• 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 (Telos) 3.0 FMT

B

brillant_marconi

Guest
We've acquired a station that runs an Omnia 3.0 FMT. Is it possible to create a competitive (loud, yet dynamic) sound with this box? In front of the Omnia is a Compellor (to provide a consistent level to our STL) and a Moseley digital STL. Any suggestions would be appreciated.
 
Yes. Absolutely. We run one. Like any processor, you have to tweak it. It took 5 years of slow, patient tweaking to get me exactly where I wanted us to be. And while it can get you as loud as the newer (O6, O5) boxes, the tradeoff in a side-by-side comparison will be more distortion and less perceived dynamic range. But that is with a side-by-side comparison. We've been very satisfied with what our O3T does for us. Wouldn't turn down an O6 or O5 if presented to us as a donation, but we're in no hurry to make any changes.
 
A "competitive sound" and "loud" are all relative terms - they mean different things to different people.

Omnia.3fmt is a far cry from Omnia.6 in any comparison...


Regards,
Goran Tomas
 
The Omnia.3fmt is a very capable box. We ran one for several years before getting the Omnia.One. Mark at Omnia tech support can provide you with alternate presets and advice how to tailor it to your desired sound.
 
Actually, Goran, the O3T can get you as loud as a 5 or a 6 in any given market. It just won't sound as good because the separation decreases and the levelling and compression is more obvious. For trained ears, it is difference s noticeable. Real world listening situations, you can't tell at all. We're hanging very well with the a O6 CHR in terms of loudness and fidelity. We just can't achieve the same large, open sound at the same time. For our situation, that's not critical. Be really really nice, but not an absolute must have. Clearly the .One, 5 and 6 benefit from years of software and DSP chip advances.
 
Clearly (if we haven't already established this ultimate truth in processing) things are subjective...

What to you is "as loud, but isn't as good" and "hanging in there with loudness but is not as large" in my world translates simply into - not in the same league.

The first processor I bought was Omnia-3fm. Then several years afterwards this was upgraded to the "turbo" version. It was a nice processor. Just by listening to it alone, you can be happy with the sound. But switch to any station with a flagship processor such as Orban 8400/8400 or Omnia.6 and it is immediately obvious this is an entry-level processor. Which is why I bought an Omnia.6 for this station later on. In the meantime I've tweaked the O.3fmt for years. I know what this processor is capable of, how it sounds, what can it do and how does it compare to others. I've directly compared it to both Omnia.5 and Omnia.6 as well as with DSPX, Orban 2300, Orban 8300 and a few other processor. Just as I know what Omnia.6 can do, which I've used, tweaked to death, spent years listening to and comparing to other processors both on the air and on the bench. If you haven't noticed so far from my posts, processing and processors are my passion, my interest and just until recently, my job.

I know very well how Omnia.3fmt compares to Omnia.6 and, in my opinion, these processor are in a different league. In terms of loudness (in a competitive market), distortion, especially in terms of "oouhmp", the build-up of density they can produce, the overall texture, the bass thump, the high-end sizzle, the impact, the consistency and the list goes on and on...

Now in a not so competitive market and if your appetites are not big, you can do very well with the Omnia.3fmt. It's a nice processor. But in a direct comparison, it can't hold a candle to Omnia.6. Let's be honest about it.


Regards,
Goran Tomas
 
All due respect, Goran. The initial question on this thread was, is an O3T capable of hanging in there well enough to be competitive. Even with what you said, the answer is yes. The box is capable of being competitive. Is it capable of being on all subjective levels matching the quality of a current model top-end box. I think my answer was that it wasn't and you've said it isn't. But the initial question posed was is it good enough where he doesn't have to run out an purchase a $10-5k new box.

We're running against a couple of CCU stations that have all the top end gear and we sound just as competitive and good enough with the trade-offs mentioned above. I notice the differences, but the listeners sure as heck don't. We still get comments about how much better we sound than the Citadel and CCU stations. And I have the thing EQ'd pretty close to flat.

The O3T in today's world is a very acceptable box. Maybe not in New York or LA where everyone is banging the pegs, but in most markets, it -- is-- capable with prudent tuning to be an absolutely fine performer. I concede it is not going to beat an O6 if you insist on cranking the O6 to 11 or 15, but as you acknowledge, it is capable of being close enough to be satisfactory if you aren't a processing junkie.

If we had the budget, we'd be running an O6 now ourselves, but we're
 
In Salt Lake, land of Omnia 6s and Orban 8400's, there is an independent FM running Omnia 3fm.hot and as far as clarity, loudness and dynamics, sound far superior to their competitors. This market is heavily radioed and you can scan the dial and really pick out who wants their station(s) sounding good and who just wants to be loudest. CC processes all their properties to the hilt, even their AC station sounds like the old 80's CHR wars era processing. Sounds extra strange now that they're all Christmas. Citadel's aren't so pegged but they add reverb and that just messes with things and they are squashed a bit.
 
Hi there!

The Omnia3FM Turbo can sound pretty good if your material doesn't require a lot of spectral matching from source to source. (i.e. "bright song" followed by a "muddy" recording.) If your format is based primarily in one era, this is a highly plausible scenario.

While there are absolute limits that any processor can do to correct really glaring tonal differences from source to source, the typical program variations are easily handled by the Omnia6, and pretty decently with an Omnia.One or 5. This is where the Omnia3 Turbo *may* fall short from time to time due to its three band nature.

Then there are those formats that just work best when using fewer bands of on-air processing. It all depends on what you need to get the job done.

Having said that, I have seen little benefit of using more than 6 or so bands in a processor. Over the years, this maximum number of bands seems to be the sweet spot between quality, and just absolute trouble.

-C
 
Thanks for all the great comments. I've been in-touch with Mark at Omnia and he's been great and very, very helpful. My "challenge" is I'm having to compare the Omnia 3.0 to its sister station's 8400. :) Over the last several days, I've been able to spend some considerable time tweaking the Omnia 3 with positive results. I realize I won't be able to get what I've got with the 8400. But...
Like most everyone else, the cap ex budget just isn't there to lay-out the cash for an Omnia 6 or an 8500. Thanks again.
 
The 8400 is a totally different beast as far as how the entire processing structure reacts to audio. You'll never get it close to the 8400. Your better bet is to make it sounds as close to a 6 as possible, because the two have the same sonic "signature". Orban is a different signature, as different as Mac to PC.
 
brillant_marconi said:
I realize I won't be able to get what I've got with the 8400. But...
Click to expand...

As long as you realize that, you'll be fine... That was the whole point of my post.


Regards,
Goran Tomas
 
wgliradio said:
The 8400 is a totally different beast as far as how the entire processing structure reacts to audio. You'll never get it close to the 8400. Your better bet is to make it sounds as close to a 6 as possible, because the two have the same sonic "signature". Orban is a different signature, as different as Mac to PC.
Click to expand...

Hopefully, with myth number 1 ("low-cost processor can sound as good as the one that costs 3x more") being at least cut into, if not debunked, Mike brings up another myth that seems to circulate around - "you can make any processor sound just like the other processor".

And I couldn't agree more with Mike here - you can't! You can get somewhere in the ball park, you can even get very close on a very narrow and similar program material, but you can't really make it sound the same. Those who've been playing with processors long enough, know this. Each processor has its own character. A character that is a consequence of its unique design and design philosophy of the person behind it. Each brand of processors reacts, adapts and modifies audio in a different way and you can't really modify this character drastically with parameter tweaking - it's defined deep in the algorithms.

And processors are typically made so that they sound different - what's the point of copying or sounding the same as another brand? Not to mention processing designers typically start on their journey because they are not completely happy with any of the designs available. And the variety of sounds and approaches that result from this, is actually the beauty of processing world and probably why there are so many discussions on this topic.

To conclude, you'll be much happier trying to make your Omnia sounds the best that it can on its own and playing on its strengths, rather than trying to get close to Orban (and a much more expensive unit at that).


Regards,
Goran Tomas
 
The biggest difference between the Omnia and the Optimod, besides the interband coupling scheme (especially in the AGC stages) is the placement and management of the 75us preemphasis curve. You will never get the two to sound the same, which is good because some of us like plain and some of us like Honey Nut Cheerios. Some even like corn flakes too, which is why we also have BW, Aphex and Vorsis. Competition makes everyone better.
 
Cornelius, you made a good point. The O3Turbo, barefoot, does not handle cross-era recording densities extremely well. A little judicious pre-processing and adjusting the AGC does get around that weakness.
 
Concur.. When we were running the 03Turbo we put a Compellor in front to help out. We were always very happy with the sound of that combo.
 
WNTIRadio said:
The biggest difference between the Omnia and the Optimod, besides the interband coupling scheme (especially in the AGC stages) is the placement and management of the 75us preemphasis curve. You will never get the two to sound the same, which is good because some of us like plain and some of us like Honey Nut Cheerios.
Click to expand...

Pre-emphasis placement makes a difference mostly on how the high-end sounds, but I would say detector and timing circuits in the AGCs and limiters is what determines the dynamic behavior of the processor most. Then there's also the type of crossover, slopes and crossover points, the clipper and how it reduces distortion (IOW what character of distortion it tends to produce), the type of filters used throughout and how are they designed and finally - the interaction of all these elements together!


Regards,
Goran Tomas
 
WNTIRadio said:
You will never get the two to sound the same, which is good because some of us like plain and some of us like Honey Nut Cheerios. Some even like corn flakes too, which is why we also have BW, Aphex and Vorsis. Competition makes everyone better.
Click to expand...

I must add that all of these will sound very crunchy unless the milk time constant set for long release.
 
DudeFan said:
Cornelius, you made a good point. The O3Turbo, barefoot, does not handle cross-era recording densities extremely well. A little judicious pre-processing and adjusting the AGC does get around that weakness.
Click to expand...

tjm_pro said:
Concur.. When we were running the 03Turbo we put a Compellor in front to help out. We were always very happy with the sound of that combo.
Click to expand...

I am struggling with this problem. Got an LPFM running the O3Turbo on an Oldies format and I am having issues setting it up to handle the different densities with any sort of consistency. I am also having a problem where it seems like tracks with wide stereo fields come out sounding lower in volume than the mono material.

We had a Compellor in front but I took it out of the air chain and am using it currently to handle processing for the web streaming computer. The programming guy was complaining about "too much gain" in the air chain with it in there. He is still griping about it with the O3Turbo running barefoot, but I dismiss it as coming from a record collector who doesn't like the "loudness" of the processing. This is a loud market we are in, so we are going to have to smash things somewhat to avoid sounding way down in the mud compared to the rest of the dial.

If I remember correctly, when I was using the Compellor I had the O3 Wideband AGC dialed back to slowest time constants to avoid dueling AGCs. I did have the Compellor set at about 50% process balance between compression and leveling.

Any suggestions for how to deal with this issue? Settings suggestions for the Compellor and/or the O3Turbo? Any help is appreciated either in the thread or via PM. Would like to upgrade to a higher end processor, but the money is the limiting factor.
 
And yes, I will also be contacting Mark at Telos for suggestions. Gotta get time off from the "real job" to get that phone call in to support. ;D
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom