Which sound enhancer?

[Schmunk]

I know there has been discussion of this topic before, but it has never come to a real conclusion. The topic being: Which is better, the Aphex C2 (newest model) or the Behringer UltraFex (also newest model)? I'm aware of what these units do, but does anybody have any real views about which product is better (effect quality/noise floor etc.) - preferably people who have tried both units....

I'd be very thankful for any input available.

Schmunk

[szvook]

I have the Aphex C2-104 and I have heard edrums through Ultrafex EX3200. I would go with the Behringer if you want a stronger punch to your mix – especially to the low and mid frequencies. The Behringer is closer to the BBE models in the effect category.

I’ am actually thinking of replacing my Aphex C2 with either another BBE or the Ultrafex EX3200, so if you get the Ultrafex EX3200 please let me know how it worked out for you.


------------------
szvook

[Schmunk]

Thanks for your reply. I've just found out that I'll be playing my first gig with the V's next month, in a marquee in front of 200-400 people. There should be a damn good PA (My college owns an 11KW Crown/Martin Audio rig and they'll probably hire some stuff too), but I think I'm going to have to get an UltraFex to help my sound.

However,if I use all four outputs of my TD-8, does that mean I need two UltraFex? Do I need to use all four outputs? If I do, how can I get a proper stereo mix if I'm seperating the instruments (as has been previously suggested)?

Schmunk

[szvook]

A few things to consider first.

1. You should use your outputs for individual and better sound control.
2. Are you using or will be using your own outboard mixer or will you be running straight from the TD in to the house board?
3. You would need 2 UltraFex if you want to run the kick, snare, toms and cymbals through each of the 4 channels in mono. But since you have one, try to feed your entire mix from the TD in stereo through the UltraFex for an overall boost to your TD output.
4. I prefer to use an outboard mixer for my TD- 8 from which I sent my stereo mix to a main board during gigs or for mixing down. I’ am my own engineer and my stereo mix is controlled and my instruments are separated in my Mackie board first, then I can feed the stereo mix to the main board with no worries.
5. The issue about using your outputs has been discussed before and a search will help you.
6. Worst-case scenario if you can’t get a stereo mix to the main board, run the kick and snare only through the UltraFex.




------------------
szvook

[rudi-mint]

What are the advantages of running stereo over mono (besides the ability to pan L/R?

I run my carvin mixer in mono mode so I can send one out to the main board and the other to my mackies. I'm always looking for better ways to things so if you have any suggestions they would be very appreciated.


Thanks

Kurt

[szvook]

Mono or monophonic describes a system where all the audio signals are mixed together and routed through a single audio channel. Mono systems can have multiple loudspeakers, and even multiple widely separated loudspeakers. The key is that the signal contains no level and arrival time/phase information that would replicate or simulate directional cues. Common types of mono systems include single channel center clusters; mono split cluster systems, and distributed loudspeaker systems with and without architectural delays. Mono systems can still be full-bandwidth and full-fidelity and are able to reinforce both voice and music effectively. The big advantage to mono is that everyone hears the very same signal, and, in properly designed systems, all listeners would hear the system at essentially the same sound level.

True stereophonic sound systems have two independent audio signal channels, and the signals that are reproduced have a specific level and phase relationship to each other so that when played back through a suitable reproduction system, there will be an apparent image of the original sound source. Stereo would be a requirement if there were a need to replicate the aural perspective and localization of instruments on a stage or platform, a very common requirement in performing arts centers.
This also means that a mono signal that is panned somewhere between the two channels does not have the requisite phase information to be a true stereophonic signal, although there can be a level difference between the two channels that simulates a position difference; this is a simulation only.
An additional requirement of the stereo playback system is that the entire listening area must have equal coverage of both the left and right channels, at essentially equal levels. This is why your home stereo system has a "sweet spot" between the two loudspeakers, where the level differences and arrival time differences are small enough that the stereo image and localization are both maintained. This sweet spot is limited to a fairly small area between the two loudspeakers and when a listener is outside that area, the image collapses and only one or the other channel is heard. Living with this sweet spot in your living room may be OK, since you can put your couch there, but in a larger venue, like a church sanctuary or theatre auditorium, that sweet spot might only include 1/3 the audience, leaving 2/3 of the audience wondering why they only hear half the program.
In addition a stereo playback system must have the correct absolute phase response input to output for both channels. This means that a signal with a positive pressure waveform at the input to the system must have the same positive pressure waveform at the output of the system. So a drum, for instance, when struck produces a positive pressure waveform at the microphone and should produce a positive pressure waveform in the listening room. If you don't believe that this makes a tremendous difference, try reversing the polarity of both your hifi loudspeakers some day and listening to a source that has a strong center sound image like a solo voice. When the absolute polarity is flipped the wrong way, you won't find a stable center channel image, it will wander around away from the center, localizing out at both the loudspeakers.


Anyway, that is the technical description between the two. The way you have you signals going to the main board and to your mackies works as well.




------------------
szvook

[rudi-mint]

Thanks for the excellent clarification szvook.


Kurt

[Oz DrumR]

Yet another very informative post svook.

Cheers.

[Schmunk]

Yes, thanks a lot for your input szvook. You're a very informtive guy, in fact I think you've replied to all my posts so far!

Well, having started this topic by dicussing the Aphex 104C2 and the Behringer UltraFex I've actually gone for the Behringer DSP1400P UltraMizer (as I mentioned in another post, I think in 'Technical'?). Apparently it should be a better enhancer than the UltraFex, and it does other stuff, too. Also, it's comes with software to let you edit settings in Windoze!

For any UK drummers looking for this kind of thing, Rose Morris (Denmark St., London are selling this for the STUPID!! price of £70 ($100) (MSRP is £179!! I was told by a different shop that they buy them at more than £100!!) Although they charged me £16 delivery, which is quite steep to say that I just bought a Behringer 802 mixer from another place and got it delivered free.
http://www.rose-morris.co.uk/specialdeals.html if you're interested.

All I've got to do now is find a P.A. to play it through!

Schmunk



------------------
TD-8, Pintech pads, Pearl rack, PM-3