G
Groove1670
Guest
Which would you choose. Any other budget processors that would be your choice (new or used) Thanks.
-
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 ONE FM - no contest. For the price point, I am not aware of any other processors which effectively compete. I'm sure the DSPX folks will be along shortly to mention them, but the last one I played with wouldn't have beat the Omnia ONE.
I do know the barefoot 8100 will never compete with an Omnia ONE FM on loudness or clarity. Perhaps with an XT and Compellor you could achieve the loudness, but that will double the cost (at least) and still you wouldn't be as clean as with the Omnia.
If your maximum budget were about 3k higher, there would be a couple other options worth discussing.
Hope this is helpful.
I do know the barefoot 8100 will never compete with an Omnia ONE FM on loudness or clarity. Perhaps with an XT and Compellor you could achieve the loudness, but that will double the cost (at least) and still you wouldn't be as clean as with the Omnia.
If your maximum budget were about 3k higher, there would be a couple other options worth discussing.
Hope this is helpful.
musiconradio.com said:
This is a really loaded question, as many on this Forum will tell you. The answer depends completely on your goals, your budget, format and last but not least, your taste. Every person posting here will give you their best advice, but it will often conflict with someone else's equally valid opinion. IOW, after any and all the suggestions you get here, you will really need to make your own decision based upon personal experience. And the best way to get that experience is to get access to as many processors as you can, and patiently put them all through the paces.
Sorry to be blunt, but the honest answer is that, short of using a dartboard, there are no shortcuts.
Kind Regards,
David
I voluteer for a noncom that runs a naked 8100. A couple of years ago they had some extra money and wanted to try an Omnia One. Before I got a chance to twiddle with it they instantly hated. They said it "sounded different." I told them of course it did, it is different. Give me some time to work with the settings. Not a chance. They wanted it gone and the 8100 back in. The station manager (also part of the airstaff) told me she couldn't do her show with the One. I'm long past arguing, so the 8100 went back in. I think they would have loved the One in about two days, but I'm not there to educate, just screw the wires together.
The thing that stands out, at least to me, are the older 8100's (and their AM counterparts) are going for what I can only classify as "stupid money" on venues like ebay (I rarely seem them in used listings from other broadcast equipment dealers). A 30 year old processor going from $1,500 to over $2k? They may sound great when adjusted but the age of the internal components alone (especially any potted modules) makes me shudder.
A colleague had an Orban product refurbed by the person touted as being the end-all refurbisher for the older Optimods and judging by the quality (or lack thereof) of the way the returned unit worked I wouldn't touch a legacy Orban product with a 10 foot pole unless you're equipped and ready to do your own refurbishing.
I like to idea of the One simply for the fact that you can cross-grade the unit to any of its styles. At least for the engineer who needs to keep an on-hand emergency spare it makes total sense. I know somebody working on a project and I hope he picks up an Omnia One as I would love to hear it for myself.
A colleague had an Orban product refurbed by the person touted as being the end-all refurbisher for the older Optimods and judging by the quality (or lack thereof) of the way the returned unit worked I wouldn't touch a legacy Orban product with a 10 foot pole unless you're equipped and ready to do your own refurbishing.
I like to idea of the One simply for the fact that you can cross-grade the unit to any of its styles. At least for the engineer who needs to keep an on-hand emergency spare it makes total sense. I know somebody working on a project and I hope he picks up an Omnia One as I would love to hear it for myself.
RadeoEngineer said:
That's an issue with all digital processors today. Problem is, many people who complain think that "robot" sound is actually on the air when it's just the comb filtering effect.
I always thought a seperate chain for talent was a cool idea when I first ran across it in NYC in the mid 90's. It lets you set the processing for talent to be whatever they want it to be, and it lets you make "real" audio on the air. Now you can grab a bunch of low latency or analog boxes that are lying around and make a seperate airchain. In fact, we used to use an 8100 at CBS FM with a de-emphasis filter hanging off the RCA jacks. Talent loved it.
With digital processing and HD, a seperate chain for talent is becoming a must. Make sure you include some sort of alert system if audio goes down, because they can be playing along and not realize the station is off the air listening to a fake chain.
Omnia One hands down. Optimod 8100 was great for its time but these two processors are in a completely different league from one another. The Omnia people just updated the software on the One to add a fifth limiter band. Custom presets for any type of sound -- even settings that can mimic an 8100 sound -- are abundant with the One and there is a significantly lower learning curve with it than with an 8100.
Having both processors right here now, my vote is on the Omnia One. IF you want the 8100 flavor without a lot of the drawbacks of the 8100 (age, drift, mushy HF limiter design) you can get Mike Erickson's 8100 preset for the O1 and have way more flexibility to craft your sound. The 8100 was a great box in it's day, and was rather revolutionary, but its time has come and gone. The O1 will be more stable, better stereo gen, presets and a lot cleaner for the same level of loudness your want. The 8100 has to be pushed to the limit to try and keep up with anything that's out there now.
The 8100 still makes a great backup processor, but I wouldn't run one on any of my stations now. Except maybe the one running the 2200... the 8100 was better than that thing.
The 8100 still makes a great backup processor, but I wouldn't run one on any of my stations now. Except maybe the one running the 2200... the 8100 was better than that thing.
The 2200 is pretty minimal for sure. Isn't it really just a 8100 with a digital stereo generator though?
I really didn't have a chance here folks. I had one very well respected and known musician that couldn't sleep because she was being changed over from an old Auditronics parts board with rotaries to an R55E. I've learned that trying to bring them into the 21st century is like teaching a pig to sing.
@OKCRadioGuy I wouldn't say a 2200 is an 8100 with a digital MPX generator. It added a (very slow, and not too useful) wideband AGC in front of the two-band processor. It also added a 12 db/oct bass EQ and high frequency "enhancer".
In reality the EQ stuff wasn't so terrible, but the really killer was the distortion cancelled clipping. It just couldn't keep up against much of anything. If you ran your 2200 the way Bob O may have wished you'd run your 8100 it would have been OK, but man did it get rough when you pushed it.
I used it for a long time, but not until I added a Compellor and some Prisms behind it, did it become passable.
No offense to anyone here who uses (or likes) the 2200, I just don't think it holds a candle to an O1 or even it's daddy, the 8100.
In reality the EQ stuff wasn't so terrible, but the really killer was the distortion cancelled clipping. It just couldn't keep up against much of anything. If you ran your 2200 the way Bob O may have wished you'd run your 8100 it would have been OK, but man did it get rough when you pushed it.
I used it for a long time, but not until I added a Compellor and some Prisms behind it, did it become passable.
No offense to anyone here who uses (or likes) the 2200, I just don't think it holds a candle to an O1 or even it's daddy, the 8100.
Well that explains it quite a bit. One of my stations (talk) uses a 2200. We have a compellor ahead of it, so as you say, it's passable. It's certainly nothing to write home about. A simulcasted signal elsewhere of the same audio is running an old 8100 XT/2. It sounds like a million bucks compared the 2200. Since we are talk we can get away with the 2200, but it's far from ideal. At another tower location I'm co-located at, the other broadcaster there uses a 2200. He had it so messed up it was distorted horribly. With his permission I was able to get it to at least be acceptable, but I did notice that it's AGC is rather lousy. He doesn't have a Compellor.
A client has one on a talk/music hybrid station. There's a Compellor in front of it, but it's still crap. The HF "Enhancer" is one of the worst sounding versions of a dynamic EQ I've ever heard. It's not even close to an Omnia One or any other halfway decent processor in terms of being clean and/or somewhat competitive. The analog 8100 even without the XT option has a better clipper section than the 2200. Another station in the chain is running Breakaway into a Crown TX (using the stereo gen in the Crown, less than ideal) and it still blows away the 2200.
Just a bad idea all the way around. A value priced digital processor that wasn't ready for prime time.
Just a bad idea all the way around. A value priced digital processor that wasn't ready for prime time.
All good points on the 2200. I feel like in fairness I should say I wouldn't let experiences with the 2200 keep me from trying the similarly priced 5500. That box features a 5 band compressor/limiter and even composite limiting for a little extra loudness. I wouldn't expect it to run circles around an 8500 but it might be a competitor to a O1 FM.
I'd like to hear one actually.
Wes
I'd like to hear one actually.
Wes
@Stace Just comparing processors in the price range. Most folks can't run out and buy a new 3-5k piece of equipment everytime a new gadget comes out. So occasionally it's useful to compare them. We still compare things to the 8100. Also, the 2200's still seem to come up on eBay from time to time, so people will wonder if they should spring for a 2200 or an O1. Not trying to draw a direct comparison between them.
I will say this though... I think Optimod products in general sound better for talk radio. Omnia products do great for music, but there's something about how they handle voice that to my ears isn't ideal. I can't put my finger on it, but there just doesn't seem to be the clarity there no matter how many changes I've tried. I have both for my talker. The old Orban stuff really does sound sweeter for talk IMHO.
G
Groove1670
Guest
Thanks for all the comments and suggestions from everyone. I decided to go with the Omnia One. It seems more flexible for future expansion, and for the most part the comments were positive. Can't see paying $1600+ for a used 8100 that might need to be recapped or has been tweaked by a non-engineer. I love the 8100 but it is time to step into the 20th century.
- Status