HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: gds@cbnewsi.cb.att.com (glenn.d.strouse)
Subject: Re: 'Bookshelf' Speakers???
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 20:06:04 GMT




	Give th Altec Lansing model 85's a try. I bought a pair for 
	my fiance' to go with an Onkyo 35w/c receiver. They retail
	for ~ $200.00/pr. But I have seen them for as low as $130.00
	mail order. They sound great for the money, and should be
	considered a best buy in this price range. Just my $.02 worth.


	Glenn
From: jeh@cmkrnl.com
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: Optimization dilemma...
Date: 23 Dec 92 19:44:31 GMT
Organization: Kernel Mode Consulting, San Diego, CA

In article <1992Dec20.201807.12202@en.ecn.purdue.edu>, syd@en.ecn.purdue.edu (Dennis P Hilgenberg) writes:
> Bruce Gan writes:
> 
>>Here's the scenario - I have a Nak CR-3A deck with Dolby B and C, and
>>an Eq switch for 120us and 70us.  I have so far been recording on
>>chrome TDK SAX tapes with Dolby C and at 70us with excellent results.
> 
> The Eq switch doesn't affect the recording, only playback.

This is not correct.  The EQ switch affects both recording and playback.  It
is the bias switch which affects only recording.

>>My car deck has Dolby B and I think it plays everything back at 120us.
>>Unfortunately it also selects the tape type automatically and reads
>>my chrome tapes as metal.  Because of this, normal tapes actually sound
>>better on my car deck than chrome ones.

> If the deck selects the tape type, it is in effect choosing between
> 120us and 70us equalization.  So the first sentence and the second 
> are contradictory.  Both chrome and metal tapes utilize the same 
> (70us) equalization, so your car deck is not misbehaving.

...but this IS correct. 

	--- Jamie Hanrahan, Kernel Mode Consulting, San Diego CA
Internet:  jeh@cmkrnl.com, hanrahan@eisner.decus.org, or jeh@crash.cts.com
Uucp:  ...{crash,eisner,uunet}!cmkrnl!jeh
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: Richard.Chalk@launchpad.unc.edu (Richard Chalk)
Subject: Yamaha low end CD Player for sale
Organization: University of North Carolina Extended Bulletin Board Service
Distribution: na
Date: Fri, 25 Dec 1992 02:50:30 GMT

For Sale: Yamaha CDX-350 CD player.  This is the entry level player, but in
the new style with the rounded faceplate.  Basic programmable player,
remote capable, but no hand unit.  

Sold new in 1991 for about $179.00

Asking $100.00 or reasonable offer.

Richard Chalk

--
   The opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the University of
     North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the Campus Office for Information
        Technology, or the Experimental Bulletin Board Service.
           internet:  laUNChpad.unc.edu or 152.2.22.80
From: glenne@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Neuromancer )
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: FM reception
Date: 21 Dec 1992 17:46:35 GMT
Organization: Computing Services Division, University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.89.7.4
Originator: glenne@csd4.csd.uwm.edu

I am looking for a setup that will allow me to get the best
FM radio reception for a reasonably low cost.
 
Also, my stereo system along with my CD player recently died, so
I will have to buy everything _but_ speakers.  I am looking to spend
maybe only $300 for the whole setup.  I don't want anything fancy.
I just want a reliable 3 beam CD player, along with a reciever/
tuner/pre/post amp.  I don't want a tape deck or turn-table.
 
I am looking for something that will last and give me awesome FM radio
reception.  Is there anyone who can make any brand name or model
suggestions?  I am looking for CHEAP, and extremely LONG-LIFESPAN,
equipment with reasonably OK sound.    For the FM reception, should
I just buy the mushroom shaped signal booster from radio shack?
Should I run a cable to my TV antenna on my roof?  What kind 'O cable?
Are there any other nifty tricks for boosting FM reception?
 
Thanks in advance,
Glenn                       glenne@csd4.csd.uwm.edu
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: gre253@mis.csiro.au (Steven Green (+61 6 276 6813))
Subject: Is Laserdisc _really_ robust ?
Keywords: Laser Disk, fiber optic output
Organization: CSIRO ITS
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 92 08:31:49 GMT

I've been following the "is S-VHS dead" thread for quite a while, and
noted several comments that concluded "... LD is more robust than
video tape ..." 

But, is it _really_ ? Sure tapes seem to wear out at a rate of knots in the
rental arena. But would you trust a 12" _expensive_ LD to a pack of "typical"
video rental freaks? Just look at the state of some of the video tapes and
covers - it makes you wonder what they did with them !?

I've lent CD's _once_ to freindes, they returned in less-than-original,
condition, with scratches, finger-prints, beer stains ,etc ....

Are rental LDs treated with care or do the mongul hoards play frisbee with
them?

BTW - Don't flame my naivity (sp?) I live in Australia - We don't have
a floroushing LD rental market - yet.


-- 
* Steve Green     *  "Hey Rocky, watch me pull a rabbit outa my hat!"    *
* Comms Group     *  "That trick never works"                            *
* ITS Branch      *  "Nothin' up my sleeve - PRESTO"                     *
* CSIRO Australia *  "No doubt about it - I gotta get another hat"       *
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: tlai@cs.toronto.edu (Tony Wen Hsun Lai)
Subject: Re: MiniDisc is here!
Organization: Department of Computer Science, University of Toronto
Date: 26 Dec 92 19:23:10 GMT

In article <PHR.92Dec25155046@napa.telebit.com> phr@telebit.com (Paul Rubin) writes:
>In article <Bzu539.DDt@news.cso.uiuc.edu> rmg53668@dcl-nxt53 (Ryan Martin Grant) writes:
>   MD still suffers from the same problems CD-ROMs do with regard to
>   variable spin rates and inertia killing random seek times.  I still
>   look forward to a small portable disc capable of handling well over
>   100MB, but I do not expect it to replace my 250MB HD.
>
>MD has 1/4th the transfer speed of CD (hence the 4:1 compression).
>This bit rate is comparable to a floppy.
[stuff deleted]

Er, I recall some magazine mentioning that an MD has a transfer rate of
around 1.4 Mbit/s, comparable to a CD; the transfer rate has to be much
faster than the compressed audio bit rate to keep the audio buffer full.  
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: jberger@novell.com (John Berger)
Subject: Personal to schludermann@sscvx1.ssc.gov
Organization: Novell, Inc.
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 18:43:36 GMT

In article <1992Dec18.162949.1@sscvx1.ssc.gov> schludermann@sscvx1.ssc.gov writes:
>Subject: FORSAIL:Nakamichi Electronic Crossover
>Nakamichi electronic crossover & power supply, EC-100 & PS-100. $200. Have
>original packaging.

Sorry for the wasted bandwidth, but I've been trying to reach you via email, 
and I get no response.  I'm interested in buying these if they are still 
available.  Please call me at (510) 623-0787 (h) or (408) 473-8332 (w) if 
they are still available, or email me at jberger@novell.com

We now return you to your regularly scheduled program......

John
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: shiv@bnr.ca (Shiv Naimpally)
Subject: Re: Poor college student seeks center speaker
Reply-To: shiv@bnr.ca (Shiv Naimpally)
Organization: Bell-Northern Research Ltd.
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 92 18:27:47 GMT

Just about all the center channel speakers I have seen are <$200.
Infinity, Yamaha, Mirage, Boston Acoustics, etc. all have them 
for <$200. Paradigm has also released one in that price range.

In Ottawa the cheapest I have seen are the Yamaha ($100 Canadian)
and the Infinity ($150 Canadian).
From: smee@bristol.ac.uk (Paul Smee)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: Carver and the FAQ
Date: 23 Dec 92 10:11:02 GMT
Reply-To: P.Smee@bristol.ac.uk (Paul Smee)
Organization: University of Bristol

In article <92357.203715U37426@uicvm.uic.edu> U37426@uicvm.uic.edu writes:
>     Just reading the new faq today and was confused about one thing.  Why is
>Carver singled out for a question?  That does not make sence.  Do the FAQ
>writers have a grudge against Carver?  

No.  Just that Carver is one of the more-often asked about makes,
historically at least.  Also, keep in mind that the FAQ is not (yet, at
least :-) cast in stone.  This version is a 'first public' version, and
comments are certainly welcome.

-- 
Paul Smee, Computing Service, University of Bristol, Bristol BS8 1UD, UK
 P.Smee@bristol.ac.uk - ..!uunet!uknet!bsmail!p.smee - Tel +44 272 303132
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Newsgroups: rec.audio

is $499.) They are physically different, but how do they compare when it
comes to performance?? And how come I don't see SE-5's in most stores? Please
respond either by post or e-mail. I have a few friends who have a decision to
make.

Thanks in advance.
----------
Maybe because Bose isn't as selective about who sells their gear?
Maybe because there is more profit in one over the other?
Maybe only stores that sell to people with "golden ears" or at least not
ear plugs sell the SE-5.

Kirk (  8-)  ) out
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: ljkong@undergrad.math.waterloo.edu (Lennard J. Kong)
Subject: Re: RECOMMANDATION FOR WALKMAN ABOUT $100
Organization: University of Waterloo
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 02:22:11 GMT

In article <1h74hoINNanr@faatcrl.Faa.Gov> frankc@faatcrl (Frank Coffman) writes:
>fm@neptune.iex.com (Mohammad Farooq) writes:
>
>
>>I posted this article a few weeks ago but didn't receive any response. I would
>>appreciate if someone on the net can share his/her experince with me. I am
>>thinking to buy a walkman. I am looking for best sound quality and some good
>> options.If someone has done comparison, I would like to have the results. 
>>Thanks in advance.
>

  Sony is definitely much better than Aiwa, Aiwa usually has all kinds of 
fancy features which aren't really needed. Also Aiwa's eat batteries for 
breakfast, and most Aiwa's use 2 AAA which are a bit more expensive, another
problem with Aiwa is that the volume control is usually on the side and near
the edge, so if you put it in your pocket it is likely to rub against your
shirt and move. I have owned both brands as well as known friends from  
countries such as Singapore and Hong Kong where the latest models always come
out years before other countries, if at all. In my opinion Sony is the best, and
the least battery consumptive, some models only take a single AA, and there is
also a 20 min. rechargeable which can be used with them. Last but not least
Sony walkmans are way lighter than Aiwa's.

-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 Lennard J. Kong               |  Emancipate yourself from mental slavery
 ljkong@descartes.waterloo.edu |                                  - Bob Marley
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: daw@cray.com (Dave Wright)
Subject: Re: Room treatments
Organization: Cray Research, Inc.
Date: 29 Dec 92 14:24:10 CST

In article <1hppnvINNr9c@faatcrl.Faa.Gov> frankc@tgf.tc.faa.gov (Frank Coffman) writes:
>BARRON@RHQVM14.VNET.IBM.COM writes:
>
>>Does anyone have any suggestions for frequency specific as well as
>>general room treatments?
>
>>I measured the response of my room yesterday to find a 10db+ peak
>>at 54hz (corresponds to my roughly 22 ft long room) plus the harmonics
>>plus resonance at the room height and room width, but not as much a peak
>>as due to the length.
>
>>This is what is giving my room the heavy/colored bass I have been hearing.
>
>>I know of room tunes, but I am sure there is a much less expensive way to
>>replicate this technology, plus I want to specifically tune out the
>>resonances for this particular room.
>
>How about a parametric equalizer?

An equalizer can not compensate for effects the room has on the sound.
RoomTunes only deals with reflection issues that affect high frequencies
not modal problems. I'm curious as to how this was measured. A 10dB peak
is unlikely from modal problems, maybe 6 but not 10dB.

Refer to the book Master Handbook of Acoustics by ALton Everest for details
on dealing with modal problems wiht Helmholtz Resonators or RPG Diffusors.

Dave Wright
From: jj@alice.att.com (jj, curmudgeon and really disguted scientist)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re:  CD SOund QUality
Date: 23 Dec 92 03:34:13 GMT
Article-I.D.: alice.24474
Reply-To: jj@alice.UUCP (jj, curmudgeon and really disguted scientist)
Organization: NJ State Home for Bewildered Terminals

In article <vanz.029i@tragula.equinox.gen.nz> vanz@tragula.equinox.gen.nz (Martin Nieuwelaar) writes:
>Say you sample at 44 KHz.  The maximum theoretical limit of frequency
>you can capture is half of this, 22 KHz.  However, at this rate there
>are only two samples per cycle.  With two samples per cycle, a sine
>wave will sound the same as a square wave.  Surely this is not hi-fi?
Oh, geeze, this again. Go look at a basic signal processing text
for the bit about an "antialaising filter".  It's as hi fi
as your filter.

I must say (I'm sorry to use YOU as an example for this, but
it's your turn, you said it) that this particular misunderstanding
must rank as the #1 utterly falicious argument as to why Digital
Doesn't Work.

The Nyquist and Shannon theorems still hold, folks, despite
your misunderstandings.

>Well, at 11 KHz, there will be 4 samples per waveform.  How close
>to a pure sine wave can you get with 4 samples?  By looking at it,
>not very.
To the quantization limit of the ADC/DAC, you can get it exactly.
Yeah, exactly.  Perfectly. Limited only by the quantization
noise, which isn't a function of frequency if you really
have 16 bit PCM signals.  Your four unfortunate samples get
nicely rounded off by that thar antialiasing filter,
and your sine wave is nice and happy.

Oh, geeeze, not THIS again.  Sigh.

>I guess it wouldn't be difficult for someone with a computer with
>reasonable sound capabilities to try this out.
I do it for a living. It works.  I'd suggest that you
go get Taub and Schilling's basic communications text or
something of that sort, and learn how the process works.
Learn something about fourier mathmatics while you're at it
too, ok?

>As I can only do this with
>certain CDs, it leads me to believe that the companies that put
>the music on the disks have some work to do! 
Here you're on VERY firm ground.  "some work" is perhaps a 
monumental understatement of what I measure on my
computer every day is any indication.

Mumble frotz.  I give up.  It's not your fault, whoever I'm replying
to, it's just the years of the SOS.
-- 
Extremism *Copyright alice!jj 1992, all rights reserved, except transmission
   in the    *by USENET and like facilities granted.      Said permission is
  defense of     *granted only for complete copies that include this notice.
 liberty is no vice.  *Use on pay-for-read services specifically disallowed.
From: BARRON@RHQVM14.VNET.IBM.COM
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 92 09:22:07 EST
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Room treatments
Reply-To: barron@rhqvm14.VNET.IBM.COM

Does anyone have any suggestions for frequency specific as well as
general room treatments?

I measured the response of my room yesterday to find a 10db+ peak
at 54hz (corresponds to my roughly 22 ft long room) plus the harmonics
plus resonance at the room height and room width, but not as much a peak
as due to the length.

This is what is giving my room the heavy/colored bass I have been hearing.

I know of room tunes, but I am sure there is a much less expensive way to
replicate this technology, plus I want to specifically tune out the
resonances for this particular room.


Organization: Advantis Advanced Technology
Disclaimer: This reflects the poster's views, not those of Advantis
News-Software: Usenet 3.0
X-X-From: Dave Barron

Xref: sparky rec.audio:17672 rec.video:15323
From: jeh@cmkrnl.com
Newsgroups: rec.audio,rec.video
Subject: Re: Radio Shack garbage
Date: 2 Jan 93 16:45:26 GMT
Organization: Kernel Mode Consulting, San Diego, CA

In article <C05qz7.Mp7@cs.uiuc.edu>, gillies@cs.uiuc.edu (Don Gillies) writes:
> Re: Somebody's Radio Shack Speakers (the ones rated highly in Consumer
>   Reports) are not working well as center-channel speakers.
> 
> Radio Shack makes total garbage; most likely your problem is all Radio
> Shack's fault.  I would never buy a Radio Shack product.  

This is a trifle overstated.  RS's upper-end scanners, for example, are widely
considered to be among the best available, and they have a long history of
reliability.  Many of their short wave (now often called "world band") radios
are also well-regarded (these are relabelled Sangean units, so I guess you 
could say that they're not really a RS product).  

In general, though, you're right.  My take on this is that I assume that
anything RS offers is bad until I have some information to the contrary. 

	--- Jamie Hanrahan, Kernel Mode Consulting, San Diego CA
Internet:  jeh@cmkrnl.com, hanrahan@eisner.decus.org, or jeh@crash.cts.com
Uucp:  ...{crash,eisner,uunet}!cmkrnl!jeh
From: arenson@twics.co.jp
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: S-DOLBY 
Date: 23 Dec 92 00:04:19 GMT
Organization: TWICS, Tokyo, Japan

     Anyone know about DOLBY S decks?  There was a guy from Europe about 8
     months ago who had rave reviews of the Pioneer deck.  Here in Japan
     these are available:
 

      2 new decks from Pioneer--one equiv. to last year's is #2 in price,
         plus another pricier one.

      3 first time decks from SONY---with the most expensive boasting
      higher grade parts , more isolation, etc.

      3 decks from Aiwa (connecetd to SONY it is said), some or
      all having DA converters to go from a CD player for example (I
       guess if they were better converters than on your CD out it
            might be useful (they are giant bulbs sticking out the
            back---Aiwa has the most expensive deck I have seen so far

      A deck from kenwood--with S inserted into an exiting non S deck--
         looks the most "plastiky"

       A deck from TEAC---no change from last year's model

        TEAC's TASCAM  models are in multi track formats only
         (open reel and casette)  Interestingly enough,
                the casettes forgo all of the latest in
                 high grade audio parts, probably in favor
                of being more rugged.  In fact, the TASCAms
               look much like Tascams have over the years

What do they have wher you are anbd have you tried it?


Please respond in this NEWSGROUP/no EMAIL

    *****************************************************
    you people in the States are lucky if you don't have 
    to pay for USENET.  Here in Japan, we don't pay for
    the topics (newsgroups) but we DO pay for ALL
    incoming as well as outgoing mail--hence the
    request for no mail.

    Thank you
From: shetline@bbn.com (Kerry Shetline)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: questions on new digital formats
Followup-To: rec.audio
Date: 2 Jan 1993 04:53:15 GMT
Organization: BBN
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: bbn.com

In article <ibhan.725943044@husc.harvard.edu>, ibhan@husc8.harvard.edu
(Ishir Bhan) wrote:
> I agree, but I haven't seen any ads in magazines for MiniDisc yet, though
> I've seen quite a few for DCC.  Not too smart, Sony.  I'm sure they'll
> appear soon, though.  Right now, both DCC and MiniDisc are out of my price
> range.  There's no doubt in my mind that MiniDisc is the better system. 
> I'm just waiting for cheaper/smaller units.

From a techno-gadget viewpoint, I find MD much more appealing than DCC.
Also, more importantly, MD is a more physically robust medium. However, in
my limited exposure to actually hearing the two formats, DCC sounded
better. The conditions were far from equal, however -- different music,
different headphones, and no immediate comparison to CD was possible. Since
my subjective impressions were exactly in line with my expectations based
on foreknowledge of the two formats (DCC compresses less severely than MD),
I consider these impressions suspect, and will reserve judgement until such
time as I can arrange better testing.

-Kerry
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: bill@thd.tv.tek.com (William K. McFadden)
Subject: Re: WHY NOT USE A BIGGER DISK FOR SONY MD?
Organization: Tektronix TV Products
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 19:26:42 GMT

In their technical presentation at the recent AES convention, Sony said that
Minidisc was designed as a replacement for analog cassette in walkman
applications, because cassette sales have been declining.  The small size is
needed to make the player small (although it's not very small yet).

BTW, Philips said it introduced dcc for the same reason (declining cassette
sales).

-- 
Bill McFadden    Tektronix, Inc.  P.O. Box 500  MS 58-639  Beaverton, OR  97077
bill@tv.tv.tek.com, ...!tektronix!tv.tv.tek.com!bill      Phone: (503) 627-6920
How can I prove I am not crazy to people who are?
Newsgroups: rec.audio,rec.video
From: bill@bilver.uucp (Bill Vermillion)
Subject: Re: Radio Shack garbage
Organization: W. J. Vermillion - Winter Park, FL
Date: Sun, 3 Jan 1993 16:36:32 GMT

In article <1993Jan2.214615.6951@wam.umd.edu> bladin@wam.umd.edu (Ilana J. Getz) writes:
>In article <1993Jan2.084526.1056@cmkrnl.com> jeh@cmkrnl.com writes:
>>In article <C05qz7.Mp7@cs.uiuc.edu>, gillies@cs.uiuc.edu (Don Gillies) writes:

>>> Radio Shack makes total garbage; most likely your problem is all Radio
>>> Shack's fault.  I would never buy a Radio Shack product.  

>>This is a trifle overstated.  RS's upper-end scanners, for example, are widely
>>considered to be among the best available, and they have a long history of
>>reliability.   ....


>I worked at good 'ol RS when I was in college, and I think I can provide
>some insight.

>Radio Shack manufactures about 50% of th stuff they sell, and the rest is
>farmed out to other suppliers. For example, when I worked there, they made
>all of the stereo receivers, but none of the VCR's. To make matters worse,
>the situation is not consistant within a product line. They made all of their
>low-end cassette decks, but none of their high end ones. The cheap ones were 
>crap, and the high end ones were pretty good. On top of all of this, the
>list of outside suppliers chages from year to year. One years models may be
>repackaged Sharp TVs & VCRs, the next may be a different model all together.

The inconsitancy from year to year is typical of many large volume
retailers who don't manufacture all of what they sell.  Sears Kenmore
line of home units are made by different manufacturers too.

>What's the bottom line? A total lack of consistancy. You simply cannot say
>that "all of the RS gear is bad," or even that all of one particular
>line of products is good or bad. They may all come from a different place.

And Tandy corporation also manufacturers for other companies and brands
for them.    At one time Tandy was making '386 based computers for
Panasonic and DEC (yup Digital Equipment Corp)

I remember being in one shop and a tech saw the Panasonic machine that
Tandy built.   Some really nice construction.

>I agree that it is best to avoid RS products in general, but not because
>they are all bad. Rather, there is no way to know which ones are bad.

That's the same way for virtually anything anymore - from automobiles
to appliances.   


-- 
Bill Vermillion - bill@bilver.oau.org  bill@bilver.uucp
                - ..!{peora|tous|tarpit}!bilver!bill
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: yuen@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (Geoffrey L Yuen)
Subject: circuit boards for lead vocal suppression
Reply-To: yuen@casbah.acns.nwu.edu
Organization: Northwestern University, Evanston, Illinois
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 22:42:15 GMT

Saw this ad in Radio Electronics May 1992 issue about
lead vocal removal circuit plans and boards which can 
work on any source (tape, phono, radio, CD, etc). However,
when I called them, the line was disconnected & phone
is unlisted.    Does anyone out there have these types of
circuits or know of kits. pc boards available ?  How good
are the quality compared Karaoke ?
Any source of information will be appreciated.

- geoff