What is the MaxxBCL? A hardware evolution of the existing Waves products or an expensive hybrid created just to "tap" us poor users who are always looking for new tools to improve our audio products? For this test I did not borrow the instrument from the importer, but I went to test it directly in a well-known mastering studio in the Neapolitan hinterland that left me with its structure and even the car for about ten days ... .
In a world that increasingly takes into account the speed with which a product is made, making extensive use of automation, virtual, plug-ins, and optional DSPs to accelerate the computing speed of the computer, there are still some survivors. , who still believe that a good analog or a good hybrid, as in this case, can give our sound a more nuanced color palette than an integrated system all inside the computer. Surely the strong point of these systems is not the great quantity and quality of nuances that can be operated on the sound. A few years ago I was lucky enough to be able to also appreciate Waves products, in my small mastering studio for third parties, using a PC (please you Mac puritans not to turn up your nose ...) an RME 9652 sound card and a RME AD 96 converter, a Mykerinos board by Merging Technologies, a series of original Waves plugs costing just under 2 million of the old coin, a compressor Millennium model Twincomp TCL 2, two pairs of speakers (B&W model Nautilus 805 and the Dynaudio model AIR 10). I thought I had an excellent studio, certainly not comparable to the Nautilus, or the Metropolis in London but I was able to get an excellent product because, unlike more famous studios, I had a small point of strength: time. One day, I was offered to try Waves' L2 hardware. I had no intention of buying it and I asserted that with my tools I could do without this outboard, as the software and hardware algorithms in my possession were the same and that what made the difference was only the converter; I stated that if I wanted to invest more, it would be enough to replace or add a new converter to my setup. After a while I was given the "L2" as a trial for a month ... I had to change my mind, there was an abyss and after a month I sold my old Master Akay, the Roland MKS 70 with the PG 800 and with just over a million difference I made this new purchase. Now, after about 4 years, Waves lists the evolution of the L2, what to do? Sell my tool before it devalues like a cell phone or see if it's not just an old car with a revamped look? First of all I download the manual in Pdf and here my first disappointment begins, it seems that this time Waves has made a hole in the water, it has not invented anything, it has only gathered in an outboard 3 of its leading products , the second generation Maxx Bass low frequency enhancer, the C1 compressor and finally and the L2 booster. I don't even find a blurb that gives me hope that the compressor is as multiband as the C4, what a disappointment, but I'm stubborn, I want to hear it and try it.
MaxxBCL Front side user interface:
The MaxxBCL comes in a 2-unit rack format in black (Fig.1) with a global control (Fig 2) by means of luminous LEDs, where the sample rate, the selected sound source (analogue or digital), the sync source and the quantization can be displayed. There is a section to store up to 4 presets (Fig. 2-2), a LED control of the input signal (Fig. 2-3), 2 rotary controls (left and right) to click to calibrate the analog input signal (Fig. 2-4), a parameter section dedicated only to the compressor (C1) (Fig. 2-5), the keys for selection of Bypass, Opto / Electro modes, Threshold, Ratio and Attack controls, the proprietary ARC AutomaticRelease Control function, automatic gain and finally a switch for switching the two Comp-Bass or Bass-Comp processors. Continuing on the right we find a section of parameters dedicated only to the second generation MaxxBass (Fig. 2-6), whose frequency is adjustable from 25Hz to 120Hz with a mixing percentage of harmonics from 0 to 100%. There is also a high-pass filter with the “harmonics only” option. Finally we find a section of parameters dedicated to the Limiter, with adjustable threshold (Fig. 2-7), a Bypass button and one for the link, an adjustable output celling and control of the output signal by means of luminous LEDs. (Fig. 2-8).
MaxxBCL Rear side user interface: (Fig.3) Connection for power cord with selectable voltage control (Fig 4-1), Word clock equipped with synchronization interface (Fig. 4-2), a section for the various types of digital, optical, spdif, and coaxial inputs, with a switch to switch from the optical to the coaxial system (Fig. 4-3) and finally a section that concerns all types of analog inputs and outputs with relative switches (Fig. 4-4). Unfortunately it is not possible to use the outputs simultaneously: it would have been convenient to send the two balanced canon outputs in the master and the two Jack outputs to the monitor speakers.
Compressor: Waves' dynamic processors are among the most appreciated by engineers. They can act selectively on definable frequency bands giving a highly technical precision especially at a corrective level, ideal in the mixing phase (Fig.5). The hardware function on the MaxxBCL, unlike the software, does not have the possibility to choose a range of frequencies to use simultaneously compressor / expander / gate functions only on the selected bands, or to function like the C4 which is a multiband compressor. The sound quality is really excellent both in opto and electro mode and the management of the parameters is simple and immediate.
Maxx Bass on low frequencies: Why put a low frequency booster (Fig 6) that they define as “second generation” and not put a good Parametric EQ instead? The software version is very powerful and works really well, allowing you to recreate the audio part in its lower frequencies without actually changing the harmonics in that band. It even gives the sensation of hearing low frequencies, which normally the dimensions of the cone would not allow to reproduce as they do not reach that passband. What will the hardware version be like? I have already tried the MaxxBass 101 and honestly it didn't drive me crazy for studio use, in fact I preferred in this case to use the Renaissance Bass software from Waves. However, I found it excellent for live use, even on high range amplification systems. In any case, the manual speaks of the second generation, perhaps the components will be improved and this section will sound more present and without "dirt"? Well yes! After several tests, I finally realize that this section is really very useful, for many applications and, even if I don't have many parameters to "play" on, it doesn't make me regret the lack of an EQ and I can do without turning on the computer under this scorching heat.
L2 Ultramaximizer Peak Limiter:
The instrument does not have all the commands to act on like the hardware L2, but the algorithm for maximizing the processed sound is identical: you immediately notice the extraordinary transparency of the sound even at the top of signal maximization (Fig 7). Again the hardware outperforms the software.
MaxxBCL under pressure First test: the "live"
Fortunately we are in summer, not only a period of sun and sand, but also of concerts; I went with the MaxxBCL under my arm to a concert where the sound engineer was starting the sound check to a Big Band style orchestra. For the sake of consistency of information, let's immediately say that the plant was made up of 8 systems Nexo PS 15 + LF 1200(subs) complete with controllers and driven by excellent QSC PL series amplifiers, and a Yamaha M3500 mixer. By connecting the MaxxBCL on the main insert, the engineer explained to me that he didn't love the use of digital outboards in an analog audio chain because, he said: “they could turn into a real Achilles heel due to their conversion quality. AD / DA ”. Between one chat and the next the soundcheck was completed, leaving our machine in Bypass and agreeing not to use any service dynamics processor in order to better test the capacity and character of the MaxxBCL. On the final touches of the mix, quite complex, I optimized the input level and, remaining in Bypass, I set the threshold to minus 12 Db, a compression ratio (Ratio) 2: 0 with medium attack (remember that the release is automatic). We are obviously talking about the “Compressor” section. With the index finger of the right hand ready on the illuminated square of the Bypass! Exchange of glances and smiles of satisfaction, “ghost” compression, truly transparent, especially in the Opto mode. Even the gossip force of the 5 trumpets was sufficiently controlled. The sound engineer is happy, the listeners do not cover their ears and the system is safe. Final conclusion of the sound engineer: let's go to the bar to enjoy a hazelnut shaekerato that here we are too many !!!
Second test: “professional piano bar”.
I have been to visit two dear friends, two good disco bar professionals included in an excellent working tour throughout the national territory. Francesco (singer pianist) tells me that the need for a powerful and space-saving system is decisive for his work.For what concerns the emission of the medium-low, medium, medium-high and high section, even with a discreet system you can get a good result, while you suffer with the low section, always not very enveloping and therefore not involving. I connected the MaxxBCL on the Main Insert of the mixer (Mackie Cr16 / 04 Vlz Pro), connected in turn to a Lab Groupen power amp and Martin model F12 speakers. Look at our device, in particular on the MAxxBASS area: by turning the generous knob to the right and exaggerating (to throttle) we bring the "Intensity" value from 0 to 100 with the HP filter off and, it turns it turns you around, we found ourselves wander around the hall looking for a hidden diver. We have exaggerated a little, but this algorithm that acts on a psychoacoustic level is really evident and softly effective, also providing excellent mono compatibility. I also set the section that follows the famous Loudness Maxxmizer L2 gaining with the Treshold and setting the maximum peak level. We immediately noticed an increase in density and a transparent limitation, combined with the plasticity typical of definitive discs complete with Mastering. At this point we should pay close attention to the suspicions and accusations of a Playback performance ...
Third test: "recording studio".
Speaking of records, always with the MaxxBCL under our arm we go to a recording studio, male voice as warm as the "soul" in a Neumann model microphone TLM 103 with Mogami cable connected to the Pre amp. Millennia Media HV 3, directly to the A / D converters of the MaxxBCL, AES / EBU output to the multi-track recorder Tascam MX 2424 with resolution 24 bit / 96 Kz, D / A output of the recorder on the tube mixer MB3 of TLA Audio with monitoring Genelec 1031 e KRK mod. V88. The conversion of the MaxxBCL proved to be truly flawless, detailed, clearly professional quality. In shooting, it is often advisable to use, in addition to the conversion, also the L2 limiter, in order to obtain an excellent track Headroom (all used always sparingly) and managing to contain the excessive impetus of the performer on duty. The optimization of the tracks could also take place after shooting, exiting the digital recording, entering the MaxxBCL and returning it (always digital) to the multi-track, gaining intensity and at the same time optimizing the dynamic range, track by track, so that during mixing it will be sufficient to raise the faders to establish a good balance of the entire mix. Another possible use in the mixing phase is to group the drums, percussion and bass on two sub-masters, using the compressor section, thus gaining punch and dynamic control, or even on the entire mix by being careful in the settings.
Fourth test: "Mastering".
The last test was done in the Mastering phase, on a slightly reworked cover of Incognito with a female voice, shot and mixed very badly and with a general quality of MP3 (very bad). Already at the start of the piece I immediately noticed little depth on the low spectrum and a harsh and old medium-high register: After about 40 seconds the singing begins and the voice detaches from the mix in a low-cut and annoying way. Connected the MaxxBCL I started redefining the bass with the fabulous psychoacoustic EQ, setting the intesity value to 50, then inserting the HP filter I did an “anti-Rumble” brushing up to 45 Hz. Immediately the difference jumped out. Finally, I set the compressor to low “Ratio” and the “Treshold” around - 15 dB, with a very fast attack. By doing this I was able to contain the vocals in the MIX without crushing the whole song too much. Finally I went to the section L2 to regain the dB lost previously with compression. The overall quality level of the song has improved considerably, so much so that it can be included in a commercial standard.
Conclusions:
What comes out of these tests is that I certainly find myself in front of a very versatile machine, which can be carried around without the aid of a computer with considerable potential in the corrective sense. We can say that the MaxxBCL has brilliantly passed all the tests, always creating a correct modification of the processed audio material. the instrument has a fairly high cost, but adequate to what the market offers. The only sore point, for those who own a professional burner a 24 bit 192 Khz, is the impossibility of being able to make the most of it to create a Super Master. I would have liked a lot if a multiband compressor had also been implemented to make the most of the possibilities, in order to obtain a professional mastering without necessarily having to use other outboards.
USEFUL INFORMATION:
Producer: Waves
Model: MaxxBCL
Website: www.waves.com
Distributor: www.midimusic.it
Price: 2.500 + VAT
Article published in CM2 Magazine.
What is the MaxxBCL? A hardware evolution of the existing Waves products or an expensive hybrid created just to "tap" us poor users who are always looking for new tools to improve our audio products? For this test I did not borrow the instrument from the importer, but I went to test it directly in a well-known mastering studio in the Neapolitan hinterland that left me with its structure and even the car for about ten days ... .
In a world that increasingly prioritizes the speed at which a product is created, making extensive use of automation, virtual reality, plug-ins, and optional DSPs to accelerate computer processing speed, there are still some survivors who believe that a good analog or hybrid, as in this case, can give our sound a richer palette of nuances than an entirely integrated system within the computer. Certainly, the strength of such systems is not the vast quantity and quality of nuances they can apply to the sound. A few years ago, I was fortunate enough to be able to appreciate Waves products in my small mastering studio for third parties, using a PC (please don't turn up your noses, you Mac puritans...), an RME 9652 audio interface and an RME AD 96 converter, a Mykerinos card from Merging Technologies, a set of original Waves plugs costing just under 2 million of the old mintage, a Millennia Twincomp TCL 2 compressor, two pairs of speakers (B&W model Nautilus 805 and Dynaudio model AIR 10). I thought I had an excellent studio, certainly not comparable to the Nautilus, or the Metropolis in London, but I was able to obtain an excellent product because, unlike more renowned studios, I had one small strength: time. One day, I was offered to try Waves' L2 hardware. I had no intention of buying it and claimed that with my instruments I could do without this outboard, as the software and hardware algorithms I had were the same and that the only difference was the converter; I argued that, if I wanted to invest more, I would simply replace or add a new converter to my setup. After a while, I was given the “L2” to test for a month… I had to change my mind, there was an abyss and after a month I sold my old Master Akay, the Roland MKS 70 with the PG 800 and for a little over a million I made this new purchase. Now, after about 4 years, Waves is launching the evolution of the L2 in their catalog, what should I do? Sell my instrument before it depreciates like a cell phone or see if it's not just an old machine with a new look? First of all, I download the PDF manual, and here comes my first disappointment. It seems like Waves has made a huge mistake this time, not inventing anything, but simply combining three of its flagship products into one outboard: the second-generation Maxx Bass low-frequency enhancer, the C1 compressor, and finally the L2 booster. I can't even find a single blurb that gives me hope that the compressor is multiband like the C4. What a disappointment, but I'm stubborn, I want to hear it and try it.
MaxxBCL Front side user interface:
The MaxxBCL comes in a 2-unit rack format in black (Fig.1) with a global control (Fig 2) by means of luminous LEDs, where the sample rate, the selected sound source (analogue or digital), the sync source and the quantization can be displayed. There is a section to store up to 4 presets (Fig. 2-2), a LED control of the input signal (Fig. 2-3), 2 rotary controls (left and right) to click to calibrate the analog input signal (Fig. 2-4), a parameter section dedicated only to the compressor (C1) (Fig. 2-5), the keys for selection of Bypass, Opto / Electro modes, Threshold, Ratio and Attack controls, the proprietary ARC AutomaticRelease Control function, automatic gain and finally a switch for switching the two Comp-Bass or Bass-Comp processors. Continuing on the right we find a section of parameters dedicated only to the second generation MaxxBass (Fig. 2-6), whose frequency is adjustable from 25Hz to 120Hz with a mixing percentage of harmonics from 0 to 100%. There is also a high-pass filter with the “harmonics only” option. Finally we find a section of parameters dedicated to the Limiter, with adjustable threshold (Fig. 2-7), a Bypass button and one for the link, an adjustable output celling and control of the output signal by means of luminous LEDs. (Fig. 2-8).
MaxxBCL Rear side user interface: (Fig.3) Connection for power cord with selectable voltage control (Fig 4-1), Word clock equipped with synchronization interface (Fig. 4-2), a section for the various types of digital, optical, spdif, and coaxial inputs, with a switch to switch from the optical to the coaxial system (Fig. 4-3) and finally a section that concerns all types of analog inputs and outputs with relative switches (Fig. 4-4). Unfortunately it is not possible to use the outputs simultaneously: it would have been convenient to send the two balanced canon outputs in the master and the two Jack outputs to the monitor speakers.
Compressor: Waves' dynamic processors are among the most appreciated by engineers. They can act selectively on definable frequency bands giving a highly technical precision especially at a corrective level, ideal in the mixing phase (Fig.5). The hardware function on the MaxxBCL, unlike the software, does not have the possibility to choose a range of frequencies to use simultaneously compressor / expander / gate functions only on the selected bands, or to function like the C4 which is a multiband compressor. The sound quality is really excellent both in opto and electro mode and the management of the parameters is simple and immediate.
Maxx Bass on low frequencies: Why put a low frequency enhancer (Fig 6) that they call “second generation” and not instead add a good Parametric EQ? The software version is very powerful and works really well, allowing you to recreate the audio part in its lowest frequencies without actually modifying the harmonics in that range. It even gives the sensation of hearing low frequencies, which normally the size of the cone would not allow to reproduce as they do not reach that passband. What will the hardware version be like? I have already tried the MaxxBass 101 previously and honestly I was not crazy about it for studio use, in fact in this case I preferred to use the Renaissance Bass software also by Waves. However, I found it excellent for live use, even on high-end amplification systems. In any case, the manual refers to it as second generation, perhaps the components will be improved and this section will sound more present and without “dirt”? Well yes! After several tests, I realize that this section is finally really useful, for many applications and, even if I don't have many parameters to "play with", it doesn't make me regret the lack of an EQ and I can do without turning on the computer in this scorching heat.
L2 Ultramaximizer Peak Limiter:
The instrument does not have all the commands to act on like the hardware L2, but the algorithm for maximizing the processed sound is identical: you immediately notice the extraordinary transparency of the sound even at the top of signal maximization (Fig 7). Again the hardware outperforms the software.
MaxxBCL under pressure First test: the "live"
Luckily, it's summer, not just a time of sun and sand, but also of concerts; I went with the MaxxBCL under my arm to a concert where the sound engineer was starting the sound check on a Big Band-style orchestra. For the sake of consistency, let's say right away that the system was made up of 8 Nexo PS 15 + LF 1200 (sub) systems complete with controllers and driven by excellent QSC PL series amplifiers, and a Yamaha M3500 mixer. Connecting the MaxxBCL to the main insert, the sound engineer explained to me that he wasn't too keen on using digital outboards in an analog audio chain because, he said: "they could turn into a real Achilles heel due to their AD/DA conversion quality". Between one chat and another, the sound check was completed, leaving our machine in bypass and mutually agreeing not to use any of the company's dynamics processors in order to better test the capacity and character of the MaxxBCL. As for the final touches to the rather complex mix, I optimized the input level and, remaining in bypass, set the threshold to minus 12 dB, a 2:0 compression ratio with medium attack (remember, the release is automatic). We're obviously talking about the "Compressor" section. With the index finger of my right hand ready on the illuminated Bypass square! We exchanged glances and smiles of satisfaction, "phantom" compression, truly transparent, especially in Opto mode. Even the chattering impetus of the five horns was sufficiently controlled. The engineer was happy, the listeners didn't cover their ears, and the system was safe. The engineer's final conclusion: let's go to the bar for a hazelnut shake, we're one too many here!!!
Second test: “professional piano bar”.
I have been to visit two dear friends, two good disco bar professionals included in an excellent working tour throughout the national territory. Francesco (singer pianist) tells me that the need for a powerful and space-saving system is decisive for his work.For what concerns the emission of the medium-low, medium, medium-high and high section, even with a discreet system you can get a good result, while you suffer with the low section, always not very enveloping and therefore not involving. I connected the MaxxBCL on the Main Insert of the mixer (Mackie Cr16 / 04 Vlz Pro), connected in turn to a Lab Groupen power amp and Martin model F12 speakers. Look at our device, in particular on the MAxxBASS area: by turning the generous knob to the right and exaggerating (to throttle) we bring the "Intensity" value from 0 to 100 with the HP filter off and, it turns it turns you around, we found ourselves wander around the hall looking for a hidden diver. We have exaggerated a little, but this algorithm that acts on a psychoacoustic level is really evident and softly effective, also providing excellent mono compatibility. I also set the section that follows the famous Loudness Maxxmizer L2 gaining with the Treshold and setting the maximum peak level. We immediately noticed an increase in density and a transparent limitation, combined with the plasticity typical of definitive discs complete with Mastering. At this point we should pay close attention to the suspicions and accusations of a Playback performance ...
Third test: "recording studio".
Speaking of records, still with the MaxxBCL under our arm, we went to a recording studio, a warm, soulful male voice into a Neumann TLM 103 microphone with a Mogami cable connected to the Millennia Media HV 3 preamp, directly to the MaxxBCL's A/D converters, AES/EBU output to the Tascam MX 2424 multitrack recorder with 24-bit/96 KHz resolution, D/A output of the recorder to the TLA Audio MB3 tube mixer with Genelec 1031 and KRK model V88 monitoring. The MaxxBCL's conversion proved to be truly impeccable, detailed, and of clearly professional quality. When recording, it is often a good idea to use the L2 limiter in addition to the conversion, in order to obtain excellent track headroom (always used sparingly) and manage to contain the excessive impetus of the performer in question. Track optimization could also be done after recording, by exiting the digital recording, entering the MaxxBCL, and sending it (again digital) back to the multitrack, gaining intensity while simultaneously optimizing the dynamic range, track by track, so that during the mixing phase it will be sufficient to raise the faders to establish a good balance of the entire mix. Another possible use during the mixing phase is to group the drums, percussion, and bass on two sub-masters, using the compressor section, thus gaining punch and dynamic control, or even across the entire mix by being careful with the settings.
Fourth test: "Mastering".
The last test was done during the mastering phase, on a slightly reworked cover of Incognito with female vocals, recorded and mixed very badly and with an overall MP3 quality (terrible). From the start of the song I immediately noticed little depth in the low end and a harsh and old mid-high range: After about 40 seconds the singing begins and the voice detaches itself from the mix in an at times detached and annoying way. After connecting the MaxxBCL I began to redefine the bass with the fabulous psychoacoustic EQ, setting the intensity value to 50, then inserting the HP filter I performed an “anti-Rumble” sweeping up to 45 Hz. The difference immediately stood out. Finally, I set the compressor to the low “Ratio” values and the “Threshold” around – 15 dB, with a very fast attack. By doing this I managed to contain the voice in the MIX without squashing the entire song too much. Finally, I moved on to the L2 section to regain the dB previously lost due to compression. The overall quality of the track improved significantly, so much so that it met commercial standards.
Conclusions:
What emerges from these tests is that I definitely find myself faced with a very versatile machine, which can be carried around without the aid of a computer and has considerable potential for corrective purposes. We can say that the MaxxBCL passed all the tests faced with flying colors, always creating the right modification to the processed audio material. The instrument is quite expensive, but adequate for what the market offers. The only sore point, for those who own a professional 24-bit 192 kHz burner, is the impossibility of using it to its full potential to create a Super Master. I would have really liked it if a multiband compressor had also been implemented to maximize its potential, in order to achieve professional mastering without having to necessarily use other outboard equipment.
USEFUL INFORMATION:
Producer: Waves
Model: MaxxBCL
Website: www.waves.com
Distributor: www.midimusic.it
Price: 2.500 + VAT
Article published in CM2 Magazine.
What is the MaxxBCL? A hardware evolution of the existing Waves products or an expensive hybrid created just to "tap" us poor users who are always looking for new tools to improve our audio products? For this test I did not borrow the instrument from the importer, but I went to test it directly in a well-known mastering studio in the Neapolitan hinterland that left me with its structure and even the car for about ten days ... .
In a world that increasingly prioritizes the speed at which a product is created, making extensive use of automation, virtual reality, plug-ins, and optional DSPs to accelerate computer processing speed, there are still some survivors who believe that a good analog or hybrid, as in this case, can give our sound a richer palette of nuances than an entirely integrated system within the computer. Certainly, the strength of such systems is not the vast quantity and quality of nuances they can apply to the sound. A few years ago, I was fortunate enough to be able to appreciate Waves products in my small mastering studio for third parties, using a PC (please don't turn up your noses, you Mac puritans...), an RME 9652 audio interface and an RME AD 96 converter, a Mykerinos card from Merging Technologies, a set of original Waves plugs costing just under 2 million of the old mintage, a Millennia Twincomp TCL 2 compressor, two pairs of speakers (B&W model Nautilus 805 and Dynaudio model AIR 10). I thought I had an excellent studio, certainly not comparable to the Nautilus, or the Metropolis in London, but I was able to obtain an excellent product because, unlike more renowned studios, I had one small strength: time. One day, I was offered to try Waves' L2 hardware. I had no intention of buying it and claimed that with my instruments I could do without this outboard, as the software and hardware algorithms I had were the same and that the only difference was the converter; I argued that, if I wanted to invest more, I would simply replace or add a new converter to my setup. After a while, I was given the “L2” to test for a month… I had to change my mind, there was an abyss and after a month I sold my old Master Akay, the Roland MKS 70 with the PG 800 and for a little over a million I made this new purchase. Now, after about 4 years, Waves is launching the evolution of the L2 in their catalog, what should I do? Sell my instrument before it depreciates like a cell phone or see if it's not just an old machine with a new look? First of all, I download the PDF manual, and here comes my first disappointment. It seems like Waves has made a huge mistake this time, not inventing anything, but simply combining three of its flagship products into one outboard: the second-generation Maxx Bass low-frequency enhancer, the C1 compressor, and finally the L2 booster. I can't even find a single blurb that gives me hope that the compressor is multiband like the C4. What a disappointment, but I'm stubborn, I want to hear it and try it.
MaxxBCL Front side user interface:
The MaxxBCL comes in a 2-unit rack format in black (Fig.1) with a global control (Fig 2) by means of luminous LEDs, where the sample rate, the selected sound source (analogue or digital), the sync source and the quantization can be displayed. There is a section to store up to 4 presets (Fig. 2-2), a LED control of the input signal (Fig. 2-3), 2 rotary controls (left and right) to click to calibrate the analog input signal (Fig. 2-4), a parameter section dedicated only to the compressor (C1) (Fig. 2-5), the keys for selection of Bypass, Opto / Electro modes, Threshold, Ratio and Attack controls, the proprietary ARC AutomaticRelease Control function, automatic gain and finally a switch for switching the two Comp-Bass or Bass-Comp processors. Continuing on the right we find a section of parameters dedicated only to the second generation MaxxBass (Fig. 2-6), whose frequency is adjustable from 25Hz to 120Hz with a mixing percentage of harmonics from 0 to 100%. There is also a high-pass filter with the “harmonics only” option. Finally we find a section of parameters dedicated to the Limiter, with adjustable threshold (Fig. 2-7), a Bypass button and one for the link, an adjustable output celling and control of the output signal by means of luminous LEDs. (Fig. 2-8).
MaxxBCL Rear side user interface: (Fig.3) Connection for power cord with selectable voltage control (Fig 4-1), Word clock equipped with synchronization interface (Fig. 4-2), a section for the various types of digital, optical, spdif, and coaxial inputs, with a switch to switch from the optical to the coaxial system (Fig. 4-3) and finally a section that concerns all types of analog inputs and outputs with relative switches (Fig. 4-4). Unfortunately it is not possible to use the outputs simultaneously: it would have been convenient to send the two balanced canon outputs in the master and the two Jack outputs to the monitor speakers.
Compressor: Waves' dynamic processors are among the most appreciated by engineers. They can act selectively on definable frequency bands giving a highly technical precision especially at a corrective level, ideal in the mixing phase (Fig.5). The hardware function on the MaxxBCL, unlike the software, does not have the possibility to choose a range of frequencies to use simultaneously compressor / expander / gate functions only on the selected bands, or to function like the C4 which is a multiband compressor. The sound quality is really excellent both in opto and electro mode and the management of the parameters is simple and immediate.
Maxx Bass on low frequencies: Why put a low frequency enhancer (Fig 6) that they call “second generation” and not instead add a good Parametric EQ? The software version is very powerful and works really well, allowing you to recreate the audio part in its lowest frequencies without actually modifying the harmonics in that range. It even gives the sensation of hearing low frequencies, which normally the size of the cone would not allow to reproduce as they do not reach that passband. What will the hardware version be like? I have already tried the MaxxBass 101 previously and honestly I was not crazy about it for studio use, in fact in this case I preferred to use the Renaissance Bass software also by Waves. However, I found it excellent for live use, even on high-end amplification systems. In any case, the manual refers to it as second generation, perhaps the components will be improved and this section will sound more present and without “dirt”? Well yes! After several tests, I realize that this section is finally really useful, for many applications and, even if I don't have many parameters to "play with", it doesn't make me regret the lack of an EQ and I can do without turning on the computer in this scorching heat.
L2 Ultramaximizer Peak Limiter:
The instrument does not have all the commands to act on like the hardware L2, but the algorithm for maximizing the processed sound is identical: you immediately notice the extraordinary transparency of the sound even at the top of signal maximization (Fig 7). Again the hardware outperforms the software.
MaxxBCL under pressure First test: the "live"
Luckily, it's summer, not just a time of sun and sand, but also of concerts; I went with the MaxxBCL under my arm to a concert where the sound engineer was starting the sound check on a Big Band-style orchestra. For the sake of consistency, let's say right away that the system was made up of 8 Nexo PS 15 + LF 1200 (sub) systems complete with controllers and driven by excellent QSC PL series amplifiers, and a Yamaha M3500 mixer. Connecting the MaxxBCL to the main insert, the sound engineer explained to me that he wasn't too keen on using digital outboards in an analog audio chain because, he said: "they could turn into a real Achilles heel due to their AD/DA conversion quality". Between one chat and another, the sound check was completed, leaving our machine in bypass and mutually agreeing not to use any of the company's dynamics processors in order to better test the capacity and character of the MaxxBCL. As for the final touches to the rather complex mix, I optimized the input level and, remaining in bypass, set the threshold to minus 12 dB, a 2:0 compression ratio with medium attack (remember, the release is automatic). We're obviously talking about the "Compressor" section. With the index finger of my right hand ready on the illuminated Bypass square! We exchanged glances and smiles of satisfaction, "phantom" compression, truly transparent, especially in Opto mode. Even the chattering impetus of the five horns was sufficiently controlled. The engineer was happy, the listeners didn't cover their ears, and the system was safe. The engineer's final conclusion: let's go to the bar for a hazelnut shake, we're one too many here!!!
Second test: “professional piano bar”.
I have been to visit two dear friends, two good disco bar professionals included in an excellent working tour throughout the national territory. Francesco (singer pianist) tells me that the need for a powerful and space-saving system is decisive for his work.For what concerns the emission of the medium-low, medium, medium-high and high section, even with a discreet system you can get a good result, while you suffer with the low section, always not very enveloping and therefore not involving. I connected the MaxxBCL on the Main Insert of the mixer (Mackie Cr16 / 04 Vlz Pro), connected in turn to a Lab Groupen power amp and Martin model F12 speakers. Look at our device, in particular on the MAxxBASS area: by turning the generous knob to the right and exaggerating (to throttle) we bring the "Intensity" value from 0 to 100 with the HP filter off and, it turns it turns you around, we found ourselves wander around the hall looking for a hidden diver. We have exaggerated a little, but this algorithm that acts on a psychoacoustic level is really evident and softly effective, also providing excellent mono compatibility. I also set the section that follows the famous Loudness Maxxmizer L2 gaining with the Treshold and setting the maximum peak level. We immediately noticed an increase in density and a transparent limitation, combined with the plasticity typical of definitive discs complete with Mastering. At this point we should pay close attention to the suspicions and accusations of a Playback performance ...
Third test: "recording studio".
Speaking of records, still with the MaxxBCL under our arm, we went to a recording studio, a warm, soulful male voice into a Neumann TLM 103 microphone with a Mogami cable connected to the Millennia Media HV 3 preamp, directly to the MaxxBCL's A/D converters, AES/EBU output to the Tascam MX 2424 multitrack recorder with 24-bit/96 KHz resolution, D/A output of the recorder to the TLA Audio MB3 tube mixer with Genelec 1031 and KRK model V88 monitoring. The MaxxBCL's conversion proved to be truly impeccable, detailed, and of clearly professional quality. When recording, it is often a good idea to use the L2 limiter in addition to the conversion, in order to obtain excellent track headroom (always used sparingly) and manage to contain the excessive impetus of the performer in question. Track optimization could also be done after recording, by exiting the digital recording, entering the MaxxBCL, and sending it (again digital) back to the multitrack, gaining intensity while simultaneously optimizing the dynamic range, track by track, so that during the mixing phase it will be sufficient to raise the faders to establish a good balance of the entire mix. Another possible use during the mixing phase is to group the drums, percussion, and bass on two sub-masters, using the compressor section, thus gaining punch and dynamic control, or even across the entire mix by being careful with the settings.
Fourth test: "Mastering".
The last test was done during the mastering phase, on a slightly reworked cover of Incognito with female vocals, recorded and mixed very badly and with an overall MP3 quality (terrible). From the start of the song I immediately noticed little depth in the low end and a harsh and old mid-high range: After about 40 seconds the singing begins and the voice detaches itself from the mix in an at times detached and annoying way. After connecting the MaxxBCL I began to redefine the bass with the fabulous psychoacoustic EQ, setting the intensity value to 50, then inserting the HP filter I performed an “anti-Rumble” sweeping up to 45 Hz. The difference immediately stood out. Finally, I set the compressor to the low “Ratio” values and the “Threshold” around – 15 dB, with a very fast attack. By doing this I managed to contain the voice in the MIX without squashing the entire song too much. Finally, I moved on to the L2 section to regain the dB previously lost due to compression. The overall quality of the track improved significantly, so much so that it met commercial standards.
Conclusions:
What emerges from these tests is that I definitely find myself faced with a very versatile machine, which can be carried around without the aid of a computer and has considerable potential for corrective purposes. We can say that the MaxxBCL passed all the tests faced with flying colors, always creating the right modification to the processed audio material. The instrument is quite expensive, but adequate for what the market offers. The only sore point, for those who own a professional 24-bit 192 kHz burner, is the impossibility of using it to its full potential to create a Super Master. I would have really liked it if a multiband compressor had also been implemented to maximize its potential, in order to achieve professional mastering without having to necessarily use other outboard equipment.
USEFUL INFORMATION:
Producer: Waves
Model: MaxxBCL
Website: www.waves.com
Distributor: www.midimusic.it
Price: 2.500 + VAT
Article published in CM2 Magazine.
What is the MaxxBCL? A hardware evolution of the existing Waves products or an expensive hybrid created just to "tap" us poor users who are always looking for new tools to improve our audio products? For this test I did not borrow the instrument from the importer, but I went to test it directly in a well-known mastering studio in the Neapolitan hinterland that left me with its structure and even the car for about ten days ... .
In a world that increasingly prioritizes the speed at which a product is created, making extensive use of automation, virtual reality, plug-ins, and optional DSPs to accelerate computer processing speed, there are still some survivors who believe that a good analog or hybrid, as in this case, can give our sound a richer palette of nuances than an entirely integrated system within the computer. Certainly, the strength of such systems is not the vast quantity and quality of nuances they can apply to the sound. A few years ago, I was fortunate enough to be able to appreciate Waves products in my small mastering studio for third parties, using a PC (please don't turn up your noses, you Mac puritans...), an RME 9652 audio interface and an RME AD 96 converter, a Mykerinos card from Merging Technologies, a set of original Waves plugs costing just under 2 million of the old mintage, a Millennia Twincomp TCL 2 compressor, two pairs of speakers (B&W model Nautilus 805 and Dynaudio model AIR 10). I thought I had an excellent studio, certainly not comparable to the Nautilus, or the Metropolis in London, but I was able to obtain an excellent product because, unlike more renowned studios, I had one small strength: time. One day, I was offered to try Waves' L2 hardware. I had no intention of buying it and claimed that with my instruments I could do without this outboard, as the software and hardware algorithms I had were the same and that the only difference was the converter; I argued that, if I wanted to invest more, I would simply replace or add a new converter to my setup. After a while, I was given the “L2” to test for a month… I had to change my mind, there was an abyss and after a month I sold my old Master Akay, the Roland MKS 70 with the PG 800 and for a little over a million I made this new purchase. Now, after about 4 years, Waves is launching the evolution of the L2 in their catalog, what should I do? Sell my instrument before it depreciates like a cell phone or see if it's not just an old machine with a new look? First of all, I download the PDF manual, and here comes my first disappointment. It seems like Waves has made a huge mistake this time, not inventing anything, but simply combining three of its flagship products into one outboard: the second-generation Maxx Bass low-frequency enhancer, the C1 compressor, and finally the L2 booster. I can't even find a single blurb that gives me hope that the compressor is multiband like the C4. What a disappointment, but I'm stubborn, I want to hear it and try it.
MaxxBCL Front side user interface:
The MaxxBCL comes in a 2-unit rack format in black (Fig.1) with a global control (Fig 2) by means of luminous LEDs, where the sample rate, the selected sound source (analogue or digital), the sync source and the quantization can be displayed. There is a section to store up to 4 presets (Fig. 2-2), a LED control of the input signal (Fig. 2-3), 2 rotary controls (left and right) to click to calibrate the analog input signal (Fig. 2-4), a parameter section dedicated only to the compressor (C1) (Fig. 2-5), the keys for selection of Bypass, Opto / Electro modes, Threshold, Ratio and Attack controls, the proprietary ARC AutomaticRelease Control function, automatic gain and finally a switch for switching the two Comp-Bass or Bass-Comp processors. Continuing on the right we find a section of parameters dedicated only to the second generation MaxxBass (Fig. 2-6), whose frequency is adjustable from 25Hz to 120Hz with a mixing percentage of harmonics from 0 to 100%. There is also a high-pass filter with the “harmonics only” option. Finally we find a section of parameters dedicated to the Limiter, with adjustable threshold (Fig. 2-7), a Bypass button and one for the link, an adjustable output celling and control of the output signal by means of luminous LEDs. (Fig. 2-8).
MaxxBCL Rear side user interface: (Fig.3) Connection for power cord with selectable voltage control (Fig 4-1), Word clock equipped with synchronization interface (Fig. 4-2), a section for the various types of digital, optical, spdif, and coaxial inputs, with a switch to switch from the optical to the coaxial system (Fig. 4-3) and finally a section that concerns all types of analog inputs and outputs with relative switches (Fig. 4-4). Unfortunately it is not possible to use the outputs simultaneously: it would have been convenient to send the two balanced canon outputs in the master and the two Jack outputs to the monitor speakers.
Compressor: Waves' dynamic processors are among the most appreciated by engineers. They can act selectively on definable frequency bands giving a highly technical precision especially at a corrective level, ideal in the mixing phase (Fig.5). The hardware function on the MaxxBCL, unlike the software, does not have the possibility to choose a range of frequencies to use simultaneously compressor / expander / gate functions only on the selected bands, or to function like the C4 which is a multiband compressor. The sound quality is really excellent both in opto and electro mode and the management of the parameters is simple and immediate.
Maxx Bass on low frequencies: Why put a low frequency enhancer (Fig 6) that they call “second generation” and not instead add a good Parametric EQ? The software version is very powerful and works really well, allowing you to recreate the audio part in its lowest frequencies without actually modifying the harmonics in that range. It even gives the sensation of hearing low frequencies, which normally the size of the cone would not allow to reproduce as they do not reach that passband. What will the hardware version be like? I have already tried the MaxxBass 101 previously and honestly I was not crazy about it for studio use, in fact in this case I preferred to use the Renaissance Bass software also by Waves. However, I found it excellent for live use, even on high-end amplification systems. In any case, the manual refers to it as second generation, perhaps the components will be improved and this section will sound more present and without “dirt”? Well yes! After several tests, I realize that this section is finally really useful, for many applications and, even if I don't have many parameters to "play with", it doesn't make me regret the lack of an EQ and I can do without turning on the computer in this scorching heat.
L2 Ultramaximizer Peak Limiter:
The instrument does not have all the commands to act on like the hardware L2, but the algorithm for maximizing the processed sound is identical: you immediately notice the extraordinary transparency of the sound even at the top of signal maximization (Fig 7). Again the hardware outperforms the software.
MaxxBCL under pressure First test: the "live"
Luckily, it's summer, not just a time of sun and sand, but also of concerts; I went with the MaxxBCL under my arm to a concert where the sound engineer was starting the sound check on a Big Band-style orchestra. For the sake of consistency, let's say right away that the system was made up of 8 Nexo PS 15 + LF 1200 (sub) systems complete with controllers and driven by excellent QSC PL series amplifiers, and a Yamaha M3500 mixer. Connecting the MaxxBCL to the main insert, the sound engineer explained to me that he wasn't too keen on using digital outboards in an analog audio chain because, he said: "they could turn into a real Achilles heel due to their AD/DA conversion quality". Between one chat and another, the sound check was completed, leaving our machine in bypass and mutually agreeing not to use any of the company's dynamics processors in order to better test the capacity and character of the MaxxBCL. As for the final touches to the rather complex mix, I optimized the input level and, remaining in bypass, set the threshold to minus 12 dB, a 2:0 compression ratio with medium attack (remember, the release is automatic). We're obviously talking about the "Compressor" section. With the index finger of my right hand ready on the illuminated Bypass square! We exchanged glances and smiles of satisfaction, "phantom" compression, truly transparent, especially in Opto mode. Even the chattering impetus of the five horns was sufficiently controlled. The engineer was happy, the listeners didn't cover their ears, and the system was safe. The engineer's final conclusion: let's go to the bar for a hazelnut shake, we're one too many here!!!
Second test: “professional piano bar”.
I have been to visit two dear friends, two good disco bar professionals included in an excellent working tour throughout the national territory. Francesco (singer pianist) tells me that the need for a powerful and space-saving system is decisive for his work.For what concerns the emission of the medium-low, medium, medium-high and high section, even with a discreet system you can get a good result, while you suffer with the low section, always not very enveloping and therefore not involving. I connected the MaxxBCL on the Main Insert of the mixer (Mackie Cr16 / 04 Vlz Pro), connected in turn to a Lab Groupen power amp and Martin model F12 speakers. Look at our device, in particular on the MAxxBASS area: by turning the generous knob to the right and exaggerating (to throttle) we bring the "Intensity" value from 0 to 100 with the HP filter off and, it turns it turns you around, we found ourselves wander around the hall looking for a hidden diver. We have exaggerated a little, but this algorithm that acts on a psychoacoustic level is really evident and softly effective, also providing excellent mono compatibility. I also set the section that follows the famous Loudness Maxxmizer L2 gaining with the Treshold and setting the maximum peak level. We immediately noticed an increase in density and a transparent limitation, combined with the plasticity typical of definitive discs complete with Mastering. At this point we should pay close attention to the suspicions and accusations of a Playback performance ...
Third test: "recording studio".
Speaking of records, still with the MaxxBCL under our arm, we went to a recording studio, a warm, soulful male voice into a Neumann TLM 103 microphone with a Mogami cable connected to the Millennia Media HV 3 preamp, directly to the MaxxBCL's A/D converters, AES/EBU output to the Tascam MX 2424 multitrack recorder with 24-bit/96 KHz resolution, D/A output of the recorder to the TLA Audio MB3 tube mixer with Genelec 1031 and KRK model V88 monitoring. The MaxxBCL's conversion proved to be truly impeccable, detailed, and of clearly professional quality. When recording, it is often a good idea to use the L2 limiter in addition to the conversion, in order to obtain excellent track headroom (always used sparingly) and manage to contain the excessive impetus of the performer in question. Track optimization could also be done after recording, by exiting the digital recording, entering the MaxxBCL, and sending it (again digital) back to the multitrack, gaining intensity while simultaneously optimizing the dynamic range, track by track, so that during the mixing phase it will be sufficient to raise the faders to establish a good balance of the entire mix. Another possible use during the mixing phase is to group the drums, percussion, and bass on two sub-masters, using the compressor section, thus gaining punch and dynamic control, or even across the entire mix by being careful with the settings.
Fourth test: "Mastering".
The last test was done during the mastering phase, on a slightly reworked cover of Incognito with female vocals, recorded and mixed very badly and with an overall MP3 quality (terrible). From the start of the song I immediately noticed little depth in the low end and a harsh and old mid-high range: After about 40 seconds the singing begins and the voice detaches itself from the mix in an at times detached and annoying way. After connecting the MaxxBCL I began to redefine the bass with the fabulous psychoacoustic EQ, setting the intensity value to 50, then inserting the HP filter I performed an “anti-Rumble” sweeping up to 45 Hz. The difference immediately stood out. Finally, I set the compressor to the low “Ratio” values and the “Threshold” around – 15 dB, with a very fast attack. By doing this I managed to contain the voice in the MIX without squashing the entire song too much. Finally, I moved on to the L2 section to regain the dB previously lost due to compression. The overall quality of the track improved significantly, so much so that it met commercial standards.
Conclusions:
What emerges from these tests is that I definitely find myself faced with a very versatile machine, which can be carried around without the aid of a computer and has considerable potential for corrective purposes. We can say that the MaxxBCL passed all the tests faced with flying colors, always creating the right modification to the processed audio material. The instrument is quite expensive, but adequate for what the market offers. The only sore point, for those who own a professional 24-bit 192 kHz burner, is the impossibility of using it to its full potential to create a Super Master. I would have really liked it if a multiband compressor had also been implemented to maximize its potential, in order to achieve professional mastering without having to necessarily use other outboard equipment.
USEFUL INFORMATION:
Producer: Waves
Model: MaxxBCL
Website: www.waves.com
Distributor: www.midimusic.it
Price: 2.500 + VAT
Article published in CM2 Magazine.
