HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: arenson@twics.co.jp
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: RE: DB METER PROBLEMS on TEAC RECORDER
Date: 10 Jan 93 17:46:55 GMT
Organization: TWICS, Tokyo, Japan

In article 8403 Jonas Palm responded to my question on TEAC.  In addition,
I got a few responses by EMAIL..Thank you

PLEASE DON'T EMAIL ME, HOWEVER.

  PLEASE RESPOND IN THIS TOPIC

Guess I wasn't all too clear.  When I said it depends on playback
levels, I had not realized that monitoring the tape was less
significant since while my new TEAC has fixed output (line, not
phono), all my old machines allowed you to adjust the output and
so a tape that is recorded with certain source readings
would play back with different TAPE readings depending on where the
output level knob was.

Anyway, a fax to TEAC said tey will check it out and adfjust things.
Turns out that different tape and source levels are not the]
problem, nor is it a case of not adjusting the bias or level
in claibration mode.  The only real probelms are the following:

   -CD fast mode level check is tracking too high.  They said they
could match it to my Denon CD deck if I want.  They confirm (where
their user's manual doesn't) that this cannot be used
with CDs in regular mode or other line sources as it is preadjusted
to take into account lower level of CDs played in search mode.

  -PEAK INDICATOR and PEAK LEVEL METER not aligned.
I checked using an input tone from my korg keyboard (to tape digital
tone) since it was steady and I could vary the input volume sufficiently.
Result is that whereas the PEAK LEVEL METER would respond and register
between 1 and 2, the PEAK indicator would still be at 0.  If I raised the
input volume to between 4 and 5, the peak indicator would rise to
1 or 2.  Not a lag, just less sensitvity or wrong
adjust,ment.  I am using off-tape numbers since I wanted to see
what would happen if I compared to models in the store.

Result---same model showed same readings in the store.

No other maker except VICTOR had these PEAK INDICATORS, when I tried
VICTOR's and my tape, the readings of their PEAK INDICATOR and
PEAK LEVEL METER were exactly the same.

Interesting side note.  BOTH VIctor decks, while reading my tape
accurately had SERIOUS playback problems , perhaps Azimuth.  One kept
fading in and out and the other seemed to play something that was on the
other side of my tape---voices---altjhough I thought they had been erased.  

All other store decks played back my tape well but no peak indicators.

I did note however that all decks except the TEAC had lower output levels as
their PEAK level meters were registering lower--closer to my PEAK INDICATOR>

Oh well, hope TEAC will do something with it.  Records fine but just can't tell
what to use to set it as readings of PEAK indicator/CD LEVEL CHECK amd
are differentr than PEAK LEVEL METER.

By the way--- I understand what BIAS does in calibration.  What
about LEVEL--is that EQUALIZATION?

I set them all the time, so unless they are out of whack that's
not the problem.

THAnK

s

PAUL ARENSON
From: carver@cs.umass.edu
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: Losing My Religion (Was...many times tangentially removed)
Date: 11 Jan 93 21:49:08 GMT
Reply-To: carver@cs.umass.edu
Organization: Computer and Information Science, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, MA

gmaltby@unpcs1.cs.unp.ac.za (Gavin Maltby) writes:

>so.  Then we removed the transport to the next room (using the 6m
>optical cable).  The difference was amazing, as though we'd changed
>some major component.  I have since installed the AT&T stuff on my
>DAC, and have similar results.  It seems that the biggest, and definitely
>worthwhile, difference was getting the transport out of an area where
>it could be vibrated.
>
>Something to think about?


Here's something else to think about:  fields around the transformers.
Unless your units have external power supplies (that were well away from
each other and the other equipment) the improvement in sound could very
well result from separating the equipment---rather than getting the
transport into a quieter environment.  I've played this game several
times when I have moved equipment and not been able to figure out why
the system then sounded better or worse.  One time, I didn't even move
anything, I just turned on a phono preamp that had not been used with
the latest setup;  took days to discover.  Guassmeters are handy things!

True, I have heard minor differences in the sound of cheap transports
when improving their isolation, but I still would not expect major
differences from the Wadia equipment.  Furthermore, I am not surprised
that you don't hear conclusive cable differences using the Wadia setup.
I found a Krell transport and DAC I played with to have very minor
sensitivity to cables.  By contrast, my (lesser) equipment was pretty
sensitive to cables...either sounding great or bass shy and soft.  By
playing with cables, however, you could get the cheaper combo to sound
essentially as good as the Krell.  This suggests that the Krell equipment
has better driver/receiver circuitry.  (Better looking too---though I
hate the ergonomics of that top-loading CD "turntable".)

BTW:  best digital cable I found was some RG-59 I made up.  Still, I
tried several RG-59 cables and not all sounded the same.  Very weird.
What, some of you don't believe me?  (Do I care?)  Well, consider this:
several times I thought I had left the "good" cable in the system the
day before, but then found myself not liking the sound.  (Yes, not a
double blind test and not enough samples...but this kind of "brain blind"
test suggests something to me.)


Norman Carver
Computer Science Dept.
University of Massachusetts
From: lstowell@pyrnova.mis.pyramid.com (Lon Stowell)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: CD anti-skip buffer (Was: Re: Stereo Review's critical judgement)
Date: 5 Jan 93 23:39:19 GMT
Reply-To: lstowell@pyrnova.pyramid.com.pyramid.com (Lon Stowell)
Organization: Pyramid Technology Corporation

In article <3340357@hpcc01.corp.hp.com> kirk@hpcc01.corp.hp.com (Kirk Lindstrom) writes:
>I didn't like "Digital" in school since it was too simple and a typical
>high-school student could be taught Boolean Logic - don't need an
>engineering degree to "do that".  Good thing most picked "digital" as it
>means good pay of us analog designers.
>
   Yeah, and a lot of that "good pay" is analog-aware engineers
   cleaning up the fu's of "digital" engineers who honestly believe
   in absolute 1's and 0's, the tooth fairy, government dollars, and
   other myths.  
>
>Thanks for the flame material:  It is nice to be reminded now and then how
>uneducated the world really is on how "digital really works".
>
   Make that pretty much digital anything: music, LAN's, computers,
   memories from the "facts" in the offending postings.  Scarey in a
   supposed computer-literate network.
From: franke@karnak.llnl.gov (Norman Franke, III)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: Another Sub Woofer question
Date: 6 Jan 93 21:11:52 GMT
Organization: Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory
X-UserAgent: Nuntius v1.1.1d13
X-XXMessage-ID: <A7708B6BF40210D0@tripoli.llnl.gov>
X-XXDate: Wed, 6 Jan 93 21:13:15 GMT

In article <1993Jan4.084318.1@tnclus.tele.nokia.fi> ,
lauusitalo@tnclus.tele.nokia.fi writes:
>        If RXV-850 has subwoofer output then you could use that to
connect
>        to sub amp. Crossover frequency is propably quite high, however.

I think it's 200Hz. I found that leaving the "loudness" switch off, and
then using
a powered subwoofer works pretty well.

| | | |   +----------------------------------------+
| | | |   | Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory |
| | | |__ |        Computer Scientist - EPD        |
| | |___/ |     T-5475, R-1321, (510) 422-7440     |
\ \____/  | Norman Franke, III - frankee@.llnl.gov |
 \____/   +----------------------------------------+
From: rouben@math9.math.umbc.edu (Rouben Rostamian)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: A receiver as a wake-up alarm?
Date: 7 Jan 1993 04:53:10 GMT
Organization: Department of Mathematics, University of Maryland Baltimore County
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: math9.math.umbc.edu
Originator: rouben@math9.math.umbc.edu


Is it possible to use a stereo receiver as a wake-up alarm?

I have a Nikko receiver with remote control in my bedroom.  It seems
not too far-fetched to imagine a generic, inexpensive bedside alarm
clock that will send a signal to the receiver to turn it on at a preset
time.  Does such a device exist, or did I just give away an idea that
will be the invention of the decade? :-)

--
Rouben Rostamian
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: solomon@becks.comm.mot.com (James Solomon)
Subject: Tuner Recommendations?
Reply-To: solomon@comm.mot.com
Organization: Land Mobile Products Sector, Motorola INC.
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 11:35:16 GMT


Greetings,

Please send me your tuner recommendations:  both positive and negative.  Here
are some specifiics:

1)  $200-$300 is preferrable.  Max = $500.
2)  AM is mandatory.  I listen to AM radio from other cities at night.  As
    such, it is important that the AM section have good sensitivity and
    selectivity.
3)  AM *STEREO* is nice but optional.
4)  If it's not obvious:  FM stereo is mandatory.
5)  In case this matters:  I have a DENON PMA-1060 Integrated Amp which drives
    Infinity RS Kappa-7's.

Thanks for your time and suggestions.  Please Email all responses.
--
Jim Solomon (solomon@comm.mot.com)
Disclaimer:  It's my fault, not Motorola's.
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: Frank@mindlink.bc.ca (Frank I. Reiter)
Subject: Re: Quest for speakers lead to Paradigm
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 17:38:40 GMT

> Ivan Chong writes:
>
> The only disappointment so far is the Yamaha Center Channel.  The
> hissing on S- sounds during movie dialogs almost drove me nuts.  I
> actually preferred using the Pro-Logic Phantom Center channel mode
> after a while.  The sales lady claims that Paradigm does not make a
> Center Channel yet, but will release one this summer.  I can't wait to
> upgrade.

They do and I've been considering buyibng one for a few weeks.  After hearing
from another netter who was very happy with his I bought a CC-200 yesterday.
So far I like it a lot.

Frank.
--
___________________________________________________________________
Frank I. Reiter                 Internet: Frank@mindlink.bc.ca
MIND LINK! Communications Corp. Surrey, British Columbia, Canada
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: shetline@bbn.com (Kerry Shetline)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: Mango Juice Treatment
Followup-To: rec.audio
Date: 7 Jan 1993 22:36:02 GMT
Organization: BBN
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: bbn.com

In article <1993Jan7.183637.4856@gvl.unisys.com>, garyp@rmtc.paramax.com
(Gary Palangian [RMTC/ISP]) wrote:
> 
> |... your CDs would sound better if you bathed them in
> |mango juice, rinsed them with Dom Perignon, rinsed them again with
> |distilled water, and then hiked to the top of Mount Everest to expose
> |them to the light of a full moon[.]
> 
> This procedure is quite effective.  Although several of friends
> disagree, I have discovered that the new Cordo Negro Extra Dry works
> just as well as the Dom Perignon, and saves about $110 per CD.

How barbaric and uncivilized. You probably listen to old Donny Osmond
records. Then again, if it is Donny Osmond, anything might be an
improvement, especially if it renders the disc unreadable.

> friend has mentioned that she finds the best sound reproduction
> results from drinking the champagne prior to playing the CD.  We
> are currently conducting double blind tests to ascertain the validity
> of this claim.

Now you're showing some sense, and a true understanding of the
investigative process. Need any research new assistants?

-Kerry
From: shetline@bbn.com (Kerry Shetline)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: Losing My Religion (Was...many times tangentially removed)
Followup-To: rec.audio
Date: 12 Jan 1993 15:39:13 GMT
Organization: BBN
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: bbn.com

In article <gmaltby.58.726840975@unpcs1.cs.unp.ac.za>,
gmaltby@unpcs1.cs.unp.ac.za (Gavin Maltby) wrote:
>>can have any audible effect. Certainly microphonics isn't a likely
>>candidate for an effect, nor mechanical jitter. ('Tiptoe' through the
>>tulips...)
>
>Try it!  Empirical evidence nulls heaps of dry speculation.

If I had the equipment I would. But considering what you probably paid for
your equipment, I think it quite reasonable for you to be able to expect
(if not demand) something that is free from audible microphonics or
mechanically induced distortion.

>And it a load of crap, too!  Not worth responding too.
 ...and...
>No chance.
 ...and...
>More crap.  The differneces are very marked.

My! Aren't we getting emotional. First of all, I didn't suggest that there
was no audible difference, only that your explanation of some mechanically
introduced distortion was unlikely. I came up with some strange but
testable alternative ideas for the cause. Other people have also suggested
some excellent ideas, such a power supply interactions and electro-magnetic
interference.

For sake of argument, I'll give you that you hear 'marked' differences when
you move your transport to another room. That does not automatically mean
you can be sure why it makes a difference.

Anyway, I was only semi-joking about the cat. It would be an interesting
experiment to run -- I'd be willing to bet that an sensitive frequency
analyzer would be able to detect a fluffy cat walking into a room, at least
if it walked in front of a wall or other hard, sound-reflective surface.
Certainly larger objects, like chairs and sofas, make a difference in room
acoustics, and are part of the design considerations for serious listening
rooms.

-Kerry


-Kerry
From: rsud@sw.stratus.com (Rajiv Sud)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: Stereo Review's critical judgement
Date: 6 Jan 1993 14:49:35 GMT
Organization: Stratus Computer, Inc.
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: ernie.cac.stratus.com

In article <C0CEJH.82o@CAM.ORG>, pascal@CAM.ORG (Pascal Gosselin) writes:
> 
> Finally someone that understands what digital audio is all about.
> 
> You see, CD is very simple. 16bit audio samples (linear) played back
> at 44.1Khz. Now, each 16bit value corresponds to a particular voltage
> level, which makes the sound we hear.  As long as the D/A converter is
> linear, the sound will be essentially perfect.
>   blah...blah.... blah.... <deleted>

	So, just what makes you believe that the electronics are perfect?
Maybe you could name one thing made by humans that is "PERFECT".

..Rajiv
(rajiv_sud@sw.stratus.com)
From: curt@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Curt Welch)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: MiniDiscs -- What Are They?
Date: 11 Jan 93 19:37:52 GMT
Reply-To: curt@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Curt Welch)
Organization: Carderock Division, NSWC, Bethesda, MD

In rec.audio, ljnelson@unix.amherst.edu (LAiRD j. NeLSoN) writes:
>On a side note, can someone explain to me the bizarre marketing strategy
>that Sony must have had in mind which led them to advertise a portable MD
>*player* for $500?  If the recorder is only $100 extra, and roughly the
>same size and portability, then, uh, what's the point?

First, I think the recorder is $700, i.e., closer to $200 more.

But in any case, $100 is still $100.  If recordability is worth the
the money to you, then you will buy it.  But for some people, it
won't be.  I agree, for most people, if you are willing to pay $500,
then another $100 or $200 is probably worth the cost for the added
feature (i.e. recordability).

But what about the people that want to have two units but only
feel they need one for recording.  They can save $200 by buying the
player.

And there are probably a few people that are willing to spend $500
now to get into the format, and will expect to buy a recorder later.
Maybe the want to wait a get a home-unit when they come out.

I don't expect Sony to sell many of the players at that price, but
I expect they will sell some of them.  Why did they pick that price?
I have no idea.  Maybe it's has more to do with what it really cost
them to make them?

Curt
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: bruce@plato.ds.boeing.com (Bruce Stock)
Subject: Vandersteen 2c Questions
Organization: Boeing Defense & Space Group
Distribution: na
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 1993 22:49:20 GMT

A few months ago I acquired a pair of used  Vandersteen 2c speakers.  
Unfortunately, they came without any manuals, so I have developed 
some questions about them:

1.  What does Vandersteen recommend for positioning the speakers 
(toe-in, separation, distance to wall)?  I have a rather live listening 
room and would like to hear what positioning worked well for you if 
you have a similar environment.

2.  The speakers seem to have no obvious fuses or other protection.  
Are they indeed at the mercy of whatever I throw at them?


Thanks,  Bruce Stock   
bruce@plato.ds.boeing.com   bruces@atc.boeing.com
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: gfl@herahera.cc.bellcore.com (lenahan,grant f)
Subject: Re: CD/LD jitter: I certainly do get it! (Was: Kerry doesn't get it...)
Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 93 17:41:59 GMT
Summary: jitter and bit errors

> >So what `bits' is the *** getting wrong?
> 
stuff deleted ...
> do know that convertors that work nicely with all sorts of
> transports DO exist, and that some of them don't cost
> a fortune.

Some perspective - I beleive the poster referred to someone's
earlier (and silly) assertion that jitter's only result would
be a bit error.  Hense, in that logic, no bit errors, no jitter.

This seems to have been taken rather too literally.

And folks, BTW, just feed an external clock to a transport,
add jitter, and listen.  It ain't hard, as I mentioned about
a year ago.

Grant

Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: jpurlia@qualcomm.com (John Purlia)
Subject: Stereo Upgrade
Followup-To: rec.audio
Organization: Qualcomm, Inc.
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 18:29:59 GMT

Over the next several months I'd like to slowly upgrade my stereo and am
looking to get the best possible components given my undetermined budget. 
Most of my existing equipment is 9 to 14 years old, so I'd like to replace
everything except my speakers (JBL 4311 studio monitors).

In order, I'm planning on replacing:
    (1)  My receiver with seperates; probably an integrated amp and power
amp.
    (2)  My CD player; possibly with a multidisc player
    (3)  One of my cassette decks with another single play deck.
    (4)  My other cassette deck, probably with a MiniDisc recorder.
    (5)  My turntable and cartridge

While video is a small consideration, I'm primarily concerned with audio
quality, so Pro Logic and all the A/V setup that salespeople are pitching
are not of primary concern (I have a very nice TV and VCR, but logistically
it doesn't make sense for me to set up surround sound unless I tear up a
lot of walls and carpet).

So far I've looked at seperate amps from NAD, Onkyo, Harmon Kardon, and
Denon in the $450 to $800 (list) range, but I'd really like to keep the
cost down much lower.  I was quite impressed with the NAD components I was
looking at, and the salesman was very helpful (not a chain, a "real" stereo
store), but their prices were flat list.

What do others think of NAD equipment and can discounts be had on this
level of equipment?  Any input would be very much appreciated, as I haven't
purchased new equipment in a number of years and, as the say goes, things
change as the years pass.

Thanks!

John


...........................................................................
John Purlia          : My brain; not my company's brain.  My brain says...
jpurlia@qualcomm.com : "The Toolbox giveth, and the Tech Notes taketh away"
...........................................................................
From: lstowell@pyrnova.mis.pyramid.com (Lon Stowell)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: Those b*s*a*ds in the white van - I hope they got them.
Date: 12 Jan 93 21:54:18 GMT
Reply-To: lstowell@pyrnova.pyramid.com.pyramid.com (Lon Stowell)
Organization: Pyramid Technology Corporation

In article <1993Jan12.191659.1442@porthos.cc.bellcore.com> gfl@herahera.cc.bellcore.com (lenahan,grant f) writes:
>4- IF they were BOSE, would that make them better?
>
   No, I prefer the "Coustics"  [one of the "van-fi" brands....]
   to Bose.  >:-)

>
>But, there is something illegal about misrepresentation.
>Of course, this buyer was mind-bogglingly dumb.

   Not to mention "morally challenged" if he in any way thought they
   were "hot" speakers.  

   Somehow the old saw about being unable to cheat an honest man
   comes to mind....
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: tgk@cs.toronto.edu (Todd Kelley)
Subject: Re: Bose Speakers
Organization: Department of Computer Science, University of Toronto
Date: 8 Jan 93 19:52:56 GMT

>In article <1993Jan7.201647.4897@athena.mit.edu>, dondon@athena.mit.edu
>(The Don) wrote:
>> 
>> I have a few questions here.  First, I am trying to decide whether to
>> buy the Bose AM-VIIs or the 901s.  I will be living in a dorm for
>> the next three years, probably and 901s might be overkill.
[some deleted]

schippit@seviche.ycc.yale.edu (Mark G. Schippits) writes:
[some deleted]
> The Bose 901's are quite nice for a dorm.  I have seen them hung
> from the ceiling to conserve space.  I own a set of series V 901's
> and am quite happy for them.
[some deleted]

I would say that 901s would lean toward the overkill side, for a dorm.
(The dorms I have lived in were closet-sized, mind you.)  Anyway, if
you did put 901s in a dorm room you'd probably want to hang them from
the ceiling, since they need lots of open space around them for optimal
effect.  From the 901 series VI manual:
        Always maintain at least 18 inches of clear space around
        the sides, top and bottom of the speaker enclosures.
        Recommended distances are 2 to 4 feet from the side walls,
        and 18 to 36 inches from the floor or ceiling.

> The drawback to Bose in all truthfulness is a lack of
> "powerfull, deep" bass.

My 901s are series VI, and I think they are a great value
for the price ($1000, 1989).  Lately though, (tastes change, I guess)
I've felt they have too much deep bass.  I've tried moving the speakers
further out from the wall, to little avail.  I suspect the frequencies
that I'm hearing are between 50 and 150 HZ, since neither the mid-base
control (+/- 6dB at 225HZ) nor the base switch (-6dB at 35HZ)
have any effect on what I'm hearing.  I think 50 to 150HZ is what most
people mean when they say ``deep base'', since many people can't even
hear 20HZ.

If one person thinks they have too much, and another thinks they
have not enough, does that make them just right? :-)
--
Todd Kelley                                 tgk@cs.toronto.edu
Department of Computer Science              (416)922-9326
University of Toronto
From: mjf9968@rigel.tamu.edu (Pi(3.143832666))
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: Another Sub Woofer question
Date: 4 Jan 1993 10:37 CST
Organization: Texas A&M University, Academic Computing Services
Distribution: na
NNTP-Posting-Host: rigel.tamu.edu
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    

In article <1993Jan4.084318.1@tnclus.tele.nokia.fi>, lauusitalo@tnclus.tele.nokia.fi writes...
> 
>        I have no knowledge about your main speakers but I have had a feeling
>        that Klipsh's are quite nonsensitive, so if you abandon your other
>        amplifier and go for passive filters then you would need more power
>        in one amplifier than with active system.

What, praytell, qualifies as sensitive when Klipschs are "quite
nonsensitive"?  I thought that was one of the main bonuses of
using a horn-- high sensitivity.  The Forte IIs, if I remember
correctly, have a 99dB or so SPL.

Living better through chemistry,
Mike "Pi" Freeman
MJF9968@rigel.tamu.edu
Newsgroups: rec.audio