HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: wb@tornado.kodak.com (wb@tornado.kodak.com)
Subject: Re: Are Record Club CD's The Same Quality? 
Organization: Digital Equipment Corp. (Telstar), Rochester, N.Y. 14653
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 19:44:24 GMT

In article <1992Nov12.182645.25110@mprgate.mpr.ca>, mcvey@mprgate.mpr.ca (Iain McVey) writes:
|> In article <1992Nov11.122316.26927@acd4.acd.com>, jwg@sedv1.acd.com ( Jim Grey) writes:
|> |> In article <1992Nov11.003456.25424@newshub.sdsu.edu> cs108069@pandora.sdsu.edu (John DeRose) writes:
|> |> >A friend of mine told me he heard somewhere that the CD's sold through
|> |> >companies such as BMG, etc. are inferior to store-bought ones!
|> |> >
|> |> >Support or refutations?
|> |> >
|> |>
|> |> False.     
|> |>
|> 
|> The CD's are often pressed (right term?) by the mail order club, using 
|> a leased factory.  Often the liner notes from a club CD are different than
|> those printed by the original recording company.
|> 
|> I have ordered CD's from Columbia House and have seen differences, including
|> slightly different labelling on the CD itself.  I noticed this because I had
|> to replace my CD's after a theft.
|> 
|> So in general, if you think there is a difference in CD's from different 
|> factories, there may indeed be a difference between club CD's and normal ones.
|> 
|> - Iain -  
|> -- 
|> Iain McVey (mcvey@mpr.ca)      | "Join the army, they said, see the next
|> Software Designer              |  world..." - Carry on up the Khyber
|> MPR Teltech Ltd.               | "This bottle of whisky is awful.  I'll be
|> 8999 Nelson Way, Burnaby, BC   |  glad when it's done" - One Scot to another

In the case of say, Columbia House, any CD that is NOT a Columbia-owned (that's
CBS, folks!), the master used to make the disc distributed by Columbia House
is not the original master. It is a copy most likely an Analog copy! I was told
this by the owner of a very large Record/CD store in town here. You can see on the
back ofthe CD's packaging something that indicates whether it is the genuine
article or a copy. This is why those CD clubs can sell what they are selling
at a cost that is less than the recording company would sell it for...

Not all CD's are created equal...
Now the question is... Can anyone notice the difference?
----------------------------------------------------------
Wendell Bigelow                  Internet:
Office Imaging                   wb%tornado@tornado.kodak.com
Printing Systems Electronics
Eastman Kodak           
----------------------------------------------------------
From: tonyb@juliet.ll.mit.edu ( Tony Berke )
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: DIY Cutting holes for woofers
Date: 9 Nov 92 17:07:09 GMT
Organization: M.I.T. Lincoln Lab: Group 43 (Weather, not Weapons)

In article <1de8krINNmc3@uwm.edu> randyd@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Randall Elton Ding) writes:
  In article <BxAuC8.BB7@usenet.ucs.indiana.edu> wakeland@silver.ucs.indiana.edu (ray s wakeland) writes:
   >I am looking for advice on cutting a 7.375 inch hole in 3/4 inch MDF.  
   >DIYourselfers--how do you normally do this?  Do you have to cut it out 
   >by hand with a jigsaw, or is there some way to drill a hole this size?
   >
   >Thanks, 
   >Ray Wakeland
   >wakeland@ucs.indiana.edu

     When I cut holes in mdf, I use an adjustable hole saw to make a 
     template out of a small piece of 3/8 inch wood.
     Then I tack it on to the baffel board and use a carbide tipped
     router with a bearing as a guide...

I use this technique as well, but it might be hard to find an
adjustable hole saw that goes to 7.375 inches!  An alternative is to
cut the template out of 1/4" Masonite using a Jig saw.  Cut it a bit
small, and then use a wood file, or if you're impatient, a drum sander
(mounted on a drill press, or an electric drill in a vise) to sand the
template to its final shape.  This technique also works for making
non-circular templates (for flush-mounting tweeters, etc).

A much faster way of cutting circular holes is to use a spiral-cut
plunge bit in the router, along with a circle-cutting guide.  This can
be purchased or shop-made -- it is just a piece of acrylic or Masonite
that is drilled to be used as a router base, with an extension heading
out radially from the router.  You stick the router on the thing, and
tack a nail through a hole in the template, and into the workpiece at
the desired center of the woofer cutout.  You plunge the router into
the wood, and pivot it about the nail.

A note on safety: I've just about cut myself in two trying to route 1"
MDF using a top-guided plunge bit and a template -- the bit can start
chattering around in the hole, resulting in a rather explosive
bit-bending and nerve-shattering event that could easily lead to
injury.  This process happens inhumanly fast when a 3.5 horsepower
router is spinning at 15,000 RPM or so.

After screwing up twice with this technique, I finally realized that the
safe thing to do is to cut the hole to within a fraction of an inch of
its desired radius using a jigsaw.  This reduces the danger, but also
reduces the wear on the bit, your nerves, and is much faster to boot.
As an added bonus, you won't need a very big router if you do it this
way.

Happy building,

Tony
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: luoni@jasper.mlb.semi.harris.com (Perry Luoni)
Subject: 1 Bit D to A CD Players
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 14:10:16 GMT
Distribution: World
Organization: Harris Semiconductor, Melbourne FL

I would like a technical description of how these 1 bit D to A converters
that are advertised in CD players these days.  Don't be afraid to dazzle 
me with your technical knowhow since I am an EE I should be able to 
understand at least part of the description :-). Thanks
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: strong@tc.fluke.COM (Norm Strong)
Subject: Re: Lencoclean analysis wanted
Organization: John Fluke Mfg. Co., Inc., Everett, WA
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 16:25:23 GMT

In article <1992Nov6.175759.10782@cti-software.nl> pim@cti-software.nl (Pim Zandbergen) writes:
}Hello NetLand,
}
}Has anyone ever analysed Lencoclean?
}
}There's nowhere I can get this stuff anymore,
}and I've got hundreds of records that are addicted.
}
}I've heard many times it's just ethanol and water,
}but that just does not look the same floating on
}the record surface.

You can make something pretty good as follows:

200g ethanol
25g ethylene glycol (anti-freeze)
.5g sodium lauryl sulfate (Kodak Photo-Flo)
Water to make 1 liter

It should sit for a while before you use it.  

No guarantees, of course.  ;-)
-- 

Norm Strong  (strong@tc.fluke.com)
2528 31st S.   Seattle WA 98144   USA
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: michael@Canada.lsil.com (Michael Smith)
Subject: Re: High Speed Dubbing
Reply-To: michael@Canada.lsil.com
Organization: LSI Logic Corporation of Canada, Inc.
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 13:25:25 GMT

High-speed dubbing shifts the frequency spectrum of the recording up by whatever
factor the speed increase is.  For example, if the play-back/recording is at twice
the normal speed (just a guess here), all the frequencies will be doubled.  In an
ideal world, this doesn't really matter.  The problem with this is that most (all??)
of the high speed dubbing machines are usually low-fi or mid-fi at best.  The heads
on these machines would probably be incapable of reproducing frequencies above
16-18kHz.

So, if we have a head roll-off at 16-18kHz under a high-speed copy, this corresponds
to a 8-9kHz roll-off on the normal play-back, or non-high-speed play-back.  This
means that the "copy" will effectively have all of its high-frequency components
stripped by the copying process.  Probably acceptable for copying store-bought
tapes on mid-fi equipment, but for good quality copies, this is probably
unacceptable.


---
     Michael Smith - Chipset Design Engineer

Phone: (416) 620-7400         michael@canada.lsil.com
Fax:   (416) 694-5005

    _/     _/_/   _/_/_/   _/                   _/
   _/    _/        _/     _/ 
  _/      _/_/    _/     _/     _/_/_/ _/_/_/ _/ _/_/_/
 _/         _/   _/     _/     _/  _/ _/  _/ _/ _/
_/_/_/ _/_/_/ _/_/_/   _/_/_/ _/_/_/ _/_/_/ _/ _/_/_/
                                        _/   LSI Logic Corp. of Canada, Inc.
                                   _/_/_/   Suite 1110, 401 The West Mall
                                           Etobicoke, Ontario
                                          M9C 5J5


Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: nau@ssesco.com (William Nau)
Subject: Re: Cheap type II tapes
Organization: SSESCO
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 21:58:14 GMT

In article <1992Nov11.211521.3814@samba.oit.unc.edu>, Siddharth.Soni@launchpad.unc.edu (Siddharth Soni) writes:
|> Is there is big differencw b/w various type II tapes?
|> 
|> I saw fuji and scotch type II tapes priced at 6 for $9, where
|> maxell xlii(S) were 7 for $20...pretty significant for difference for tapes that are are in the same classification....
|> 
|> What could the differences be?
|> ssoni@csnext.colgate.edu

The type classification is not a quality classification.  It simply indicates
what kind of base material is on the tape.  It's easy to make a poor quality
type II (or even type IV) tape if you so choose.  Hundya (sp) and Lincoln
both make sedans.  Which one is better?  Typically (in this case) you get
what you pay for.  The Maxell XL-IIs is a very good type II tape.

Also, some tapes work better with some players.  Try a few brands to see
which works best with yours.
-- 
William R. Nau
Supercomputer Systems Engineering and Services Company (SSESCO)
511 11th Avenue South, Suite 216
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55415-1536
(612) 342-0003

nau@SSESCO.com
From: DPierce@world.std.com (Richard d Pierce)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: Help with port sizes please!
Date: 12 Nov 92 22:55:14 GMT
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA

In article <1992Nov12.070935.20020@scott.skidmore.edu> Jason Reiser writes:
>I am looking to build a pair of speakers, and I need a port measuring
>3.25 inches long and 1.6875 inches in diameter (that's 1 11/16 BTW)...
>anyway, is there any way of figuring out what alternate diameter port
>I could use that is available from plumbing suppliers... like 1.5" or
>1.75" diameter... but how do I go about calculating the corrected
>length for the different diameter port?  I know that it is not a
>conservation of internal air volume, but what is it?

The port in a reflex enclosure provides the acoustical "mass" that
together with the acoustical compliance of the air in the box forms a
resonant system. The (supposedly) careful tuning of that resonance with
the driver resonance provides the alignment that makes the system work as
it should.

The acoustical mass of the port is proportional to its length and
inversely proportional to the square of its diameter (or inversely
proportional to its cross-sectional area, as the case may be). The exact
relationship is:

            p0 l'
        M = -----
              S

where p0 is the density of air (1.18 kg m^-3), l' is the end-corrected
length in meters, S is the area of the port in meters, and M is the acoustical
mass (or intertance) in kg/m^4.

If you, say, double the diameter, the length must then increase by the
square of the diameter, or 4 times. Halving the diameter means a decrease
in length to 1/4 the original. In you case, where you want to change from,
say 1.6875" diameter to 1.5", that implies a change in length of 0.79, or
reducing the length from 3.25" to 2.57". Change the diameter to 1.75"
means the length must increase by 1.075, or to about 3.5".

Now, notice the equation above has the "end-corrected" length. The
effective length is not the real length, but somewhat longer due to end
correction factors. The accepted value is that the end correction for a
port with one end flush with the cabinet wall and the other hanging out in
midair is approximately 0.43 times the diameter for the flanged end and
about 0.3 times the diameter for the unflanged end, for a total of 0.73
times the diameter. For a 1.5" diameter port, you would then subtract
about 1 inch and for the 1.75" port, subtract about 1.28". This, of
course, presumes that the original dimensions include the end correction.

Now, if I had a choice, I would opt for the larger diameter, simply to
minimize air velocity through the port (which will be roughly proportional
to the port's area).
-- 
|                Dick Pierce                |
|    Loudspeaker and Software Consulting    |
| 17 Sartelle Street   Pepperell, MA  01463 |
|       (508) 433-9183 (Voice and FAX)      |
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: monta@image.mit.edu (Peter Monta)
Subject: Re: PNP vs NPN Output Stages
Organization: MIT Advanced Television Research Program
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 09:10:32 GMT

> [NPN/PNP "comparison"]
>
> We believe this effect owes to the higher speed of electrons through an
> N-type junction being relativistically effected (by the uncertainty
> principle) leading to noise and distortion, particularly noticeable at low
> frequencies. 

This must be a joke, even though no smiley.  No one could
simultaneously know that NPNs are better devices in most processes
*and* mangle it this horribly.  My guess is that the author
wants to get a rise out of rec.audio.

Peter Monta   monta@image.mit.edu
MIT Advanced Television Research Program
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Gabe M Wiener)
Subject: Re: DCC, MD Limitations
Reply-To: gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Gabe M Wiener)
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 07:20:59 GMT

In article <of07=ae00WAuMm90Qm@andrew.cmu.edu> bc2y+@andrew.cmu.edu (Brian T Cheek) writes:
>
>I hear the flames coming, but listen:  If musicians use either of these
>formats for source sampling, when you later go in to edit or
>effect-process those sounds, some of the original sound components would
>have been dropped, and not be acted on.  Believe me, sometimes it's
[STUFF DELETED]

No audio engineer worth his salt would use MD or DCC for source material,
just as they wouldn't use analog cassette.  When sampling source material,
you use DAT, or you use a good 1/4" machine, or something of that caliber.

>Why will MD and DCC take a LONG time to mature?
>1. Record stores can't afford to keep them with the small demand
>2. People can't even program their VCR's yet.
>3. Smart people will wait for true CD quality, (like DAT now, which
>blows the doors off DCC in all areas but analog cassette compatibility
>and text information)

Probably not.  Those who want a true CD quality recordable medium will
buy DAT machines.  DCC/MD are meant to replace the analog cassette, and
I believe we will see the same thing happen with CD/[MD/DCC] as happened
with record/cassette.  One became primarily a "home" medium, and the other
became a car/walkman medium.  No harm done.


>All it would take is a smart marketeer to kill both these formats!

Doubtful.  DAT certainly isn't going to catch on as a home format.  It's
great for professional use, but that's about all.


--
Gabe Wiener - Columbia Univ.     "This 'telephone' has too many shortcomings 
gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu       to be seriously considered as a means of 
N2GPZ in ham radio circles        communication. The device is inherently of
72355,1226 on CI$                 no value to us." -Western Union memo, 1877
Xref: sparky rec.audio:14770 rec.audio.pro:2235
From: kludge@grissom.larc.nasa.gov (Scott Dorsey)
Newsgroups: rec.audio,rec.audio.pro
Subject: Re: DAT recorders with mike input
Date: 9 Nov 1992 15:53:39 GMT
Organization: NASA Langley Research Center and Reptile Farm
NNTP-Posting-Host: grissom.larc.nasa.gov

In article <1992Nov7.205538.876@news.columbia.edu> gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Gabe M Wiener) writes:
>In article <1992Nov5.144628.5134@tc.fluke.COM> strong@tc.fluke.COM (Norm Strong) writes:
>>Does anyone know of a one-piece DAT recorder that will accommodate 2
>>phantom-powered mikes?  It does not--repeat, does not--have to run from
>>batteries.  Line power is entirely adequate--maybe even preferred.  
>>It's important that it be portable, and operable by someone who knows
>>nothing about audio recording.  They don't have to do a world class job,
>>but they should get reliable results.  
>
>There is no DAT on the market with built-in phantom powering.  There
>are plenty of portables (Tascam P20, Dony D10 Pro, etc) that'll take
>mic levels, but if you want to run phantom, spend the extra $50 for a
>phantom supply.

True enough, but it's not that difficult to construct a phantom supply of
your own, and build it into the cabinet.  The Teac machine at least seems
to have enough space to fit some additional electronics inside.

>As for operating it without knowing anything about recording, I wouldn't
>trust such a person to set levels for you.

Admittedly, the additional dynamic range of the DAT gear makes it less likely
for people who don't know what they are doing to screw things up completely,
as long as you beat into their heads that too little is better than too much.
--scott
From: twong@civil.ubc.ca (Thomas Wong)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Question on A/V Receiver usage
Date: 13 Nov 1992 20:17:28 GMT
Organization: Dept. of Civil Engineering, U.B.C., Vancouver, B.C., Canada
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: sam.civil.ubc.ca


I'm no audiophile and I have a very basic question. There are ads for 
A/V Receivers everywhere and I can't find an article in the newstands
that talks about what an A/V Receiver is for. Only reviews. So my
question is, why would I want to add an A/V Receiver to my stereo
system & TV? What advantage does it have? How are people using the
multi-room capabilities of an A/V Receiver? Does this mean you have
to go over to the next room with the receiver before you can change
settings or whatever? Thanks in advance.

Thomas.

--
    /*----------------------------------------------------------------------*/
   /*   Thomas Y. K. Wong            BITNET:        usercedl@ubcmtsg       */
  /*   Civil Eng., U.B.C       INTERNET:     thomas_wong@civil.ubc.ca     */
 /*   Van, B.C., Canada    UUCP:    ...!uunet!civil.ubc.ca!thomas_wong   */
/*----------------------------------------------------------------------*/
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: gfl@hera.cc.bellcore.com (lenahan,grant f)
Subject: Re: Pre-amplifiers
Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 92 13:58:41 GMT

> (Greg Sanguinetti) writes:
>> (William Nau) writes:
> >
> >I've also seen passive preamps that go for $60 (didn't have any kind of
> >input switching).  It had a buffered input and level control (up to line
> 
> How does a passive preamp have a buffered input stage? Is my connotation
> of the term "buffered" too narrow?
> I consider passive and buffered to be mutually exclusive terms.

They are.  And for $60 you can't get a decent potentiometer (retail)
let alone a good buffer / power supply.  This defeats the purpose
of sonic purity.
 
> BTW watch out for impedance missmatches using a passive preamp. Their output
> impedance can be quite high, and variable with pot settings.

And, more importantly, you have a trade off (in POT resistance) between
a low input impedance (bad) and a high output impedance (also bad).
With passives, you can't have it both ways.
 
Grant


Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: gilchr@ee.ualberta.ca (Andrew Gilchrist)
Subject: Re: Audio cables ...
Organization: University Of Alberta, Edmonton Canada
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 08:38:44 GMT

stud1b53@bnr.ca (Anshu Prasad) writes:
>In article <...c, gilchr@ee.ualberta.ca (Andrew Gilchrist) writes:
>|> 
>|> [Junk about how good speaker wires can make all the difference in the
>    ^^^^
>|>  world deleted]
>|>

>  Junk?!?  IMHO, speaker wire and interconnects _can_ make a considerable
>difference.  I have heard it.  I did not believe it UNTIL I heard it for
[Blah blah blah blah blah blah blah]
>  Diverting power to flame shields...
>-- 
>  /\ \ \ \  Anshu Prasad                        stud1b53@bnr.ca

Look, I could easily have said stuff, things, words, shit, whatever.
The use of "junk" was primarily influenced by the fact that your comments
were irrelevant to my post.  If you want to rehash the age old flame war,
go find someone else to play.  I'd appreciate it if you'd stop putting
words into my mouth.  I haven't said anything about whether or not
I think using different wires/connectors/voodoo/whatever make an audible
difference.  Nor am I likely to.

Andrew
From: kmr4@po.CWRU.edu (Keith M Ryan)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: DA conversion
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 15:35:22 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University
NNTP-Posting-Host: b64746.student.cwru.edu
Summary: What are the sonic differences among the various systems?
Keywords: PCM, PDM.

In article <1992Nov5.014422.21674@leland.Stanford.EDU> ianchan@leland.Stanford.EDU (Ian Hin Yun Chan) writes:
>When PDM (bitstream) came out a number of years ago, I thought it solved
>everything that PCM suffered from, but I still see a lot of DACs out there
>with regular muti-bit conversion. Why is everybody hanging on? Is there
>some deficiency in PDM that I don't know about? In particular, what are
>the relative strengths and weakness of the two DAC systems (dynamics,
>smoothness, "natural-ness," detail, bass/treble, etc...)?
>- Ian

	I don't think its so much a matter of bit's vs. a bit, but rather, 
the design quality. I believe that it is easier and cheaper to get a 
bitstream DA to work properly than a multi-bit. However, properly designed, 
I do not think one is inherently superior to another. I would pay more 
attention to the quality of contruction, their outputs, etc, then worry 
about how many bits it's decoder is. 

	IMHO, in the lower to mid priced units, I prefer the 20 bit 
converter in the Denon's, then the 'mash' bitstreams in the Yamaha's and 
Technics. 

	
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: janik@gfx.engga.uwo.ca (Janik Joire)
Subject: Re: DCC, what and how is it different from other recording media?
Organization: Univ. Western Ontario, London Ont. CA
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 17:58:01 GMT

In article <1992Nov9.153347.5967@porthos.cc.bellcore.com>, whs70@dancer.uucp (22501-sohl) writes:
|> 
|> I saw a brief commercial on TV last
|> night which was hailing the DCC availability from Phillips.  It was
|> a Phillips commercial.  What, if anything, is there similar to
|> SCMS in the DCC format?
|> 
|> Actually, maybe someone could provide an overview of DCC for those
|> of us that aren't familiar with it.  What is the actual recording
|> type (analog/digital?),  physical size, length, recording time
|> of the tapes, etc.
|> 
|> Standard Disclaimer- Any opinions, etc. are mine and NOT my employer's.
|> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
|> Note - If email replying to me with an automatic addressing process
|> bounces, manually address the resend using one of the addresses below.
|> -----------------------------------------------------------------------
|> Bill Sohl (K2UNK) BELLCORE (Bell Communications Research, Inc.)
|> Morristown, NJ             email via UUCP      bcr!dancer!whs70
|> 201-829-2879 Weekdays      email via Internet  whs70@dancer.cc.bellcore.com

	Check the November issue of Stereo Review: there are lots of goodies
about DCC and a nice SONY ad. on MD.

				Janik
-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Janik Joire                          The University of Western Ontario, Canada
Programmer / Systems maintenance                        Faculty of Engineering
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Office Tel: (519) 679-2111 Ext. 8112    | Home Tel: (519) 434-7601
                                        |
E-Mail:	janik@gfx.engga.uwo.ca          | Fax: (519) 661-3292
        janik@melmak.engga.uwo.ca       |      c/o Janik Joire
        janik@charon.engga.uwo.ca       |
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------