482 i BBE Sonic rack mnt Maximizer... $75..good deal?

[Robert Burns]

Isnt this their best unit? True Stereo?

[dannyr]

From there web site:

The 482i is perfect for semi-pro applications not requiring balanced jacks. With true dual-mono operation, the 482 is two independent BBE SONIC MAXIMIZER™ signal processors in one chassis.


That being said.....it is probably their best currently made unit for use with guitar. $75 is a good price for a used one.

[DonP]

I've heard the 422a sounded the best, but I haven't A/B'd them.

[Cleveland Metal]

IMO, the 422a seems to work best for guitar... Other units do better on PA and recording duty than the 422 does.

Units after the 422, seem too sizzly to my ears for guitar.

Seen 422's for 40-50 bucks.

[Strat God]

Yup. Buy it.

[vklobucar]

Indeed the 422A is the best one of all for guitars rigs!

[zeegler]

I've had a chance to directly compare the 462, 422, and 422a. Guess what? No difference, at least not through my rig. I had 4 other people present, and none of them could tell the difference.

[Cleveland Metal]

I've personally owned 422a's, 462's and I believe a 482 possibly. Played a few others at length as well, and there is a big diff... I've got an early 401 I believe it is, and it's just terrible. Mustaine was sposed to have used that, and i just think it sucks. More of a Preamp actually.

Nonetheless, the 362 was considerably much more sizzly. Anything past the 422a that I've played is. And, although you might not believe my 30 years of tone seeking, Bill will say the exact same thing. Maybe his word goes farther here. Even tho I believe that I turned him onto the BBE, haha.

I spoke with BBE a long time ago for something I needed, and the rep even said they were going more for PA and recording in the later stuff so it's a wider frequency band they are working with and even the guy I spoke with agreed with me and felt the 422 was more suitable for the guitar freqs. I believe he said they changed the "algorythms" that make the decisions on what happens with the delays etc inside.
The later ones are quieter tho.

[zeegler]

LOL, we've had this exact same discussion before. Either that or it's deja vu.

[horns666]

Wassup Zeegs. Yeah I've been messin' around with BBE's for quite some time. I was turned onto the 422 via Vivain Cambell in a "hot guitarist" VHS tape around '89-''90. When he stated they were a "godsend" . So I hunted one down and bought it. I conferred with barcus barry as well, because I had to order rack ear for my 422. Ironically I tried that unit with the 5150 first with great results. The other three half stacks I ran at the same time via a custom made 4 way switcher didn't do very well with the BBE in the loop. So in the 5150 it stayed. At this time John and his freind Mark came by and used to check out my gear. John bought my first two 5150's (block logos) and a 422 for himself. The next BBE purchase I made was a 422a which sounds identical to the 422, but there was a "pumping" noise that became more apparant as I pushed the amp harder. I equated that to some automtic bullshit built-in that model. So I prefer the 422, and not the 422a. Then I learned John had the older units that he stated above. He was partial to running a EQ in the loop of his 900 at the time. So, I tried various rack EQs for a while with my 5150s without much satisfaction..so I just used the 422. Then I bought the new BBE 462 when it came out and I wasn't pleassed with some changes they made. Icluding the smooth sweep of the control knobs. Since I ran mine in stereo, I liked that I was able to get a perfect balance by having the controls that had precise "clicks". As far as tone I did hear more "sizzle" with the 462, especially when I turned the process controll all the way up when compared to the 422. The low contour was pretty much the same on both units. The effect that you'd hear when you bypassed the unit off and on was also quite similiar. Which basically boosted the sound of the amp in general when engaged. I'm just partial the the older 422 models because I like the dials that "click" for a precise balance when in stereo, and less sizzle with the definition control all the way up. I did try te 462 with a Crate BV120 at GC and it really woke that amp up as well. Since BBE works very well with my Marshall rig ..I'd assume it would sound pretty good with your Marshall 900. Was that clip you posted with the BBE, and a stomp in the front? Whatever it was, it certainly worked well! So, your doin' something right.

[horns666]

Sorry, To Bob's original question. I did try the 482 some time ago, and didn't hear much differenece, if any at all between the 462 and the 482. I do know the 482 is more expensive new..something around $300.

But I've been using the 422s with lots luck for nearly 20 years now, and they're dirt cheap on the Bay. I this one mint, shipped for 50 bucks about 10 years ago and it still works perfectly. Its a important part of my Marshall rack tone. You gotta go with what ya know..

[zeegler]

Bill, the clip was done without the 422 engaged. I do use the 422 to tighten the sound up for a more modern metal sound though when I need it. I totally agree about the notched control pots too. It helps keep your settings where you put them. I'm glad that I still had it around. It never sounded good with the B-52, so it just sat collecting dust for a long time. It works well with the Marshall though.

[horns666]

Bill, the clip was done without the 422 engaged. I do use the 422 to tighten the sound up for a more modern metal sound though when I need it. I totally agree about the notched control pots too. It helps keep your settings where you put them. I'm glad that I still had it around. It never sounded good with the B-52, so it just sat collecting dust for a long time. It works well with the Marshall though.

Yes, I can absolutely see that after playing a B-52 half stack. I was quite surprised. I really enjoyed playing that amp, amd would consider buying one, especiallly for the price. I actually had my son in mind while playing it. Think, there, no fuggin' way I'll let him barrow my shit if he ever statred his own band. I will help him get his own gear to beat on. He doesn't taje care of his stiff like I take care of mine..That B-52 sounds perfectly fine the way it is. The BBE definitely helps thickens, and tightens up my Marshall for sure. The LEDs on both cghannels are perfectly balanced . I always keep the definitions three "CLICKS" past noon..that seems to be the G-spot for me.

I remember trying the SD-1 in front of my rack..it didn't take it very well, but it really doesn't need it, because ther'e always a silicone diode in there. I would LOVE to try it with the Uber to tighten things up. I think the balance between odd and even harmonics would smooth things out perfectly. I was if that's what Jeff Lommis meant by his title "zero order phase"..

Man, I LOVE his tone..and I think I'm dialed in a close as I'm going to get it!!!

This ain't your daddy's tone..no more Van Halen aloud!!! Been there, done that..that was then, this is now!!