In Reply to: BBE - Is there anyone who does not need it? posted by John Kercheval on March 14, 2007 at 13:38:40:
I only have one thing to say: To each his own taste, I guess.I was there when BBE started 20 years ago. I designed the first and (I'm pretty sure) only audiophile version of the BBE processor. Won a prize at CES, it did! I was a young EE, hired to pick the brain of the crotchety old guy who invented the BBE processor, Bob Crooks.
Bob did actually build a full servo system once. As Kal said in the thread below, there's only one way to really correct the funnies in the speaker/amp interface, and that's to make the corrections at that interface. I was the lucky guy who got to hook the servo up to the megabucks sound system at the Cinerama Dome in Hollywood one day. We didn't get much time to demo, the techs were scared to death I was going to turn all the cones inside out on this big array of A7's!, but I do remember that when they played the copter scene from Apocalypse Now through it, everyone in the room ran for cover!
But I digress. That's not what the BBE processor does. It attempts to fake the servo's action in 3 ways: First, it divides the spectrum into 3 bands, just like an active crossover. Then it boosts the bass. Bob did the low crossover at 200 Hz, I'll bet it's not very different now. Just like your average bass control. Second, the midrange phase is flipped 180 degrees. That's your so called time or phase correction. Ya, right. Sure. You betcha. Third, the highs (above around 2kHz in the original version)are boosted dynamically. Here's where Bob's creative idea lies: the highs are expanded in dynamic range based on the level of the mids! So what is it? A bass boost and a dynamic expander with a twist.
Yes, it does wonders for cassette recordings, and yes, it does improve a lot of music on midrange systems. So does a DBX expander or an Aural Exciter (remember those? they put Aphex on the map. That's aural, not oral, fellas!). I did most of the demos in the early days, and saw lots of mouths fall open as mediocre systems seemed to improve dramatically. But then I discovered high resolution systems for myself, and I began to really hate the BBE sound. It adds a lot of dynamic jangle (Itzhak Perlman said it made him seasick, if I remember right) and is very tiring to listen to long-term, just my opinion after hundreds of hours of listening in a wide variety of systems. I bailed after two fun years to design laser systems.
Hey, if you like it, whatever floats yer boat. Me, I prefer the simplest Class A single-ended tube system these days.
cheers
Adam912.Out.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Re: BBE - Is there anyone who does not need it? - Adam912 19:06:50 03/14/07 (2)
- Re: BBE - Is there anyone who does not need it? - ontrack2@gmail.com 01:18:59 03/15/07 (0)
- Well, there we have it. - Squonk 19:37:14 03/14/07 (0)