BX_Digital
If I had 60,000 euros spare, I'd buy 2000 copies of BX & give them away free to 2000 Scope users on Z. What a hoot that would be, supporting Creamware & giving away presents at the same time. As it stands however, I don't have 2 baked beans to rub together & need to rob the elderly to eat, so it's not likely to happen at the moment unfortunately.
if you want to sponsor 2k copies, you'd need(*) 600k Euro - which would certainly please them... 
(*) summer special expired on 17th (if I got that right from the email...) - so you'd need more than a million now
cheers, Tom
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: astroman on 2006-09-18 05:00 ]</font>
(*) summer special expired on 17th (if I got that right from the email...) - so you'd need more than a million now
cheers, Tom
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: astroman on 2006-09-18 05:00 ]</font>
Probably for 2k copies the summer special could be extended, also because after such a sale I see them all having a nice fall in the caribbean islands....On 2006-09-18 04:57, astroman wrote:
if you want to sponsor 2k copies, you'd need(*) 600k Euro - which would certainly please them...
(*) summer special expired on 17th (if I got that right from the email...) - so you'd need more than a million now
cheers, Tom
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: astroman on 2006-09-18 05:00 ]</font>
-
Crickstone
- Posts: 244
- Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 4:00 pm
- Location: Canada
Like Gainman, I processed some CDs that I know inside and out with bx and was amazed what I heard and learned when auditioning in either M or S mode. Quite an eye opener on how things fit in the mix. These lessons for me are worth every sale penny I spent on bx. And simply really not just a tool for mastering. It made some incredible nuances to some patches from my trusty old Oberheim Xpander...I do not regret for a moment this purchase...but sadly to all those that missed the sale..save up it is truly an amazingly plug...
Some Listening Tests
--------------------
As I mentioned in my previous post, I have used a set up where switching the inputs of the control room device I can monitor one of the following:
1) Regular stereo.
2) Left channel only, sent to both L and R monitors.
3) Right channel only, sent to both L and R monitors.
4) BX_Digital mono signal (M = L+R), sent to both L and R monitors.
5) BX_Digital stereo signal (S = L-R), sent to both L and R monitors.
Here are my observations on some songs.I refer to the different monitoring options with the numbers above.
Artist: Adrian Legg; Album: Wine, Women & Waltz; Song: Silent Night
Comments:
This is just one acoustic guitar with a very nice stereo sound.
1) -> The nice stereo sound of the guitar. Maybe they used the M/S technique to record this, and then added some reverb.
2) and 3) -> Similar level and character.
4) and 5) -> Both M and S have similar character to L and R, but S has lower level than M. I think this is quite natural, since basically it's the same guitar sound in L and R, and S is just those differences between L and R that provide the mentioned "nice stereo sound".
Artist: Dio; Album: Holy Diver; Song: Stand Up And Shout
Comments:
Rythm guitar is double-tracked with two different distortion voicings, which are hard-panned left and right. Bass, vocals and solo guitar are centered, and drums have some stereo spread.
The song intro is the main riff played only by the double-tracked guitar. During this intro, switching between the different monitoring alternatives I observe the following:
1) -> Full guitar sound. Paying attention one can notice very slight variations between one track and the other, thus showing that Vivian Campbell actually played the track 2 times (i.e. it's not the same guitar track re-amped or equallized differently in the L and R channels).
2) and 3) -> One can appreciate the distinct voicings of the two guitar tracks. Different points of the midrange seem to dominate in each track. On their own, each track could be considered a bit weak, but they are very complementary and sound great together in stereo.
4) and 5) -> Curiously, these two sound very similar, both in character and level. Since L and R channels are mostly the same (only different distortion voicings), I would have expected a weak S signal compared to the M signal. But I guess that the fact that the L and R channels contain different tracks is enough to make that they do not cancel each other in the S component, even if both tracks are playing the same.
During the rest of the song, most of the content is in the M component. The S component is limited to the double-tracked rythm guitar, a little bit of drums and a little reverb contribution from the rest of the instruments. There is practically no bass in the S component.
Also, it can be noticed that the double-tracked rythm guitar is the element that gets more degraded in 4) when compared to 1).
Artist: AC/DC; Album: Back in Black; Song: Back in Black
Comments:
Very similar results to the previous song. In this case the L and R rythm guitars do not play exactly the same (very similar, though), but their distortion voicing is not so different as in Stand Up And Shout.
Artist: The Police; Album: Synchronicity; Song: Every Breath You Take
Comments:
Very similar results to the previous songs. This time the S component has a little less guitar and more reverb contribution from the different tracks.
Artist: Frank Zappa; Album: Hot Rats; Song: Willy the Pimp
Comments:
Bass guitar, drums, vocals, electric violin melody and guitar solo are placed quite at the center. There is also some hard-panned percussion.
1) -> Amazing Zappa.
2) and 3) -> The same guitar solo track can be heard both at the L and R channels, but their sound is different. It seems that a different amp and/or mic and/or eq (etcetera) was used for each channel.
4) and 5) -> Most of the instruments can be heard both in the M and S components. I comment on them separately:
Drums: No big difference between M and S. I guess that's because of the kit pieces being panned out of the center position.
Bass guitar: Surprisingly this sounds very similar in the M and S component, even if they also sound similar in the L and R channels. The only explanation I can think of is that they recorded L and R from different amps/mics (?).
Electric Violin: It is almost cancelled in the S component.
Voice: Partially cancelled in the S component.
Guitar Solo: A slight volume and character difference between M and S, but not very much, possibly due to the differences between L and R.
So, in this case the S component has much more content than in the heavy/rock/pop examples. As an adverse effect, I would say that the mono version degrades more than in the other examples.
--------------------
As I mentioned in my previous post, I have used a set up where switching the inputs of the control room device I can monitor one of the following:
1) Regular stereo.
2) Left channel only, sent to both L and R monitors.
3) Right channel only, sent to both L and R monitors.
4) BX_Digital mono signal (M = L+R), sent to both L and R monitors.
5) BX_Digital stereo signal (S = L-R), sent to both L and R monitors.
Here are my observations on some songs.I refer to the different monitoring options with the numbers above.
Artist: Adrian Legg; Album: Wine, Women & Waltz; Song: Silent Night
Comments:
This is just one acoustic guitar with a very nice stereo sound.
1) -> The nice stereo sound of the guitar. Maybe they used the M/S technique to record this, and then added some reverb.
2) and 3) -> Similar level and character.
4) and 5) -> Both M and S have similar character to L and R, but S has lower level than M. I think this is quite natural, since basically it's the same guitar sound in L and R, and S is just those differences between L and R that provide the mentioned "nice stereo sound".
Artist: Dio; Album: Holy Diver; Song: Stand Up And Shout
Comments:
Rythm guitar is double-tracked with two different distortion voicings, which are hard-panned left and right. Bass, vocals and solo guitar are centered, and drums have some stereo spread.
The song intro is the main riff played only by the double-tracked guitar. During this intro, switching between the different monitoring alternatives I observe the following:
1) -> Full guitar sound. Paying attention one can notice very slight variations between one track and the other, thus showing that Vivian Campbell actually played the track 2 times (i.e. it's not the same guitar track re-amped or equallized differently in the L and R channels).
2) and 3) -> One can appreciate the distinct voicings of the two guitar tracks. Different points of the midrange seem to dominate in each track. On their own, each track could be considered a bit weak, but they are very complementary and sound great together in stereo.
4) and 5) -> Curiously, these two sound very similar, both in character and level. Since L and R channels are mostly the same (only different distortion voicings), I would have expected a weak S signal compared to the M signal. But I guess that the fact that the L and R channels contain different tracks is enough to make that they do not cancel each other in the S component, even if both tracks are playing the same.
During the rest of the song, most of the content is in the M component. The S component is limited to the double-tracked rythm guitar, a little bit of drums and a little reverb contribution from the rest of the instruments. There is practically no bass in the S component.
Also, it can be noticed that the double-tracked rythm guitar is the element that gets more degraded in 4) when compared to 1).
Artist: AC/DC; Album: Back in Black; Song: Back in Black
Comments:
Very similar results to the previous song. In this case the L and R rythm guitars do not play exactly the same (very similar, though), but their distortion voicing is not so different as in Stand Up And Shout.
Artist: The Police; Album: Synchronicity; Song: Every Breath You Take
Comments:
Very similar results to the previous songs. This time the S component has a little less guitar and more reverb contribution from the different tracks.
Artist: Frank Zappa; Album: Hot Rats; Song: Willy the Pimp
Comments:
Bass guitar, drums, vocals, electric violin melody and guitar solo are placed quite at the center. There is also some hard-panned percussion.
1) -> Amazing Zappa.
2) and 3) -> The same guitar solo track can be heard both at the L and R channels, but their sound is different. It seems that a different amp and/or mic and/or eq (etcetera) was used for each channel.
4) and 5) -> Most of the instruments can be heard both in the M and S components. I comment on them separately:
Drums: No big difference between M and S. I guess that's because of the kit pieces being panned out of the center position.
Bass guitar: Surprisingly this sounds very similar in the M and S component, even if they also sound similar in the L and R channels. The only explanation I can think of is that they recorded L and R from different amps/mics (?).
Electric Violin: It is almost cancelled in the S component.
Voice: Partially cancelled in the S component.
Guitar Solo: A slight volume and character difference between M and S, but not very much, possibly due to the differences between L and R.
So, in this case the S component has much more content than in the heavy/rock/pop examples. As an adverse effect, I would say that the mono version degrades more than in the other examples.
Conclusions
------------
In general, the S component gets its sound from two sources:
* Direct instument sound panned out of the center, with volume proportional to the distance from the center.
* Sound of instruments through stereo effects, typically reverb, with volume proportional to distance from the center of the effect and how much effected signal was used in the mix.
Similar lines hard-panned left and right (e.g. a double-tracked line, harmonies, etc) make for a fantastic stereo effect. The price to pay is that the more similarities between those lines, the more they get muffled in the mono conversion.
So, in this respect there is a compromise regarding how much S content you have. With more S content, the normal stereo reproduction is livelier, but the mono reproduction gets darker. To put it in another way, the more you hear in the S component, the less you hear in the M component.
An exception to this are hard-panned instruments that are not "doubled" (e.g. if you pan your bass hard left), since they get to the S component but they are not cancelled in the M component by any other instrument. However, this can easily unbalance the mix in the stereo field.
Therefore, similar to the dynamic range vs. volume compromise, there is another one: the stereo vs. mono compromise.
But note that, different to the dynamic vs. volume compromise, which to a degree can be decided in the mastering stage, the decisions about the stereo vs. mono compromise are more determined by the mix layout rather than mastering decisions.
That is, if a given mix gets muffled in its mono version, you can hardly fix that without touching the mix, even if you have bx_digital. At least, that's what I believe. Decisions in this respect should be taken quite early in the process.
With all this I got the impression that, even if you don’t change anything with bx_digital, it serves as a great listening tool, to be used when planning the mix.
------------
In general, the S component gets its sound from two sources:
* Direct instument sound panned out of the center, with volume proportional to the distance from the center.
* Sound of instruments through stereo effects, typically reverb, with volume proportional to distance from the center of the effect and how much effected signal was used in the mix.
Similar lines hard-panned left and right (e.g. a double-tracked line, harmonies, etc) make for a fantastic stereo effect. The price to pay is that the more similarities between those lines, the more they get muffled in the mono conversion.
So, in this respect there is a compromise regarding how much S content you have. With more S content, the normal stereo reproduction is livelier, but the mono reproduction gets darker. To put it in another way, the more you hear in the S component, the less you hear in the M component.
An exception to this are hard-panned instruments that are not "doubled" (e.g. if you pan your bass hard left), since they get to the S component but they are not cancelled in the M component by any other instrument. However, this can easily unbalance the mix in the stereo field.
Therefore, similar to the dynamic range vs. volume compromise, there is another one: the stereo vs. mono compromise.
But note that, different to the dynamic vs. volume compromise, which to a degree can be decided in the mastering stage, the decisions about the stereo vs. mono compromise are more determined by the mix layout rather than mastering decisions.
That is, if a given mix gets muffled in its mono version, you can hardly fix that without touching the mix, even if you have bx_digital. At least, that's what I believe. Decisions in this respect should be taken quite early in the process.
With all this I got the impression that, even if you don’t change anything with bx_digital, it serves as a great listening tool, to be used when planning the mix.
Hi gainman,
a really good posting !! Good work !!
cheers
ralf
a really good posting !! Good work !!
cheers
ralf
On 2006-09-19 00:21, gainman wrote:
Some Listening Tests
--------------------
As I mentioned in my previous post, I have used a set up where switching the inputs of the control room device I can monitor one of the following:
1) Regular stereo.
2) Left channel only, sent to both L and R monitors.
3) Right channel only, sent to both L and R monitors.
4) BX_Digital mono signal (M = L+R), sent to both L and R monitors.
5) BX_Digital stereo signal (S = L-R), sent to both L and R monitors.
Here are my observations on some songs.I refer to the different monitoring options with the numbers above.
Artist: Adrian Legg; Album: Wine, Women & Waltz; Song: Silent Night
Comments:
This is just one acoustic guitar with a very nice stereo sound.
1) -> The nice stereo sound of the guitar. Maybe they used the M/S technique to record this, and then added some reverb.
2) and 3) -> Similar level and character.
4) and 5) -> Both M and S have similar character to L and R, but S has lower level than M. I think this is quite natural, since basically it's the same guitar sound in L and R, and S is just those differences between L and R that provide the mentioned "nice stereo sound".
Artist: Dio; Album: Holy Diver; Song: Stand Up And Shout
Comments:
Rythm guitar is double-tracked with two different distortion voicings, which are hard-panned left and right. Bass, vocals and solo guitar are centered, and drums have some stereo spread.
The song intro is the main riff played only by the double-tracked guitar. During this intro, switching between the different monitoring alternatives I observe the following:
1) -> Full guitar sound. Paying attention one can notice very slight variations between one track and the other, thus showing that Vivian Campbell actually played the track 2 times (i.e. it's not the same guitar track re-amped or equallized differently in the L and R channels).
2) and 3) -> One can appreciate the distinct voicings of the two guitar tracks. Different points of the midrange seem to dominate in each track. On their own, each track could be considered a bit weak, but they are very complementary and sound great together in stereo.
4) and 5) -> Curiously, these two sound very similar, both in character and level. Since L and R channels are mostly the same (only different distortion voicings), I would have expected a weak S signal compared to the M signal. But I guess that the fact that the L and R channels contain different tracks is enough to make that they do not cancel each other in the S component, even if both tracks are playing the same.
During the rest of the song, most of the content is in the M component. The S component is limited to the double-tracked rythm guitar, a little bit of drums and a little reverb contribution from the rest of the instruments. There is practically no bass in the S component.
Also, it can be noticed that the double-tracked rythm guitar is the element that gets more degraded in 4) when compared to 1).
Artist: AC/DC; Album: Back in Black; Song: Back in Black
Comments:
Very similar results to the previous song. In this case the L and R rythm guitars do not play exactly the same (very similar, though), but their distortion voicing is not so different as in Stand Up And Shout.
Artist: The Police; Album: Synchronicity; Song: Every Breath You Take
Comments:
Very similar results to the previous songs. This time the S component has a little less guitar and more reverb contribution from the different tracks.
Artist: Frank Zappa; Album: Hot Rats; Song: Willy the Pimp
Comments:
Bass guitar, drums, vocals, electric violin melody and guitar solo are placed quite at the center. There is also some hard-panned percussion.
1) -> Amazing Zappa.
2) and 3) -> The same guitar solo track can be heard both at the L and R channels, but their sound is different. It seems that a different amp and/or mic and/or eq (etcetera) was used for each channel.
4) and 5) -> Most of the instruments can be heard both in the M and S components. I comment on them separately:
Drums: No big difference between M and S. I guess that's because of the kit pieces being panned out of the center position.
Bass guitar: Surprisingly this sounds very similar in the M and S component, even if they also sound similar in the L and R channels. The only explanation I can think of is that they recorded L and R from different amps/mics (?).
Electric Violin: It is almost cancelled in the S component.
Voice: Partially cancelled in the S component.
Guitar Solo: A slight volume and character difference between M and S, but not very much, possibly due to the differences between L and R.
So, in this case the S component has much more content than in the heavy/rock/pop examples. As an adverse effect, I would say that the mono version degrades more than in the other examples.
-
Crickstone
- Posts: 244
- Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 4:00 pm
- Location: Canada
Quite an in depth analysis. You put into words and tested what I found out. Thank you for a great analysis of bx. I don't have the experience and knowledge that obviously you do so thank you for making it so clear to me...
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Crickstone on 2006-09-19 17:16 ]</font>
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Crickstone on 2006-09-19 17:17 ]</font>
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Crickstone on 2006-09-19 17:16 ]</font>
<font size=-1>[ This Message was edited by: Crickstone on 2006-09-19 17:17 ]</font>
-
siriusbliss
- Posts: 3118
- Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2001 4:00 pm
- Location: Cupertino, California US
- Contact:
I'm using the bx more and more now on some older mixes.
However, I HAVE noticed that it tends to run hot and I have to pull back on the mains in the mixer. If I use a wav module directly into bx, it's VERY hot and borderline distorted. I don't think my source mixes are too hot to begin with.
Anyone else see this and/or have any suggestions?
Thanks,
Greg
However, I HAVE noticed that it tends to run hot and I have to pull back on the mains in the mixer. If I use a wav module directly into bx, it's VERY hot and borderline distorted. I don't think my source mixes are too hot to begin with.
Anyone else see this and/or have any suggestions?
Thanks,
Greg
Xite rig - ADK laptop - i7 975 3.33 GHz Quad w/HT 8meg cache /MDR3-4G/1066SODIMM / VD-GGTX280M nVidia GeForce GTX 280M w/1GB DDR3
-
siriusbliss
- Posts: 3118
- Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2001 4:00 pm
- Location: Cupertino, California US
- Contact: