• 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

Best Boxes

E

elchupacabras

OK, let's open up the firing line (kidding of course), but let's open a thread with votes for the best boxes.

Here are my votes:

Best analog FM: Optimod 8100 XT
Best digital FM: Omnia Six
Best overall AM: Optimod 9100 B2.
Best software based: Breakaway

And what about variants? Adding additional horsepower behind/ahead of the boxes? My favorite that I set up for a friend:
Sonic Maximizer - Aphex Compellor- Audio Prizm - Optimod 8100.

And now for the worst?

Anything CRL! Don't understand how they could get together with Orban!

I'm not saying that others are bad (DAP - great early box, for instance), just stating my opinion.
 
DITTO WGLI

i disagree with your assestment of CRL.Their SG and SPP is one of the best ever.Early AM and FM products were great.See we already got a whizzzing contest.One other thing 8100/Ariane is the best combo for analog.IMHO
 
oldiesstation said:
DITTO WGLI
See we already got a whizzzing contest.
Click to expand...

Gee whizz! I knew this thread would get everyone going. I posted it half out of REAL curiosity and half, well, because there is a certain troll inside of me.
 
You troll other people when you are "trolling"... not you being a troll. The trolls are the people who reply.

Anyways... "best" is subjective, and as such can never be proven scientifically. It's literally impossible. Threads like this will never be more than a pissing match, by nature of the "argument".


.... by the way ....

my dad can beat up your dad!
 
Best box for album rock - whichever one Bob Helbush set up.

Best box for country - which ever one Glen Clark set up.

Hard rock? Which ever one Foti set up.

'Pirate' sound? Whatsisname who used to travle around.

Get the idea?

Jim Loupas, that was his name...
 
Jesse Graffam said:
.... by the way ....

my dad can beat up your dad!
Click to expand...

Probably could! LOL! Thanks for the humor! Look, for the most part all boxes have some ingenious work. I don't want to denigrate them, nor their creators, because it's probably a lot more engineering than I will ever be capable of. Kudos to the designers who left their impact on the industry.
 
Sure some things can be scientifically proven, you just have to know how and what to measure.

For example, try carving a nice big hole in a track, using an incredibly sharp band-stop filter (let's say 5 - 10 kHz), run it through a few different processors, and then check how much crap ended up in that hole at the output of each processor. :)

///Leif
 
Dontcha think it would be worth your while to take a look at the spectra passing the filter unprocessed first? You will likely get a fair amount of crud from the filter itself, will you not? And various proc amps will react differently to this crud.
 
konbaasiang said:
Sure some things can be scientifically proven, you just have to know how and what to measure.

For example, try carving a nice big hole in a track, using an incredibly sharp band-stop filter (let's say 5 - 10 kHz), run it through a few different processors, and then check how much crap ended up in that hole at the output of each processor. :)

///Leif
Click to expand...

Thats proof with numbers in the lab...... doesn't say much on how they do their job for the average listener at the end.
 
"Thats proof with numbers in the lab...... doesn't say much on how they do their job for the average listener at the end."

Well, maybe to a degree it does. If box A is percieved by the average listener as being a better 'sond ' than box B, you can quantify the difference(s) in the boxes with these numbers from the lab. And perhaps either enhance the positive ones, or reduce the negative ones. Quantifying 'perception' is like nailing jell-p to the wall. But, you might well be able to indirectly get a handle on it in the manner Konbiassing (sp?) suggersts.
 
That was just one example. Leif could probably write a book entitled "1,001 Ways to Bring Your Broadcast Audio Processor to it's Knees"
 
Littlejohn, I agree but that isn't the point. The fact that you can point out the breaking point of a processor with certain "lab science" doesn’t necessarily mean it does in the real world when applied correctly like it is supposed.
High graded glass for skyscrapers is tested so when you lean in to it you don't fall down. Or when a bird hits it, it doesn't break. But I can still think of 1001 ways of breaking that glass. But like I said I agree to certain extend. ;)
 
Actually, my methodology for coming up with that example was not the following:

"Find a way to break existing processors"

That wasn't it at all. In fact, my methodology was:

"This song sounds bad on every processor out there no matter what the settings. Why is that? What's so special about it?"

Two examples of songs this applies to:

Evanescence - My Immortal
Kelly Clarkson - Because of you

There are many more, but those two are nice, clear examples.

These songs happen to have big holes in the middle of the spectrum -- holes that traditional processors are more than eager to fill with clipping distortion. When they do, it's immediately obvious. Extreme caution must be taken by the algorithm to not pollute the spectrum, and have these songs like these sound clean on the air.

For demonstration purposes, however, a band-stop filter will provide an even clearer view of the phenomenon.

Littlejohn, I did say "incredibly sharp".
One candidate is the FFT filter in Adobe Audition. It will *not* generate any crud -- it will be a clean hole in the spectrum as if you carved it with a razorblade. :)

Best,
///Leif
 
The F Mister said:
Littlejohn, I agree but that isn't the point. The fact that you can point out the breaking point of a processor with certain "lab science" doesn’t necessarily mean it does in the real world when applied correctly like it is supposed.
<snip>
Click to expand...

You don't even need lab science, just listen to a phone call.

A live phone-in call is naturally going to be narrow band, and sharply defined. The crap you hear that DOESN'T sound like a phone call ...distortion, crackling, etc. ...Well, that's what was created by the processor.

Kind Regards,
David
 
Amen to that, David!

That particular problem is so easy to solve too -- I am stunned none of the current generation boxes deal with it.

///Leif
 
I promised myself I wouldn't make any comparative posts here...all I'm going to say is that I have loved or liked various processors and pre-processors at various stages of my career...old and new.

I WILL however, pile onto where this thread has gone in relation to voice and phone calls "breaking" digital processors. 1000% agreed!

I have experimented with voice and phone calls in Breakway and it sounds completely different than any FM box on voice. Better? Worse? That's up to you...who cares what I think?
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom