HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: muller@world.std.com (James L Muller)
Subject: Re: Earplugs for audiences?
Keywords: earplugs, hearing
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 21:00:25 GMT

In <3162@ariel.its.unimelb.EDU.AU> cm@ariel.its.unimelb.EDU.AU
  (Charles Meo) writes:
>I find it hard to credit that people feel the need to seriously discuss
>earplugs at rock gigs. If you need 'em, you're too old, and should go home.

Music (or noise) too loud will (not "can") damage anyone's ears, no matter
whether your are old or young, enjoying the music or offended or bored.
The question of someone's children is yet another problem, a social one,
not an artisitc one, since not everyone is aware enough to take full
responsibility of ones own future.  It is common enough that music is
too loud, even at shows intended for older audiences.  If you want to
blow your ears off, that's your right (until it starts to run my medical
insurance bills up), but I like to enjoy music without worrying and
without pain.  When I have to hold fingers over my ears, I'd just as
soon go home, and in that case, the damned volume is preventing me from
enjoying what might otherwise be a great show.

>In this country, we have these stupid SPL meters hooked into the mains...

In the amp or mixer circuits?  In the speakers?  How can anyone know
ahead of time what the speaker output rating will be or how far the
audience will be?  Sounds like someone is trying to protect themselves
or their audience from you.

>I have been in the business for 15 years (drums and board) and my hearing
>is maybe 10% gone  on some frequencies last time I checked. To me, this is
>quite acceptable and if my ears start to pack up about the time the rest
>of me does, that's OK too.

Well, don't ask everyone to make the same sacrifice.  I hope to keep *all*
of what hearing I still have, and I am not making plans for *any* of me to
"pack up" until I can't help it.

(We do a number of shows every year for a promoter who wears a hearing aid!
With all due respect, he has no clue, but has been know to tell the sound
guys to turn it up a bit more.)

-- 
Jim Muller  muller@world.std.com
From: grego@bit.UUCP (Greg Sanguinetti)
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
Subject: Re: Home Audio distribution
Keywords: audio distribution, balanced lines
Date: 14 Sep 92 15:42:49 GMT
Article-I.D.: bit.420
Reply-To: grego@bit.UUCP (Grego Sanguinetti)
Distribution: na
Organization: BIT  Portland, OR

In article <5198@gold.gvg.tek.com> chrisc@gold.gvg.tek.com (Chris Christensen) writes:
  <...initial thread deleted...>

>There is no reason to have the shell of a three pin audio connector
>connected.  This connection will make a nice chassis to chassis ground 
>loop and the lifting of pin 1 won't help because the ground loop is made 
>at the chassis level.  
>I am sure that some will argue my statement about the shell ground and...

Not an arguement per se but an addendum. You can still get the extra
shielding but avoid the chassis ground loops (at least cable propagated)
by connecting the shell at one end only.

Many commercial XLR, and even some unbalanced, cables are built this way.
-grego
-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Grego Sanguinetti, Bipolar Integrated Technology | Water, water everywhere,
grego@bit.uucp or grego%bit%ogi.cse.edu          | but I'd rather drink
or bit!grego@ogi.cse.edu or ...!ogicse!bit!grego | beer.
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
From: jrusby@darkwing.uoregon.edu (Jim T. Rusby)
Subject: Re: Sound reinforcement questions
Organization: University of Oregon Network Services
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 92 15:48:16 GMT

In article <1992Sep8.063920.15950@ucc.su.OZ.AU> theo@physics.su.OZ.AU (Theo ten Brummelaar) writes:
>In article <1992Sep7.193207.10057@kth.se> moose@guppy.tds.kth.se ((]ke Nordin)) writes:
>
>P.S. A quick question: Do sound engineers know more about serial numbers
>     of microphones than music ?

Not if they expect to make a living.  I assume this is a good natured
jibe, everyone does it at least once.   
Serial numbers can be meaningful. Most of the well -equipped studios have
custom retrofitted microphones that were reworked by Stephen Paul or
German Masterworks (Klaus Heine).  Certain production runs of the famous
U-87 Neumann or U-89 are well worth upgrading, producing an outstanding
microphone.  The production run is identified by: the serial number.
Likewise, the older AKG414 series can be also turbocharged.  The newer
variety employed construction methods that make such an upgrade impossible.

This information is musically important to drummers who hire sound engineers.

Now, let me pose a question: Do drummers know more about drum product
numbers or cymbal weights than music?

We all try to take an interest in our tools.

Jim Rusby
UO School of Music 
Eugene Oregon
From: hollan@INRS-Telecom.UQuebec.CA (Rene Hollan)
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
Subject: Home Audio distribution
Keywords: audio distribution, balanced lines
Date: 8 Sep 92 20:46:26 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: INRS Telecommunications

I've been following rec.audio.pro for a while now and while this post departs
from the usual topics of discussion (pro audio equipment, recording, etc.)
this group's audience may be best suited to answer my questions (as opposed
to rec.audio or rec.audio.high-end).

I'm considering wiring my home for distribution of audio and video signals
to and from several zones (from two, and to as many as six) and seek advice
regarding the best wiring scheme.

I've planned for wiring runs to/from each zone to a central distribution
location. Max distance is about 50 feet from the central location to the
furthest zones.

I'd like to run analog audio (eventually SP-DIF or AES-EBU), composite video
(possible seperate chroma/luma a la S-Video), and perhaps some control/status
communication link.

I've looked at digital distribution systems such as Sony's DST (and others)
but find technical info hard to get, and the technology not mature enough to
warrant an investment.

My questions:

1) Given the distances involved, are balanced lines worth it? Much of my
current equipment has unbalanced I/O and would require conversion. Some of
this equipment is very good however, and I wouldn't want a long unbalanced
run to become a "weak link".

2) Could I get away with running balanced signals on 24 AWG twisted pair
such as that used for telephone wiring? Note that I AM NOT referring to
normal residential telephone wiring here, usually called "Quad" or "JaKE",
but rather the stuff used for business telephone and data (10BASE-T)
wiring. I've been told that this has been used with success in some
professional installations.

I envision (up to) three sets of 4-pair running to each zone, thus:

1. Left Audio Out    5. Left Audio In    9. Control Out
2. Right Audio Out   6. Right Audio In  10. Control/Status In
3. Video Out         7. Video In        11. Telephone 1
4. Aux. Audio Out    8. Aux. Audio In   12. Spare

I also expect to run two broadband RF lines (a la cable (RG-58U?)) to each
zone from the distribution point.

Hopefully, the investment in the combination of twisted-pair and 75 ohm coax
wiring should be adequate for any commercial distribution systems that may
appear on the market.

I would consider seperate shielded twisted-pair balanced lines per channel
(as opposed to unshielded 4-pair bundles) if net.wisdom indicates that
this is warranted.

If there is sufficient interest/feedback I will summerize and post the
results.

Thanks Muchly,

Rene S. Hollan
hollan@inrs-telecom.uquebec.ca
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
From: richie@leonardo.src.honeywell.com (Rich Olson 7758)
Subject: Home Studio Monitor System
Reply-To: richie@leonardo.src.honeywell.com
Organization: Honeywell Systems and Research Center
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 15:17:09 GMT


	In the very near future, I will be purchasing an inexpensive/quality home studio monitor system.  Does anyone have any advice on amps and speakers that should be considered?  I am hoping the total cost will be under $1000.

	Also, does anyone have any comments on the new JBL monitor speakers (the 4200 line, I think)?  Is there also any comments on the new Alesis Studio amp (can't remember the model number)?

	Any and all advice will be welcome.  I am presently using consumer speakers and receiver.  

Thanks!!!

Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
From: smills@news.weeg.uiowa.edu (MuffinHead)
Subject: Re: Sound reinforcement questions
Organization: University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, USA
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 00:21:32 GMT

In article <H.dkL5ZTYtBvs@jonh.wimsey.bc.ca> jhenders@jonh.wimsey.bc.ca writes:

>p.s. another quick question: Do sound engineers usually know more about 
>tuning drums than drummers. ;-)

   Yeah, most sound engineers know how to make ANY drummer's drums sound just
like the drummer they engineered last weekend. Most have one sound in mind:
"Man, that kick is BOOMING and I got the snare to sound like a machine
gun." A real soundman will ask for a detailed description of how a drummer
wants his/her drums to sound. He'll even have the drummer tweak the EQ's
while someone else hits the drums.
-- 
Muff
From: jhenders@jonh.wimsey.bc.ca ( John Henders )
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
Organization:  One of these days for sure
Subject: Re: Sound reinforcement questions
	<1992Sep8.063920.15950@ucc.su.OZ.AU>
Reply-To: jhenders@jonh.wimsey.bc.ca
X-Software: HERMES GUS 1.03 Rev. Apr 14 1992
Date: Tue, 08 Sep 1992 07:57:08 -0700

In <1992Sep8.063920.15950@ucc.su.OZ.AU>, Theo ten Brummelaar writes:
>
>1. (It's obvious) If the drum doesn't sound good by itself, it is VERY hard
>   to make it sound good through a mic.

	While obvious, it's often the case.
>
>P.S. A quick question: Do sound engineers know more about serial numbers
>     of microphones than music ?

	Maybe just the ones you work with,

p.s. another quick question: Do sound engineers usually know more about 
tuning drums than drummers. ;-)



-- 
jhenders@jonh.wimsey.bc.ca
From: jhenders@jonh.wimsey.bc.ca ( John Henders )
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
Distribution: na
Organization:  One of these days for sure
Subject: Re: Home Audio distribution
Keywords: audio distribution, balanced lines
	<5178@gold.gvg.tek.com> <H.NVHke0HsK0g@jonh.wimsey.bc.ca>
	<5185@gold.gvg.tek.com>
Reply-To: jhenders@jonh.wimsey.bc.ca
X-Software: HERMES GUS 1.03 Rev. Apr 14 1992
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 09:08:48 -0700

In <5185@gold.gvg.tek.com>, Chris Christensen writes:
>
>I am curious as to the what the "ground looping from video feed to
>audio.." is.  
>
>If the vodeo was causing a ground loop and buzz into the audio I would have 
>been inclined to lift pin 1 of the audio connector to stop the loop.

	In the last place I had this problem, merely lifting pin 1 didn't help.
It reduced the buzz slightly, but I had to use a transformer DI to kill it
completely. As the video feed was plugged into a Soundcraft mixer on a
one night a week basis, one night when I wasn't there, someone didn't
lift the ground on the DI. It actually toasted an IC on the input
stage of the Soundcraft. There was a lot of potential on the ground
from the cable feed.



-- 
       John Henders      jhenders@jonh.wimsey.bc.ca
    I think your "evolutionary scale" needs an adjustment.  Either 
      that, or you've got your thumb on it. -> (lefty@apple.com)
From: ewm@cbnews.cb.att.com (edward.w.mcfarland)
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
Subject: Re: Review of Sony PCM-3324S in August '92 MIX
Date: 11 Sep 92 20:51:44 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: AT&T

In article <1992Sep11.170031.14934@bilver.uucp> bill@bilver.uucp (Bill Vermillion) writes:
>In article <1992Sep10.042535.6139@ultb.isc.rit.edu> cms2839@ultb.isc.rit.edu (a.stranger) writes:
>>
>>				the review was positive throughout , but
>>the strength of this paragraph really surprised me . the PCM-3324S still
>>costs *twice* as much as sony's comparable analogue machine , the APR-24
>>( which i've used frequently and like a lot ) . i haven't been in this
>>business long enough to have a really wide perspective , but i'm kinda
>>skeptical . what do you " oldsters " 8^>= think ?
>
>I'd probably go along with Pohlman's thoughts.  I don't know
>how old you think we oldster's are (or might be), but in the
>first of our 2 warehouse studios before we built a state of the
>art dual 24-track studio, our first brand new out of the box
>direct from the factory 8-track, was an Ampex AG-440-8.  It was
>the first Ampex 8 track, and the serial number on it was #13.
>That's right THIRTEEN!  (That is their 1st true production
>8-track - Les Paul had a custom 300 8-track).
>
>So I guess that puts me far enought back :-)
>-- 
>Bill Vermillion - bill@bilver.oau.org  bill.vermillion@oau.org
>                - bill@bilver.uucp 
>                - ..!{peora|ge-dab|tous|tarpit}!bilver!bill

I took a workshop course in recording technology in 1976.  It was at a 
Boston recording studio which at the time was one of the best in town.
They had the first 16 track production Ampex serial # 1.  I think they
had bought it from its original owner.
This course was made available by a group called the Recording Institute of
America.  Are they still around?  They were as good as whatever studio and 
teacher that they could hire in the local area and they were nation wide.
I was lucky in that Intermedia studio was (and is, under a different name)
very good and the teacher was Bob Runstein, author of "Modern Recording
Techniques", a very good text.



     Ed McFarland                       We make history the old-fashioned
     ewm@mvuzr.att.com                  way, we revise it!

           "Almost anyone can be on TV, I prove it nightly."
                           -David Letterman
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
From: cms2839@ultb.isc.rit.edu (a.stranger)
Subject: Review of Sony PCM-3324S in August '92 MIX
Originator: cms2839@ultb
Organization: Minimalist Music for Hyperactive Children (MMHC)
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 04:25:35 GMT

				recently , i asked what sony " left off
" their new 24 track DASH-F machine to bring it down to approximately
half of the price of their previous model . another netter recommended
Ken Pohlmann's review in the August '92 issue of MIX , which i read with
interest , and discovered that the answer , essentially , is " nothing . "
i was , however , quite surprised by the last paragraph of the review ,
where Pohlmann states :

"Pound for pound, dollar for dollar, the PCM-3324S is the best
multitrack tape recorder on the market today.  Its mechanical,
electrical and sonic qualities are unsurpassed, and its competitive
price could drive a stake thorough the heart of analog multitrack
recording.  With the arrival of this machine, it is possible that the
science of open-reel audio tape recorders has reached its zenith and
will be superseded only by entirely different forms of data storage."

				the review was positive throughout , but
the strength of this paragraph really surprised me . the PCM-3324S still
costs *twice* as much as sony's comparable analogue machine , the APR-24
( which i've used frequently and like a lot ) . i haven't been in this
business long enough to have a really wide perspective , but i'm kinda
skeptical . what do you " oldsters " 8^>= think ?

DISCLAIMER: anyone attempting to restart the digital vs. analogue flame
war will be ignored .
-- 
       @@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
       @       "Imagination keeps the shadows away  -  Xymox       @
       @~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~@
       @ a.stranger - CMS2839@ritvax.isc.rit.edu - PGP key on req. @
From: chrisc@gold.gvg.tek.com (Chris Christensen)
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
Subject: Re: Home Audio distribution
Keywords: audio distribution, balanced lines
Date: 13 Sep 92 19:18:33 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Grass Valley Group, Grass Valley, CA

In article <H.AoQWTS6rUUc@jonh.wimsey.bc.ca> jhenders@jonh.wimsey.bc.ca writes:
>In <5185@gold.gvg.tek.com>, Chris Christensen writes:

>>I am curious as to the what the "ground looping from video feed to
>>audio.." is.  

>	In the last place I had this problem, merely lifting pin 1 didn't help.
>It reduced the buzz slightly, but I had to use a transformer DI to kill it
>completely. As the video feed was plugged into a Soundcraft mixer on a
>one night a week basis, one night when I wasn't there, someone didn't
>lift the ground on the DI. It actually toasted an IC on the input
>stage of the Soundcraft. There was a lot of potential on the ground
>from the cable feed.

I was confused with the reference to the audio and video portions of
the problem.

Your "real" problem was dealing with a power system ground loop.

Something I have irregurlarly checked on my cables for was the
connection of the audio cable shell to pin 1.

There is no reason to have the shell of a three pin audio connector
connected.  This connection will make a nice chassis to chassis ground 
loop and the lifting of pin 1 won't help because the ground loop is made 
at the chassis level.  

I haven't checked all of my microphone cables for this condition but
I have made all of my system interconnects and I haven't connected the
shell.

I am sure that some will argue my statement about the shell ground and
I will further state that if anyone really thinks it is necessary for
their application test it!
-- 
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.
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
From: theo@physics.su.OZ.AU (Theo ten Brummelaar)
Subject: Re: Sound reinforcement questions
Organization: School of Physics, University of Sydney, Australia
Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1992 06:06:56 GMT

In article <H.dkL5ZTYtBvs@jonh.wimsey.bc.ca> jhenders@jonh.wimsey.bc.ca writes:
>
>p.s. another quick question: Do sound engineers usually know more about 
>tuning drums than drummers. ;-)
>
SOAP BOX ON

Unfortunately, this seems to be true. I didn't start to learn how to tune
my drums until I started trying to mic them up and working with sound 
reinforcement people. Basically I didn't know what to really listen for.
By the same token, a number of sound engineershave said they learnt a few
things by listening to what the musicians have to say.

The comment that started this thread was due to my frustration 
at working with sound engineers who can tell you lots about serial numbers
but cann't actualy help you get `that sound'. This does not always happen,
in fact not very often. I place these people in the same catagory as the
guitar players that know all about the history of their guitar but aren't
able to keep time.

People in the music trade should listen to each other as well as know 
their equipment ;-).

SOAP BOX OFF

	Theo.
From: hollan@INRS-Telecom.UQuebec.CA (Rene Hollan)
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
Subject: Re: Home Audio Distribution
Date: 15 Sep 92 17:56:08 GMT
Followup-To: rec.audio
Distribution: na
Organization: INRS Telecommunications

Thanks for the advice I received regarding distribution of audio (and other)
signals in a home environment. While much of the gear to be interconnected
is consumer equipment, I was concerned about long runs of unbalanced line-level
signals.

From chrisc@gold.gvg.tek.com (Chris Christensen), I received confirmation that
shielded, balanced lines were the way to go. The suggestions for "poor-mans"
unbalanced to balanced conversion were appreciated.

Also, jhenders@jonh.wimsey.bc.ca ( John Henders ) gives useful advice about
the dangers of audio noise coming from audio+video sources (ground loops).

Since both of you have posted your replies to the net, I won't quote verbatim.
Just wanted to acknowledge that the input was appreciated.

I've decided to go with balanced lines, but will probably combine left and
right channels in a single cable sheath with two separately shielded balanced
twisted pair lines, and use 6-pin DIN connectors at the ends:

        L+ ------\. ./------ R+
        L- ------.   .------ R-
     GND(L) -----\. ./----- GND(R)

This seems (to humble me anyway), a reasonable compomise between unbalanced
lines and going the "pro" XLR connector and separate channel cable route. The
biggest benefit probably comes from the use of balanced lines, no? Besides,
XLR connectors are kind of big, coming out of decorative wall plates.

Thanks a bunch, and, since this probably doesn't belong on r.a.pro, I'll
look for followups (if any) on rec.audio.

Rene Hollan
hollan@inrs-telecom.uquebec.ca
From: chrisc@gold.gvg.tek.com (Chris Christensen)
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
Subject: Re: Home Audio distribution
Keywords: audio distribution, balanced lines
Date: 10 Sep 92 21:50:23 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Grass Valley Group, Grass Valley, CA

In article <H.NVHke0HsK0g@jonh.wimsey.bc.ca> jhenders@jonh.wimsey.bc.ca writes:
>In <5178@gold.gvg.tek.com>, Chris Christensen writes:

>>I suggest that all audio/control lines run from the central
>>distribution point be of the individually shielded and balanced.

>	I second this, and the other suggestions Chris makes in his post.
>One additional one he missed is a video isolator. I haven't done homes,
>but I've installed and maintained night-club/dance-club installations, 
>and I've found an amazing amount of ground looping from video fed to 
>audio. You can isolate the audio signal with a balance box, but I found 
>out recently there are companies making video isolators. Maybe someone 
>else can name some names, I can't at the moment. 

The video D.A. that I suggested should help with video/audio grounding
problems.  I have seen/used video hum buckers but I haven't seen a video
isolator (I probably have but I don't remember.... :-)  I have used
differential video D.A.'s on the far end of a video cable to cancel the hum
induced nd establish a local ground.

I am curious as to the what the "ground looping from video feed to
audio.." is.  

If the vodeo was causing a ground loop and buzz into the audio I would have 
been inclined to lift pin 1 of the audio connector to stop the loop.

Video hum buckers do effect the frequency response of the signal.
This should *not* be a problem in the home situation as the video
signals in the home are reduced bandwith anyway.
-- 
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.
From: jhenders@jonh.wimsey.bc.ca ( John Henders )
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
Distribution: na
Organization:  One of these days for sure
Subject: Re: Home Audio distribution
Keywords: audio distribution, balanced lines
	<5178@gold.gvg.tek.com>
Reply-To: jhenders@jonh.wimsey.bc.ca
X-Software: HERMES GUS 1.03 Rev. Apr 14 1992
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 00:02:02 -0700

In <5178@gold.gvg.tek.com>, Chris Christensen writes:

>
>I suggest that all audio/control lines run from the central
>distribution point be of the individually shielded and balanced.
>
	I second this, and the other suggestions Chris makes in his post.
One additional one he missed is a video isolator. I haven't done homes,
but I've installed and maintained night-club/dance-club installations, 
and I've found an amazing amount of ground looping from video fed to 
audio. You can isolate the audio signal with a balance box, but I found 
out recently there are companies making video isolators. Maybe someone 
else can name some names, I can't at the moment. 



-- 
jhenders@jonh.wimsey.bc.ca 	

Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro