Hello,
I was wondering if to compare Broadcast DSPX Mini SE to Stereo tool how would they hold up? When taking into account price of a good performance PC as to buying a standalone unit they compare in price. As regards performance I do see you can do and tweak more with Stereo tool. Would be interested to hear if anyone did a side by side or have compared both. Or if anyone else would purchase another standalone unit for the price of Broadcast DSPX Mini SE. Thanks in advance.
I've worked with BW's DSPX and DSPX-tra processors, as well as the scaled-down versions they put in their V2 transmitters. I can't say specifically about the "mini-SE", but I can comment on Stereo Tool and give a somewhat-educated guess on the rest. I can say initially that there's enough difference in the sound of BW's processors that the DSPXtra is the minimum of their line that I'd use in any of the competitive stations I take care of. I have a few of their V2 systems out there and, while the built-in processor is fine for rural translator use, I wouldn't use it in a competitive environment where I was up against any of the name-brand gear.
There's no issue about reliability with a PC-based processor, other than the natural resistance a few still have to putting a (Windows) PC in the audio chain. I've had them in the field for over 10 years and haven't had a failure yet. Get rid of all software you don't need, swap the drive for an SSD and put VNC or Team Viewer in for control, turn off automatic updates and the computer's good to go. Stereo Tool is stable, needs no periodic rebooting and can be updated by remote.
BW's gear is also reliable. I have their stuff in several stations, as well as my 3-screen drive-in theatre. In terms of reliability, I have no problems putting their products next to more-expensive legacy brands.
As for features, you're dealing with subjective matter, so opinions will vary. I prefer Stereo Tool over BW's processors because I understand the software and prefer to have the kind of control that ST allows. Stereo Tool's clipper is much less noticeable to my ears, which is reason enough for me to prefer one processor over another. On the other hand, BW's gear is certainly fine for markets where a competitive edge isn't sliced as thin as some of the areas I work in. In their promo page, even BW says you should consider one of their higher-end processors if you need more processing power and a louder sound.
If you're comfortable with computers and wouldn't be intimidated by a plethora of adjustable functions, Stereo Tool is worth a try. The software license, along with a good computer and sound interface will run you about what BW wants for the DSPX Mini SE, but you'll get far more flexibility, and probably loudness as well, if that's important to you. If you're the only show in town and just want to rack the processor, load a preset and let it go, the BW probably won't disappoint. For what it is however, it probably won't blow your skirt up, either.
You can download and test drive Stereo Tool for free, though it will eventually toss out audible nag recordings to prevent full-time broadcast use of the evaluation mode. During evaluation, it's not crippled in any other way and has plenty of presets to get you started.
Latency is probably the only issue that might cause you any real concern with Stereo Tool. There's a lot going on in the software, and they make no effort to keep the processing requirements within an acceptable time frame for use in your headphones. If you're using any kind of digital codec or STL however, this isn't an issue, as you're probably not listening to your air monitor in the phones anyway.
As to your price question: My personal opinion is that a properly calibrated Stereo Tool assembly can be made to compare favorably with any of the Optimod or Omnia products on the market right now, except possibly the Air-Aura, which I haven't seen, but have heard plenty about. If you can get over having paid less than $2,000 for a sound other stations might have paid closer to $14,000 for, you'll find your audience probably won't hear any difference they'd describe as being negative. Given the philosophies the authors write into their processors, it's even possible you'll like your sound better.
The author of Stereo Tool has joined the Telos Alliance, as did the creator of the Breakaway Broadcast processor before him. The two have collaborated on several features that are found in each others designs, and Stereo Tool has benefitted from this. In the case of Breakaway, the software was eventually frozen in place and the author developed a formal hardware box under the Omnia banner. Breakaway is a very good low-latency processor, is still available and is reasonably priced, though it hasn't progressed in a couple of years now.
It's possible that something along this line could eventually happen with Stereo Tool, though its author hasn't shown any sign that this might happen any time soon.
