New Omnia One.FM for Sale...

[FFoti1]

Because I don't like one flavor of processor means I hate all DSP based processors? I'll repeat, if I needed to spend money to either refurbish an 8100 or buy an Omnia ONE, I know what I would do, because I have both and know the potential of each. I don't like the Omnia sound for over the air broadcast, OK? Even my review of the ONE dropped hints that I thought the box needed improvement on the FM side. I was very careful when I wrote that article (and thought it was funny to see it in the Telos NOW booklet at NAB).

Gotta call you out on this one Mike!

No you don't know the potential of Omnia.One. You continue to bash our products, rant incessantly about them, but FAIL to work with us. Corny, as well as myself are available to you, but you claim we don't reply to your requests. Makes no sense at all. There's no Mike Erickson filter here. I'm not buying it. I know Corny chats with loads of users of processing...any processing, and offers thoughts, opinions, and suggestions. Likewise, I'm in communique with folks all over, and doing much the same as Corny.

You claim the original Z-100 sound is what got you into processing, great! Humbly speaking...I AM the guy who created that sound - AND - all of our products are based on that!!

Seems to me, there's a disconnect here. If you'd like to rectify that, we're here to work with you.

-Frank Foti

 

[cgould]

If I may chime in here, to come to Mike's defense (although I do not condone his incessant, apparent bashing of the Foti boxes and for that matter DSP based processing in general, If you have never heard an 8100/XT2 combo, or a 9100, custom recapped, re-chipped and thoroughly re-worked by Bill and Kim Sacks, you're missing his point. These refurbished boxes are an absolute joy.

I'm not totally against DSP, I think I have stated in this post I run many DSP-based processors and one of my all time favorite devices (Ariane Sequal) is DSP.

I just like to cut thru the hype.

Agreed and well said. I have to say that for certain formats the Omnia sound is beautiful. For the more active formats, not always so much. In most cases I really don't care for the sound, at least the way most are set up. Cornelius has introduced some very good options as presets for the 'set it and forget it' mentality, but out of all the broadcast engineers out here, how many have gone to the trouble to implement them and then take the time to tweak them to meet conditions?

This post swings back and forth between answering Mike, and addressing the readers in general. Here it goes...

My presets are not intended as "set it and forget it". They tune the box to a different range using controls end users do not have access to. With those tweaks, end users can find a new world of sound characteristics from the processor....the controls you thought you knew before now respond in a different way.

So, if there ever was a "set it and forget it" processor, I kindly submit that analog processors were and are indeed - set it and forget it. The 8000 had 2 controls. The 8100 had Drive, Release, Band Coupling, and Clipper drive. The XT2 gave you the options of Drive, and bass EQ.

Now, for those who take the time to understand the philosophies behind the 8100, XT2, and the bunch, one can go in under the hood, and make changes in the circuitry using the trusty soldering iron, some resistors & caps, and a razor blade. Doing this got you around the cookie-cutter sound of the '80's heard by those who didn't have the talents to make mods.

As many have pointed out, what has changed is the business is that it is no longer possible to focus on just one station anymore. You have to juggle many, and the time needed to learn the ins and out of any brand of processor, and to BS about secret mods with fellow engineers is nil.

I know, I was there just a couple of years ago. Time for on-the-job training (sadly) is gone. Now, if you don't want a life, and don't mind possible divorce from your families (as well as developing a bad attitude towards work and life), you can spend your free time in a transmitter shack learning this stuff. Many (including me) will find that living life is more important than that.

I made a change where I am able to focus on what I love, have a family & a life. As a side benefit to our industry, this translates into me being able to help others get the sounds they desire from their stations.

As far as the cookie-cutter goes, what DSP processing has brought to the picture (in addition to the reliability, repeatability, etc that others have mentioned) is the ability to have as much or as little control as one wishes to have. If you have no time, and a preset makes you happy, fine. If you have lots of time, you can dig in, and play under the hood to your heart's content.

Since I love processing, and - as Frank has stated - talk to a LOT of folks about processing, I get ideas from folks, and they are either funneled into new products, or find their way into existing products in the form of presets that tune the processing in a totally different range. Think of my presets as a jump-start in a different direction not easily available with the standard ones.

THIS makes DSP processing waaay less cookie-cutter than analog.

I'll submit this: Any cookie cutter approaches you see out there are NOT the result of the DSP Audio Processing, but the result of the state of the radio industry today.

Anyone who is able to take the time to really learn a processing structure enough to get into the "back door" will find many ways to make a unique impression on the dial, but this takes TIME and patience. Mike, just think of how long it took to dissect the Optimods, Audio Prizm's and the like to learn how to make them rock. It takes YEARS. It takes careful study to virtually reverse-engineer the magic black boxes to understand what they do, which makes your next set of mods even better. (You should see the Optimods that passed through my hands during those times "back in 'da day" LOL.)

In reality, older analog gear sounds unique simply due to the fact that they are not really used much anymore...but if they were, you'd be clawing to get your hands on a DSP processor because you would be able to REALLY make your station stand out over the sea of 8100's. I know...I was there when it happened!

Which processor philosophy is better? There is no answer.

The two big "O's" in processing come from two entirely different trains of thought. So, what works on one will crash and burn on the other. You cannot apply observations & and adjustment tricks of one to the other.

Having said all that:

Mike, you clearly have a preference for Optimods, BW, etc. but seem unwilling to do what it takes to master Omnia. Which is fine. Everyone has their preferences. But if you really want to be the top stuff in processing, it behooves you to learn about ALL processing, and learn how to drive all of them well to make an impact on the dial. I know people who are this flexible, and they are very successful. Give 'em any box, and they can make them rock. All processors I REPEAT: ALL PROCESSORS have limitations -- knowing this, and finding how to drive around these limitations to get what you want makes a true processing pro. I would be happy to help.

Just a loving kick in the pants for ya ;-)

I am available if you have any questions on driving Omnias. You can always e-mail or call me.

-Cornelius

 

[RolfTaylor]

<snip> ... the passion of audio processing takes a further and further back seat as audio equipment becomes crappier, receivers become cheaper, and as all this cheap plastic Chinese junk becomes more an more accepted by the general public, any relatively decent equipment becomes increasingly more prohibitively expensive and commercial recordings are mastered to sound like loud noise rather than music...

What can you do? But like you, I like to cut through the hype, too :-D

Voiceguy123

Back in the 80's, I got sick of the loudness wars. In fact I even thought about getting help to design a expander specifically designed to undo as much of the damage as possible. I would have called it the de-optimod!

At the time I ran two expanders (one in my Phase linear pre-amp, and another that was a kit) on Records and FM. For CD's I usually disable one or both (though having dynamic range trigger my startle reflex added an interesting "life" to CD's. As you point out though, the quality of most modern CD's is so bad there is no hope of recovery, and it is sad.

When I was applying for a job at Telos, I had lunch with Frank and I told him the honestly I was not a big fan of processing. I got the job anyway!

But since that time I have been struck by the fact that The Omnias all had the ability to advance the quality of the audio as compared to a previous generation. Yes, they all can be abused. But, when not abused, they can be amazing. And no "scritchy" treble, unlike the 8100.

Both Corny and Frank have upon occasion used me as a "skeptic" to listen to whatever they were working on at the time. Back then it was Corny's analog creations I was listening to, as well as his processing on various Clevland stations over the years. I will admit I much prefer Cornelius' style to Frank's. But the thing that proves the point is that Corny could always make the processor to sing in his style, even Franks boxes.

When I hear people talking about running an 8100a it makes me shutter (takes me back to when I thought all processing was bad). I put one on the air in the mid-80's and it was configured minimalist. It wasn't until the late 90's that it got replaced and my ears were much happier! Bob himself has repeatedly mentioned his lack of desire to "go back to the past" since he can do so much more now.

The only reasons for using an 8100 today are:

1) A "quiet" market
AND
2) No money.
AND
3) Someone able to configure and tweak it on a regular basis.
AND
4) A "retro" programming them.

So, let me say, a properly adjusted DSP processor is markedly superior and gives me (a picky listener to be sure) a reason to up my TSL. I only rarely listen to the radio any more (hint if I could listen to discrete surround on the radio I'd spend a lot me time listening), but when the station has no clarity in the highs (scritch, scritch scritch) I have to tune elsewhere. Even my wife now knows enough about processing that she can spot an 8100 or 8200 and knows that if she likes the source she has to turn down the treble to filter out the trash. Or move along to another station.

WGLI undermines his credibility when he says he prefers to spend money on a 8100 than on a Omnia ONE. He is welcome to prefer a particular brand. But he's no more credible than someone who says "a car from 1976 is better than anything on the road today". It just isn't true (based reliability and safety alone). Obviously, he just doesn't have the desire to learn the box, which is also fine, but just don't engage in some sort of "vendetta" against it, and the many folks (processor gurus as well as amateurs) who know otherwise.

And PLEASE don't put the 8100 on the air in any market I expect to be in !

 

[Voiceguy123]

But since that time I have been struck by the fact that The Omnias all had the ability to advance the quality of the audio as compared to a previous generation. Yes, they all can be abused. But, when not abused, they can be amazing. And no "scritchy" treble, unlike the 8100.

The 'scritchy' treble is a problem I am extremely familiar with. But it's one that is easily dealt with by proper adjustment and light protection in the front of the chain. All processors run into this sort of problem (I harken back to my original statement about the modern CD mastering that is a dreadful task for ANY processor, either Orban, Telos/Omnia, BW, Vorsis, what have you...).

We go over this again and again, and it's almost always an interesting discourse. I hold no bars against any of them whether digital or analog. All I'm saying-- is that combined with consumers' lack of audio quality awareness, which is directly related to the dumbing down of their perception by really crummy playback equipment, and the lousy, balls-to-the-wall mastering techniques handed down by major label EDICT, makes the 'Passion' that once existed for audio processing for broadcast much less prevalent. And, to Corny- that's what I meant by 'set it and forget it'.

I won't go into quoting the rest Rolf, but just let me clarify that I don't think DSP-based processing is bad by any stretch, but just by the very nature of having presets, you immediately put expediency ahead of the quality that can be gained by simply taking a night or two to make manual adjustments by ear. The incentive to make those kinds of tweaks is effectively washed away.

 

[RolfTaylor]

I won't go into quoting the rest Rolf, but just let me clarify that I don't think DSP-based processing is bad by any stretch, but just by the very nature of having presets, you immediately put expediency ahead of the quality that can be gained by simply taking a night or two to make manual adjustments by ear. The incentive to make those kinds of tweaks is effectively washed away.

Voiceguy,

I think we agree. There is no doubt that there are a lot of processors that are running presets. And it is also true there are a lot of novices who due there due diligence by demoing several boxes and if the presets on a given box don't "do it" for them they don't buy it.

However, to play devil's advocate, IIRC the 8100 had "presets" in the manual. I started with the one called something like "to make air as close as possible to program" and then tweaked a bit from there to be somewhat louder.

Then again, there were experts (not me) that knew how to combine different boxes, and or make mods. At that point you were far from the "presets"

I don't consider myself a golden eared hi-fi expert, but I have spent a lot of time working with audio at work and at home and I know I am above average. And I will say my transition to 5.1 as aided by the remarkably good, low cost, receivers that are available. The other big advantage was the ability to buy used speakers on ebay for far less than the cost to start over buying new speakers.

I also have to give a lot of credit to my wife, who's ears may be even better than my own. She started out with no vocabulary, but knew what sounds good or bad. My joke was that I wanted a pre-nuptial agreement that I got to keep the audio system . She has quickly learned about the artifacts of bad processing.

We all know the experience of hearing "better audio" and the fact there is no going back once you have heard it. I guess those of us that have good fidelity need to share it with others and give them the opportunity to hear the difference. Sadly, FM is to often not a good example. I think that is a matter of the transition from radio being a "craft" along with being "engineering" to becoming a bussiness.

Along those lines, let me note the sad passing of WQXR - what a shame.

 

[cgould]

But since that time I have been struck by the fact that The Omnias all had the ability to advance the quality of the audio as compared to a previous generation. Yes, they all can be abused. But, when not abused, they can be amazing. And no "scritchy" treble, unlike the 8100.

The 'scritchy' treble is a problem I am extremely familiar with. But it's one that is easily dealt with by proper adjustment and light protection in the front of the chain. All processors run into this sort of problem (I harken back to my original statement about the modern CD mastering that is a dreadful task for ANY processor, either Orban, Telos/Omnia, BW, Vorsis, what have you...).

We go over this again and again, and it's almost always an interesting discourse. I hold no bars against any of them whether digital or analog. All I'm saying-- is that combined with consumers' lack of audio quality awareness, which is directly related to the dumbing down of their perception by really crummy playback equipment, and the lousy, balls-to-the-wall mastering techniques handed down by major label EDICT, makes the 'Passion' that once existed for audio processing for broadcast much less prevalent. And, to Corny- that's what I meant by 'set it and forget it'.

I won't go into quoting the rest Rolf, but just let me clarify that I don't think DSP-based processing is bad by any stretch, but just by the very nature of having presets, you immediately put expediency ahead of the quality that can be gained by simply taking a night or two to make manual adjustments by ear. The incentive to make those kinds of tweaks is effectively washed away.

OK, Voiceguy...I follow you, and agree with you.

The record company issue is one that has been driving my current research & development into new processing algorithms, and as you noticed, that stuff is taken into account with my presets for the existing lineup. The presets are not a magic pill, but they help a lot with the smash.

BTW, I've noticed over the past couple of months or so that new releases are not as trashed as previous ones. While not the quality of 15 or more years ago, the backing off of brickwall clippers by the record companies was a pleasant surprise.

As far as the presets go, yes they can make some people complacent, but they have always been there. As Rolf pointed out, these were the same people who would pick a suggested setting in an analog processor manual, dial it in, and walk away....so it's nothing new.

For me, I've never met a preset I've ever liked, so I would tweak away. Heck, I've never met an analog processor structure I really liked (except my own...hehe) so that would drive me to get the razor blade & soldering iron out.

Even the presets of mine available for general use aren't really what I would use in any specific application, but I had to make them general enough to "play right" in most locations. End users will usually have to tweak them to fine tune to the market in question.

This cookie-cutter trend is not unique to processing, but to the lack of time & vision or just a plain 'ol case of "innocently ignorant to the possibilities available". I try to step in and inform those who will listen

Heck, I'm known to get into my car and drive to the location to help out & teach!

-Cornelius

 

[wgliradio]

Gotta call you out on this one Mike!

No you don't know the potential of Omnia.One. You continue to bash our products, rant incessantly about them, but FAIL to work with us. Corny, as well as myself are available to you, but you claim we don't reply to your requests. Makes no sense at all. There's no Mike Erickson filter here. I'm not buying it. I know Corny chats with loads of users of processing...any processing, and offers thoughts, opinions, and suggestions. Likewise, I'm in communique with folks all over, and doing much the same as Corny.

You claim the original Z-100 sound is what got you into processing, great! Humbly speaking...I AM the guy who created that sound - AND - all of our products are based on that!!

Seems to me, there's a disconnect here. If you'd like to rectify that, we're here to work with you.

-Frank Foti

OK, here is the challenge. Create a preset that has the punch of Orban low end (not the Omnia low end where the bass sounds like it's having an out of body experience), give me parameters that let me couple the low mid and upper mid and highs as I need to tailor them. Let the mids sound musical and allow for elements to punch thru but not overpower the mix or cause it to take a few seconds to recover. Give me warm powerful voice. I have yet to achieve any of those running any Omnia product barefoot.

I say it can't do all of those things at the same time. I don't want processing that "lays" on the music but gets into it. I want it to be somewhat thick but very listenable, to have slap on drums, that just fills in enough of the breaks in songs to give you the idea that something is going on.

On "Honky Tonk Woman", the drums need to slam, not just hit flat. On "Natural High" by Bloodstone, same thing. On "Why Can't We Live Together" the percussion needs to explode, on "More More More" the sticks need to sound like they pop out of the radio. The processing has to play along with the music, not just sit there waiting for it to pass by. Artistic IM at times, slightly pumpy but never missing.

If I could put audio into words that is it....

 

[cgould]

Gotta call you out on this one Mike!

No you don't know the potential of Omnia.One. You continue to bash our products, rant incessantly about them, but FAIL to work with us. Corny, as well as myself are available to you, but you claim we don't reply to your requests. Makes no sense at all. There's no Mike Erickson filter here. I'm not buying it. I know Corny chats with loads of users of processing...any processing, and offers thoughts, opinions, and suggestions. Likewise, I'm in communique with folks all over, and doing much the same as Corny.

You claim the original Z-100 sound is what got you into processing, great! Humbly speaking...I AM the guy who created that sound - AND - all of our products are based on that!!

Seems to me, there's a disconnect here. If you'd like to rectify that, we're here to work with you.

-Frank Foti

OK, here is the challenge. Create a preset that has the punch of Orban low end (not the Omnia low end where the bass sounds like it's having an out of body experience), give me parameters that let me couple the low mid and upper mid and highs as I need to tailor them. Let the mids sound musical and allow for elements to punch thru but not overpower the mix or cause it to take a few seconds to recover. Give me warm powerful voice. I have yet to achieve any of those running any Omnia product barefoot.

I say it can't do all of those things at the same time. I don't want processing that "lays" on the music but gets into it. I want it to be somewhat thick but very listenable, to have slap on drums, that just fills in enough of the breaks in songs to give you the idea that something is going on.

On "Honky Tonk Woman", the drums need to slam, not just hit flat. On "Natural High" by Bloodstone, same thing. On "Why Can't We Live Together" the percussion needs to explode, on "More More More" the sticks need to sound like they pop out of the radio. The processing has to play along with the music, not just sit there waiting for it to pass by. Artistic IM at times, slightly pumpy but never missing.

If I could put audio into words that is it....

If you want the Orban sound, then you should just stick to using Orbans and not trashing folks for not subscribing to the Orban sound.

As for being ignored, I have made at least a couple of offers to come there to work with you and your Omnia6 on one of your stations a few months back. My e-mail was met with silence both times.

My only guess is that you do not want the help, but it is confusing when you claim you're being ignored all while we keep offering to help you. Your descriptions of audio lying on top of, under , around the processor or vice-versa doesn't explain much. Nothing is better than sitting with a customer while comparing boxes to HEAR what it is you mean. A sit-down listen with a customer is worth avoiding a thousand frustrated e-mails.

Again, I offered, and was met with silence. I believe I even offered to you on the phone while we worked through a recent hardware with your Omnia6.

Either you really want to get to the bottom of things, or you just love complaining. Not sure which one, but when you are REALLY ready to do this, we are here.

I'm getting the sense that you've made a game of saying the sky is dark when Frank says it's light, and the glass is half empty when he says it's full, and it's really becoming a waste of time to continue this game any further. What little we've worked together with the Omnia.one seemed to be met with pure satisfaction at one point, but you then go and claim no one is listening to you. I've been ready for quite some time to work with you on the Omnia6, but you seem unwilling.

When you're ready, I'm here.

-Cornelius

 

[wgliradio]

We put your preset on the 6 and fiddled with it. Everyone in the group thought it was as good as what I had come up with, but we ultimately went with something else.

The satisfaction with the Omnia ONE was more disbelief at how different your presets sounded. Most of my comparisons were against what HAD been. I was basically happy that someone had actually gotten the box to behave somewhat, but I'm still waiting for that final step.

I've heard your processors on Legato. I've read your website over and over. I know what you can do. Take it to the next step.

There are things about Orban I don't like. I wish Optimod had a more detailed high end, not a huge fan of their look ahead limiter and the fact that Orban, out of everybody, listens LEAST to end users. I also think their processors get packed in when used aggressively and only recently has their AGC been acceptable.

I like Vorsis because they're trying new ideas, like placement of pre-emphasis, limiters that are really good so you don't need clippers. I actually prefer running their 31 band box in 10 band mode because it sounds more natural. Yeah, there are things I'd like to see changed too, but they listen. And, no, I've never made a dime from them. In fact the two products I own from Wheatstone were purchased by me, the Air 2+ and the VP-8. I even RETURNED a Vorsis processor early on.

Corny, I don't NEED help. The request made for the 6 preset was just to see what an Omnia guy could do because they thought I wasn't getting enough out of the box. It turned out that your preset was just as good as mine and it was at that point programming realized I was right about it.

I know the limitations of the box and based on where it is today, I can get more out of a Bill Sacks 8100. I'm sorry. I have very particular tastes on audio texture. The ONE presets I gave you, I could live with on my station in that box. But I can never get the "wow, this sounds f-ing great" out of it.

Let me help you guys....

 

[cgould]

Let me help you guys....

Mike, buddy...what do you think I'm doing here?!!?!?

I have tried harder than anyone else to get you to say this! As I said before, I have no problem going to your turf, sitting down and seeing where things fall apart for you. The preset I sent was something I put together to see if I was even in the ballpark, and we could take it from there.

I heard nothing back from you til now...after pounding at you in public over it.

Dude, you are talking to one of the main designers of all new Omnia products here, and you fail to see that this guy on the other end of the computer screen has been trying to get feedback from you for months. Assumptions can get you into to trouble...especially when you put the blinders on.

I'll restate what Frank has said. Somehow things have gotten off track with you, and we just need to get in contact, and lets work through what's bugging you. A lot of people have had excellent feedback that went into the projects we've got brewing -- only they didn't realize it at the time. This is how I work. I observe while helping people. These observations have ALL been ported into the projects I've got brewing here @ Omnia.

A possible missing piece is YOU. Contact me off-list, and lets figure out when I can meet with you there, and let's work together, and see what we can and cannot do....this is the process where you will see your feedback come to life. Even if, at the end of the day, the processor STILL falls flat on its face as far as your expectations are concerned -- that's at least something we've learned because of you.

I don't do e-mails and phone calls of descriptions when things are at this level. One person's descriptions can all-too-easily be interpreted differently (and usually will). What I do is to listen while the audio is playing and comparisons are being made to fully understand what it is a customer is looking for in an audio processor.

I've been trying to do this with you for several months.

Now -- look back at your communications with me, and I think the picture will be much clearer now...

-Cornelius

 

[FFoti1]

Corny, I don't NEED help. The request made for the 6 preset was just to see what an Omnia guy could do because they thought I wasn't getting enough out of the box. It turned out that your preset was just as good as mine and it was at that point programming realized I was right about it.

I know the limitations of the box and based on where it is today, I can get more out of a Bill Sacks 8100. I'm sorry. I have very particular tastes on audio texture. The ONE presets I gave you, I could live with on my station in that box. But I can never get the "wow, this sounds f-ing great" out of it.

Let me help you guys....

Mike,

There's some major disconnects here. Corny's replies seem to sum it up. Both of us have offered you help...Corny more recently. I, personally, know his life revolves around processing 24/7/365. Both of us will stop at nothing to work with ANYONE.

I think your last reply - "I don't need help" - says a lot. It doesn't seem like you wish to work with us. If anything, the message you send is "I (Mike) know processing better than you. I'll test anything. If there's something I don't like, I'll send info to that company, and expect them to make changes solely based on my opinion. If they don't make my suggested changes, then their box is rubbish."

BTW: Corny's correct. It's not possible to "understand" another person's sonic desires based upon what's written here, via eMail, or over the phone. Better to be in the same room listening together, or share presets of the device(s) under test, so both sides are hearing the same thing. Some of the descriptions you make about sonic signatures seem odd, but unless we're both listening to the same signal, at the same time, it's a crap shoot.

So, if you truly mean what you say in your reply, of "helping us," then let's figure a time and place to hookup, where we can listen together, and discuss together. If you're game, so are we. Your call...

-Frank Foti

 

[wgliradio]

Next time you're in NYC, you can come see the new place downtown.

 

[calstymes]

In an effort to take the feverish pitch of this discussion down a notch, FFoti offered:

...let's figure a time and place to hookup, where we can listen together, and discuss together. If you're game, so are we. Your call...

And to be magnanimous, wgliradio suggested:

Next time you're in NYC, you can come see the new place downtown.

And my intel reports that Frank should prepare himself to be VERY surprised at the engineering design of the new place. Does it get any more excellent than that?

 

[elchupacabras]

I want to make a positive comment about the Omnia One. I am seldom without words, but I am relegated to a state of speechlessness when it comes to this box. I helped a buddy set up an internet stream and a part 15 station a number of years ago. We set it up with a BBE Sonic Maximizer, Compeller, a pair of Gentner Prisms and finally into an Optimod 8100-A. We wanted to give his station a professional sound, but preserve a LOUD and DENSE sound of 70's radio. At the same time, we were running it off of mp3's, which created some interesting artifacts. Fastforward December 2009. My buddy and I talked about DSP and going all digital. I had read a number of threads and concluded that the Omnia One is the best sounding box for the money. My friend ordered it and it is now on the air. It is THICK, LOUD, and CLEAN. The older material shines through much better with the processing, and frankly nobody could be happier. I would definitely recommend the Omnia One to ANYONE. Although a little boxy due to the data compression, here is the stream: http://www.live365.com/stations/mixutah
Take a listen to what the Omnia One has done!

 

[erwin33]

I want to make a positive comment about the Omnia One. I am seldom without words, but I am relegated to a state of speechlessness when it comes to this box. I helped a buddy set up an internet stream and a part 15 station a number of years ago. We set it up with a BBE Sonic Maximizer, Compeller, a pair of Gentner Prisms and finally into an Optimod 8100-A. We wanted to give his station a professional sound, but preserve a LOUD and DENSE sound of 70's radio. At the same time, we were running it off of mp3's, which created some interesting artifacts. Fastforward December 2009. My buddy and I talked about DSP and going all digital. I had read a number of threads and concluded that the Omnia One is the best sounding box for the money. My friend ordered it and it is now on the air. It is THICK, LOUD, and CLEAN. The older material shines through much better with the processing, and frankly nobody could be happier. I would definitely recommend the Omnia One to ANYONE. Although a little boxy due to the data compression, here is the stream: http://www.live365.com/stations/mixutah
Take a listen to what the Omnia One has done!

Sounds great. Are you using some phase rotation in the sound? I hear that. Many French stations are using this in there Omnia's.

 

[rrsounds]

<snip>
frankly nobody could be happier. I would definitely recommend the Omnia One to ANYONE.
</snip>

Frankly, and of course, Corneliusly, too! LOL!!

Kind Regards,
David