• Get involved.
    We want your input!
    Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.

    After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
    If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.

    After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
    https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/

    Thanks in advance and have fun!
    RadioDiscussions Administrators

Omnia 11 G Force

Am I the only one who has noticed that audio processing is pretty much a mature technology and there's nothing new to "invent." ANY of the boxes can be made musical or ratty sounding.
De-clipping...are you serious?? The clipped waveforms are going to be psychically reconstructed??!! You're going to spend another $800, on top of the $11K you've already spent to get ANOTHER 1 db of "loudness?"
I have a flux capacitor I would like to sell you....
I have an Omnia 11s and I can flat top the waveform as much as I like. Any sound, from musically pleasing to electro-explosive can be created with this processor. Why would you need to spend another penny...and why do you think it would even matter?
 
Bingo Wavo. In a day and age where radio competes with portable music players, phones, and streaming, why would you spend big money to add a bunch of distortion? That, and most modern radios have built in Automatic Gain Controls to keep levels consistent to the consumer anyway, so you're fighting against the receiver. Certainly the new digital audio processors are much improved over old 8100 Optimods, CRL, or Cutting Edge processing, but when it comes to FM audio processing, less is more.
 
Honestly, it matters because a client is asking about it, and I wanted to provide the most accurate information possible. I told them not to necessarily run out and buy the upgrade but they are still curious. I'm sure we've all worked with groups / owners / mangers / executives like that.
 
Honestly, it matters because a client is asking about it, and I wanted to provide the most accurate information possible. I told them not to necessarily run out and buy the upgrade but they are still curious. I'm sure we've all worked with groups / owners / mangers / executives like that.

I absolutely understand! I know Frank, Bob, and the others have to develop, and then create interest in new products or they will go out of business. My point is that we have reached the point of diminishing return when it comes to audio processing. Most boxes have enough DSP "umph" to make almost any kind of sound imaginable and spending another $800, after spending $12-14K, is not, IMHO, a wise use of resources.
There will still be people who swear they can hear an improvement...just like people who swear they can hear the difference in speakers fed by 3 inch copper strap. You can argue all day and night about how skin affect doesn't apply at audio frequencies...you will soon find that math, science, and logic have nothing to do with people's perception.
If you have an Omnia 11 you have EVERY tool you need to make your station the best sounding or the loudest.
 
I find it difficult to believe that multiple, complex, clipped waveforms can be "reconstructed" in real time to render anything close to the original waveforms. This is snake oil. Listen to the "de-clipped" audio and then tell me it works. I have heard it...garbage in is still garbage out.
Still...you find people who will swear they can hear a difference. Same for gold plated "monster cables."
The big problem we have had with radio engineering for so long is TOO MANY PROCESSORS and TOO FEW PEOPLE WHO HAVE THE TALENT AND KNOWLEDGE to adjust them properly. Bob Orban said it himself many, many years ago...the stations that sound really good are usually the ones with simple audio processing schemes. The "big" stations, with everything including the kitchen sink in the audio chain, are usually the ones that sound horrible.
 
It is pointless to debate audio processing at this level. There are some very intelligent people out there who make good use of the "kitchen sink". There's no argument about Bob Orban's knowledge of the art. However, his philosophy about processing appears to be somewhat different from Frank's, who also is no slouch. There are people in New York who consider their aggressively-processed stations to be pretty darn fine. Over here, "horrible" might be the first word to come to mind. Someone once opined that Bob's processors were best described as "polite". That was years ago however, before he tossed in DSP and more bands into his gear.

Right now, I'd say the larger problems are that some folks can't keep the clipping and density levels under control. CD's are nearly flat-topped before they get to the stations, where being louder than the next guy still seems to be more important than audio quality.

Say what you want, but the declipper does have a positive effect, at least to some. I happen to be one who thinks I can hear the difference. Apparently, some of the folks at Omnia feel the same way.

Processing continues to be a subjective art, and probably always will be. IMHO, those who can evaluate where, how, why and against whom, likely have a better shot at fitting a good processing philosophy into a given market.
 
Last edited:
I will agree that audio processing is subjective...there is no *right* answer. I'm glad there are different flavors of audio processors, developed by people with differing philosophies, experience, and goals.
Adding the kitchen sink only adds additional noise/distortion; today's audio processors do NOT need a kitchen sink thrown in.
Why is there still this programming fixation on "loud?"
 
Ahhh... sadly, a rhetorical question. Your unneeded feature is someone else's hotbutton, gotta have, absolute.

Nature of the beast.

I would have asked that question when I first saw the promotional material on the 31-band Air Aura. I've never had an opportunity to work with one, but 31 bands seems a little scary to me.
 
I've been wondering if buying the upgrade is worth the money. I have an Omnia 11, but took it out of service because it didn't seem to be a good fit with my station's format. I actually liked my old processor (a BW Broadcast DSP-Xtra) so the 11 is just sitting there.

Before you tell me that I'm deaf, stupid or otherwise unqualified, I've been in the pro-audio business and in the broadcasting business for a very long time. I'm also the station owner, so I write the checks.

As has been mentioned, processing is a very subjective thing. There is no "one size fits all." Format as well as variability of audio sources can have a big influence on what sounds right. While an aggressive processor may be great on one format, it may suck on another. By backing off on a lot of settings, I can make the Omnia 11 sound good on my station, but then it sounds pretty much like what I already had.

I paid in the vicinity of $11,000.00 for it a couple of years ago. Now, the question is do I spend another $1000 to upgrade it, or do I find it a new home and move on? Has anyone had first hand experience with the G-Force add on?
 
I find it difficult to believe that multiple, complex, clipped waveforms can be "reconstructed" in real time to render anything close to the original waveforms. This is snake oil. Listen to the "de-clipped" audio and then tell me it works. I have heard it...garbage in is still garbage out.

Most of today's processors do not work in real time. They use a delay loop for the "real" audio which is processed based on instructions sent upon analysis of the real time audio. So an analysis of the waveforms can be used to send instructions to the processor which appropriately adjusts the delayed audio.

In such a scenario, those clipped samples can be restored by a logic algorithm to the way they likely were before mastering.

Obviously, this would be very useful in formats playing music that was originally mastered digitally. Other formats would not benefit as much unless the source audio was remastered and made to look like square waves.
 
Should you upgrade the Omnia? If you like the DSPXtra, no. There's no point to changing processing unless there's something you feel you need to accomplish. There are lots of stations that still get by just fine with old 8100s. They like how they sound and don't feel any competitive reason to hit the gas any harder.

I have several early DSPXtra models on the shelf here and, and I like pretty much everything about them, except the clipper. Compared to other processors, it's a bit harsh to my ears. it's all subjective though. if you like the DSPXtra, keep it. It's a pretty decent box.
 
Last edited:
Should you upgrade the Omnia? If you like the DSPXtra, no. There's no point to changing processing unless there's something you feel you need to accomplish. There are lots of stations that still get by just fine with old 8100s. They like how they sound and don't feel any competitive reason to hit the gas any harder.

I have several early DSPXtra models on the shelf here and, and I like pretty much everything about them, except the clipper. Compared to other processors, it's a bit harsh to my ears. it's all subjective though. if you like the DSPXtra, keep it. It's a pretty decent box.

Since I own the Omnia 11, and it is sitting on a shelf unused, I'm wondering if the upgrade is worth the money. If it is, I might put it back in the signal chain. So far, I haven't heard any comments about G-Force, except from the folks at Telos/Omnia who obviously like it. Has anybody actually purchased the upgrade? What did you think? was it a good investment?
 


Most of today's processors do not work in real time. They use a delay loop for the "real" audio which is processed based on instructions sent upon analysis of the real time audio. So an analysis of the waveforms can be used to send instructions to the processor which appropriately adjusts the delayed audio.

In such a scenario, those clipped samples can be restored by a logic algorithm to the way they likely were before mastering.

Obviously, this would be very useful in formats playing music that was originally mastered digitally. Other formats would not benefit as much unless the source audio was remastered and made to look like square waves.

Yes, David. Most of the folks on this board have at least a rough idea on how DSP processing works. The point is that it's hard to believe that you can restore clipping - a process that takes a lot of time when done offline - in just a few seconds as part of a processing chain. It actually IS possible as you're not processing an entire file in one chunk.
 
Given some of the comments posted here, I certainly wouldn't make that assumption.

I always think it is appropriate to explain things well for the benefit of those with an interest but without a technical background. And I think that defines the majority of readers.
 
Yes, David. Most of the folks on this board have at least a rough idea on how DSP processing works. The point is that it's hard to believe that you can restore clipping - a process that takes a lot of time when done offline - in just a few seconds as part of a processing chain. It actually IS possible as you're not processing an entire file in one chunk.

Then the issue is not whether it can be done but how well the Omnia does it.
 
I just wanted to know if anyone has actually purchased the upgrade and what do they think? I heard it at NAB and it sounded great, but then, everything sounds great on the convention floor. It's pretty hard to separate the smoke and mirrors from reality at a trade show. Before I plunk down an additional thousand bucks, I'd like to know if it is worth doing. I know all the Omnia supporters will tell me it is the greatest thing since sliced bread, but I'd like to hear that from disinterested parties.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.
Back
Top Bottom