K
KT
Guest
I'm being given a choice between the Orban 2300 and the Omnia 3 FM Turbo Fm processors. I'm looking for your experiences with the two. Any thoughts on the comparison?
KT
KT
-
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
1
1290wgli
Guest
> I'm being given a choice between the Orban 2300 and the
> Omnia 3 FM Turbo Fm processors. I'm looking for your
> experiences with the two. Any thoughts on the comparison?
>
> KT
>
The 2300 has better pre-emphasis management, but the Omnia may be slightly better all around (if you sacrifice some HF distortion and clipping).
> Omnia 3 FM Turbo Fm processors. I'm looking for your
> experiences with the two. Any thoughts on the comparison?
>
> KT
>
The 2300 has better pre-emphasis management, but the Omnia may be slightly better all around (if you sacrifice some HF distortion and clipping).
F
FFoti
Guest
> > I'm being given a choice between the Orban 2300 and the
> > Omnia 3 FM Turbo Fm processors. I'm looking for your
> > experiences with the two. Any thoughts on the comparison?
>
> >
> > KT
> >
>
> The 2300 has better pre-emphasis management, but the Omnia
> may be slightly better all around (if you sacrifice some HF
> distortion and clipping).
>
This doesn't make sense...The Omnia.3 Turbo has more flexibility and capability in managing the preemphasis curve than the 2300. Also, the Omnia clipper is far more sophisticated with lower distortion. I've listened to these two boxes quite a bit, up against oneanother, and the Omnia is cleaner/louder all the way around.
-Frank Foti
> > Omnia 3 FM Turbo Fm processors. I'm looking for your
> > experiences with the two. Any thoughts on the comparison?
>
> >
> > KT
> >
>
> The 2300 has better pre-emphasis management, but the Omnia
> may be slightly better all around (if you sacrifice some HF
> distortion and clipping).
>
This doesn't make sense...The Omnia.3 Turbo has more flexibility and capability in managing the preemphasis curve than the 2300. Also, the Omnia clipper is far more sophisticated with lower distortion. I've listened to these two boxes quite a bit, up against oneanother, and the Omnia is cleaner/louder all the way around.
-Frank Foti
> > > I'm being given a choice between the Orban 2300 and the
> > > Omnia 3 FM Turbo Fm processors. I'm looking for your
> > > experiences with the two. Any thoughts on the
> comparison?
> >
> > >
> > > KT
> > >
> >
> > The 2300 has better pre-emphasis management, but the Omnia
>
> > may be slightly better all around (if you sacrifice some
> HF
> > distortion and clipping).
> >
> This doesn't make sense...The Omnia.3 Turbo has more
> flexibility and capability in managing the preemphasis curve
> than the 2300. Also, the Omnia clipper is far more
> sophisticated with lower distortion. I've listened to these
> two boxes quite a bit, up against oneanother, and the Omnia
> is cleaner/louder all the way around.
> -Frank Foti
I agree with the guy known as Frank Foti(Omnia founder). Seriously,
the O3 Turbo is a fantastic little box and the pre/de section is
very tight. No problems there. The fact is that both of the boxes
are great in that area. But the O3 Turbo just has a lot more processing
power without a lot of latency. I have compared this box to the
Orban and the highly touted DSPX and the O3T is my choice.
> > > Omnia 3 FM Turbo Fm processors. I'm looking for your
> > > experiences with the two. Any thoughts on the
> comparison?
> >
> > >
> > > KT
> > >
> >
> > The 2300 has better pre-emphasis management, but the Omnia
>
> > may be slightly better all around (if you sacrifice some
> HF
> > distortion and clipping).
> >
> This doesn't make sense...The Omnia.3 Turbo has more
> flexibility and capability in managing the preemphasis curve
> than the 2300. Also, the Omnia clipper is far more
> sophisticated with lower distortion. I've listened to these
> two boxes quite a bit, up against oneanother, and the Omnia
> is cleaner/louder all the way around.
> -Frank Foti
I agree with the guy known as Frank Foti(Omnia founder). Seriously,
the O3 Turbo is a fantastic little box and the pre/de section is
very tight. No problems there. The fact is that both of the boxes
are great in that area. But the O3 Turbo just has a lot more processing
power without a lot of latency. I have compared this box to the
Orban and the highly touted DSPX and the O3T is my choice.
S
SamBuca
Guest
My offer to do an unbiased field test still stands. Send the equivalent of the 9100A..in exchange for my unbiased opinion, you let me keep the unit 
<P ID="signature">______________
</P>
<P ID="signature">______________</P>
R
RadioDoc
Guest
> > > I'm being given a choice between the Orban 2300 and the
> > > Omnia 3 FM Turbo Fm processors. I'm looking for your
> > > experiences with the two. Any thoughts on the
> comparison?
> >
> > >
> > > KT
> > >
> >
> > The 2300 has better pre-emphasis management, but the Omnia
>
> > may be slightly better all around (if you sacrifice some
> HF
> > distortion and clipping).
> >
> This doesn't make sense...The Omnia.3 Turbo has more
> flexibility and capability in managing the preemphasis curve
> than the 2300. Also, the Omnia clipper is far more
> sophisticated with lower distortion. I've listened to these
> two boxes quite a bit, up against oneanother, and the Omnia
> is cleaner/louder all the way around.
>
> -Frank Foti
>
My .02? Although I'm an admitted Orban fan, I still believe that the Omnia.3 Turbo is one of the cleanest sounding units ever made. I had one on a classic hits station in a Chicago suburb, and it just Owned!<P ID="signature">______________
</P>
> > > Omnia 3 FM Turbo Fm processors. I'm looking for your
> > > experiences with the two. Any thoughts on the
> comparison?
> >
> > >
> > > KT
> > >
> >
> > The 2300 has better pre-emphasis management, but the Omnia
>
> > may be slightly better all around (if you sacrifice some
> HF
> > distortion and clipping).
> >
> This doesn't make sense...The Omnia.3 Turbo has more
> flexibility and capability in managing the preemphasis curve
> than the 2300. Also, the Omnia clipper is far more
> sophisticated with lower distortion. I've listened to these
> two boxes quite a bit, up against oneanother, and the Omnia
> is cleaner/louder all the way around.
>
> -Frank Foti
>
My .02? Although I'm an admitted Orban fan, I still believe that the Omnia.3 Turbo is one of the cleanest sounding units ever made. I had one on a classic hits station in a Chicago suburb, and it just Owned!<P ID="signature">______________
</P>
I have compared this box to
> the
> Orban and the highly touted DSPX and the O3T is my choice.
My 2 pence. 2300 may sound cleaner on the HF but it doesn't have anywhere near the level of HF that the turbo or DSPX does so you can't really compare what HF is cleaner because the level of HF difference between the two boxes is massive. I think the choice between the two is format dependent.
Mod note: Scott - Please no sales on the board. Thanks.<P ID="edit"><FONT class="small">Edited by RadioDoc on 01/20/06 03:02 PM.</FONT></P>
> the
> Orban and the highly touted DSPX and the O3T is my choice.
My 2 pence. 2300 may sound cleaner on the HF but it doesn't have anywhere near the level of HF that the turbo or DSPX does so you can't really compare what HF is cleaner because the level of HF difference between the two boxes is massive. I think the choice between the two is format dependent.
Mod note: Scott - Please no sales on the board. Thanks.<P ID="edit"><FONT class="small">Edited by RadioDoc on 01/20/06 03:02 PM.</FONT></P>
> I have compared this box to
> > the
> > Orban and the highly touted DSPX and the O3T is my choice.
>
>
>
> My 2 pence. 2300 may sound cleaner on the HF but it doesn't
> have anywhere near the level of HF that the turbo or DSPX
> does so you can't really compare what HF is cleaner because
> the level of HF difference between the two boxes is massive.
> I think the choice between the two is format dependent.
>
> Mod note: Scott - Please no sales on the board. Thanks.
>
Hi radiodoc. I am discussing HF level between two competitors products. Hardly promoting my own products. How do you see that I am?
Best regards
> > the
> > Orban and the highly touted DSPX and the O3T is my choice.
>
>
>
> My 2 pence. 2300 may sound cleaner on the HF but it doesn't
> have anywhere near the level of HF that the turbo or DSPX
> does so you can't really compare what HF is cleaner because
> the level of HF difference between the two boxes is massive.
> I think the choice between the two is format dependent.
>
> Mod note: Scott - Please no sales on the board. Thanks.
>
Hi radiodoc. I am discussing HF level between two competitors products. Hardly promoting my own products. How do you see that I am?
Best regards
R
RadioDoc
Guest
> > I have compared this box to
> > > the
> > > Orban and the highly touted DSPX and the O3T is my
> choice.
> >
> >
> >
> > My 2 pence. 2300 may sound cleaner on the HF but it
> doesn't
> > have anywhere near the level of HF that the turbo or DSPX
> > does so you can't really compare what HF is cleaner
> because
> > the level of HF difference between the two boxes is
> massive.
> > I think the choice between the two is format dependent.
> >
> > Mod note: Scott - Please no sales on the board. Thanks.
> >
>
> Hi radiodoc. I am discussing HF level between two
> competitors products. Hardly promoting my own products. How
> do you see that I am?
> Best regards
>
I left that part in. I took out the part where you offered to sell the poster a processor (along the lines of "if you want one, we have those in stock as well as the DSP-X").
We are pretty liberal when it comes to allowing manufacturers come here and talk about their products. If you want to sell something, new or used, please contact the administrators about purchasing advertising.
Having said all of that, if you have further issues with the Moderation of the board, I'll direct you to Radio-Info rule number 5:
Complaints regarding the moderation or administration of Radio-Info.
Generic questions should be directed to the 'Ask Radio-Info' forum, however direct concerns relating to moderation/administration should be handled via email with the person responsible for that section of the site.
We have, in my opinion, the best group of contributers and some of the best discussions on Radio-Info. If you look at the other boards, you'll see that Les and I use a very light hand when it comes to moderating. There are rules that must enforce, and we are relied upon to use our judgment.
<P ID="signature">______________
</P>
> > > the
> > > Orban and the highly touted DSPX and the O3T is my
> choice.
> >
> >
> >
> > My 2 pence. 2300 may sound cleaner on the HF but it
> doesn't
> > have anywhere near the level of HF that the turbo or DSPX
> > does so you can't really compare what HF is cleaner
> because
> > the level of HF difference between the two boxes is
> massive.
> > I think the choice between the two is format dependent.
> >
> > Mod note: Scott - Please no sales on the board. Thanks.
> >
>
> Hi radiodoc. I am discussing HF level between two
> competitors products. Hardly promoting my own products. How
> do you see that I am?
> Best regards
>
I left that part in. I took out the part where you offered to sell the poster a processor (along the lines of "if you want one, we have those in stock as well as the DSP-X").
We are pretty liberal when it comes to allowing manufacturers come here and talk about their products. If you want to sell something, new or used, please contact the administrators about purchasing advertising.
Having said all of that, if you have further issues with the Moderation of the board, I'll direct you to Radio-Info rule number 5:
Complaints regarding the moderation or administration of Radio-Info.
Generic questions should be directed to the 'Ask Radio-Info' forum, however direct concerns relating to moderation/administration should be handled via email with the person responsible for that section of the site.
We have, in my opinion, the best group of contributers and some of the best discussions on Radio-Info. If you look at the other boards, you'll see that Les and I use a very light hand when it comes to moderating. There are rules that must enforce, and we are relied upon to use our judgment.
<P ID="signature">______________
</P>
1
1290wgli
Guest
Actually it does make sense.
I've done the 2300 vs Omnia 3 turbo vs some other processors. Taking just the O&O brothers, The Orban has better pre-emphasis management over Omnia, but the Omnia is better cut-to-cut for consistancy and overall loudness over Orban, albeit if you can stand some tearing on the highs with voice and some material (not alot here, but trained ears can hear the difference).
As the manufacturer, I am sure you believe in your method of pre-emphasis management, but whatever the thoughts on Orban are, for me, their pre-emphasis management is excellent across the board.
> This doesn't make sense...The Omnia.3 Turbo has more
> flexibility and capability in managing the preemphasis curve
> than the 2300. Also, the Omnia clipper is far more
> sophisticated with lower distortion. I've listened to these
> two boxes quite a bit, up against oneanother, and the Omnia
> is cleaner/louder all the way around.
>
> -Frank Foti
>
I've done the 2300 vs Omnia 3 turbo vs some other processors. Taking just the O&O brothers, The Orban has better pre-emphasis management over Omnia, but the Omnia is better cut-to-cut for consistancy and overall loudness over Orban, albeit if you can stand some tearing on the highs with voice and some material (not alot here, but trained ears can hear the difference).
As the manufacturer, I am sure you believe in your method of pre-emphasis management, but whatever the thoughts on Orban are, for me, their pre-emphasis management is excellent across the board.
> This doesn't make sense...The Omnia.3 Turbo has more
> flexibility and capability in managing the preemphasis curve
> than the 2300. Also, the Omnia clipper is far more
> sophisticated with lower distortion. I've listened to these
> two boxes quite a bit, up against oneanother, and the Omnia
> is cleaner/louder all the way around.
>
> -Frank Foti
>
1
1290wgli
Guest
> My 2 pence. 2300 may sound cleaner on the HF but it doesn't
> have anywhere near the level of HF that the turbo or DSPX
> does so you can't really compare what HF is cleaner because
> the level of HF difference between the two boxes is massive.
In my test with the 2300, I got more than enough brightness out of it to think, in that area, you could make a subjective comparison.
BUT, when you consider other factors (consistancy, overall loudness, that "polished" sound), the Omnia 3 Turbo is more like the real world vs Orban. I was only speaking about one aspect of two processors.
BTW: The DSP-X should not be properly evaluated until you have V2.6 in the box. With older versions, you really needed to be familiar with what was going on to get it right. With V2.6, improved bass, clipping and AGC give you more room for error, allowing you to quickly get that polished sound.
Processing is very subjective and the safe answer is to evaluate all and buy the one you are most comfortable with.. but you should LISTEN to ALL to make sure you're not missing out on anything.
> have anywhere near the level of HF that the turbo or DSPX
> does so you can't really compare what HF is cleaner because
> the level of HF difference between the two boxes is massive.
In my test with the 2300, I got more than enough brightness out of it to think, in that area, you could make a subjective comparison.
BUT, when you consider other factors (consistancy, overall loudness, that "polished" sound), the Omnia 3 Turbo is more like the real world vs Orban. I was only speaking about one aspect of two processors.
BTW: The DSP-X should not be properly evaluated until you have V2.6 in the box. With older versions, you really needed to be familiar with what was going on to get it right. With V2.6, improved bass, clipping and AGC give you more room for error, allowing you to quickly get that polished sound.
Processing is very subjective and the safe answer is to evaluate all and buy the one you are most comfortable with.. but you should LISTEN to ALL to make sure you're not missing out on anything.
1
1290wgli
Guest
> My .02? Although I'm an admitted Orban fan, I still believe
> that the Omnia.3 Turbo is one of the cleanest sounding units
> ever made. I had one on a classic hits station in a Chicago
> suburb, and it just Owned!
>
The Omnia 3 Turbo is a much improved box over its original software, but for me there is still too much harshness in the mids on horns and other nastiness that can ride the clipper (sustained notes esp. female voices, pianos and bass and electric guitar etc). For consistancy, it does a good job at creating that major market sound and emulating its older brothers, but with everything, you have the major market in your face sound vs clean tradeoff.
The Orban had its own limitations because of its two band structure. It's not exactly suited for the loud "in your face" CHR processing.
DSP-X V2.6 doesn't suffer from the same problems because of the improved features, but processing is very subjective and what may be tolerable to some is unacceptable to others. The DSP-X wasn't born that way. It took *alot* of hard work from Scott and countless emails back and forth over the pond from testers to get it right (the world is alot different in 75us pre-empahsis land).
> that the Omnia.3 Turbo is one of the cleanest sounding units
> ever made. I had one on a classic hits station in a Chicago
> suburb, and it just Owned!
>
The Omnia 3 Turbo is a much improved box over its original software, but for me there is still too much harshness in the mids on horns and other nastiness that can ride the clipper (sustained notes esp. female voices, pianos and bass and electric guitar etc). For consistancy, it does a good job at creating that major market sound and emulating its older brothers, but with everything, you have the major market in your face sound vs clean tradeoff.
The Orban had its own limitations because of its two band structure. It's not exactly suited for the loud "in your face" CHR processing.
DSP-X V2.6 doesn't suffer from the same problems because of the improved features, but processing is very subjective and what may be tolerable to some is unacceptable to others. The DSP-X wasn't born that way. It took *alot* of hard work from Scott and countless emails back and forth over the pond from testers to get it right (the world is alot different in 75us pre-empahsis land).
We are all here as guests and I like others will have to respect the house rules if we want to be here.
I can't speak for others but I will try and refrain from getting too commercial, on any products, mine or otherwise. I hope you will allow a little mentioning of product names here and there if the topic requires it.
It must be hard being a full time moderator and i think i can speak on the behalf of everyone here when i say that it is apprecaited and keep up the good work.
Best regards
Scott
I can't speak for others but I will try and refrain from getting too commercial, on any products, mine or otherwise. I hope you will allow a little mentioning of product names here and there if the topic requires it.
It must be hard being a full time moderator and i think i can speak on the behalf of everyone here when i say that it is apprecaited and keep up the good work.
Best regards
Scott
1
1290wgli
Guest
> It must be hard being a full time moderator and i think i
> can speak on the behalf of everyone here when i say that it
> is apprecaited and keep up the good work.
>
> Best regards
> Scott
>
As a fromer moderator for the LI Board, I can tell you it is not easy trying to be fair and not look biased. Without law there is no order.
> can speak on the behalf of everyone here when i say that it
> is apprecaited and keep up the good work.
>
> Best regards
> Scott
>
As a fromer moderator for the LI Board, I can tell you it is not easy trying to be fair and not look biased. Without law there is no order.
S
SamBuca
Guest
> My 2 pence. 2300 may sound cleaner on the HF but it doesn't
> have anywhere near the level of HF that the turbo or DSPX
> does so you can't really compare what HF is cleaner because
> the level of HF difference between the two boxes is massive.
> I think the choice between the two is format dependent.
If you have an AM model, send me one for free and I'll give an official unbiased opinion<P ID="signature">______________
</P>
> have anywhere near the level of HF that the turbo or DSPX
> does so you can't really compare what HF is cleaner because
> the level of HF difference between the two boxes is massive.
> I think the choice between the two is format dependent.
If you have an AM model, send me one for free and I'll give an official unbiased opinion
<P ID="signature">______________</P>
F
FFoti
Guest
Mike,
The Omnia allows the user to adjust the operation of the limiters across the preemphasis curve, whereas the other product does not. That being said, Omnia's preemphasis management falls into the hands of the user, if they so choose, and dependent upon user settings, will dictate sound performance. The range can be "dull-n-boring" to "in-your-face," with plenty of variance in between.
I have done plenty of A/B comparisons with the products mentioned here, and have been able to provide better consistency (overall & HF), quality, and loudness with the Omnia.3 turbo. We also have plenty of customer feedback from the field that supports this claim.
I do agree with you regarding processing subjectivity. It's all in how the application is applied. Naturally, your own mileage may vary.
-Frank Foti
> Actually it does make sense.
>
> I've done the 2300 vs Omnia 3 turbo vs some other
> processors. Taking just the O&O brothers, The Orban has
> better pre-emphasis management over Omnia, but the Omnia is
> better cut-to-cut for consistancy and overall loudness over
> Orban, albeit if you can stand some tearing on the highs
> with voice and some material (not alot here, but trained
> ears can hear the difference).
>
> As the manufacturer, I am sure you believe in your method of
> pre-emphasis management, but whatever the thoughts on Orban
> are, for me, their pre-emphasis management is excellent
> across the board.
>
>
> > This doesn't make sense...The Omnia.3 Turbo has more
> > flexibility and capability in managing the preemphasis
> curve
> > than the 2300. Also, the Omnia clipper is far more
> > sophisticated with lower distortion. I've listened to
> these
> > two boxes quite a bit, up against oneanother, and the
> Omnia
> > is cleaner/louder all the way around.
> >
> > -Frank Foti
> >
>
The Omnia allows the user to adjust the operation of the limiters across the preemphasis curve, whereas the other product does not. That being said, Omnia's preemphasis management falls into the hands of the user, if they so choose, and dependent upon user settings, will dictate sound performance. The range can be "dull-n-boring" to "in-your-face," with plenty of variance in between.
I have done plenty of A/B comparisons with the products mentioned here, and have been able to provide better consistency (overall & HF), quality, and loudness with the Omnia.3 turbo. We also have plenty of customer feedback from the field that supports this claim.
I do agree with you regarding processing subjectivity. It's all in how the application is applied. Naturally, your own mileage may vary.
-Frank Foti
> Actually it does make sense.
>
> I've done the 2300 vs Omnia 3 turbo vs some other
> processors. Taking just the O&O brothers, The Orban has
> better pre-emphasis management over Omnia, but the Omnia is
> better cut-to-cut for consistancy and overall loudness over
> Orban, albeit if you can stand some tearing on the highs
> with voice and some material (not alot here, but trained
> ears can hear the difference).
>
> As the manufacturer, I am sure you believe in your method of
> pre-emphasis management, but whatever the thoughts on Orban
> are, for me, their pre-emphasis management is excellent
> across the board.
>
>
> > This doesn't make sense...The Omnia.3 Turbo has more
> > flexibility and capability in managing the preemphasis
> curve
> > than the 2300. Also, the Omnia clipper is far more
> > sophisticated with lower distortion. I've listened to
> these
> > two boxes quite a bit, up against oneanother, and the
> Omnia
> > is cleaner/louder all the way around.
> >
> > -Frank Foti
> >
>
> > My 2 pence. 2300 may sound cleaner on the HF but it
> doesn't
> > have anywhere near the level of HF that the turbo or DSPX
> > does so you can't really compare what HF is cleaner
> because
> > the level of HF difference between the two boxes is
> massive.
> > I think the choice between the two is format dependent.
>
> If you have an AM model, send me one for free and I'll give
> an official unbiased opinion
>
No problem, contact me off list!
> doesn't
> > have anywhere near the level of HF that the turbo or DSPX
> > does so you can't really compare what HF is cleaner
> because
> > the level of HF difference between the two boxes is
> massive.
> > I think the choice between the two is format dependent.
>
> If you have an AM model, send me one for free and I'll give
> an official unbiased opinion
>
No problem, contact me off list!
1
1290wgli
Guest
> Mike,
>
> The Omnia allows the user to adjust the operation of the
> limiters across the preemphasis curve, whereas the other
> product does not. That being said, Omnia's preemphasis
> management falls into the hands of the user, if they so
> choose, and dependent upon user settings, will dictate sound
> performance. The range can be "dull-n-boring" to
> "in-your-face," with plenty of variance in between.
I have just always preferred Orban's management of pre-emphasis, from the 8100 up, it was always their strongest suit (IMHO). While their method has more often been "we know better, so we give you less control", I feel their HF limiters are usually best set to factory recommendations and they're usually right there. Just my opinion.
The DSP-X does allow you to control for 2 bands of midrange and HF RMS and Peak limiting as well as threshold controls for HF clipping and a midrange clip control. There is also an HF limit/clip tradeoff to further tailor your highs and release delay controls to make the highs sound more natural on excessive energy (or as busy as you want 'em). If you have a test box, I would suggest V2.6 to evaluate. Like your Turbo software, "it makes life sound easier" (can I trademark that slogan?).
I do like the fact, if I am correct, that Omnia doesn't allow its limiters to be slaves to pre-emphasis, yeilding more predictable sound out of the limiters. But with the O3 Turbo (not the bigger boxes), I have found that voice and some music can tear the highs on occasion, not gross tearing, just a matter of the texture of the highs, something most listeners probably would not hear and you have to be listening for it. These are problems I have not encountered with the Orban or DSP-X. And while the DSP-X does sound cleaner, it took alot of fiddling itself to get that clean (and had tradeoffs) in previous versions BUT is a little easier now.
>
> I have done plenty of A/B comparisons with the products
> mentioned here, and have been able to provide better
> consistency (overall & HF), quality, and loudness with the
> Omnia.3 turbo. We also have plenty of customer feedback from
> the field that supports this claim.
There is no doubt, which is why your box is on many marquee stations. You've spent many hours with your processors making sure they are fit for prime time. I too am proud of the contributions I have made towards the processors I have worked with (I don't even want to start recalling how many listening hours I have logged over the past 2 years and 3 months). While this box is not on as many stations, I strongly feel it is something that should be evaluated, especially if you have not heard it with recent upgrades. Some may find what I hear, others may not and that is fair.
>
> I do agree with you regarding processing subjectivity. It's
> all in how the application is applied. Naturally, your own
> mileage may vary.
I get 33MPG, how about you (mostly highway in a Ford... 50 miles to work each day)
>
> The Omnia allows the user to adjust the operation of the
> limiters across the preemphasis curve, whereas the other
> product does not. That being said, Omnia's preemphasis
> management falls into the hands of the user, if they so
> choose, and dependent upon user settings, will dictate sound
> performance. The range can be "dull-n-boring" to
> "in-your-face," with plenty of variance in between.
I have just always preferred Orban's management of pre-emphasis, from the 8100 up, it was always their strongest suit (IMHO). While their method has more often been "we know better, so we give you less control", I feel their HF limiters are usually best set to factory recommendations and they're usually right there. Just my opinion.
The DSP-X does allow you to control for 2 bands of midrange and HF RMS and Peak limiting as well as threshold controls for HF clipping and a midrange clip control. There is also an HF limit/clip tradeoff to further tailor your highs and release delay controls to make the highs sound more natural on excessive energy (or as busy as you want 'em). If you have a test box, I would suggest V2.6 to evaluate. Like your Turbo software, "it makes life sound easier" (can I trademark that slogan?).
I do like the fact, if I am correct, that Omnia doesn't allow its limiters to be slaves to pre-emphasis, yeilding more predictable sound out of the limiters. But with the O3 Turbo (not the bigger boxes), I have found that voice and some music can tear the highs on occasion, not gross tearing, just a matter of the texture of the highs, something most listeners probably would not hear and you have to be listening for it. These are problems I have not encountered with the Orban or DSP-X. And while the DSP-X does sound cleaner, it took alot of fiddling itself to get that clean (and had tradeoffs) in previous versions BUT is a little easier now.
>
> I have done plenty of A/B comparisons with the products
> mentioned here, and have been able to provide better
> consistency (overall & HF), quality, and loudness with the
> Omnia.3 turbo. We also have plenty of customer feedback from
> the field that supports this claim.
There is no doubt, which is why your box is on many marquee stations. You've spent many hours with your processors making sure they are fit for prime time. I too am proud of the contributions I have made towards the processors I have worked with (I don't even want to start recalling how many listening hours I have logged over the past 2 years and 3 months). While this box is not on as many stations, I strongly feel it is something that should be evaluated, especially if you have not heard it with recent upgrades. Some may find what I hear, others may not and that is fair.
>
> I do agree with you regarding processing subjectivity. It's
> all in how the application is applied. Naturally, your own
> mileage may vary.
I get 33MPG, how about you (mostly highway in a Ford... 50 miles to work each day)
R
RadioDoc
Guest
> We are all here as guests and I like others will have to
> respect the house rules if we want to be here.
>
> I can't speak for others but I will try and refrain from
> getting too commercial, on any products, mine or otherwise.
> I hope you will allow a little mentioning of product names
> here and there if the topic requires it.
>
> It must be hard being a full time moderator and i think i
> can speak on the behalf of everyone here when i say that it
> is apprecaited and keep up the good work.
>
> Best regards
> Scott
>
Thanks for your understanding, it's appreciated!
Believe me, you are more than welcome to talk about the features and names of your products any time. I appreciate you and Frank Foti coming around and sharing information about your processors, even when it comes to defending them! The goal is to not cross the line into using the site as a vehicle to directly sell a product. As a rule, we like to feel that we give you quite a bit of leeway in product promotion. After all, we all like talking about processing, and new processing toys!
Again, thanks for understanding!<P ID="signature">______________
</P>
> respect the house rules if we want to be here.
>
> I can't speak for others but I will try and refrain from
> getting too commercial, on any products, mine or otherwise.
> I hope you will allow a little mentioning of product names
> here and there if the topic requires it.
>
> It must be hard being a full time moderator and i think i
> can speak on the behalf of everyone here when i say that it
> is apprecaited and keep up the good work.
>
> Best regards
> Scott
>
Thanks for your understanding, it's appreciated!
Believe me, you are more than welcome to talk about the features and names of your products any time. I appreciate you and Frank Foti coming around and sharing information about your processors, even when it comes to defending them! The goal is to not cross the line into using the site as a vehicle to directly sell a product. As a rule, we like to feel that we give you quite a bit of leeway in product promotion. After all, we all like talking about processing, and new processing toys!
Again, thanks for understanding!<P ID="signature">______________
</P>
K
KT
Guest
I posted the questions and just got around to seeing what you said, great information. Thanks for all of the input and thanks to the moderators for doing a great job!
I think I'll order me a processor now!
KT
I think I'll order me a processor now!
KT
- Status