310 was mike dorrough's box,1st multiband processor early 70's.610 came along around the mid 80's.It was fierce and made a radio jump out of the dash.Several mod's done thru the years.Greg from Orban had the 2nd multiband processor,had killer bass.As the song goes "those were the days my friend".
-
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
Sound Solutions Processor
- Thread starter elchupacabras
- Start date
liradioprez said:
Likewise, the AGC built into Zara (free version) automation is atrocious. Exhibits sucking, pumping, ducking and every bad behavior imaginable. Sounds bad straight off the computer and even worse on-the-air.
Love it for automation, but the built in AGC is not even a toy, it's worse than nothing.
Just bought a big VU meter with the bridge rectifier and cap still on it for 5.95 in a junk bin.
50 mfd, 50v filter cap...wonder what it's out of, it's nice but clearly a "cheapie" not a reference-quality meter.
I built a meter into my modulator way back, but never got around to making it active. It as much prettier than this VU,
it's a 1930's unit with beautiful deco styling and numbers on the scale. I guess this is a fine time to get around to
making it really work. Maybe I'll hang the new unit off the air monitor.
My line levels though the ART processor run at -15db, so the meters on that are useless.
There's a LOT of audio gain in the modulator, I'll need to tap it somewhere after the 2 6SN7 audio stages to get the real picture.
I don’t understand why Orban, Foti or any of the big boys won’t release a “software” version of there multiband boxed processors. Outside of the Sound Solution crap or MBL/Sonos there really isn’t a decent multiband software package out there. I know I personally would be interested in the software and I’m sure others would be also.
http://www.claessonedwards.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=47&Itemid=55
How about $ 199.00. download it free and try it.you will be amazed. better yet you can build a little computer under $ 300.00 and have your own processor in a box.card or chip should be able to handle 192 sample rate. For under $ 500.00 you'll have one "big dog" processor.
How about $ 199.00. download it free and try it.you will be amazed. better yet you can build a little computer under $ 300.00 and have your own processor in a box.card or chip should be able to handle 192 sample rate. For under $ 500.00 you'll have one "big dog" processor.
yeah, I gotta agree with oldiesstation, BB ranks among the best audio processors I've ever heard. I'd either take an Omnia 6, or Breakaway, seriously!
Particularly when Breakaway releases a full control version. For our purposes, we need an AES in/out soundcard...driving up the price of the box a bit...but still...to get $13,000 of performance for that cheap is just brilliant.
Particularly when Breakaway releases a full control version. For our purposes, we need an AES in/out soundcard...driving up the price of the box a bit...but still...to get $13,000 of performance for that cheap is just brilliant.
mp3RadioGuy said:
I can't speak for the aforementioned names but if you will excuse me the liberty of being considered as a contender for "any of the big boys" then I would like you to consider my answer to your question.
1. It will be cracked. the Intellectual property (IP), or the software is what makes these companies, not colour displays on nice front panels. Think of a hardware processor as the ultimate dongle around that intellectual property.
2. It's harder to command four and five figure sums for software and those figures need to be charged in order to provide first class support of the products and to aid in the development of existing and new products.
3. It's harder to make something mission critical when you are not in control of the hardware. These companies charge the money they do because they have built hardware and software that you can rely on.
I know that many enthusiasts and engineers on this board rave about breakaway and other software processors but find me a CE in charge of a major market network station who will put his neck on the line by trusting windows on a remote transmitter site to keep the radio station on the air (and him or her in a job). I'm not knocking software processors because all digital processors are just that. However, outside of a lab or enthusiast enviroment it's hard to draw a comparison between a dedicated hardware solution and a piece of software running on windows and any old PC.
But I concede that current types of audio processors will run on PC variants in the future. The leading edge products will always run on custom hardware because the PC archtechture and off the shelf plug in cards won't be mature enough at the point of release of the leading edge product. Take the Orban 8585 as an example, try and spec the IO and connections it has on its rear panel on a PC, no matter what off the shelf cards you decide to add into the chassis.
Have a great weekend guys and girls.
O
OttoM
Guest
dspxscott said:
Scott, I know you work for one of those "hardware" processor companies so you might be accused of being biased, but I have to say I totally agree with you.
For streaming or playing around at home with your Ramsey FM25B, a PC app is perfectly suitable (yes, even the vaunted-on-this-board BBP fits here too). But no sensible CE - big market or small market - is going to risk their station's revenue stream by putting it in their audio chain. Period.
Even as a raving BBP fan, I agree with all the comments regarding hardware-box dedicated function reliability.
Not that I don't trust BBP, I wouldn't trust Microsoft or windows enough with a mission-critical app like commercial radio.
If we were still in the days of a dedicated engineer-per-station, it might be acceptable.
Printing press manufacturers do not use PC based systems for press motion control because it would risk life, limb, and property.
By the time you went to the trouble of setting up dual audio processing PCs, silence detector w/ auto switchover to the other PC, you might as well buy a hardware based box, which "cannot" get confused.
And if your PC got tripped up by a Microsoft error or "upgrade incompatibility" the other machine would likely be just as busted.
There is no substitute for the reliability of dedicated hardware. ( And the real-time result )
Not that I don't trust BBP, I wouldn't trust Microsoft or windows enough with a mission-critical app like commercial radio.
If we were still in the days of a dedicated engineer-per-station, it might be acceptable.
Printing press manufacturers do not use PC based systems for press motion control because it would risk life, limb, and property.
By the time you went to the trouble of setting up dual audio processing PCs, silence detector w/ auto switchover to the other PC, you might as well buy a hardware based box, which "cannot" get confused.
And if your PC got tripped up by a Microsoft error or "upgrade incompatibility" the other machine would likely be just as busted.
There is no substitute for the reliability of dedicated hardware. ( And the real-time result )
Quick show of hands... How many run a daypart 9overnight being the most likely) using any of the top program automation systems - Scott Studios/Maestro/Google, or ENCO or Prohpet or iMedia, or.....
Are you not betting the farm on a windows box running your radio station? Uh, yep, you are. Revenue stream and all.
Are you not betting the farm on a windows box running your radio station? Uh, yep, you are. Revenue stream and all.
CHIME in there littlejohn.Hell hardware boxes crash ,too.power supplies, fans,motherboards, etc.That's why it's best to have backups.In dsp processing the best code wins.I'm sure BBP is looking at the situation in the long haul,if you get my drift.I know stations in top 20 markets that are testing it.You can build a good box,use embedded xp on a flash drive.Remember the days of the home brewed processors found at quite a few am's.( the secret black box).....Bet little john does.
In all fairness, the dedicated boxes will reboot a lot faster than the generic windows/linux/DOS/whatever with an app on top. And, they tend to have more horsepower for the task at hand.
I suspect Scott's analysis has a lot to do with the situation though. They all get cracked but software in a generci box is a lot easier to crack than a box of DSPs and PALs with paper labels on top. As long as the cost of equipment and time to crack exceeds the cost of the box, why bother?
Likewise, even of the manufacturer uses a generic PC motherboard, if he uses a 'blessed' one he has some confidence that it will perform; and that he can support it in the field.
I suspect Scott's analysis has a lot to do with the situation though. They all get cracked but software in a generci box is a lot easier to crack than a box of DSPs and PALs with paper labels on top. As long as the cost of equipment and time to crack exceeds the cost of the box, why bother?
Likewise, even of the manufacturer uses a generic PC motherboard, if he uses a 'blessed' one he has some confidence that it will perform; and that he can support it in the field.
It's not a matter of a computer being as or as not as reliable as a hardware box....it's just human nature:
people resist change
:-*
A dual core intel machine, ASUS motherboard, Crucial memory, SSD HD, AES in/out soundcard...in a well ventilated box, with good ventilation in the shack, clean cool air, and a good ups? Eh...i'm good with it !!!!
I've sent omnias orbans and aphexes all back to their factories and been without a box up to 7-14 days.
I can repair MOST computer failures quickly by myself, if I have the parts...I just don't see the reliability issue.
people resist change
:-*
A dual core intel machine, ASUS motherboard, Crucial memory, SSD HD, AES in/out soundcard...in a well ventilated box, with good ventilation in the shack, clean cool air, and a good ups? Eh...i'm good with it !!!!
I've sent omnias orbans and aphexes all back to their factories and been without a box up to 7-14 days.
I can repair MOST computer failures quickly by myself, if I have the parts...I just don't see the reliability issue.
Howdy! Thought I'd chime in 
.
Dedicated boxes indeed usually boot faster. How much faster, though? I've successfully set up a Windows XP Embedded system, booting off a $10 flash drive (using the enhanced write filter), power-on to passing audio = under 40 seconds.
The claim that dedicated boxes tend to have more horsepower is patently false. A Core 2 Quad CPU can be had for $170 and packs an *insane* amount of power for audio processing (provided you know how to write good code.) In fact, I currently don't know what to do with that much power. BBP uses just 11% on a Q6600 Quad Core CPU in full mode, and it's a *very* complex algorithm.
It did use to be true that computers were too slow for audio processing, and DSPs were the only route, but it's been a long time now. Pentium 4 changed all that.
Setting up two dedicated BBP systems with some kind of auto failover, provided you don't go nuts on the sound card, should still be significantly less expensive than even a Mini or a One. You don't need a quad core to run it -- the lowest of the low end single core Celerons currently available for desktops (Celeron 430) is enough. A celeron 430 is $39.99. For ten measly bucks extra you get a dual core 2 GHz celeron (E1400), which doesn't even break a sweat running BBP (35% load or so).
Sgeirk has a good point too. You can get a computer repaired *anywhere*. You can buy a new box *anywhere*, and they're so inexpensive that you can have a backup practically for peanuts.
I don't agree about ASUS boards though. They're alright, but their model life cycle is WAY too fast. They have almost 100 different boards just for Socket 775! At Linear Acoustic we've had good experiences with MSI boards. Nice, stable, not expensive.
Oh, speaking of LinAc -- Goran made a reference to the I/O connectivity on the 8585.1 as being unachievable with a PC motherboard. Not so -- we've used PC motherboards for years, with completely custom case and I/O boards. We still retain the huge advantage of being able to develop on x86 (development cycles of days, not months), while still being able to offer rock solid hardware to customers.
People do resist change. It takes a dramatic improvement for people to stray from the beaten path. No sense in sticking your neck out if there's no benefit. Well, if you're looking for good sound, and you're ready to take the plunge, look no further than http://claessonedwards.com
Best,
///Leif
.Dedicated boxes indeed usually boot faster. How much faster, though? I've successfully set up a Windows XP Embedded system, booting off a $10 flash drive (using the enhanced write filter), power-on to passing audio = under 40 seconds.
The claim that dedicated boxes tend to have more horsepower is patently false. A Core 2 Quad CPU can be had for $170 and packs an *insane* amount of power for audio processing (provided you know how to write good code.) In fact, I currently don't know what to do with that much power. BBP uses just 11% on a Q6600 Quad Core CPU in full mode, and it's a *very* complex algorithm.
It did use to be true that computers were too slow for audio processing, and DSPs were the only route, but it's been a long time now. Pentium 4 changed all that.
Setting up two dedicated BBP systems with some kind of auto failover, provided you don't go nuts on the sound card, should still be significantly less expensive than even a Mini or a One. You don't need a quad core to run it -- the lowest of the low end single core Celerons currently available for desktops (Celeron 430) is enough. A celeron 430 is $39.99. For ten measly bucks extra you get a dual core 2 GHz celeron (E1400), which doesn't even break a sweat running BBP (35% load or so).
Sgeirk has a good point too. You can get a computer repaired *anywhere*. You can buy a new box *anywhere*, and they're so inexpensive that you can have a backup practically for peanuts.
I don't agree about ASUS boards though. They're alright, but their model life cycle is WAY too fast. They have almost 100 different boards just for Socket 775! At Linear Acoustic we've had good experiences with MSI boards. Nice, stable, not expensive.
Oh, speaking of LinAc -- Goran made a reference to the I/O connectivity on the 8585.1 as being unachievable with a PC motherboard. Not so -- we've used PC motherboards for years, with completely custom case and I/O boards. We still retain the huge advantage of being able to develop on x86 (development cycles of days, not months), while still being able to offer rock solid hardware to customers.
People do resist change. It takes a dramatic improvement for people to stray from the beaten path. No sense in sticking your neck out if there's no benefit. Well, if you're looking for good sound, and you're ready to take the plunge, look no further than http://claessonedwards.com
Best,
///Leif
Now I got to go back and time one... I think I get audio outa my 6EXis somewhat under 40 seconds at a reboot.
As for reliability, the best I've seen personally was an ENCO DOS system we ran on Novell SFT III boxes. The virtual server ran for something over 4 years without an upset. In that time, I think we replaced every cojmponent on both hardware boxes at one time or another. And they used ARCNet (!) to tie the two boxes toghether. My experience in reliability as we progress is that it has to a large degree progressed backwards. Oh well.....
As for reliability, the best I've seen personally was an ENCO DOS system we ran on Novell SFT III boxes. The virtual server ran for something over 4 years without an upset. In that time, I think we replaced every cojmponent on both hardware boxes at one time or another. And they used ARCNet (!) to tie the two boxes toghether. My experience in reliability as we progress is that it has to a large degree progressed backwards. Oh well.....
konbaasiang said:Well, if you're looking for good sound, and you're ready to take the plunge, look no further than http://claessonedwards.com
I can't speak for the quality of your product but your ego is tip-top!
I trust my ears, Radioengr!
///Leif
///Leif
Radioeng,download the software,then you will be able to speak for the quality as well.It is tip-top, as you say.GOT EARS?
- Status