted so as to retain the signals integrity when captured.

By the way I own one.

-John

[kraftrourke]

does anyone own the SPL Vitalizer? a studio ive worked at had it and it always sounded much nicer to me than the aphex. and it has a stereo widener. dont know how different they are in the way they work but the spl is expensive.
i have the aphex and used to use it on mixes or bussed guitars ever so slightly.

kraftrourke

[gizeh12]

How is the low of the aphex204?? Is it comparible with a compounder?

[travisbrown]

I've got an older one. I used to find it way too easy to overuse, but I loved it on big BG vocals. Got tired of hearing it on whole mixes (not me - others)

Now I keep it in my live acoustic guitar rig. I kick it in and out and it adds a nice sizzle and boom on occasion. I use MAXXBASS when I need some DAW low end.

[rwhitney]

Like others have said, the high boost on the 204 can be useful in very small amounts. There's something slightly "cheap" about the sound, though, so I sold mine.

[ddageek]

Aphex and BBE are nothing but distortion boxes one odd order one even order I always forget which is which!

[TAVD]

I have a 204. It doesn't get used much. Moderation is the key and even then, I wouldn't dare put in on the mix buss or anything important. It's fine for synths and e-drums or maybe some old school U2 dub bass.

Distortion boxes? Not sure, but I do like distortion boxes.

[GYang]

Originally Posted by gizeh12

How is the low of the aphex204?? Is it comparible with a compounder?

Completely incomparable.
Compounder does usable dynamic EQing on low end, Aphex is pretty unusable.
I still keep it, just as kind of effect on some electronic instruments, it distorts in strange way and it does what no other gear do, but it's not good for processing natural sounding tracks or 2-buss tracks as it kills many subtle details and make good mix sounding smaller, less defined, plastic and artificial.
Still I don't plan to sell it

[bleeding ears]

I've had an Aphex 204 for a few years, but it is pretty much redundant now.

I used it in a live rig in small clubs, over the stereo mix, which was quite effective in bringing out the kick and vocals if used in small amounts.

I've been working in studios for the last few years and haven't really found a use for it, so it's just gathering dust at the mo.