Despite of being endorsed and used by high-profile Heavy Metal guitarists and bassists during the late 1980s and early 1990s, does the BBE Sonic Maximizer really improve your guitar’s tone?
By: Ringo Bones
After listening to Liz Phair wring out righteous tones from her Fender Duo Sonic guitar on Red Light Fever from her eponymous 2003 album for the umpteenth this past few years. I can now safely conclude that a) you don’t need to play at warp speed to perform a really beautiful guitar solo and b) gorgeously loud midranges are a guitarist’s birthright. Given my recent experiences on how the BBE Sonic Maximizer tends to make those very midrange tones sound like the visual equivalent of an airbrushed photo, I now wonder if the guitar world still really needs this quirky black box. But when it comes to Liz Phair’s guitar playing, I just couldn’t airbrush her already excellent tone - Especially not somebody with that kind of soul. Thus the question now is why did the BBE Sonic Maximizer ever gained inroads into the tone obsessed world of electric guitar playing?
After being endorsed by Megadeth and Skid Row during the Golden Age of Heavy Metal – i.e. the late 1980s and early 1990s. Almost every guitarist around the world coveted of using a BBE Sonic Maximizer just because a growing number of guitarists with a major label deal had began using one. Plus given the growing number of boom-boxes and as an audio system ad-on in both pro recording and domestic hi-fi setting, one could safely say that this is one piece of kit that’s aggressively marketed. But how did it sound?
After obtaining one rather cheaply from our local pawnshop that accepts electric guitars and related pro audio gear. All I can say that the BBE Sonic Maximizer – though can do wonders if you are recording into cassette tapes and intend to use cassette tapes as master tapes – is one of those technologically driven products that can sound mediocre, even awful, in its intended application. Its ability to boost the bass and treble ends of the spectrum tends to ruin the sound of most – if not all – applications related to electric guitar recording and / or connecting your axe to a concert PA system.
One of the main reasons that a very distorted guitar tube amplifier sounds so good is that guitar amp speakers can’t reproduce the higher-order harmonics generated as the guitar player overdrives the tubes by cranking up the amp to 11. If it does it tends to make your guitar rig to sound very shrill and somewhat weak. And there is a surprising amount of infrasonic to low bass energy put out by a typical guitar amp. Due to the guitar strings reacting in a resonant manner with the magnetic bias of the guitar’s pickups. And probably the only time when the BBE Sonic Maximizer produced a righteous guitar tone on the intro of Megadeth’s Train of Consequences from their Youthanasia album. But most of the time, the BBE Sonic Maximizer when used in electric guitar applications tend to make your guitar tone shrill and overly weak while making the bass frequencies honk like a drunken tuba player during Oktoberfest.
While I never compared one side by side, there was a similar audio processor intended to enhance the high and low end of the audio spectrum that came out during the height of the BBE craze. It was called the Aphex Aural Exciter Type C² with Big Bottom. It was supposedly claimed to enhance the high-frequency region of your recordings or electric guitar while making your 8-inch woofer sounds like a 15-inch woofer without making your rig and recordings sound muddy due to tape saturation and / or system overload. Though it was favorably reviewed in some forums by a number of guitarists for improving their tone, I haven’t yet heard it being compared in a side by side showdown with the BBE Sonic Maximizer.
From my point of view I think the BBE Sonic Maximizer and the Aphex Aural Exciter Type C² with Big Bottom were probably produced as tone enhancers by their respective makers - Probably because during the time of these products release, vacuum tubes were getting very scarce. And their respective manufacturers probably decided that since vacuum tubes – and their tone enhancing properties – are going the way of the dodo, it is only logical to create a solid-state based replacement. I can only guess how a BBE Sonic Maximizer could sound – tone wise - if the folks at BBE Sound Inc. decide to make one using Electro-Harmonix 12AX7 preamplifier tubes or equivalent.
Showing posts with label Guitar Effects. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Guitar Effects. Show all posts
Friday, October 9, 2009
Monday, September 7, 2009
Should We Be Using Op-Amps for Our Guitar Effects Fuzz Boxes
Although 99.9% of guitar effects / fuzz stomp boxes now use op-amp chips, if great tone is the goal, is it a question of should we be using op-amps instead of can?
By: Ringo Bones
If you are old – or rich - enough to experience the hi-fi wonders of the 1990s when 500 US dollar CD players began to sound as good as entry-level vinyl LP replay. Then it is more than likely that you heard the hype of the “tone enhancing” effects of premium-grade op-amp chips. After choosing to emulate my past experiments of using op-amp integrated circuit chips with audiophile credentials in guitar stomp boxes for ultimate tone. You could probably end up asking yourself should we – rather than can – be using op-amp based guitar stomp boxes? Before proceeding to the long-winded narration of my experiences with “boutique” op-amps, here’s a primer on what happens when an electric guitar is played.
Whenever you pluck the strings of your electric guitar or strum a chord, the guitar’s signal varies from a few millivolts to as high as 1 volt peak-to-peak depending upon how hard the strings are plucked or strummed or the kind of pick-up used. The electric guitar’s output signal when viewed on an oscilloscope is characterized by a sharp rise to a maximum value and then diminishes rapidly. This makes a tube-based electric guitar amplifier with a good vacuum tube pre-amp section or a fuzz box – i.e. distortion effects stomp box – a necessity if you want a pleasingly sustained tone from your electric guitar.
During the 1960s – when Jimi Hendrix and countless other guitarists – began experimenting with electric guitar effects boxes, most of these fuzz boxes were made with discrete small-signal transistors and germanium signal diodes. This provided those effect’s signature smooth tone and a long sustain compared to more recent op-amp chip based fuzz boxes. When the venerable 741 op-amp (LM741 op-amp and related variants) became available in 1966 after being made by most IC manufacturers, it was tried as an active amplifying device in guitar fuzz boxes to see how it compares to discrete small-signal transistors.
Sadly, many found out that the rate of decay is much faster than a conventional guitar fuzz box that uses discrete transistors. Op-amp based guitar fuzz boxes only became popular in the 1980s during the rise of high-decibel Heavy Metal music when the harsh sound of the op-amp based electric guitar effect fuzz box became de rigueur. Not to mention the silicon signal diodes that replaced the almost extinct germanium signal diodes only made the op-amp based fuzz boxes sound even harsher and Death Metal ready. Thus making the tonal versatility of a Marshall amp bristling with EL34 tubes really worth the very steep price premium.
By this time you could be asking yourself, if the “hi-fi world” can get away with using those gorgeously toned Electro-Harmonix reissued tubes, why can the “guitar world” benefit from using op-amps with audiophile credentials to improve the tone of their fuzz boxes? The short answer is music performance recordings, either from vinyl or CD (the two leading “state of the art” domestic mediums) has a vastly more complicated signal waveform in comparison to what a typical electric guitar produces no matter how beautifully played. Audiophile-grade JFET input op-amps like the AD845, LF356, or high slew rate types like the LM318 might be the cheapest way to make Iron Maiden or Veruca Salt sound as if they were playing right in your bedroom. But these premium grade op-amps don’t do squat – tone wise - when used in guitar fuzz boxes.
Audiophile-grade op-amps only shine when supplied with a well-regulated plus / minus 15 volts split power supply. You can’t tell the difference if you use them in place of your bog-standard LM741 found in your Hyper-Metal fuzz box being supplied by a 9-volt PP3 battery. And if you ever try to shoehorn a switching-mode power supply to power these audiophile-grade op-amps from a 9-volt PP3 in the hopes of a 12AX7 based preamplifier on the cheap. I tried it and it doesn’t work. Or it does play, but tone-wise you’re better off taking the all-tube route. An overwhelming number of fuzz boxes today are even using op-amps with much lower specs than the venerable LM741 op-amp. Good luck trying to find guitar stomp / fuzz boxes using high slew rate types like the LM318.
As it was in the 1960s as it is today, tube amps are still the best way to get the ultimate fuzz tone effects. If the contrary is true, how come I still see thirty-something housewives wearing a Lunachicks T-shirt hunched over their 1965 Fender Twin with soldering iron in one hand and a 6L6 tube in another? In truth, fuzz circuits do mirror the “quality hierarchy” found in the hi-fi world namely tubes are the best, followed by discrete transistors, and op-amps being the budget sector. Even though a skillful designer can still create great sounding gear using the right op-amp in the proper application.
By: Ringo Bones
If you are old – or rich - enough to experience the hi-fi wonders of the 1990s when 500 US dollar CD players began to sound as good as entry-level vinyl LP replay. Then it is more than likely that you heard the hype of the “tone enhancing” effects of premium-grade op-amp chips. After choosing to emulate my past experiments of using op-amp integrated circuit chips with audiophile credentials in guitar stomp boxes for ultimate tone. You could probably end up asking yourself should we – rather than can – be using op-amp based guitar stomp boxes? Before proceeding to the long-winded narration of my experiences with “boutique” op-amps, here’s a primer on what happens when an electric guitar is played.
Whenever you pluck the strings of your electric guitar or strum a chord, the guitar’s signal varies from a few millivolts to as high as 1 volt peak-to-peak depending upon how hard the strings are plucked or strummed or the kind of pick-up used. The electric guitar’s output signal when viewed on an oscilloscope is characterized by a sharp rise to a maximum value and then diminishes rapidly. This makes a tube-based electric guitar amplifier with a good vacuum tube pre-amp section or a fuzz box – i.e. distortion effects stomp box – a necessity if you want a pleasingly sustained tone from your electric guitar.
During the 1960s – when Jimi Hendrix and countless other guitarists – began experimenting with electric guitar effects boxes, most of these fuzz boxes were made with discrete small-signal transistors and germanium signal diodes. This provided those effect’s signature smooth tone and a long sustain compared to more recent op-amp chip based fuzz boxes. When the venerable 741 op-amp (LM741 op-amp and related variants) became available in 1966 after being made by most IC manufacturers, it was tried as an active amplifying device in guitar fuzz boxes to see how it compares to discrete small-signal transistors.
Sadly, many found out that the rate of decay is much faster than a conventional guitar fuzz box that uses discrete transistors. Op-amp based guitar fuzz boxes only became popular in the 1980s during the rise of high-decibel Heavy Metal music when the harsh sound of the op-amp based electric guitar effect fuzz box became de rigueur. Not to mention the silicon signal diodes that replaced the almost extinct germanium signal diodes only made the op-amp based fuzz boxes sound even harsher and Death Metal ready. Thus making the tonal versatility of a Marshall amp bristling with EL34 tubes really worth the very steep price premium.
By this time you could be asking yourself, if the “hi-fi world” can get away with using those gorgeously toned Electro-Harmonix reissued tubes, why can the “guitar world” benefit from using op-amps with audiophile credentials to improve the tone of their fuzz boxes? The short answer is music performance recordings, either from vinyl or CD (the two leading “state of the art” domestic mediums) has a vastly more complicated signal waveform in comparison to what a typical electric guitar produces no matter how beautifully played. Audiophile-grade JFET input op-amps like the AD845, LF356, or high slew rate types like the LM318 might be the cheapest way to make Iron Maiden or Veruca Salt sound as if they were playing right in your bedroom. But these premium grade op-amps don’t do squat – tone wise - when used in guitar fuzz boxes.
Audiophile-grade op-amps only shine when supplied with a well-regulated plus / minus 15 volts split power supply. You can’t tell the difference if you use them in place of your bog-standard LM741 found in your Hyper-Metal fuzz box being supplied by a 9-volt PP3 battery. And if you ever try to shoehorn a switching-mode power supply to power these audiophile-grade op-amps from a 9-volt PP3 in the hopes of a 12AX7 based preamplifier on the cheap. I tried it and it doesn’t work. Or it does play, but tone-wise you’re better off taking the all-tube route. An overwhelming number of fuzz boxes today are even using op-amps with much lower specs than the venerable LM741 op-amp. Good luck trying to find guitar stomp / fuzz boxes using high slew rate types like the LM318.
As it was in the 1960s as it is today, tube amps are still the best way to get the ultimate fuzz tone effects. If the contrary is true, how come I still see thirty-something housewives wearing a Lunachicks T-shirt hunched over their 1965 Fender Twin with soldering iron in one hand and a 6L6 tube in another? In truth, fuzz circuits do mirror the “quality hierarchy” found in the hi-fi world namely tubes are the best, followed by discrete transistors, and op-amps being the budget sector. Even though a skillful designer can still create great sounding gear using the right op-amp in the proper application.
Tuesday, July 28, 2009
Using Aging Tubes: A Dangerous Guitar Tone Tweak?
Though very, very rarely mentioned in interviews by superstar guitarists, is the use of aging tubes to create your very own unique guitar tone very dangerous to your very expensive gear?
By: Ringo Bones
I’ve probably lost count since 1997 on how many guitarists around my neck of the woods explored in finding ways to make their renditions of Veruca Salt’s Earthcrosser intro sound more “soulful”, especially by resorting to tone tweaks that could irreparably damage to their extremely expensive (3,000 US dollars MSRP) electric guitar amplifier. From connecting four 8-ohm speakers in series to a push-pull based tube electric guitar amp – which could result in a very high voltage build up of the output power tubes – to using aging tubes. Though by far, the use of aging tubes is the most common. Given that tubes are becoming very scarce compared to latest generation mobile phones – especially in the US – the “poor” unsigned amateur guitarist is more than likely be using output power tubes in his or her electric guitar amplifier that are past its prime.
I’ve read an article about the summer NAMM 1992 in Guitar Player magazine about a company introducing a digital electric guitar effects processor - with an effects setting - that emulates the sound of an aging tube, such tone never became popular. Even during the guitar-heavy musical genre of Seattle Grunge that went mainstream a few months after reading that feature.
Given that I’ve only began building and owning tube-based amplifiers in the mid 1990s, I’ve asked some veteran audiophiles on how an aging power tube sounds in a “hi-fi audio setting.” Most of them pointed out the “quirky acoustics” of the Tori Amos song China from the Little Earthquakes album as what music would sound like when played through a tube amp with output power tubes past its prime and will be arcing anytime soon.
Back in April 2009, I was asked to help an amateur unsigned guitarist who wants his performance to be video recorded for You Tube posting. He was using a family heirloom 1965 Fender Twin Reverb with aging 6L6 tubes. He did manage to conjure up a very unique tone until 30 minutes into the session when one of the 6L6 tubes started to arc and fused into its tube sockets, though it did manage to emit a very cool apocalyptic-sounding high-pitched squeal when the final chord was struck.
Given that equipment of this vintage still uses plastic / phenolic resin output power tube sockets for the 6L6 output tubes / valves instead of being upgraded to military-spec porcelain tube sockets with silver plated contacts when it became widely available during the mid-1990s. Fortunately, only the output section of his Fender Twin was damaged. But it resulted in a very expensive repair bill, especially when you live in a place where most people live on slightly less than a dollar a day.
It is still a mystery why guitar digital effects processors still don’t add an aging tube emulator proviso on its menu of effects, especially ones that do advanced 24-bit 96-kHz digital signal processing are now relatively cheap and widely available. An aging tube sound / tone obtained through digital domain physical modeling is a much safer way of doing things compared to using actual aging tubes on your very expensive tube-based electric guitar amp since complete catastrophic failure resulting from such practice is not that far from impossible. Maybe guitar effects manufacturers are ignoring this sector of the market at their own peril since the sound of an aging tube is very interesting and very soulful.
By: Ringo Bones
I’ve probably lost count since 1997 on how many guitarists around my neck of the woods explored in finding ways to make their renditions of Veruca Salt’s Earthcrosser intro sound more “soulful”, especially by resorting to tone tweaks that could irreparably damage to their extremely expensive (3,000 US dollars MSRP) electric guitar amplifier. From connecting four 8-ohm speakers in series to a push-pull based tube electric guitar amp – which could result in a very high voltage build up of the output power tubes – to using aging tubes. Though by far, the use of aging tubes is the most common. Given that tubes are becoming very scarce compared to latest generation mobile phones – especially in the US – the “poor” unsigned amateur guitarist is more than likely be using output power tubes in his or her electric guitar amplifier that are past its prime.
I’ve read an article about the summer NAMM 1992 in Guitar Player magazine about a company introducing a digital electric guitar effects processor - with an effects setting - that emulates the sound of an aging tube, such tone never became popular. Even during the guitar-heavy musical genre of Seattle Grunge that went mainstream a few months after reading that feature.
Given that I’ve only began building and owning tube-based amplifiers in the mid 1990s, I’ve asked some veteran audiophiles on how an aging power tube sounds in a “hi-fi audio setting.” Most of them pointed out the “quirky acoustics” of the Tori Amos song China from the Little Earthquakes album as what music would sound like when played through a tube amp with output power tubes past its prime and will be arcing anytime soon.
Back in April 2009, I was asked to help an amateur unsigned guitarist who wants his performance to be video recorded for You Tube posting. He was using a family heirloom 1965 Fender Twin Reverb with aging 6L6 tubes. He did manage to conjure up a very unique tone until 30 minutes into the session when one of the 6L6 tubes started to arc and fused into its tube sockets, though it did manage to emit a very cool apocalyptic-sounding high-pitched squeal when the final chord was struck.
Given that equipment of this vintage still uses plastic / phenolic resin output power tube sockets for the 6L6 output tubes / valves instead of being upgraded to military-spec porcelain tube sockets with silver plated contacts when it became widely available during the mid-1990s. Fortunately, only the output section of his Fender Twin was damaged. But it resulted in a very expensive repair bill, especially when you live in a place where most people live on slightly less than a dollar a day.
It is still a mystery why guitar digital effects processors still don’t add an aging tube emulator proviso on its menu of effects, especially ones that do advanced 24-bit 96-kHz digital signal processing are now relatively cheap and widely available. An aging tube sound / tone obtained through digital domain physical modeling is a much safer way of doing things compared to using actual aging tubes on your very expensive tube-based electric guitar amp since complete catastrophic failure resulting from such practice is not that far from impossible. Maybe guitar effects manufacturers are ignoring this sector of the market at their own peril since the sound of an aging tube is very interesting and very soulful.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
