• 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

Sta-Level vs. Audimax follow up question

B

Bitman

Guest
First off, thanks for the responses! As is often the case, the more information you have, the more confusing it gets. So, in answer to TowerLamp, I'd rather have an actual processor as opposed to a sound card since I change computers like I change socks (don't ask) and I just like having the toys around. Now, keep in mind I'm a jock, not an engineer. I'm trying to figure out all the terminology. So there's limiting and gain control. Now, to me that sounds like the same thing. Both keep the level from going past a certain point, no? Then there are audio levelers and compressors. Both keep the audio levels within designated parameters, no? I have a line on an Audimax 3, but then there's the Sta-Level and Urei, ADL and sheesh I'm confused. So, aside from clarifying the aforementioned terms, what's going to give me that big, bad 60's AM Top 40 sound?

Thanks again, guys!

David
 
Bitman said:
First off, thanks for the responses! As is often the case, the more information you have, the more confusing it gets. So, in answer to TowerLamp, I'd rather have an actual processor as opposed to a sound card since I change computers like I change socks (don't ask) and I just like having the toys around. Now, keep in mind I'm a jock, not an engineer. I'm trying to figure out all the terminology. So there's limiting and gain control. Now, to me that sounds like the same thing. Both keep the level from going past a certain point, no? Then there are audio levelers and compressors. Both keep the audio levels within designated parameters, no? I have a line on an Audimax 3, but then there's the Sta-Level and Urei, ADL and sheesh I'm confused. So, aside from clarifying the aforementioned terms, what's going to give me that big, bad 60's AM Top 40 sound?

Thanks again, guys!

David
Click to expand...

You're entering the realm of subjective judgment here. But suffice to say, for better or worse, 60s processing was a resultant combination of engineering know-how, the legal requirements of the time, the idiosyncrasies of the available technology and of course, blind luck. ;)

From an elementary standpoint, processing was intended to prevent overmodulation and to maintain consistent audible level.
As they were considered separate issues at the time, CBS Labs developed the Audimax to control long-term consistency, and the Volumax for the modulation control. To a large degree, both units are similar in that they altered the dynamics of the incoming audio. Their differences (and this applies to any processor) is how nonlinearities are applied, and the timing of them.

The competing manufacturers were similarly developing separate function processors: consistency machines like the Sta-Level, and modulation control tools as with the Collins 26U-1.

Your particular requirements are probably more for the sound they created, which at the time was merely a side effect that we grew to love. So your use veers away a bit from the design intent.

As a result, you have more freedom in what you can do, never mind infinitely more choices than the engineers of forty years ago. As you have noted, the freedom is in some ways a curse, because you have SO many choices!

Look at it this way: there is no wrong choice. If you like it, it's good.
:)

Kind Regards,
David
 
David Reaves said:
Look at it this way: there is no wrong choice. If you like it, it's good.
Click to expand...

I have to disagree. If a particular choice of processing causes loss of audience share, then it's objectively a wrong choice. Unlike consumer audio systems, on-air processing is not just about the preference of a few people at the station level.
 
rorban said:
David Reaves said:
Look at it this way: there is no wrong choice. If you like it, it's good.
Click to expand...

I have to disagree. If a particular choice of processing causes loss of audience share, then it's objectively a wrong choice. Unlike consumer audio systems, on-air processing is not just about the preference of a few people at the station level.
Click to expand...


In this particular case, keep in mind Bitman is looking for a 'sound,' so his subjectivity will HAVE to be a part of the picture! HE will have to decide, and until he gets a ratings return he won't know conclusively if what he does is working or not. It's a bit of a chicken and egg scenario, hence my paraphrasing of Joe Meek's alleged "if it sounds good, it is good" statement.

Anyway, Bitman, I'm really not sure how you could go too far wrong using either a Sta-Level or an Audimax, or a DSP approximation of something similar. I mean, it's not as though there's clipping or other intentional distortion involved. ;) Either choice has its downsides and upsides. If using original hardware, success (however you would quantify it) would probably depend as much upon the condition of the unit as it would the original sound that either created. Hopefully we can all agree upon that point.


Kind Regards,
David
 
Interesting. Bob & Dave have valid points. But on the down side, there''s reliablity issues of pressing a 30-40-50 year old piece of equipment into daily service. Then there's parts...the one tube in the Sta-Level is now so exotic, used ones are going for a hundred $.

You can recreated that "sound", with massive improvements with one of Bob's Optimods. They can be adjusted, with patience, to meet your needs and programming, or to sound like anything, plus eq. And one added bonus, their bulletproof reliablity.

Most of those CBS units at most stations were never set right anyway. They, depending how hard the jock rode gain, would pump and suck and punch holes in the bassline, offering tune-outs with listener fatigue. The one unit was an audio expander, leveler if you will, and helped bring up soft passeges of music without riding gain. The second limited the peaks. There is a matching third unit called the CBS Dynamic Equalizer, which was a mid band limiter, cutting the sound on hollow, thin records and AT&T Long Line Network feeds. We used all three at WFPG-AM in Atlantic City, and they worked well, till the caps started to fade. Those units were obsolete with the DAP tri-band processor. The Optimod took it several steps further. You really have to work hard at making an Optimod or Omnia sound bad...but there's always g.i.g.o.

In my opinion, go modern to sound retro.
 
Status
This thread has been closed due to inactivity. You can create a new thread to discuss this topic.


Back
Top Bottom