HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: muller@world.std.com (James L Muller)
Newsgroups: rec.music.makers
Subject: Re: HELP ME! I AM A VICTIM OF FEEDBACK!
Keywords: feedback, microphone
Date: 28 Jan 93 18:18:29 GMT
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA

In <C1JJ73.DFH@mentor.cc.purdue.edu> truth@sage.cc.purdue.edu writes:

>I am having a MAJOR problem with feedback.

Aaaargh...  You are asking something akin to "Teach me how to drive."
First, a comment on someone else's reply.  I saw a few notes on "ringing
out the system."  Please, DO NOT DO THIS as your first technique.  If you
had infinitely adjustable EQ bands (and some EQ's are better than others),
all you'd get is a final frequency response of the system that mirrors your
system's feedback-rejection curve - not a very good formula for things
to sound good.  And then if you turn it up loud enough, all you get is
plenty of volume but all frequencies feeding back at the same time!  Not
to mention that feedback is phase-dependent, so some will be out of phase
and thus will behave very differently.

>Microphone -- ElectroVoice N/D 457-B to...

Should be okay.

>...Alesis 3630 compressor (threshold at -10db / ratio at 5:1) to...

Ahah!!!!  Compressors are mighty contributors to feedback.  Reduce the
ratio and/or set the threshold so you aren't tripping it all the time.

>...Alesis QuadraVerb Plus (E.Q. is set FLAT --

Okay, but don't let it get into the monitors.

>    -I realize we should have the compressor on an insert, and the reverb
>       on an effects send, but we tried that before to no avail.

I don't know what this is trying to say, but if you don't have things
hooked up right, it ain't gonna' work.

>1) What is a good general EQ setting that will reduce feedback?

There is no good general setting.  Every mic and speaker brand (not to
mention some variation between specimens) will have its own response
curve, and how you set them up will affect the phasing between mic and
speaker.  In general, EQ settings should correct for speaker frequency
response first, then maybe room resonance, then maybe feedback control.
If you must resort to using the EQ for feedback control, you are gaining
headroom at the expense of fidelity.

>...without shelling out $400 for that feedback exterminator, 
>PLEASE let me know.  I know I can't have my monitor TOO loud, but...

The feedback eliminator may help but it is *not* a cure-all.  You need to
spend time thinking about the mathematics of feedback and wave interference.
Indeed, you *can* have your monitor too loud.  That's what causes feedback,
i.e. when the level of sound getting back into a mic exceeds the total
rejection.  Also, remember that in-phase feedback causes squeal but out-of-
phase feedback causes cancelling, putting a limit on how much amplification
that frequency gets.  At the very least, a good monitor speaker should have
no peaks in its frequency response, because these often contribute to
feedback problems.  As a last item, consider telling the rest of the
band to turn their amps down! because otherwise you can't hear anything.

(Like I said, this isn't a simple subject...)
-- 
Jim Muller  muller@world.std.com
From: mycroft@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Alex Currier)
Newsgroups: rec.music.makers
Subject: Peavey SP/SX... Comments?
Date: 26 Jan 1993 07:22:30 GMT
Organization: The University of Texas at Austin, Austin TX
NNTP-Posting-Host: happy.cc.utexas.edu


O'kay, so it seems like a nice little box for the money. Would someone who
actually owns one tell me what you think? Any other comments (aside from
general Peavey flames) would be welcome as well. If I decide to buy one
and I hate it I will blame all of you.


-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alex Currier					| 
Texas Union MicroCenter, UT Austin              |  "This is the best darn
mycroft@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu                      |   Pizza-in-a-Cup I have
alex@fiskville.mc.utexas.edu  (NeXTmail only)   |       ever tasted!"
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: scott@bbx.basis.com (Scott Amspoker)
Newsgroups: rec.music.makers
Subject: Re: HELP ME! I AM A VICTIM OF FEEDBACK!
Keywords: feedback, microphone, cheddar cheese
Date: 28 Jan 93 03:30:11 GMT
Organization: BASIS International, Ltd., Albuquerque NM USA

In article truth@sage.cc.purdue.edu (I am always right.) writes:
>
>I am having a MAJOR problem with feedback.  I would like to know
>if there is anyone out there who can help me out with this problem.
>[...]
>This is my current setup (in order):
>
>Microphone -- ElectroVoice N/D 457-B to...
>...One of those XLR to 1/4 inch in-line transformer thingies to...
>...Alesis 3630 compressor (threshold at -10db / ratio at 5:1) to...
    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Just a guess but I've had problems with compressors increasing the
likelihood of feedback.  A 5:1 ratio is almost begging for feedback
in a live situation.  If your effects are too wet, that will also
compound the problem.

I noticed that your EQ is rather minimal.  I would suggest something
like a 1/3 octave graphic EQ (this will have about 32 sliders per channel).
Learn how to "ring out" the PA during your sound check.  And yes, you will
end up doing this anew for each gig but it only takes a few minutes.

-- 
Scott Amspoker                       |    
Basis International, Albuquerque, NM |  Too bad ignorance isn't really
                                     |  bliss.  Then it could be outlawed.
scott@bbx.basis.com                  |
Newsgroups: rec.music.makers
From: blave@netcom.com (David W. Blevins)
Subject: Re: Gibson Widget MIDI Guitar Converter
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services (408 241-9760 guest)
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 19:49:08 GMT


I subscribe to "The MIDI Guitarist" that Warren Sirotta puts out (it's ad-
vertised in EM, GP, etc.) and his latest issue has a comprehensive test
drive of the GR-1.  He used some Mac MIDI software to test triggering times
for the GR-1 internal/external vs. the GR-50 int/ext.  I don't have the
info here but interestingly, the GR-50 actually triggers faster, and the
difference between int and ext is not very much.  (Warren still thinks the
GR-1 "feels" faster...)

I'm wondering whether
the response time of the external MIDI instrument comes into play here.
As I stated in my mini-review of the GR-1 here, I found the triggering
of my T3 to be quite acceptable on single note leads (I haven't played
around with playing chords with the T3 much yet).  As a matter of fact,
the MIDI stream goes "thru" a MX-8 midi patchbay on its way to the Korg.

I will strongly second the statement here that "your mileage may vary."
The response of a guitar > MIDI instrument is a VERY subjective thing,
based on the various opinions of the GR-1 posted on the net.  I personally
am very happy with my GR-1, and I'm the sort who's not very interested
in modifying my playing style much to make the toys work right.

I _am_ anxiously waiting for the add-on PCM sample ROM card...

Blave.
Newsgroups: rec.music.makers
From: jbeer@lonestar.utsa.edu (Jason R. Beerhalter)
Subject: Deliverance
Organization: University of Texas at San Antonio
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 19:49:14 GMT

If anyone has or can get a copy of the "Deliverance" CD single with the

remixes, please E-mail!!!

jbeer@lonestar.utsa.edu
jbeer%UTSAVM1.BITNET@ricevm1.rice.edu

Thank you.



Xref: sparky rec.music.makers:12132 alt.guitar:11664
From: flloyd@l1-a.West.Sun.COM (Fred Lloyd [Phoenix SE])
Newsgroups: rec.music.makers,alt.guitar
Subject: Re: Can powering amps/PAs off/on damage them?
Date: 26 Jan 1993 17:03:54 GMT
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Phoenix, AZ
NNTP-Posting-Host: l1-a.west.sun.com

In article <1993Jan25.204156.24014@cbnewsi.cb.att.com> acura@cbnewsi.cb.att.com (james.r.feeney) writes:
>The amps we use in our band, as well as our PA equipment, do not have "standby"
>switches on them. Usually we power them off during breaks between sets,
>however I was recently told that that was bad for the amps and PA. Does
>anyone know about this? Why would powering them off/on four times a night
>be different than powering them off/on once a day? What (if any) damage could
>be caused by this? Inquiring minds want to know! 
>
>Jim Feeney


Every time a piece of electronic equipment is turned on, whether it
be a PA, guitar amp or a washing machine, there is a momentary electric
surge which is very strong but short lived.  This surge is caused by
several factors, the most prominent of them likely being the power
supply filter capacitors capacitors which must be charged
up to a working voltage before operation can begin.  

Without getting into a technical discussion, it is safe to simply state
that each time you switch an appliance on, this momentary surge of
current strains the equipment ever so slightly.  Depending on how your
particular piece of equipment was designed, it may or may not be
particularly suseptable to frequent turn-ons.  In general, There is
really no way to tell until the system blows.  Naturally, some well
designed stuff will never have a problem. 

Speakers can also be damaged by the "Thump" of power on.

Turn-on strain contributes to a lot of the "wear and tear" that a piece
of equipment eperiences over its lifetime.  Over time, the strain can
accumulate (certian parts will wear out) and eventually the system
_may_ fail because of it.  Notice that I say "may fail" because there
will often be other things which go wrong as well.  Since this type of
failure mode is so easy to prevent (just don't turn it off) then why
take a chance?  It costs practically nothing to leave it turned on
during the break, so why mess with it.  If there is an annoying hiss or
hum from the speakers, then turn down the volume.  If the equipment
is warm or hot from heavy use, it's better to leave it turned on so
that the fan(s) can cool it down.  If you turn it off, then you turn off
the fan too....

In general, it is far less stressful to leave a device turned on
than to cycle power on it.


-fred


-- 
[ Fred Lloyd, AA7BQ                             Fred.Lloyd@West.Sun.COM ]
[ Sun Microsystems,           Southwest Area Solaris Transition Manager ]
[ Phoenix, AZ                                            (602) 275-4242 ]
Newsgroups: rec.music.makers
From: sands@isl.Stanford.EDU (Nicholas P. Sands)
Subject: Nirvana lyrics
Organization: Stanford University
Distribution: usa
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 93 04:20:16 GMT

Could anyone help me out with the words to 
Nirvana's "Come as you are"?   

--


	    _/	  _/   _/    _/_/     _/  _/
	   _/_/  _/        _/   _/   _/ _/
	  _/ _/ _/   _/   _/        _/_/ 
	 _/  _/_/   _/   _/   _/   _/  _/
	_/    _/   _/     _/_/    _/    _/

Xref: sparky rec.music.makers:12121 alt.guitar:11646
From: msjle@uxa.ecn.bgu.edu (Joi L. Ellis)
Newsgroups: rec.music.makers,alt.guitar
Subject: Re: Can powering amps/PAs off/on damage them?
Date: 25 Jan 1993 21:56:30 -0600
Organization: Educational Computing Network
NNTP-Posting-Host: uxa.ecn.bgu.edu

acura@cbnewsi.cb.att.com (james.r.feeney) writes:

Powering off equipment isn't necessarily a bad thing.  However, the
act of turning on or turning off electrical equipment is often the most
stressful state the equipment finds itself in, and it is more likely to
fry itself during that transition period than during actual use.  

Think about lightbulbs.  The little suckers always die right when you
turn them on... I've lost two this week.

I'd just leave all the stuff on during your breaks.  

>The amps we use in our band, as well as our PA equipment, do not have "standby"
>switches on them. Usually we power them off during breaks between sets,
>however I was recently told that that was bad for the amps and PA. Does
>anyone know about this? Why would powering them off/on four times a night
>be different than powering them off/on once a day? What (if any) damage could
>be caused by this? Inquiring minds want to know! 

>Jim Feeney
-- 
Joi Ellis                      msjle@uxa.ecn.bgu.edu
Student Residential Programs   Western Illinois University

Newsgroups: rec.music.makers,rec.music.makers.guitar
From: barothwe@hwking.cca.cr.rockwell.com
Subject: NEED QUICK RESPONSE: Manual, Jackson JX3 Preamp
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 93 11:43:18 -0600
X-Received: by usenet.pa.dec.com; id AA26103; Wed, 27 Jan 93 09:44:15 -0800
X-Received: by inet-gw-2.pa.dec.com; id AA04669; Wed, 27 Jan 93 09:43:52 -0800
X-Received: by floyd.cca.cr.rockwell.com (5.57/Ultrix3.0-C)
	id AA14923; Wed, 27 Jan 93 11:43:19 -0600
X-To: rec.music.makers.usenet, rec.music.makers.guitar.usenet
X-Mts: smtp


	Anybody out there use a Jackson JX3 Preamp?

	I just purchased a used one . It's in good shape, 
but did include a manual or the original carton.

	Would anyone have a manual they could photocopy for me?
I realize that the use of this thing is not complicated, but
I'd like to get the manual anyway.

	Also, I'd like some input on how to use this thing
to it's fullest potential in a "direct recording" situation.

	Lastly, it has two 12AX7 tubes in it, and it's also
got stereo master volume controls. From what I can tell, it 
only operates in stereo when you are running both l&r outputs
to separate mixer channels. Does this mean that if I'm using
only one output (l or r), I'm only realizing the benefit of 
just one of the tubes? If so, how can I get ALL the tone from
both tubes while only outputing thru just one of the output
channels?

Thanks for any help,

Bruce

===============================================================================
  Bruce Rothwell                            \ /~~~~~~\     Opinions expressed
  barothwe@floyd.cca.cr.rockwell.com         X        )    are mine, but they
  Rockwell Int'l - CCA                      / \______/     might be shared by 
  Cedar Rapids, IA 	                                        multitudes !!
===============================================================================
From: chrisc@gold.gvg.tek.com (Chris Christensen)
Newsgroups: rec.music.makers
Subject: Re: Beatles & ADT...how?
Date: 25 Jan 93 19:51:01 GMT
Organization: Grass Valley Group, Grass Valley, CA

In article <1993Jan20.063614.19971@cs.yale.edu> nathan@laplace.csb.yale.edu 
(Nathan F. Janette) writes:
>In article <1jhlgsINN3nd@male.EBay.Sun.COM> warlock@halloween.EBay.Sun.COM  
>(Dennis Montgomery) writes:
>>I've read many articles discussing the Beatles use of ADT (Automatic Double
>> Tracking) to 'fatten' up their vocals and I was wondering...  

>> 1) How exactly did it work? 

>John and Paul would sing at the same time ;-)

sorry Nathan.......That's not how they did it!

The Doubble tracking that the Beatles would do was that the lead
vocalist would just sing along with the original already recorded
vocal.  They were using a three track machine at the time.

I believe that the cut "Michelle" was doubble tracked. What you will
hear is the second vocal and a little delay sound.  The delay sound
came from the speaker that was placed near the performer.

I don't know anything about an "Automatic Double Tracking" system. My
source is an article in Mix, and interview with George Martin.  The
articles came out when all of the Beatles CD's were release a few
years ago.

The Beatles double tracked many of the vocals on Sgt. Pepers also.

-- 
Chris Christensen                  The opinions I express are my own,
chrisc@gold.gvg.tek.com            and sometimes they are wrong!
916-478-3419 FAX 916-478-3887      After all, I *AM* only human.
Xref: sparky rec.music.makers:12098 rec.music.synth:20276
From: archer@elysium.esd.sgi.com (Archer Sully)
Newsgroups: rec.music.makers.synth
Subject: Re: Winter NAMM 1983
Date: 25 Jan 93 22:48:45 GMT
Organization: Silicon Graphics, Inc.  Mountain View, CA

In <9301251825.aa10817@gate.demon.co.uk> cassiel@cassiel.demon.co.uk (Nick Rothwell) writes:

*>> Alesis showed off their new Synthesizer and Mixer unit.
*>> The synthesizer has 64 note polyphony, an industry first.
*
*Actually, I believe, an industry second. (TG100 is there already.)
*
*I presume the Alesis was a mock-up.
*

The droid was pounding on keys and making noise, so it might not have been.
He also held down a key, leaned on the keyboard, and stood up.  The original
not was still sounding.  So, it may have actually had real guts inside.  

                    Archer Sully      archer@sgi.com

        You are a good man, but you are in the wrong place and
        you are going to die a horrible death.
                        - A Chinese Ghost Story
From: scollins@cs.tcd.ie (Steven Collins)
Newsgroups: rec.music.makers.synth
Subject: Re: Winter NAMM 1983
Date: 27 Jan 93 09:51:36 GMT
Organization: Trinity College, Dublin (Computer Science)

In article <1993Jan26.224928.3751@zia.aoc.nrao.edu> awkerr@zia.aoc.nrao.edu (Alan Kerr) writes:
>In article <1993Jan26.144420.3277@cs.tcd.ie> scollins@cs.tcd.ie (Steven Collins) writes:
>>
>>Could still be an industry 1st 64 note polyphonic.  The Yammy TG module
>>is 2 32 note polys not a full 64 note.  Sort of like the supposedly 32
>>note polyphonic SY77, which is in fact 2 16 note polys.
>
>Don't know which module you *think* you're talking about (the TG500
>maybe?) ...but I own a TG100 and it is 28 note polyphonic.  The TG100
>is yamaha's new General MIDI box.

Yes, its the TG500 I'm referring to and what Mr Rothwell meant in his original
post, even though he said the TG100.  Sorry for any confusion caused.

Steven
Xref: sparky rec.music.makers.synth:1878 rec.music.synth:20384 rec.music.industrial:15483 comp.music:6409
From: dippybir@tz.ucs.sfu.ca (# 1 1 6)
Subject: Re: Make Sampling Legal...
Organization: Somewhere in The Twilight Zone, Vancouver, B.C
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 20:44:00 GMT

gtaylor@vme.heurikon.com (Gregory Taylor) writes:

> hope you get the drift. Is this a little clearer?
> 
> 
 
Yes I think you've clarified your arguements concisely and that is 
commendable.
From: scott@bbx.basis.com (Scott Amspoker)
Newsgroups: rec.music.makers.synth
Subject: Re: Make Sampling Legal...
Date: 21 Jan 93 16:17:21 GMT
Organization: BASIS International, Ltd., Albuquerque NM USA

In article <C16nJ5.A0r@unix.amherst.edu> ljnelson@unix.amherst.edu (LAiRD j. NeLSoN) writes:
>Karen Silkwood's car (jondr@sco.COM) wrote:
>
>> false.  a company must fight to "protect" its copyright or lose the right to
>> the name.  this is why if you order a coke in a restaurant that serves
>> pepsi, the server is supposed to ask you "is pepsi OK?"
>
>Flat wrong.  There is an enormous, immensely significant difference between
>a copyright and a trademark.  When you create something--a work of art, a book,
>a piece of music--it is considered copywritten merely by virtue of your having
>created it.  A trademark, on the other hand, is a mark chosen to distinguish
>your particular product/service from all others of its kind.  Trademarks--
>Pepsi, Coke--have nothing to do with copywritten creations.
>
>If we're going to argue about this, and it is an interesting thread, let's
>not post unless we have a reasonable idea of what we're talking about.

Even better, let's have a reasonable idea of what we're *reading* about.
It is true that trademarks and copyrights are different things.  The
point of this thread about the necessity to protect a claim of
copyright or trademark applies to both.  Nobody's confusing the two.

-- 
Scott Amspoker                       |    
Basis International, Albuquerque, NM |  Too bad ignorance isn't really
                                     |  bliss.  Then it could be outlawed.
scott@bbx.basis.com                  |
From: adamsj@gtewd.mtv.gsc.gte.com
Newsgroups: rec.music.makers.synth
Subject: Re: [EMAX II] Who's got one & disk format.
Date: 25 Jan 93 17:53:28 -0800
Distribution: rec
Organization: GTE Govt. Systems, Electronics Def. Div.

In article <MJP.93Jan25175936@prudence.hplb.hpl.hp.com>, mjp@hplb.hpl.hp.com (Mike Prudence) writes:
> Hi all,
> 
> I've been looking around at samplers recently, and finally narrowed
> the choice down to two: the Ensoniq ASR-10 or the Emu Emax II.  I've
> played with the ASR10 for a weekend, and found it pretty good.  Next
> weekend it's the turn of the Emax II.
> 
> The Ensoniq owners on the net have a friendly mailing list going,
> complete with their own sample exchange and public domain utilities
> for handling Ensoniq disks on PCs.  They even have a couple of Ensoniq
> employees answering the occasional question for them.
> 
> So, I'd firstly like to solicit opinions on the Emax II from anyone
> out there who owns one.
> 
> Secondly, I'd like to know if anyone has ever figured out the floppy
> disk format for the machine - perhaps even written a tool or two to
> futz around with them.  Are their any Emu employees out there ??
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Mike
> 
> mjp@hplb.hpl.hp.com                   "Only those who attempt the absurd will 
>                                                      achieve the impossible."
> 
I don't own one, but before you invest in an EMAX, know that you have to buy EMU's
memory, and that (unless they've upgraded it) it only goes to 8 meg... You could 
have a K2000 with sampling option and 8 megs of memory for about $2850 US....

Also, wait and look into the new Akai stuff coming out... the 2800, 3000, and 3200.
32 voice, but you still have to buy memory from them (how come they haven't learned...
or do they just figure since they are the standard [are they?] that they can get
away with this, when everyone else has finally built instruments that take MAC simms???).
Lot's of other cool features, no prices that I've heard yet (one person said 3k for the
2800, another said 3500). The 2800 only goes to 8 megs (comes with 2meg). the 3000 looks
like a good compromise, but probably EXPENSIVE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

-Jeff Adams-
Newsgroups: rec.music.makers.synth,rec.music.synth,rec.music.industrial,comp.music
From: pet@mullian.ee.mu.OZ.AU (paul eng-yi tan)
Subject: Re: Make Sampling Legal...
Organization: Computer Science, University of Melbourne, Australia
Distribution: inet
Date: Thu, 28 Jan 1993 11:36:41 GMT

eric@muttley.ucsd.edu (Eric Lyon) writes:

[a totally brilliant, intelligent, and interesting article which cuts to the
heart of the issue and makes some great suggestions to boot! I was going to
excerpt it but couldn't decide which was my favorite paragraph and so I did
this instead of quote the entire thing :]

All I can say is, BRAVO. Now why doesn't someone in power listen to
something like this an put it in action? Sampling artists are mostly,
as yet, economically disadvantaged and not on major labels...
Paul

--
Second Hand vinyl for sale: Depeche Mode, Indie, Severed Heads,
Beloved, New Order, Pet Shop Boys, Stone Roses, Inspiral Carpets,
Cabaret Voltaire. Excell. Cond. Also X1 as NEW $88US, $110AUS.
Newsgroups: rec.music.makers.synth
From: mbl@media.mit.edu (Marc LoCascio)
Subject: Re: The Newest Emu synth... McAnalog!!!???!!!
Organization: MIT Media Laboratory
Date: Wed, 20 Jan 1993 22:19:50 GMT

In article <C15G7M.Cy3@world.std.com> tmm@world.std.com (Tom M Moravansky) writes:
>The reports back from NAMM of old analog users who have actually heard
>the Emu-Vintage say it sounds dull and cold compared to the originals.

as i understand it, the new E-Mu box uses the sound playback capabilities of
the Proteus series (i.e. their "G" chip) along with the filter chip from the
Emax and EIII series (the "H" chip?).  i *think* that the ROM waveforms in 
this "vintage" module are the unprocessed sounds from the various oscillators
in the old synths (along with much of the Mellotron tape library), processed
by their own filter chip.

while their filter chip is very good as digital filters go, i don't think that
you'll get an exact MiniMoog sound, for example.  i suspect that it will be a
*very* cool box for the price, though.

Marc LoCascio		(mbl@media-lab.media.mit.edu)

From: mjp@hplb.hpl.hp.com (Mike Prudence)
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 11:47:45 GMT
Subject: Re: New family of High-end Akai samplers!?
Organization: Hewlett Packard Laboratories, Bristol, UK