• 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

8200 vs. DSP-X products

> And don't forget being 15 years old the 8200 could have or
> be getting ready to have bad electrolytic capacitors....
>

There is a switching(?) supply in the 8200 that is known to go bad. In some cases the 8200 gets unplugged and won't come back on when plugged in again. Fortunately, replacement supplies are readily available from more than one source (not just Orban) and are not terribly expensive.
 
> There is a switching(?) supply in the 8200 that is known to
> go bad. In some cases the 8200 gets unplugged and won't
> come back on when plugged in again. Fortunately,
> replacement supplies are readily available from more than
> one source (not just Orban) and are not terribly expensive.

I'm not sure if it was the 8200 or some other model, but that's exactly what happened to "New Jersey 101.5" (WKXW-FM Trenton, NJ) a few years ago. They took their Optimod down for maintenance and it never came back up, due to a dead power supply.<P ID="signature">______________
noiboc.jpg

"This is the New York Emergency Broadcast System satellite channel. They took the crosstown bus."</P>
 
> As far as the DSP-X boxes. I haven't had the opportunity to
> hear
> one in action yet.
> They may be great boxes, but it seems that there are two or
> three
> of the same guys cheerleading them on all the lists.
> Their enthusiasm makes me wonder if they actually BOUGHT
> them or have them GRATIS from the company. This may sometime
> alter the perspective.


You raise a valid point and it is not something that BW influences or has any control of. All processors manufacturers have their fans and we have a few here. We don't give away product but like ALL processor manufacturers we do deals here and there.
Compared to Orban and Omnia BW have a very small customer base (at the moment) but the ones we do have are to the best of our knowledge very happy with their purchase. They know they couldn't have bought a better box for the money.
Remember that BW will give you 100% money back for up to 3 months after purchase should you change your mind. Now that is standing behind a product! You can't do that unless you know that the customer will be happy with it.
We look forward to proving to you that any threads from satisfied customers are just that!
Contact us nearer the time to see if we can offer you any factory direct deals. Either that or contact your preferred equipment supplier and pester them for a demo.
Best regards
Scott
 
Re: DSP-X for AM?

>
> BTW, is there any hope for the long-awaited AM version of
> the DSP-X? Orban will be releasing their new Optimod-AM
> 9400 in January 2006... it would be nice if you had
> something with similar capabilities (hopefully including
> full matrix processing for C-Quam AM Stereo, which the 9400
> unfortunately does not) at a more affordable price -- i.e.
> at or below the cost of the entry-level CRL Amigo AM.
>

Here is the schedule.
We are currently working on bringing the DSPXmini from beta to V1 and this should be about a week or so.
We are then going to revise the DSPX to V3 software.
At that point the DSPX website will be updated and new downloads, remote control apps, manuals and everything else will be uploaded. This should all be done before Xmas.
First thing in the new year we are going to start beta testing some AM versions. We are not 100% yet on which of the FM models to allow AM software. It will probably be the X and the Xtra but the mini is also a possibilty as we could feed the AM signal from the composite output.
Your comments on what you think the AM market wants is helpful.
Expect betas for NAB time.
The first release of the AM software will not have C-Quam but we will look into the issue and if its not to difficult we will implement a software update shortly afterwards.

Best regards
Scott
 
> Either way, if I was in a small market and could pick up an
> 8200
> for let's say 1K to 1.5K that's the way I would go.

Orban 8100A goes on eBay from 1.2K to 1.8K, so I doubt you'll be able to get 8200 that cheap...


Regards,
Goran Tomas
 
> > As far as the DSP-X boxes. I haven't had the opportunity
> to
> > hear
> > one in action yet.
> > They may be great boxes, but it seems that there are two
> or
> > three
> > of the same guys cheerleading them on all the lists.
> > Their enthusiasm makes me wonder if they actually BOUGHT
> > them or have them GRATIS from the company. This may
> sometime
> > alter the perspective.
>
>
> You raise a valid point and it is not something that BW
> influences or has any control of. All processors
> manufacturers have their fans and we have a few here. We
> don't give away product but like ALL processor manufacturers
> we do deals here and there.
> Compared to Orban and Omnia BW have a very small customer
> base (at the moment) but the ones we do have are to the best
> of our knowledge very happy with their purchase. They know
> they couldn't have bought a better box for the money.
> Remember that BW will give you 100% money back for up to 3
> months after purchase should you change your mind. Now that
> is standing behind a product! You can't do that unless you
> know that the customer will be happy with it.
> We look forward to proving to you that any threads from
> satisfied customers are just that!
> Contact us nearer the time to see if we can offer you any
> factory direct deals. Either that or contact your preferred
> equipment supplier and pester them for a demo.
> Best regards
> Scott
>

Very well. When I get ready to make my next processor purchase
I will try to arrange for an appropriate DSP-X model for comparison.
 
Re: DSP-X for AM?

> We are then going to revise the DSPX to V3 software.
> At that point the DSPX website will be updated and new
> downloads, remote control apps, manuals and everything else
> will be uploaded. This should all be done before Xmas.

Great! Been wating for that. There's nothing better than a new upgrade for your processor ;-)


Regards,
Goran Tomas
 
> What I haven't seen yet is anyone advising you to try them
> all! You can get 15 day "demos" of all those boxes, so you
> can hear them first hand. Processing is so

Maybe I haven't said so here explicitly, but I'm always recommending to get your hands on as many processors as you can (that fit your budget) and make a direct comparison, preferably on-air on your station!

IMO, this is the only way you can be sure you've bought the best box for your station.

Recommendations are always subjective and often biased, not to mention they come form different "environments" (program on one side and transmission equipment on the other).


Regards,
Goran Tomas
 
Just my two cents.

We are a small NCE and just upgraded our air chain with an Omnia.03T and are using a compellor in liu of the WB AGC.

At first out of the box I thought the sound was a bit harsh, a quick call to Omnia Tech support and a few minor adjustments cleared up any doubt that we made the correct processing choice.

Over the past two months we have received tons of compliments on our sound. A CE at a local full power FM emailed me and thought we were using an Omnia.06.

Our sound is open, musical and competitive.

We were extremely impressed with the quick response from Omnia Tech Support, for just under 3K for the 03Turbo you can’t go wrong..
 
Re: DSP-X for AM?

> > This should all be done before Xmas.

It'll be a DSP-X mas!
 
Re: The definitive list!

Here's the order of quality on that list from what I have tested (the DSPX mini is coming soon. I'll be doing another A/B, again with the Omnia 3 Turbo)

$3316.25 DSPX
$4499.00 Inovonics Omega FM (BSW special price)
$2995.00 Omnia-3fm Turbo (factory special price)
$2200.00 Inovonics 718 David III
$4950.00 Orban Optimod-FM 2300
$3015.00 Orban Optimod-FM 2200 (BSW special price)
$2995.00 CRL Amigo FM
$2000.00 Inovonics 716 David II
$1895.00 Hnat-Hindes Ultramod FM
$995.00 Hnat-Hindes Ultramod UM2000

The Hnat Hindes stuff is suited for education or classical, but not much else. Hnat Hindes has some of the best out-of-the-box bass I have ever heard in an analog processor.

I've had AM and FM Amigo's... not impressive for either. The David III is an interesting box I hope to demo soon as well. The Omega FM is very impressive (with what I heard at NAB... would love to get a full demo).


> $995.00 Hnat-Hindes Ultramod UM2000
> $1748.25 DSPXmini
> $1895.00 Hnat-Hindes Ultramod FM
> $2000.00 Inovonics 716 David II
> $2200.00 Inovonics 718 David III
> $2995.00 CRL Amigo FM
> $2995.00 Omnia-3fm Turbo (factory special price)
> $3015.00 Orban Optimod-FM 2200 (BSW special price)
> $3316.25 DSPX
> $4499.00 Inovonics Omega FM (BSW special price)
> $4898.25 DSPXmini + Ariane Sequel
> $4950.00 Orban Optimod-FM 2300
>
> All prices are factory list except where noted. All
> processors include at least AGC, limiting, clipping, lowpass
> filtering, and stereo generation -- the basic stuff you need
> to put a legally-modulated FM Stereo signal on the air.
>
 
> They may be great boxes, but it seems that there are two or
> three
> of the same guys cheerleading them on all the lists.
> Their enthusiasm makes me wonder if they actually BOUGHT
> them or have them GRATIS from the company. This may sometime
> alter the perspective.

My box was purchased, so there was nothing "gratis". If I didn't feel the box was worth it, I would have returned it and forgotten about it. What I wanted was to in on something on the ground floor and try to help make it better, since I love processing and would never have gotten the chance to use my "golden ears" with Foti or Orban.

Why I like BW... because they listen to the ideas of ALL end users and put these ideas into the box to make a BETTER box (not like other processor manufacturers who seem to sometimes have their own "inner circle").

Scott can tell you I used to email him more times than he probably can remember about improvements I was looking for. 99.9% of what I was looking for was implemented and the box is better now and I like to think some of that is because of me and the tests I performed in the US with the box in the 75us New York City radio wars.
 
> KRXO, the station I normally work at, has an 8200 that we
> are "happy" with. However, when music becomes more complex,
> so to speak, I can hear it having a hard time effectively
> keeping up, creating a bit of grunge that the 8400 on one of
> our stations doesn't have, on similar passages. Otherwise,
> I am "happy" with the sound of a 8200. Familiarity probably
> makes me feel safer with a 8200, however, since the
> technology has improved fairly radically, it might be in the
> best intrest of the contract station to try the BW stuff and
> just see how it works. Appearently most on here seem to
> agree that most any of the major players' newer stuff would
> be a better solution than the older 8200. I think the Omnia
> stuff is ok, however, my thoughts on their products are, in
> general, they are made for producing more loudness that
> clean audio. In the market I am needing processing for, I
> would prefer cleaner audio. At this point, I am thinking
> about recommending a test-drive of one of the BW products
> when the time comes. I appreciate the input from everyone
> and look foward to hearing further comments on the subject.
>

I have used the older Omnia.FM and have found that it had a great deal of clarity IF you wanted it to sound that way. I had also gotten it to thump and bump like they wanted it with some trade off though. I have also seen an Omnia6 at another local station and just with a standard preset that station is one of the top in the market and sounds great!

It's all user preference and budget at this point the way I see it. I am personally set on the Omnia stuff from using the FM, 6 and also playing with an older 8200. I think Omnia is much easier to work on easier to get a better sounding and competitive signal.
 
> > They may be great boxes, but it seems that there are two
> or
> > three
> > of the same guys cheerleading them on all the lists.
> > Their enthusiasm makes me wonder if they actually BOUGHT
> > them or have them GRATIS from the company. This may
> sometime
> > alter the perspective.
>
> My box was purchased, so there was nothing "gratis". If I
> didn't feel the box was worth it, I would have returned it
> and forgotten about it. What I wanted was to in on
> something on the ground floor and try to help make it
> better, since I love processing and would never have gotten
> the chance to use my "golden ears" with Foti or Orban.
>
> Why I like BW... because they listen to the ideas of ALL end
> users and put these ideas into the box to make a BETTER box
> (not like other processor manufacturers who seem to
> sometimes have their own "inner circle").
>
> Scott can tell you I used to email him more times than he
> probably can remember about improvements I was looking for.
> 99.9% of what I was looking for was implemented and the box
> is better now and I like to think some of that is because of
> me and the tests I performed in the US with the box in the
> 75us New York City radio wars.
>

PASSION....I like that. Guess I need to give one of these
boxes a test drive!
 
> Why I like BW... because they listen to the ideas of ALL end
> users and put these ideas into the box to make a BETTER box
> (not like other processor manufacturers who seem to
> sometimes have their own "inner circle").
>
> Scott can tell you I used to email him more times than he
> probably can remember about improvements I was looking for.
> 99.9% of what I was looking for was implemented and the box
> is better now and I like to think some of that is because of
> me and the tests I performed in the US with the box in the
> 75us New York City radio wars.

I can too testify that Scott is very responsive to user's input and will listen to ideas. Some of my suggestions also ended up in the box.


Regards,
Goran Tomas
 
Re: DSP-X for AM?

First thing in the new year we are going to start beta
> testing some AM versions. We are not 100% yet on which of
> the FM models to allow AM software. .
>
> Best regards
> Scott

Send one my way Scott and I'll beta test that sum bitch TOMORROW! I hate the sound of our AM as our 9100 is sick. Been recapped and the whole 9 yards. I swear to God I have the prototype...LOL
Oh, I forgot Scott.......
PULEASE!!!!!!!!!!!
 
Paging Frank Foti

Hey Frank,
Does Denny Sanders have an email address? I wanted to ask him a few questions and searched high and low on the Omnia site but failed to find one. I spoke with him a month or so ago and wanted to follow up.
Thanks,
George
 
Re: DSP-X for AM?

> First thing in the new year we are going to start beta
> testing some AM versions. We are not 100% yet on which of
> the FM models to allow AM software. It will probably be the
> X and the Xtra but the mini is also a possibilty as we could
> feed the AM signal from the composite output.
> Your comments on what you think the AM market wants is
> helpful.
> Expect betas for NAB time.

Excellent news! I think you'll easily find a market for AM versions of your three current DSPX processors. Here's a basic outline of what I have in mind:

DSPXmini AM
Competition: Inovonics 235 ($1800, mono only)
Same features as FM version, except the FM Stereo generator (useless for AM) is replaced with the analog/digital output module (or just analog only, as in this price range there is little need for digital outputs). With lowpass filtering adjustable from 4.5 to 15 kHz and pre-emphasis variable up to 75 uS, making it suitable for narrow- and wide-band AM and even for FM when a built-in stereo generator is not required. Asymmetrical peak limiting for up to +150% positive modulation on AM. Optional matrix limiting for C-Quam AM Stereo (see below).

DSPX AM
Competition: CRL Amigo AM ($2995); Omnia 3-AM ($3990); CRL Amigo Talk/HF ($3995, mono only); Orban Optimod-AM 9200 ($4350, mono only)
Adds the same goodies to the "mini" as the FM version, plus multiband matrix limiting for C-Quam AM Stereo (see below).

DSPXtra AM
Competition: Orban Optimod-AM 9200D ($4750, mono only); CRL AM-4 Legend System ($5995, mono only); Omnia-5EX HDAM ($6980); Orban Optimod-AM 9400 ($7990)
Big toys for big boys! Same built-in Ariane levelling, 6-band processing structure, and analog/digital outputs as the FM version.

> The first release of the AM software will not have C-Quam
> but we will look into the issue and if its not too difficult
> we will implement a software update shortly afterwards.

It's really quite simple: instead of limiting the left and right audio channels, the limiting is performed on the matrixed L+R (mono sum) and L-R (stereo difference) components, just like the levelling within the Ariane. C-Quam AM Stereo compatibility is provided by further limiting negative modulation during single-channel audio to a maximum of -75%, as required by Motorola specifications. (Unlike FM Stereo, the actual generation of the AM Stereo signal is performed by a separate C-Quam exciter at the transmitter, so a stereo generator within the processor is not needed; all you need are the left- and right-channel outputs of the processed audio.)

Here is CRL's detailed description of how matrix processing for AM Stereo works:

i1xs13.gif

i1xs1v.gif

i1xs2g.gif

i1xs37.gif

i1xs3p.gif

i1xs78.gif

i1xs7r.gif

<P ID="signature">______________
noiboc.jpg

"This is the New York Emergency Broadcast System satellite channel. They took the crosstown bus."</P>
 
Re: DSP-X for AM?

Kevin
Your wish is my command.
We will start with the AM mini and work up from there. I will try and get an alpha software version done in the next couple of weeks. If anyone wants to beta hardware/software over xmas period contact me off list.
The most time consuming thing is getting revised xover structure and distortion filtering right for AM. Actually implementing the filtering is easy peasy but what filter arrangements sound best, which is subjective, is the hard part.

I will try and digest the C-quam and implement it. Is there anyone else who wants it apart from Kevin?

The only thing that is concerning me with the mini is the lack of balanced outputs. we would need to feed out of the composite D/A convertor and it's unbalanced audio circuity. I am concerned about how this would work on high power AM sites. Any input from you AM gurus would help.

Also, how important is a transmitter compensation (tilt) function nowadays?

I am only too happy to admit that i personally have never played with AM processors and transmitters so it's going to be a learning curve but there seems to be enough people here who know what sounds right on AM so I am sure we can get some really cool low cost AM units out over the course of the next few months.V

Best regards
Scott
 
Re: DSP-X for AM?

> Kevin
> Your wish is my command.
> We will start with the AM mini and work up from there. I
> will try and get an alpha software version done in the next
> couple of weeks. If anyone wants to beta hardware/software
> over xmas period contact me off list.

*raises hand* :)

> The most time consuming thing is getting revised xover
> structure and distortion filtering right for AM. Actually
> implementing the filtering is easy peasy but what filter
> arrangements sound best, which is subjective, is the hard
> part.

Yes, and with the "brick-wall" filter, there is a trade-off between brightness, distortion/ringing, and overshoot control which needs to be fine-tuned, especially at lower frequencies (like the horribly low 4.5 kHz bandwidth that the ITU requires in Europe). Plus there is no point to having four or six bands of processing when the upper half of those bands will never be heard on the air! Thus, adjustable crossover frequencies between each band is a really nice thing to have, at least for users who are stuck with narrowband AM audio. For example, on the Omnia 5-EX, the highest band's crossover is at 4.8 kHz -- so if you're only transmitting 4.5 or 5 kHz's worth of audio, that processing band is rendered useless.

> I will try and digest the C-quam and implement it. Is there
> anyone else who wants it apart from Kevin?

As long as companies like Harris are still manufacturing C-Quam AM Stereo equipment, then there is definitely a market for C-Quam-compatible audio processing. Companies like <a target="_blank" href=http://www.bdcast.com/products/am_trans/am_idx.html>Broadcast Electronics</a> are also building AM transmitters with built-in AM Stereo capability.

> Also, how important is a transmitter compensation (tilt)
> function nowadays?

For stations still using tube-type transmitters, it definitely is a useful feature. It isn't needed with solid-state transmitters, but there are still many tube-type transmitters in use, especially in backup service or at small-market stations.
<P ID="signature">______________
noiboc.jpg

"This is the New York Emergency Broadcast System satellite channel. They took the crosstown bus."</P>
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom