gswitz
And the fact that sharke didn't say he can't live without it gives me pause. If course bit and others have given it a thumbs up which is why I've become suddenly curious... That and the fact that I have trouble getting bass to sound good on mp3 played through ear buds .
No dongles at Waves any more! Although you still have to deal with that stupid Waves Shell nonsense.
The reason why it's not an "essential" plug for me is that most of the stuff I play with involves either synths or commercial samples, and if you can't dial in more "zing" from the synth itself then you're doing something wrong. However, I will occasionally mess with samples from old records, especially old orchestral recordings that sound a little muddy and lifeless, and the aural exciter really polishes them up somewhat. It's something to be used in moderation, of course. You can really screw a mix up with it to the point where it's literally painful to listen to - but I suppose the same goes with any plug.
As far as I am aware, the main use for it is in helping with recordings that could use a little more top end and which EQ isn't going to fix (because there's no top end to boost). Although I'm sure it can be used for effect too. The Waves press release said of the unit it's modeled from:
Highly regarded for its ability to increase and enhance presence, brightness and detail on vocal tracks and masters alike, the Aural Exciter was even credited on popular albums by the likes of Jackson Browne, Linda Ronstadt and James Taylor, as a sort of hardware "session player."
I'm pretty sure there must be A/B demos out there.