Omnia ONE

[wgliradio]

Actually, it's more a testament to the designer of the 8100 and the person at the controls.

With your logic, the Omnia.FM must be better than an Omnia 6, because I'm beating Omnia 6's with a DSP-X and you claim that Omnia.FM is better than a DSP-X. Time to pony up here Zeke.

 

[CalifZeke]

Actually, it's more a testament to the designer of the 8100 and the person at the controls.

With your logic, the Omnia.FM must be better than an Omnia 6, because I'm beating Omnia 6's with a DSP-X and you claim that Omnia.FM is better than a DSP-X. Time to pony up here Zeke.

Same in return wgliradio.

 

[dspxscott]

I don't believe in having a debate with lurkers. They obviously don't feel strongly enough about something to put their real identity to their statements.

However, I would like to say that the DSPX did take INSPIRATION from a whole host of processors including the Omnia.fm, so bloody what. A clone! I think not. As WGLI points out the DSPX has a whole range of features not found in the Omnia.fm or any other processor at that time. So it has 4 band of agc and 4 bands of limiters, so does the Omega fm from Inovonics. Is that an omnia clone as well. Is the Omnia 4.5 a clone of an Orban because of the number of bands it employs?!?

I didn't say we were laughing at Omnia or their advert. I said i loved it. Friendly rivalry or the occasional marketing jibe is no bad thing. We certainly don't take offence and its all part of the game. I don't know if that was the case during the 'no grunge' war but we were not involved in that so can't comment.

Competition between manufacturers, to quote frank 'raises the bar' and is good for customers.

Regards
Scott

 

[gtomas]

If you knew processing, as you profess, then you'd know that omnia offered dedicated multiband compressor sections connected directly to their corresponding limiter sections. No mixer between multiband AGC and limiters. That was a first, and that was copied...not to mention many other functions.

If you're going to have separate AGC and limiter in the same number of bands, it makes no engineering - in fact not even common - sense to do anything different than stacking them up, one behind the other. Different number of bands in AGC and limiter (like Orban or Omnias 4.5 and 6) is another story, but who would want and why to sum a 4-band (or 3-band) AGC only to add another crossover to divide it again in 4-bands (3-bands)? And then sum it back again?

I don't belive it's anything novel or special about that topology that anybody could claim it's their idea...


Regards,
Goran Tomas

 

[FFoti1]

If you're going to have separate AGC and limiter in the same number of bands, it makes no engineering - in fact not even common - sense to do anything different than stacking them up, one behind the other. Different number of bands in AGC and limiter (like Orban or Omnias 4.5 and 6) is another story, but who would want and why to sum a 4-band (or 3-band) AGC only to add another crossover to divide it again in 4-bands (3-bands)? And then sum it back again?

I don't belive it's anything novel or special about that topology that anybody could claim it's their idea...


Regards,
Goran Tomas

Might be time that this thread is given a rest.

Regarding topology, the layout in Omnia.fm was the second to employ that method. We did it first in the Unity 2000 and it was novel at the time. Considering that it had not been done before in *any* prior broadcast processor, it was one of the *performance* features that set the system apart from other units.

There were other four band boxes that did split and sum the bands multiple times in the system for the compressors and limiters. Also, the method employed in Omnia.fm, allowed full isolation of the compression and limiting functions. This reduces processing induced IMD quite a bit.

-Frank Foti

 

[gtomas]

Well, I think there aren't many absolutes in dynamics processing design. One topology is not necessarily better or worse than the other, it all depends how it works (sounds!) in a processor as a whole...


Regards,
Goran Tomas

 

[Martijn]

So the Omnia was the first box EVER to place an AGC before a compressor before a limiter and clipper? OK!

Thanks for clearing that up.

If you knew processing, as you profess, then you'd know that omnia offered dedicated multiband compressor sections connected directly to their corresponding limiter sections. No mixer between multiband AGC and limiters. That was a first, and that was copied...not to mention many other functions.

No way!
Maybe you have heard of the IDT Sound Style. This was a 4 band AGC, 4 band compressor/limiter were there was no mixer between the AGC and multibands and each AGC band drove his "own" multiband part (AGC1 to Multiband 1 etc).

This was the first unit ever that could offer 4 band AGC and 4, 5 or 7 bands of compression/limiting. IDT stil uses this technology today in their DVP (Digital Virtual Processor) but of course now with DSP power.

So everyone is copying the good parts from each other in their own way. Frank also used Orban's during his time as an engineer, probably stil own some Orban's jus for curiosity. I bet Bob or the company do own Omnia's just to take a peek inside. And Scott ( for sure) had (or even has) Orban's and Omnia's. And maybe Don has a private collection of sound-processors of different marks, just like Jim. Why bother? It's fun to a/b test this processors just to see how far we have come today and find out what brand best taylor your needs?

 

[kevtronics]

If you knew processing, as you profess, then you'd know that omnia offered dedicated multiband compressor sections connected directly to their corresponding limiter sections. No mixer between multiband AGC and limiters. That was a first, and that was copied...not to mention many other functions.

Umm... the CRL Spectral Energy Processor had that kind of design in the late '70s. I have one and the ICs inside are dated 1979. The owner's manual boasts about its "analog computer circuits".

 

[kevtronics]

Old post...

What is interesting is that even today when music and the texture of music changed so drastically since the time 8100 was designed, it still sounds good. It's a testament to a well conceived design to stand a test of time for so long...

Just play "All I Have To Give" by the Backstreet Boys thru an 8100. The limiters are still gentle on all that HF energy. Alot to say about a box that was designed when Air Supply had the ballads.

Remember, Bob Orban fine-tuned the 8100 during the height of the Disco era. During the late '70s/early '80s, popular music probably had the highest peak-to-average ratio, and thus the "wildest peaks to tame", of all time. (Plus, they were really pushing the high end, too. There was a real need for a processor which didn't make "Theme From Shaft" sound like someone banging on garbage can lids.)

Just try ABBA's "Super Trouper". The peak intensity on that song is out of this world! That's what the 8100 was designed to deal with... when you've got peaks flying along at 10-15 dB above the vocals. Nowadays the peaks are clipped down to zero above average level right on the CD, and all the processor is left to do is to reshape one form of audio mush into another form of mush.

 

[gtomas]

Remember, Bob Orban fine-tuned the 8100 during the height of the Disco era. During the late '70s/early '80s, popular music probably had the highest peak-to-average ratio, and thus the "wildest peaks to tame", of all time. (Plus, they were really pushing the high end, too. There was a real need for a processor which didn't make "Theme From Shaft" sound like someone banging on garbage can lids.)

Just try ABBA's "Super Trouper". The peak intensity on that song is out of this world! That's what the 8100 was designed to deal with... when you've got peaks flying along at 10-15 dB above the vocals. Nowadays the peaks are clipped down to zero above average level right on the CD, and all the processor is left to do is to reshape one form of audio mush into another form of mush.

There's much truth in what you're saying... The 8100(XT2) really handles peak transients extremely well. I like to say unnoticeably and effortlessly. Once you get used to that, it really annoys you when you hear some processors hole punching and producing other noticeable modulation artifacts. You can hear them "sweating" with difficult transient material.

Then again, some would call my effortless processing as "smashing" and if you want that "silky" high-end some people seem to like very much, you have to be sensitive on peaks. So, it's not an easy compromise to make.

You're also right that todays processed music is easier to process as it doesn't put that much strain on the dynamics sections of the processors. As Frank and Bob have explained in their article "What happens to my song when it's played on the radio" you will loose that tight peak control on the CD right after phase rotation, but nevertheless the peaks that need handling are easier to cope with than some of the older material with high peak-to-average ratios.

It's been said many times, but 8100(XT2) was (is!) truly a remarkable piece of dynamics processing engineering...


Regards,
Goran Tomas

 

[FFoti1]

No way!
Maybe you have heard of the IDT Sound Style. This was a 4 band AGC, 4 band compressor/limiter were there was no mixer between the AGC and multibands and each AGC band drove his "own" multiband part (AGC1 to Multiband 1 etc).

Sorry, we did this long before IDT. I know this, as we showed one of our processors to FUN RADIO, Paris, and they were using a beta version of IDT. Our Unity had already been available for a number of years, at that time.

-Frank Foti

 

[FFoti1]

Umm... the CRL Spectral Energy Processor had that kind of design in the late '70s. I have one and the ICs inside are dated 1979. The owner's manual boasts about its "analog computer circuits".

The CRL box did not offer independent AGC and limiter functions that were broken out. The control loops were not the same as being discussed here. BTW: I have their schematics, and they are different than our design.

-Frank Foti

 

[ChiefEngineer]

Historical reference to sales for the ONE? Has it passed any milestone since becoming available sales wise?

 

[FFoti1]

Historical reference to sales for the ONE? Has it passed any milestone since becoming available sales wise?

Well, we can't make them fast enough. The first 500 are already sold, since shipping began a few short months ago.

-Frank Foti

 

[wgliradio]

I am Mr. Critical, the Omnia ONE is an excellent deal for the price. When you add in the Sensus for streaming, it wins hands down in that area.

 

[ChiefEngineer]

WHAT is the Sensus????

I know there's a large manual but I am legally blind. I thought this would only work streaming or air but not both.

LOVE THE ONE!

 

[FFoti1]

WHAT is the Sensus????

I know there's a large manual but I am legally blind. I thought this would only work streaming or air but not both.

LOVE THE ONE!

SENSUS is the algorithm designed to modify the final section in the coded audio limiter. Depending upon various conditions in the audio signal, this function will 'modify' the topology in order to condition the signal for optimized codec performance.

At present, the ONE can be setup to process for FM, or streaming. It will not do both at the same time.

-Frank Foti

 

[kevtronics]

At present, the ONE can be setup to process for FM, or streaming. It will not do both at the same time.

Can this setup be done "on the fly", or does different firmware have to be loaded for FM or streaming?

 

[kevtronics]

I'm just wondering about something at http://www.omniaaudio.com/fm.htm :
"Couple that with years of real-world radio engineering experience, plus Omnia exclusives like the world's first user-adjustable multiband crossover network, and it's no wonder top stations choose Omnia to dominate their markets."

The CRL Audio Signature had user-adjustable multiband crossovers 15 years ago. It has trimpots on the front panel to adjust the L/M1 crossover from 80 to 320 Hz and the M2/H crossover from 2 to 8 kHz. Does Omnia's claim predate this?

Pic for reference:
http://i10.tinypic.com/6pi2flf.jpg

 

[stace]

Yes but the Unity had user adjustable cross-overs pretty early in the piece also.