manuals | software | brochures

YOU CAN’T USE JUST ANY PROCESSOR TO DO THE JOB OF AN OMNIA.

A question was posed to Frank Foti, a few years ago, by an editor of the trade press. The proverbial, "where does Omnia go from here?" Frank’s reply was simple, "Our next offering must restore quality back into the on-air signal, while maintaining competitive texture." Easier said than done. Yet once again, he and his team have delivered!

Omnia.11 is not just the next step forward from our prior offerings. We took our platform, stripped it down beyond the bare walls and built a fortress. Everything from the firmware platform, the GUI, to every algorithm was re-thought, and in most cases re-engineered or re-designed. The signature Omnia sound was kept intact, while the level of perceivable quality has noticeably improved.

The firmware in Omnia.11 takes advantage of software resources never before available for this calibre of product. The results are dynamics algorithms that were once a pipe dream of the processing enthusiast. Instead of making all the cliched claims about how much better it sounds than such-n-such box (we’ll leave those for others to make) you will hear how Omnia.11 is more revealing... period.

OMNIA.11 TECH OVERVIEW

Chameleon Processing Technology

AGC’s, Compressors, and Limiters analyze music in real time and adjust internal parameters for optimum performance across a broad range of material. Listeners will hear the music, not the processor.

A major part of this technology, the new Density Detector, enables Omnia.11 to properly handle hypercompressed content. The AGC system cannot be fooled due to heavy density, or older material that contains high peak-to-average levels. One could almost say, there isn’t a sweet-spot, as the density-detector keeps Omnia.11 operating on-target, at all times.

Ultra- Multiband Limiter System

Limiters have traditionally carried "that bizzy limiter sound". You know, when drums sound like tin cans and detail gets smashed to smithereens. Our new LoIMD technology coupled with smart gain reduction algorithms resets the bar. The limiters now sound amazingly transparent.

All AGC and limiting algorithms employ an auto acceleration/deceleration mechanism, which tunes out perceptible intermodulation distortion. The attack/release functions adjust themselves based upon content density. This breakthrough method literally analyzes the audio content in both the amplitude and frequency domain, then adapts the timing networks - on the fly - to transparently control the signal, without the control being heard. The result is revealed in added detail, clarity, and quality, yet maintaining the desired competitive loudness level.

Needless to say, the improved performance of the AGC and limiter functions generate live voice quality that is truly second to none. We’ll say no more.

Bass Management

Boom-Boom, out go the lights! The bass enhancement algorithm is audio processing’s testosterone. We took our Phat Bass effect and sent it to a health club, resulting in low end physique with no body fat. Full punch, power, and girth, with no nasty side-effects whatsoever. New material, old material, hip-hop, urban, rap, rock, country... you name it, this is HGH (human growth hormone) for processing!

All kidding aside, our new bass-management method is a mixture of innovation, as well as a rearrangement of the system topology. Achieving great sounding bass requires the most effort, partly due to the fact that the bass spectrum has the most number of harmonics, and all of these must be kept properly accounted for in the time domain. Also, any additional spectra created (enhancement) must have its harmonic content managed, or the bass region begins to sound distorted, unnatural, or like someone is suffering from an intestinal disorder! This process requires much more than just fancy EQ, bass clipping/filtering, or any of the prior attempts at bass enhancement. Even the location where the function is inserted matters, as well as how it maintains its frequency range along with the rest of the system. An entire dissertation could be done on the bass enhancement/management system alone. Our classic dynamically flat & time aligned crossover system has been further refined to produce smooth, rich, and full tonality. The AGC and limiter sections cannot be fooled into false gain control due to spectral density (or lack thereof) from the crossover network.

New Ultra LoIMD Distortion Controlled Clipper System

Audio processing for conventional broadcast (FM and AM) has reached extreme levels. Various methods are available today capable of creating LOUD competitive signals, but at the expense of perceptible quality. What causes this, and what can be done - again - to raise the bar? Through critical listening, extensive research, and evaluation of processing methods, it has been determined the single most annoying quotient is due to intermodulation distortion (IMD) induced by aggressive functions within the processing system. The algorithms are pushed to the limits, and beyond. One of the most crucial, aggressively used algorithms in the FM processor is the pre-emphasized final limiter/clipper. We have developed the new Ultra LoIMD Distortion controlled clipper system specifically to reduce IMD in this critical stage of the processing. See the next page for a full explanation of the new Ultra LoIMD clipper system.

For those who feel the need to use it, there’s also a composite clipper embedded in the stereo generator, but thus far, all of our testing has been done without any composite clipping. Pilot protection is on the order of magnitude close to 90 dB, considerably more protection provided than the best FM receiver can recognize! Integrated laboratory-grade stereo generator with dual MPX outputs, 19 kHz reference output for external RDS/RBDS systems and pilot protection that provides >80 dB pilot protection - with or without composite clipping. MPX spectral low-pass filter to protect RDS/RBDS and SCA signals if composite clipping is employed. Adjustability Multiple ways to adjust the system to achieve the exact sound you’re looking for. An installation wizard will guide anyone through a simple step-by-step setup to on-air operation. Using the answers to a series of simple questions, Omnia.11 adapts itself, based upon the answers, to craft a preset which delivers the desired end result quickly for an advanced out of the box experience.

Unprecedented Access

A front panel touch screen GUI, on a 10.5" diagonal screen,provides ease of use and enhanced metering and diagnostics. Remote access is via any web browser, as well as a local onboard WI-FI connection. Laptops to iPads have access!

Livewire, AES/EBU digital and analog I/O is standard. Headphone soft "patch points" are available for listening through the processing chain.

Fanless cooling design built into a rugged 4 RU chassis.

ADDITIONAL FUN STUFF

Diversity-Delay, with ramp-in and ramp-out ability, for smooth transition and alignment of conventional analog to HD-Radio signals.(Max delay is 20 seconds)

ITU-BS-412 MPX limiter.

Dual processing paths for FM and coded audio transmissions.

FEATURE PACKED FUTURE

Optional RDS/RBDS generator.

Optional HD Radio time alignment method.

Optional Third-Party plug-ins for enhanced processing library/toolbox.

Optional ratings encoder and confidence monitor.  We have embedded the ratings encoder where it belongs, in the audio processor.  Just as we initiated the diversity-delay function for HD radio, Omnia innovation leads the way--again--in the broadcast transmission world.  The ratings confidence monitor does more than indicate when the encoder signal is not present.  It can e-mail or text the end-user to alert them of a failure.

• 

  MPX Tool

MPX Tool... a very cool tool developed by Leif Claesson. This embedded application displays the FM multiplex (MPX) signal, peak modulation,pilot level, as well as a preview of the deviated FM carrier. A built-incomplete transmission signal analysis system right at your fingertips! Also currently in development are additional tools to measure quantifiable processing elements like: fatigue, distortion, quality, clipper depth and power in each processing band, along with utilitarian functions to log preset history, and detailed system diagnostics.

ULTRA LoIMD CLIPPER SYSTEM EXPLAINED:

Audio processing for conventional broadcast (FM and AM) has reached extreme levels. Various methods are available today capable of creating LOUD competitive signals, but at the expense of perceptible quality. What causes this, and what can be done - again - to raise the bar?

ON-AIR ANABOLIC STEROIDS

Audio processing is no different today than athletes who take performance enhancing drugs to get an extra edge. A scan across the dial in most markets, around the world, yield radio stations transmitting DC modulation as their means to be the loudest/proudest on-the-air. Some even subscribe to the notion of "more loudness than allowed by law!"

Not to be outdone, the music industry has adopted the same radio mind set producing L-O-U-D CDs that are so heavily processed, they sound as if they’re on-the-air, before being on-the-air. To say we live in a dynamically processed world is an understatement!

Being loud is not the problem. "If it’s too loud, you’re too old" does apply. The problem is the unfriendly annoying artifacts generated by current processing practices used by broadcasters and the music industry. The combination of hyper-compressed content and "I gotta be louder than the other guy" on-air processing, results in audio lacking definition, and quality, while containing perceiving annoyances. It would be easy to say, just back down the processing and all will be OK, except reality, and the psychology of broadcasters suggest differently. We will always have loud radio stations, as long as programming philosophy remains, as it has, ever since Mike Dorrough fathered multiband processing.

The challenge now is how do we put quality back into on-air audio; yet retain the competitive loudness level broadcasters demand?

The path to find the next frontier in processing began with a simple, but somewhat frightening, exercise: careful and extremely critical listening of the status quo. As a developer it requires leaving your own ego at the door and being prepared to face some harsh realities. Suffice it to say, we were about to embark upon a humbling experience.

Having been around the block a few times with respect to loud competitive processing, our own system was setup to simulate any one of a number of well-known major market radio stations. Hot Rockin’ Flame Throwin’applies! Benchmarking was done using stock processing and cranked up presets,along with the use of processors from other manufacturers. The choice of programming content was made up of recent recordings as well as many time-tested segments used over the past twenty-plus years for processing development.

Modern music mastering practices generate content that is noticeably rich in deep bass, presence, and treble. When processed aggressively, especially for FM-Stereo, the resulting audio appears synthetic in tonality and quality. Treble frequencies appear overly bright, and sometimes harsh, even with additional application of dynamic high frequency processing.Bass sounds tight and defined, but depending upon the processor’s spectral limiting system, it can also sound distorted.

Listening to current music, with aggressive processing, produces a distinct annoyance: the appearance of a sizzling or frying sound to midrange, presence, and treble spectra. This was noticeable on all the processors used for evaluation. Reducing the final limiting, or clipping, helped ease the pain. This indicated that the problem is harmonic, related to the clipping process. Significant reduction of clipping removed the annoyance, but the loss of loudness was on the order of 6 dB or more. Not suitable for the needs of competitive audio.

Was this the age-old issue of too much bass forcing the rest of the spectrum into the limiter? This is known as bass induced intermod. At first, it would seem so, but the test segments did not have any bass content,and the frying was still present. Was it in the original source, and the processor was magnifying it via multiband dynamics control? Careful evaluation of the source audio revealed the answer to be no. Seems a new gremlin hath arrived!

By example, this is easily heard in the song "Because Of You" by Kelly Clarkson. The opening of the selection is a piano solo, and the vocalist begins to hum along with the piano, a few seconds later. Present day audio processors, set up aggressively, cause the humming in the vocal to sound as if bacon is being fried! Prior statement not intended for humor, by the way.This was a high rotation song on CHR (Contemporary Hit Radio) formatted radio stations. Since most of those require aggressive processing, this test case replicates the real world. This example is just one of many which illustrate the challenges in current processing technique.

Since the aforementioned bacon frying annoyance was affected by the action of the clipping function, a probe into that algorithm was in order. Most final limiting/clipping systems in modern audio processors employ some form of proprietary means to control perceived distortion. The methods for these vary. While open for subjective discussion, the end result is still the same: absolute peak control is performed and a minimal level of harmonic distortion is acceptable within a specified operating range. Basically, some form of masking method is used to hide the most annoying clipping side effects from the ear. Although, it appears now, we’ve pushed these methods to the point where modern recordings generate distortion annoyances when aggressive processing is used.

For the processing novice, a clipper - by design - will generate harmonics of the fundamental audio frequency. Using a sinewave for an example, if the upper and lower peaks of the waveform are chopped off(clipped), harmonics are born out of the clippings and show up within the spectrum space as harmonic multiples of the original frequency. An example frequency of 1 kHz, with 3 dB of clipping generates odd-order harmonics at 3kHz, 5 kHz, 7 kHz, etc, out to infinity. Figures 1 - 2 illustrate examples of this.

• 

  Figure-1, 1kHz Square Wave

• 

  Figure-2, 1kHz Square Wave Spectra

Note: Broadcast audio processors band-limit frequency spectra within a specified range, for their respective transmission paths.FM-Stereo bandwidth is 15 kHz, and AM is between 4.5 kHz and 10 kHz, depending on location. As such, clipping harmonics are limited via non-overshooting filtering methods in order to properly maintain operating legal bandwidth.

The challenging problems stated here are not based upon clipping functions of singular frequencies. Modern clipping methods, with distortion management, reduce clipping side effects over a preset range and only up to a specified level. It appears modern recording techniques either overload the present distortion mechanisms, or they cannot process this content aggressively without generating this frying/sizzling-like distortion. Since this problem exhibits itself with full range linear recordings, data reduced content (mp3 audio files) is even more distorted. This question becomes,where’s the rub?

WHAT HAPPENS WHEN ADDITIONAL SPECTRA IS ADDED?

When additional audio is added to a fundamental, lots of fun activity occurs! Sum and difference frequencies are created along with another component known as intermodulation, or IMD for short. Simply stated, this is where one signal will ride alongside, on top of, or modulate another. Sometimes this is done for specific effect. Music synthesizers use various intermodulating functions to create desired sounds.

In an audio processor,the dynamic action of compressors and limiters are examples of modulators, as they generate a level controlling signal to change the gain of the audio. The level controlling signal and audio is routed to a multiplier function, and the audio is multiplied by the controlling signal. Through this action, the level is dynamically adjusted. This is an example of intermodulation, as the audio is modulated by the control function. When the control signal starts to operate too fast, it generates a controlling rate with an additional frequency of its own. This operating frequency will possess additional harmonics and those get factored (multiplied) into the audio during the multiplication stage. The resultant contains the level adjusted audio along with harmonics from the controlling signal that were intermodulated into the final product. This is what happens when the control signal operates in an overly aggressive manner:the sonic quality becomes fuzzy, dull, and lifeless. We refer to this as dynamic intermodulation distortion.

With the above example in mind, let’s consider what happens within a clipper, when multiple audio signals are present and clipping is applied. A clipper, in reality, is a zero-attack/zero-release time limiter operating with a ratio of infinity-to-one. When multiple frequencies are present and clipping is active, the lower fundamental frequency will push the higher fundamental frequency into, and out of, the clipper at the rate of the lower frequency. This is known as clipper induced IMD. An easy example of this would be music with deep defined bass and a solo guitar or vocal. When clipping is active, the guitar or vocal will warble at the rate of the bass frequency due to the action of the bass signal pushing the guitar/vocal signal in and out of the clipper. Some audio processors employ bass processing techniques to reduce - and in some cases - remove this annoyance. On account of this, IMD components are amplified in level and spectra. Even modern distortion canceling clippers (or whatever other marketing name is given to them)generate IMD.

Up until now, it’s been an accepted notion that clipper induced IMD was a by-product of deep bass and enhanced midrange/presence/treble content. When studying the example of the Kelly Clarkson track, it became evident the problem was related to clipper induced IMD, except the example does not possess any bass spectrum of any significance.

• 

  Figure-3, Kelly Clarkson Segment

Notice inFigure-3, a segment taken from the Kelly Clarkson track, the dominance of signal centered at 500 Hz, and the range between 10 kHz - 15 kHz. Wonder what happens if some IMD tests were run on present clipping systems?

UNDER THE MICROSCOPE

Performing an IMD test on a clipping system is quite easy.Two audio frequencies are mixed together, then passed through the system under test and the output is observed on a scope and spectrum analyzer. In this instance, the clipping systems all employed the required 15 kHz low pass filtering and zero-overshoot control mechanisms found in broadcast processors.

For the test, 100 Hz was inserted at a level, which generated 3 dB of clipping. A high frequency component was mixed in at the same level and 75 s pre-emphasis was applied. The tests were run over the range of5 kHz up through 15 kHz, while 100 Hz was used as a constant low frequencysource. Figures 4 - 8 are the results of the tests.

• 

  Figure-4, Clipper Induced IMD: 100Hz & 5kHz

• 

  Figure-5, Clipper Induced IMD: 100Hz & 7.5kHz

• 

  Figure-6, Clipper Induced IMD: 100Hz & 10kHz

• 

  Figure-7, Clipper Induced IMD: 100Hz & 12.5kHz

• 

  Figure-8, Clipper Induced IMD: 100Hz & 15kHz

Notice as the upper frequency is increased, there is significant difference spectra that falls between the two fundamentals. This is extremely severe at 10 kHz, 12 kHz, and 15 kHz. If you recall the music example, this is very close to the spectral illustration in the Kelly Clarkson track. Houston, we’ve got a problem! It is clipper induced IMD!

CLIPPER SYSTEMS, DISTORTION CANCELLING, AND TOO MANY BANDS!

As stated, all present day clipping systems employ methods to control distortion. Of interest is that each of these use a static method to mask harmonic distortion when clipping is active. As the Kelly Clarkson example clearly illustrates, harmonic distortion is not the concern as it once was. Intermodulation, due to added presence and high frequency spectra, has overtaken the problem that once was dominated by harmonic distortion. Suffice it to say, all clipping methods must employ some form of harmonic distortion control, or they will not operate sufficiently enough to generate competitive sounding on-air audio. Modern content now requires additional processing means to reduce induced IMD.

Suppressing IMD is significantly more difficult, as the constantly different frequency components are a non-stop moving target. Whereas suppressing harmonic distortion can easily be predicted and controlled through a static filtering system.

Proof of this is demonstrated with an evaluation of present day distortion canceling systems.All of them employ static filtering to mask distortion components. They vary in range from broadband to 5-6 band, or more. All of these fail with aggressive processing. The broadband method suppresses harmonics and some IMD at specific frequencies. The multiband methods are designed to insert gentle low pass filters after multiband clippers in each audio band. This works over a narrow range, but falls apart with aggressive levels of clipping. Multiband clipper/filtering is done in parallel architecture and each singular band clipper is not able to understand what the others are doing. Therefore, the resulting filtered harmonics of each band interact in unpredictable ways - some of which exaggerate IMD. Adding more bands or steeper filters does not improve or fix the problem!

THE ANSWER IS...

... not in the number of bands. Anyone who thinks adding more bands of clipping and filtering to the system is wasting DSP cycles, or computer MIPS, along with wasting your time with a lot of marketing rhetoric.The answer lies in understanding the range of frequencies that generate both harmonic and intermodulation distortion, then applying various masking means to suppress both simultaneously as they are generated. Much easier said than done!It’s a combination of breaking down the audio spectrum by octaves and interaction with the Gibbs Phenomenon. Almost explained too much already. Suffice it to say, the prior statement - along with technology - enables a clipping system that suppresses BOTH harmonic and IMD distortion components when aggressive processing levels are required. Additionally, and more importantly, this new clipping method does not employ the use of dynamic compressors or limiters to control depth of clipping in order to minimize clipping induced IMD. There have been, and remain, a few proponents who utilize this method to reduce generated IMD, but it is at the expense of added dynamic intermod which manifests itself as audio pumping and hole punching.

PROOF

Running the same IMD tests, as mentioned earlier, now offer the following results. Compare figures 9 - 13 to those of figures 4 - 8 of both the old and new methods.

• 

  Figure-9, Clipper Induced IMD: 100Hz & 5kHz

• 

  Figure-10, Clipper Induced IMD: 100Hz & 7.5kHz

• 

  Figure-11, Clipper Induced IMD: 100Hz & 10kHz

• 

  Figure-12, Clipper Induced IMD: 100Hz & 12.5kHz

• 

  Figure-13, Clipper Induced IMD: 100Hz & 15kHz

It is easy to see. For the exact same amount of clipping employed, midrange, presence, and treble IMD is gone! With the new method,Kelly Clarkson’s test segment does not possess any of the bacon frying sizzle annoyance as heard prior with all other clipping systems. As a matter of subjective observance, all audio auditioned through this new method sounds cleaner for the same given level of loudness. It does not matter if the content source contains deep-rich bass or not: the audio signal is subjectively cleaner for the same level of loudness.

WHAT GIVES?

Just the same as with the recipe for Coca-Cola®, this new IMD and THD masking method is locked away in the same vault with the secret ingredients for the famous soft drink! What can be said however, is the answer lies not in the number of clipping bands and filters, but how all distortion products are dealt with interactively on an instantaneous basis. Multiband clipping does not take into consideration any interactivity of outlaying spectra. That’s where the method eventually fails. The proof is in the audio performance with critical content.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This is dedicated to the loving memories of Jim Somich and Mathew Connor. Two passionate, dedicated, driven, and innovative engineers who understood great sounding radio, how to get there, and the advantages of"dial-dominance!" You both are truly missed.

Additionally, Rob Dye, Leif Claesson, Tim Carroll, Mike Dorrough, Cornelius Gould, Mark Manolio, and Steve Church have contributed significantly to the success and growth of our Omnia product family.

Modestly speaking, we haven’t been sitting around putting afresh coat of paint on an age old - and vastly tired - design. Omnia.11 is designed for today and the future. Consider that we stretched the Omnia.fm firmware platform close to fifteen years, as that design grew into Omnia-3,Omnia-5 and Omnia-6. Our Omnia ONE platform re-design lent itself to become the tech basis of Omnia.11. An investment in Omnia is more than an investment in quality, competitive on-air audio today. Our track record proves your investment is safe for the foreseeable future both sonically and financially.

You can’t send just any processor to do the job of an Omnia!