-
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
Omnia 11 On In Philadelphia
- Thread starter HHH
- Start date
HHH said:
I don't even know what it is?
ah.....What is it?
There is one in PA that I know of, not in Philadelphia though.
MattParker said:
Omnia.11’s AGCs, compressors and limiters are the first of their kind, as they employ Chameleon Technology that transparently analyzes music in real time and adjusts internal parameters for optimum performance across a broad range of material. This process results in better performance, ease of use and, most importantly, perceptibly better sounding audio that reveals more detail, clarity and quality, while maintaining desired loudness levels.
And even much more propoganda on their web page.
I still like my Sansui QSD-2.
Merkin said:
If I don't have my receiver connected to a high-end sound system, is this anything I'm likely to notice? What would sound different?
I'll stick with the old Valley People 'Dynamite" 410.
Keep us informed about any cheese steak upgrades
i'm with rene. the first time we got one on a 'puppy dog close' (try it for a month...see how you like it), the entire staff went nuts finding ways to cut and shift the budget to purchase it. we did, and were very pleased with it. it brought out nuances in songs i've heard a thousand times, and made then sound new again. but...we were running .wav files then, from top-of-the-line denon players, known for their fabulous d/a converters. most everyone today is running crap...mp3, mp2 through scott or similar automation systems. a typical mp3 holds only 10% of the information of a .wav file. that's a 90% loss of the fine sounds of strings, cymbals, horns, and turning complicated 's' sounds into 'z' sounds in speech, not to mention the grain and grit. so unless you are at the top of your game with high fidelity at the board source, all this new omnia will do is clearly demonstrate the inferiority of your station's music library compression teqniques. G.I.G.O. sort of what 1080p hdtv did for vhs.
rtetro said:MattParker said:
From discussions I had with other engineers, it's supposed to be the greatest thing since God invent cheesteaksBeing an Omnia guy I can't wait to hear one.
Was told there is a Pittsburgh station running one now.
If I had to bet I would say it's the B. I have been listening for about an hour and their songs sound more clear than they have in the past. Even the automated female announcer at the end of each track sounds more crisp than she has sounded before. Add that to the fact that they are the most successful station in the city. Also, most of their counterparts are corporate owned radio stations that aren't in the habit of spending money unnecessarily.
If it is B...it would explain the lack of punch & loudness lately. Everything is clean, but sounds too dry for my tastes and too low.
Then again, there arent really any stations here in Philly that sound amazing processing wise. Wired is loud and has plenty of bass, but no high end, WOGL sound ok, Ben sounds good...but nothing to make me go "YES!" like with K-Earth 101 in LA.
Then again, there arent really any stations here in Philly that sound amazing processing wise. Wired is loud and has plenty of bass, but no high end, WOGL sound ok, Ben sounds good...but nothing to make me go "YES!" like with K-Earth 101 in LA.
Turnpike Tuner said:
I have to agree. Audio processing on both FM and AM stations in Philly is generally sub-par. The problem is that when you try to process as in other markets it sounds too "out of the ordinary" in Philly. On the whole, a lot of the processing here is overly strident and crunched when compared to other east coast major markets like New York or Boston - IMHO.
I'd say we are about five years behind in using modern processors properly. And it hurts the industry. It was one thing back in the day when radio just competed against radio. Now you're competing with other music sources which are often inherently of greater quality than radio. Anything we do that diminishes our quality in comparison to those mediums hurts us. But there are just far too stations in Philly who process as if LOUDNESS!!!! is still the primary goal. But loudness will not get you listeners when you do it at the expense of "listenability;" meaning the ability to listen to a station for more than 5-10 minutes without becoming fatigued. The problem with processing wars is that if a couple of the highly rated stations overprocess, then programmers and managers (and some engineers) believe that they must keep up. It keeps ramping up until everyone sounds like garbage - unless you find some major players who are willing to buck the trend.
It's not 1978 anymore. Those of us who cut our teeth on extremely heavy processing need to rethink what our goals need to be and how to best achieve them. That means responding to the new paradigms of media.
I agree Rene'. Being from Boston and spending time in L.A. I'd say that Philly audio processing SUCKS-and that's both on FM and AM. When my little kilowatt sounds 'bigger' then KYW that's a problem! Not to mention that hiss in their background all the time that's caused by their own IBOC.
Pathetic.
I process stations for 'bigness'. For example, within their coverage area(s), there's no reason why class A FM stations can't sound 'bigger' then their class B cousins.
It's almost as if many programmers and engineers in this town have the attitude: "Well, this is the way we've always done it, so why not continue"? The reason is because listeners can hear the difference-and today they also have the ability to carry their own radio station in their pockets, that's why!
Pathetic.
I process stations for 'bigness'. For example, within their coverage area(s), there's no reason why class A FM stations can't sound 'bigger' then their class B cousins.
It's almost as if many programmers and engineers in this town have the attitude: "Well, this is the way we've always done it, so why not continue"? The reason is because listeners can hear the difference-and today they also have the ability to carry their own radio station in their pockets, that's why!
rtetro said:
Nothing wrong with processing - I love it myself - but with all the great tools out there, there really is no excuse for lousy audio. All 3 of the major processor manufactures have released boxes that can be loud as anything, but also have the ability to preserve clarity and not sound "processed." Especially since radio is competing with the iPod and other digital media that doesn't have to deal with multipath and pre-emphasis curve problems.
I love a FM station that has nice, open highs. And I really don't hear that on the Philly FM dial. A station like Wired has the bass down low (pardon the pun), but when I listen to it, I think someone messed with the treble knob on my radio.
Processing wise, with both highs and lows, I think that WVLT sounds better than any of the Philly stations.
- Status