everything BUT the audio processor

[Sgeirk]

Going digital. Stem to stern. Looking for a REAL expert's opinion on digital gear.

I know what audio processor we're getting, what's up in the air is:

1) Board
2) STL
3) xmtr

I've heard great things about Nautel for xmtr AND stl gear...and Wheatstone/Audioarts for boards. We still want
a console that LOOKS like a broadcast console, one that's router-based.

Hammer away. Thanks for your opinions.

 

[TomT]

Avoid as many Analog/Digital conversions as possible, and you will have fewer problems. Analog IS state of the art, digital is still evolving.

Unless you are installing a multi-station, multi-studio plant, I fail to see any real advantage to digital consoles except as an ego trip. Wheatstone makes the R-55E, not a perfect console but well built, economical, and with good audio. Easy to install if you take your time--everything comes in and out on "d" connectors. I've done two installs--a 12ch./18 frame for my production studio, and the small one for a classical non-com. I wired up pigtails in my spare time, then punched down everything at install. I used barrier strips and crimp lugs because it is easier to add or move sources around.

STL: If you need to have more than one channel per path, or have a crowded RF environment, digital can solve problems. Other wise, analog saves $$$. Better to spend some money engineering the path first, then determine if you really need to go digital. We have two 25 miles paths through hill country using PCL-606's Never had a problem with fade or noise, but we had a consultant suggest the tower height and size of dishes needed before we built the system. Armstrong, Marti and TFT all make good composite STL's. If clircumstances demand digital, Moseley is the usual answer, but be prepared to pay big bucks.

Transmitter: Several questions come to mind: What class station? what power is needed? We have a Harris 2.5H3 at our smaller station, just bought a Nautel V2 2800 watt transmitter to replace it. (Yes, there is such a thing--they don't have it on the website. Already had a conversation with Jeff Welton on this.) But we bought it sans exciter. We're going to use our recent vintage BE FX-50 to drive the Nautel.

 

[TomT]

Further thoughts. If your management is determined to go IBOC so they can play this "mine is bigger than yours" game in the market, then your choice of an exciter is probably narrowed down to BE. Beyond that point, the transmitter decision is determined by your class of station and a host of other factors.

Three ways to go IBOC: low-level combining, high-level combining, and separate antenna. With low level combining, you need a modern transmitter that can serve as a linear power amp. The Nautel's can do this--but it reduces the output of the transmitter as opposed to analog class C operation. If I went IBOC I couldn't use the V-2 at 2800 watts because it is then de-rated to 2000 watts analog--and I need 2450 watts TPO. With high-level combining you put your money into plumbing--a combiner that sits on the output of the existing transmitter and combines it with the lower-level IBOC signal to send up the pipe to the antenna. Separate antennas are simpler--you just put up another antenna for the low-level IBOC transmitter. Simple if you have the tower space, that is.

Otherwise, if you are not going IBOC, then there are several good analog exciters on the market: Continental 802B (used) BE FX-50, and on the lower end Armstrong. Nautel's exciter is not getting good reviews by comparison. There are some known problems with feeding a digital signal from your processor into some models of digital exciters because of incompatible data rates. Again, I fail to see the point in the added complexity. One more point of failure.

 

[Sgeirk]

Yes indeed, we're going IBOC and in need of:

router-based console
28kw main fm output
and the need to send exported HD1/HD2 stream and 1 44khz linear audio stream....or 3 44.1khz linear streams.

brand suggestions?

 

[AMX]

Definitely go with Nautel for your transmitter. You could go with a V10x3 system which would provide 33kW max analog output to cover your need for 28kW.

 

[RealityCheckr]

I would look at the "new fangled" options first, then see how they compare to more familiar options.

For example, carefully look at the Axia stuff and then look at Harris and Wheatstone.

Another example is look at the APT stuff for STLs and then look at Intraplex and Mosely.

I find this is the best way to become educated and makes the process more fun.

Best of luck

 

[Sgeirk]

Anybody running virtual high speed bandwidth via 2ghz (higher) out to their xmtr sites? How's it working for you?

 

[littlejohn]

For 28KW out the top of the transmitter, I'd seriously consider the water cooled version of the Continental with low level combining of analog and HD. If I needed some redundancy, I'd seriously consider their dual system. Interestingly, either one will come with a Nautel HD exciter. There's not a thing wrong with the Nautel box, it's just that transistor radios at that power level are pricey and have a very high component count, because nobody builds high power VHF devices. Tubes still rule if you have to pay for it.
We got both high level and low level at both low and high output (relatively). The overall efficiency is riughly the same either way, there's no magic in the physics of generating the signal.
If I was doing a high level injection, there's no question. A Continental analog radio, and either a BE or a Nautel for the HD. The Z series Harris works fairly well, but is sort of complicated by comparison.
For studios, I'd cost out Wheatstone and SAS and Axia. We have Wheatstone which works well, in our situation, the expansion costs using SAS would have been prohibitive by comparison. And, somehow, they always need expanding. I actually like the SAS worksurface better for looks. The operation is essentially the same with either. When these were built, Axia had just appeared on the market, and the users we asked thought the system wasn't quite ready for prime time. Since their manufacturer never stands still with anything, I'd ask a couple of users of newer Axia systems what they think of the prodyuct. If it fits your expectations, there's something of a price advantage.
Remember that part of the price of a digital audio plant is the price of a UPS to run ALL of it, and a generator behind the UPS. Also remember, backup is a necessity. Digital has no graceful fade to noise, it's either all there, or you hear one hand clapping. A spare studio and a direct line from a source or two to your STL or transmitter is invaluable,consider it a part of the cost.
It may be heresy to suggest, but the proc amp you use will be much more affected by how you set it up than who made it. Consequently, it's sort of like production software - the best is the one you or whomever is most comfortable with.
I'm sure there's some compelling reason to build an analog plant, I just can't think of it. Digitize the mics and phones, and keep everything else in the digital domain from the CD or whatever throughout. As someone said, eschew A/D and D/A conversions. Run it all at 44.1 and clock everything off a common source and it works real well.
Your mileage may vary.

 

[Sgeirk]

Thanks for sharing, Littlejohn.

Our IT guy suggested today that we go server-class UPS units in each rack (we're only 2 stations), as opposed to one main UPS. Any thoughts to that?

We're Continental friendly...and going all-digital. A non-comm in the area is the only all-digital station in the area, incredibly quiet, you can tell.

 

[littlejohn]

Part of the UPS is the recurring cost of batteries. Every two or three years is a necessity - as is generator maintenance. These things are valueless if they aren't kept up, and it's easy to overlook the maintenance and its cost. I've done it both ways in different places. Currently, we got a 30KW three phase UPS which runs everything except the airconditioners and some of the general office lighting and appliances. Everything comes up on the genset. Our UPS emails the tech folks if it hiccups, a valuable function. At a lower power level, we might look at individual UPSes but with multiple studios, we just run it all off the big one.
I'd also look real hard at the spread spectrum T1 / E1 radios out there for STL use. The performance is awesome if they fit your path(s).
My ultimate take on digital is either you commit to it or you don't, a mix of digital and analog gives you the worst opf both worlds plus the headache of interfacing... kind of like paying money for the privlege of spending more money.

 

[fm-engineer]

Nautel's exciter is not getting good reviews by comparison. There are some known problems with feeding a digital signal from your processor into some models of digital exciters because of incompatible data rates. Again, I fail to see the point in the added complexity. One more point of failure.

Why is the Nautel getting bad reviews? We are considering upgrading to a new Nautel exciter. I would appreciate any links or info you can provide.

 

[littlejohn]

He (Tomt) appears to be referring tp the analog product, not the digital, in that he compares with the 802B and FX-50, both analog products, and both very good ones. The BE digital product would be the FXi-60. I've used it, works well. I'd expect the Nautel digital product to do so as well. I've heard nothing derogatory about the Nautel digital xciter, I note Continental chose it for their IBOC efforts. And in that service, it works quite well. In our high level combined plants, we use the Continental 802D and D1 because all our audio is AES3 digital delivered. They are head and shoulders beyond anything else in the analog realm, mostly in my opinion because their stereo processor is beyond the competition. I find the FXi - 60 a close second. Haven't tried the Nautel. The Digit is a sorry and distant third. In fact, when I had a Digit in backup service, it was fed from the composite output of the proc amps. The trade was the greater noise and crud from the analog baseband, but much better composite processing in the proc amp (Omnia) than the Digit's composite limiter.