Processing clips

[kevtronics]

Phaser,

Considering that Broadcast's audio samples clearly have the best quality, I don't think you should be disputing the accuracy of his recordings.

 

[Info-warrior]

I totally grasp Mr. Foti's point about not making processor choices for your station based on internet samples. However, and I mean no disrespect, as Mr. Foti is a lot smarter than I am, if you can't get any idea of how good something is from a recording, than no one should make judgements about an artist's, or an engineer's abilities or lack of based on a recording.

You might say that's just silly, but it's really the same thing when you stop and think about it.

Phaser made some good points about tuner variables. However, consumers are going to judge the sound of radio stations using many of those cheaply made tuners, so if anything, using one levels the field a bit. It's likely that all the big makers of audio processors gauge the performance of their products using tuners ranging from cheap to expensive.

Mr. Foti's point about this thread getting out of hand is well taken and noted.

I'd love to personally audition much of this equipment, though, as a hobbiest, I'll likely never do so. So I have to settle for the next best thing i.e. well made recordings.

Just to show that I do take all those concerns seriously, I had a Pioneer tuner that made my setup sound duller than other stations. It annoyed me such that I though something was defective in the transmitter, but then I listened on several different radios,sure enough, the high end was there and some of the stations that sounded alright on the Pioneer were much brighter than I was used to.

Omnia, Orban, and all the rest, keep up the good work because we need new products to yack about.

 

[RadioFixerCLE]

Phaser made some good points about tuner variables. However, consumers are going to judge the sound of radio stations using many of those cheaply made tuners, so if anything, using one levels the field a bit. It's likely that all the big makers of audio processors gauge the performance of their products using tuners ranging from cheap to expensive.

That's an excellent point. My experience with a lot of the newer boomboxes on the market is that the sound seems like it's missing something. Just yesterday I was in a store trying out a couple of these -- one being a JVC, whose produts usually sounded nice back in the old days. It seemed like there was plenty high-end and some noticeable low end, but there was no presence. Like the mids had been totally eliminated.

At least that's the sound I can mimic using the 5-band EQ on my old ghetto blaster, if I turn down the 1 and 3.3 khz sliders all the way down. :-\

It's always a good idea to find out how your station sounds on common cheap-crud radios and then process accordingly to make it sound acceptable on those things.

 

[dspxscott]

Hi Kevin
Can you explain your reasoning behind your last sentence. hmmmm.

Your own posting to this board explaining that the AM versions of the DSPX / DSPXmini were put on hold to develop the DSPXtreme-FM....

But you did not say that. You said BW dropped everything for the Xtreme. We have been involved in multiple projects outside of audio processing and to make out that we have been spending our efforts solely on the Xtreme is far from the truth. If anyone has any questions as to what BW is working on and a timetable for developments on new and existing products they should ask and I will do my best to keep you all up to date.

thanks

 

[kevtronics]

But you did not say that. You said BW dropped everything for the Xtreme. We have been involved in multiple projects outside of audio processing and to make out that we have been spending our efforts solely on the Xtreme is far from the truth. If anyone has any questions as to what BW is working on and a timetable for developments on new and existing products they should ask and I will do my best to keep you all up to date.

thanks

Since this is a thread about processing, I was speaking only in terms of BW's audio processing products... which would consist of the DSPX range. Sorry if I gave an incorrect impression.

 

[wgliradio]

Perhaps the fact that the DSPX is only used for processing a Classical music station in New York City is an indication that it isn't quite up to snuff by "major-market" standards... thus also explaining why the BW folks basically dropped everything to rush the DSPXtreme to market!

Processing Classical music is easy? Do you realize how difficult it is to be able to keep the audio above a certain threshold so that you don't hear multipath/car noise while at the same time maintain some sort of dial presence and consistancy within non classical elements without pissing off audiophiles? Not easy.

The DSP-X added 3-4dB of loudness over the previous analog airchain without any complaints. I can match my Omnia ONE point to point with my DSP-X (which I have played with since it was beta hardware) as far as loudness/quality goes (each has a slightly different sonic texture) and I know both boxes stand up to even more expensive boxes when adjusted properly.

 

[The F Mister]

I'm with info-warrior. I find it sad that this topic becomes something else than what it was intended. Just good fun and not judging boxes solely on a sample recorded by someone using something with x setting using y source and z soundcard and I said this before IIRC. I think some of us are taking this to serious. Because of this the company's of these boxes chime in to emphasize again and again not to judge their boxes based on these samples but try it hands on. I totally understand this but as info-warrior said an this also applies to me, we don't have the opportunity to check out every box as enthusiast so exchanging samples is indeed the next best thing just to get a feel of how someone set up his particularly box. Now we are listening to various models from several companies, what's next? Bob Orban saying that someone using a custom preset of his 8200 that doesn't seem to hold up against other 8200 samples so he should be using only factory presets? Because what if someone would judge the 8200 based on this bad example........ Somebody seriously on the lookout for a new box isn't coming here, and the people here are well enough in the matter to make the right decision and have his own shoot-out with different boxes hands on! As long as everybody is posting their comments as personal opinions I don't see the problem why we should't have some fun.

If we would all just go back to the main engineering topic and have a good look at what is in front of the name of this topic.

 

[RadioFixerCLE]

Processing Classical music is easy? Do you realize how difficult it is to be able to keep the audio above a certain threshold so that you don't hear multipath/car noise while at the same time maintain some sort of dial presence and consistancy within non classical elements without pissing off audiophiles? Not easy.

And even with what's been done, it can still be difficult listening to that station in a noisy environment like a stock room. But if you process it even louder, you'd mush up the music as you said. :-\

 

[FFoti1]

Somebody seriously on the lookout for a new box isn't coming here, and the people here are well enough in the matter to make the right decision and have his own shoot-out with different boxes hands on! As long as everybody is posting their comments as personal opinions I don't see the problem why we should't have some fun.

You don't know whether or not someone is reading this thread for fun. They may stumble across and read these posts as if they are factual claims about the various products discussed.

Thus far, this thread has been complaining about one processed sample against another. Factor in all the variables I mentioned recently, and that stirs the pot.

If you guys want to do this for 'fun,' then find a hobbyist list-serve and move it there.

-Frank Foti

 

[The F Mister]

Come on Frank do you seriously think that they still would with all this arguing throughout this thread? I stumbled on this thread while browsing for a new box. I never heard of DSPX before and I red both positive as negative personal posts so I did the next wise thing, looked for a dealer in the Netherlands and went to him for a hands on experience. And bought the box, don't see how this affected Scott in a bad way. And I can feel your reply coming "That's how you did it". but I don't think I'm that special in my approach.

 

[FFoti1]

Come on Frank do you seriously think that they still would with all this arguing throughout this thread?

Yes!

We live in a world today, were pessimism reigns. Driven by the media, culture now dictates that if a life experience yields 9 positive elements out of a possible 10, we must overly focus on the one negative. Instead of realizing the 9 to the good, culture magnifies the one negative as being larger than the other 9. By example, look at the political arena here in the USA.

I have studied this, and sadly, must report that our world, mostly driven by American culture, has proven this to be true.

-Frank Foti

 

[rrsounds]

I remember many, many moons ago when I was CE at Z100, being invited into the PD (Steve Kingston's) office, and being played a cassette tape of some unknown station, and then being asked "can you make us sound like this?"

Some posts on this thread remind me very much of that episode. There were no points of reference, nothing to go by other than the subjective qualities of the sound I was played. It didn't matter whether it sounded good or bad, nicely processed or not, the point is that I had no way of really knowing the circumstances of the recording, how competitively loud it was on the air or a multitude of other variables...

So I guess, to a very large degree, I'm with Frank.

On the other hand I myself can't seriously imagine that anyone would make a purchase based upon hearing a downloaded sound file purported to be of a product, adjusted by someone else, with program material they may not be familiar with, recorded on unknown equipment.

Yeah, it's better than comparing cassette tapes, but by how much it's not fair to say...

While I have kept up with this thread from the beginning and I do read it every few days, I have yet to listen to any of the files. Not because they may not be entertaining (no doubt they probably are!), but because, simply, all the variables make any serious judgment near impossible and any conclusions pretty much irrelevant.

Now, that being said, I am not so steadfast in when it comes to the comparison of recordings of the processing of online streams, rather than received broadcasts.

In that case we are somewhat closer to comparing apples to apples, since it is possible to make a relatively representative copy of what the stream sounds like. But also in that case, it might be more useful (not to mention simpler) to just point us to the address of the stream itself, so we can listen live, for as long as we want.

Kind Regards,
David

 

[BROADCAST]

Hi Phaser,
Regarding my tuner,yes of course i have checked it out.

On my tuner have replaced caps and opamps accordingly,as i have done my various mods on the 8100a/xt2,i would make sure my tuner was as good as possible to the best receive the transmitted audio quality,so the tuner would be audibly transparant as possible.

Regarding Kevin's comments regarding who's recorded quality is best,i leave that to others to judge.

I don't believe that the uploaded clips are a waste of time,far from it.
Next we will be saying that any processor used for testing has to use the same balanced line cable and xlr connectors and the same cd player for a known sonic reference input source,otherwise it is all null and void !!!

 

[kevtronics]

Somebody seriously on the lookout for a new box isn't coming here, and the people here are well enough in the matter to make the right decision and have his own shoot-out with different boxes hands on! As long as everybody is posting their comments as personal opinions I don't see the problem why we should't have some fun.

Frank,

Have you ever knowingly lost a sale just because of what someone (aside from one of your competitors in the industry) said about your products on an online forum or mailing list?

 

[kevtronics]

On the other hand I myself can't seriously imagine that anyone would make a purchase based upon hearing a downloaded sound file purported to be of a product, adjusted by someone else, with program material they may not be familiar with, recorded on unknown equipment.

At least my audio samples are made using a piece of freeware software, so its author isn't losing anything if anyone thinks negatively of it.

In fact, he's probably gaining downloads, from people curious enough to give it a try, regardless if they like how my samples sound or not.

 

[menotti1]

well just like everyone has a favorite football team, i suppose it's the same with processors.still very subjective and alot has to do with great ears in the setup.But ultimately it's the entire air chain that will define your stations sound.
I would never buy one without a demo at my site..wish you all the best for the holidays.

 

[Slawek B.]

On the other hand I myself can't seriously imagine that anyone would make a purchase based upon hearing a downloaded sound file purported to be of a product, adjusted by someone else, with program material they may not be familiar with, recorded on unknown equipment.

At least my audio samples are made using a piece of freeware software, so its author isn't losing anything if anyone thinks negatively of it.

In fact, he's probably gaining downloads, from people curious enough to give it a try, regardless if they like how my samples sound or not.

I agree !

For example - to be honest - I'm not a serious broadcaster. I just came here out of my curiosity since I'm interested in DSP - especially considering broadcasting technology. I had my little web-radio, also tried to build a little transmitter just to check out whether it's possible or not with very little money I had. It's a kind of hobby to me (totally different from what I do for living).

I really admire efforts of anyone trying to make their piece of hardware/software sound best because it's not simple at all. And I think this is most important - it gives you satisfaction. Today there are many sophisticated devices that give you almost unlimited possibilities of adjustment. But on the other hand - it doesn't really matter if you're using a software, 100, 1000 or 10.000 $ hardware box - principles remain the same. For example you don't need a xx.xxx $ hardware box if you just want to check out how it works. In general - every of them does the same thing...

Actually it's pointless to argue how good or bad these devices are - it depends on everybody's taste, skills, experience... and money.

What's more - I bet there are few people, who will really notice any difference in processing between different stations on air (unless it is really bad processed or distorted) It's an art for the art itself for some degree.


Regards from Poland

Slawek B.

 

[Phaser]

Hello Gentlemen sorry for my delay. Kevin and Broadcast sadly I see that you miss the mining of my post NO I don’t “dispute” Broadcast neither other users here (that is not my Goal) each user have his free opinion, but as an outside reader from early start of radio-info.com I believe and insist that this thread has missed the touch with reality (its not coincidence of views with others).

I know very well the tech capabilities and how “blind” passionate the Broadcast is with 8100/xt2 and for that reason I “distinguish” him from others (with exception of Mr Foti, Reaves and Scott which are processing manufactures/ designers) for my example with Fm tuner and because he is the only one that give details about used audio side chain.
Broadcast I don’t have any doubt for the upgrades made on your 8100/xt2, but bad or best sound is “subjective” and “under psychoacoustic considerations” also that answer “Regarding Kevin's comments regarding who's recorded quality is “best”, I leave that to others to judge” seems to me an “childish expression” rather than from a “mature” person, any way isn’t that “who's recorded quality is “best” the reason to read that thread, I hate the phrase the “BEST” 1) because dynamic processing is under well known “major subjective factor” and 2) because “BEST” it cant exist but only in our “childish” head. By the way Tina Arena “Chains” track which choose for your tests are full of heavy distortion especially at fortissimo of song, did nobody notice it that?

Broadcast that you say “Next WE will be saying that any processor used for testing has to use the same balanced line cable and xlr connectors” I suppose that “WE” concern yours audio samples and not others audio.

Info-warrior says “consumers are going to judge the sound of radio stations using many of those cheaply made tuners” I don’t think that common/massive radio listeners care so much if the station which host their loving DJ presenter have that expensive processing unit on air even badly they don’t give a dime how sounds, they only listen his favourite DJ presenter. Only I am try to say that, majority of listener’s that they wants from a radio station is a real “product” and NOT “fancy processing tricks”.

Here are the best opinions/users which catch the mining of my first post.
The F Mister says “we don't have the opportunity to check out every box as enthusiast so exchanging samples is indeed the next best thing just to get a feel of how someone set up his particularly box, I don't see the problem why we shouldn’t have some fun” I am totally agreed with you F Mister, Because you are very honest.

menotti1 says “just like everyone has a favourite football team, I suppose it's the same with processors. Still very subjective and a lot has to do with great ears in the setup. But ultimately it's the entire air chain that will define your stations sound”
that guy have absolutely right as well the Slawek B. “Actually it's pointless to argue how good or bad these devices are - it depends on everybody's taste, skills, experience... and money”

Gentlemen, instead of argle-bargle and exaggerate Super EGO - my upgraded box is better from yours etc blaa(-blaa) you better try to fight/reverse the bad situation now days with Hyper-Processed CD, that is the #1 enemy for any processor, artist, music in general, everybody talk like an expert on processing (except manufactures around here) if so why NO one make even a small mention on that awfully situation, hey!! For good sake how make your fine tune with almost distorted, clipped – severe flat tops – audio sources? How judge so easily processing boxes with such bad audio sources mp3 etc and after that put your opinions here so easily? And don’t say now that all use only 80’s- early 90’s recordings for setting up!! If so then you are out of reality, I am sure you don’t listen on principles of music and how treat on it that or this box but on how react the examine unit on each track, with few words you don’t listen with ears but with eyes. I hope stop to act “childish” and do something more usefully for all of us except if you only want to “have some fun here”. Sorry if be annoying some how but this is the real life as mentioned by Mr Foti.

Thanks a lot.
Best regards and greetings to all from Athens GR.
Phaser

 

[BROADCAST]

Hi Phaser,
I used the word "we" as a general term meaning anyone that has uploaded any audio files,not just mine!

The reason for my information regarding how i recorded the tracks was to "make people aware" the method of how i did it.

Anyway i think we should get back to the main reason for the uploads,that being Goran asked for recordings from stations/processors.

 

[kevtronics]

By the way Tina Arena ?Chains? track which choose for your tests are full of heavy distortion especially at fortissimo of song, did nobody notice it that?

That's what makes it a good test track... the song itself (in original form) is right on the edge of audible distortion, so it takes careful skill to process it without exaggerating that distortion and making it annoying to the listener.