HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: igb@fulcrum.co.uk (Ian G Batten)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: CD Sound (continued)
Date: 30 Dec 92 10:54:34 GMT
Organization: Fulcrum Communications

In article <1992Dec28.052025.13340@leland.Stanford.EDU> kong@leland.Stanford.EDU (Kong Kritayakirana) writes:
> From: igb@fulcrum.co.uk (Ian G Batten)
> >money on a well-engineered DAC based around the Ultra Analogue 20400
> >chip I've got something that competes well with Linn/Roksan equipment,
> >for about the same money.
>  
> Linn uses Burr-Brown PCM63P and Roksan uses Crystal CS4328. (May I add

I was comparing my 20400 based DAC to Linn and Roksan record decks, not
DACS.

ian
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: joe@avs.com (Joe Peterson)
Subject: Re: WHY NOT USE A BIGGER DISK FOR SONY MD?
Organization: Advanced Visual Systems Inc.
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL8]
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 17:59:26 GMT

Shiv Naimpally (shiv@bnr.ca) wrote:
: Gee if Sony used a bigger disk for MD, eg. the size of a CD then
: they would no longer have to use ATRAC for data compression but
: could record full bandwidth on the disk. It would have also meant
: they wouldn't have a proprietary format. The last thing Sony wants
: is to be compatible.

: At least with DCC, Phillips wanted compatibility with standard 
: cassettes and so had to use data compression to acomplish it.

: MD will go into the 'Sony Hall of Shame' along with Elcassette, Beta,
: etc..

Please, anyone correct me if I am wrong, but as I understand it, even if
the new recordable (MD) technology used CD-sized disks, it would still have
to use data compression.  The writing technology requires a lower bit-rate,
which is possible when using compression.  If compression were not used, the
bits would be coming in too fast for magneto-optical process to handle.

Does anyone know the real story here?  As far as I know, this is the real
reason for compression, and making the discs smaller is possible as a side
effect.

								Joe
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: baldwin@frodo.colorado.edu (Dan "Viper" Baldwin)
Subject: Subwoofer dumb question
Organization: Colorado Center for Astrodynamics Research
Date: Tue, 29 Dec 1992 21:47:02 GMT

  I have a subwoofer oriented question. I have heard that a subwoofer will
lower the demands made on the main speakers thus allowing them to use 
the power to better reproduce the higher frequencies.
	I have a powered subwoofer hooked to the sub out ( < 200Hz) of my
reciever. I like it and it sounds great, but I dont understand how this
is changing the demands on my main speakers.

E-mail is fine, thanks,

Dan Baldwin  baldwin@frodo.colorado.edu
Newsgroups: rec.audio,rec.video
From: baldwin@frodo.colorado.edu (Dan "Viper" Baldwin)
Subject: Re: Just got my new Yamaha RX-V850 -- a few questions
Keywords: yamaha rxv850 question help audio video surround prologic
Organization: Colorado Center for Astrodynamics Research
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 22:05:32 GMT

In article <1992Dec23.155359.13918%jim.uucp@wupost.wustl.edu>, mike%jim.uucp@wupost.wustl.edu (Mike S.) writes:
|> I just took delivery of my new Yamaha RX-V850 (and Sony MDP-455 LD
|> player, Aiwa 810 cassette deck, neither of which are hooked up yet :)
|> from J&R Music World last nite, and have a few questions on the
|> receiver.  
|> 
|> So far, my system consists of the above components, plus a nice
|> VHS (oxymoron?) hifi VCR, eq/analyzer, Definitive DR-7's in front
|> and Minimus-7's in the rear.  Sound quality is great (the DR-7's
|> are amazing!).
|> 
|> 
|> 1) I have an outboard eq/spectrum analyzer between the pre-out/main-in
|>    couplers on the receiver (for the disco lights :) -- the signal is
|>    indeed passing through the eq (if I turn the eq off, the receiver goes
|>    quiet), but the analyzer remains dark (it does work!).  Could the 
|>    Yamaha be passing an extremely low signal or something?  (adjusting
|>    the volume on the receiver seemed to have no effect)
|> 
|> 2) I tried to cheat on the center channel--by hooking the center pre-amp
|>    output to an old boombox, but the signal from the boombox is VERY low.
|>    I have never had this problem hooking other components to this boombox
|>    through line level inputs.
|> 
|> 3) The signal from the rear (Minimus-7's) is also a bit low.  I have
|>    to turn the surround channel volume up to ~94-96% for acceptable
|>    results.  I haven't been able to find any sensitivity numbers on
|>    the Minimus-7's--could it be that low??
|> 
|> Any help appreciated!
|> 
|> Thanks!

	I have the same reciever and I notice that the rear signal is low,
however my previous Kenwood surround reciever also had low rear signals. Have
you used the test mode on the 850 yet ? I find that 94-100%  is the proper setting. I guess this is OK since the rear channel should not be set
higher than the L,R or center.

Its a nice unit.
Dan
From: grego@bit.UUCP (Greg Sanguinetti)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: More subwoofer amplification & power
Date: 22 Dec 92 19:16:02 GMT
Article-I.D.: bit.542
Reply-To: grego@bit.UUCP (Greg Sanguinetti)
Organization: BIT  Portland, OR

In article <42789@sdcc12.ucsd.edu> mtrostle@sdcc13.ucsd.edu (Mark Trostler) writes:
>	Having determined that my 12V/2.5amp supply is totally
>unacceptable to power a 140W mono amp (which is a car stereo amp
>BTW) I decided to look into deep-cycle batteries (used by boats and
>RV's - they recharge all the way & last longer) and just recharge it
>when not in use.  At my local NAPA dealer those go for $70 minimum,

Not to mention that they are VERY dangerous to charge indoors!

>however, while browsing the battery rechargers I found one that puts
>out 12V/10amps for $29!  Can I use this for a power supply instead
>of a battery??  I suppose it would suck down major wattage from my

Battery chargers are not well filtered. They don't really have to be
since the battery itself makes a good filter capacitor. They are awful
choices for audio supplies. You can build a supply yourself. You need
a large transformer, easy to find at supply stores, capable of providing
about 18v AC at say 15A. Get a giant bridge, also available surplus.
While at the surplus store pick up some 16+ volt power supply filter
caps (10,000 mfd total, or more). Several sources (Moto, National, NTE)
make 12volt 10 amp three terminal regulators. Get one in a TO3 case and
heat sink it to the max. See National's linear databook for suggestions
on paralleling regulators and/or using 3055's (or similar) and other
current increasing schemes. I've built some Godzilla 12v supplies this
way. I had the parts and some extra car amps to play with. It all works
but is a tremendously inefficient way to generate watts to your speakers.
It is a good way to empty out some boxes from the parts room B^)

Much better solution: Get a regular amp from a used HiFi dealer or paper.

>above what the amp needs to run normally, so the 10amps should be
>okay it seems (120watts max.)  This all seems like it'd work to me,
>what am I missing?
derating for inefficiencies in linear supply plus DC-DC converter in amps.
120w goes to something like 220w (target) implies something like 18A @12v.
But that will only be needed for peaks and if you don't crank it all the way
and have plenty of mfd's in the filters and the regs are current limitted
and well heatsinked and....  you should be ok. The regulators will shut
down and you'll know when to crank the volume down!

-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.
From: sups@vax.oxford.ac.uk
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Sony DAT for sale
Date: 24 Dec 92 10:12:14 GMT
Organization: Oxford University VAX 6620

Would anyone be interested in buying a SONY DTC55ES just over a year old? I
need a machine to record through the analogue inputs at 44K1 and also have
half-speed for a project in the new year.

Bernard Martin
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: mike%jim.uucp@wupost.wustl.edu (Mike S.)
Subject: Re: Just got my new Yamaha RX-V850 -- a few questions
Organization: BITS, St. Louis, MO
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1992 15:54:53 GMT

kirk@hpcc01.corp.hp.com (Kirk Lindstrom) writes:

>>2) I tried to cheat on the center channel--by hooking the center pre-amp
>>   output to an old boombox, but the signal from the boombox is VERY low.
>>   I have never had this problem hooking other components to this boombox
>>   through line level inputs.
>>
>I believe the sub out on Yamaha only puts out power below 100 Hz.  It
>could be your boom-box speakers are too small to do anything with that
>low a signal.

I had the boombox hooked to the pro-logic center channel preamp out,
not the sub out.  I think I fixed the problem, though--the Yamaha
apparently has lower line level signals than the other components
expect.  I turned the attenuator of the EQ up a bit, which forces
the Yamaha's volume knob to be higher for the same actual sound
level, but the EQ and boombox are both happy now.

>>3) The signal from the rear (Minimus-7's) is also a bit low.  I have
>>   to turn the surround channel volume up to ~94-96% for acceptable
>>   results.  I haven't been able to find any sensitivity numbers on
>>   the Minimus-7's--could it be that low??
>>
>You should only hear the rear channels on some movies.  Some people say
>"if you can hear the rear channel, then they are too loud".  You should
>calibrate with a noise source.  Check rec.video for the FAQ on how to do
>this.

Last night I played with the music DSP settings (Hall, Video, etc),
and the rears are *MUCH* more prominant in these modes than surround.
When running the test tone mode, should the rear tones be the same
approx volume as the fronts, as a general rule?

>Kirk out

Mike
mike%jim.uucp@wupost.wustl.edu
-- 
mike%jim.uucp@wupost.wustl.edu
Xref: sparky rec.audio:17420 rec.music.marketplace:2821 rec.music.misc:29799
From: dchou@husc11.harvard.edu (David Chou)
Newsgroups: rec.audio,rec.music.marketplace,rec.music.misc
Subject: *** Rear and Center SURROUND (Yamaha/Realistic) 4 SALE ***
Date: 28 Dec 92 19:16:10 GMT
Article-I.D.: husc.dchou.725570170
Distribution: usa

Hello Netfolx.  My last post generated a lot of responses for my speakers,
and after having thought that I had sold them, it turned out that my buyer
thought otherwise.  Anyway, here I am again, hopefully to sell these
speakers once and for all.  Again, I am selling a pair (2) of rear SURROUND
Yamaha speakers and one (1) Center Channel SURROUND Realistic speaker.
The Yamahas are the model NS-A95, rated at a maximum of 30 Watts into an
impedance of 4 ohms.  The Realistic is the Minimus 2.5 rated at a maximum 
of 10 Watts into an impedance of 8 ohms.  All figures are continuous power 
ratings; peaks will be higher, and usually, surround channels seldom exceed 
the above ratings.  In anycase, these are great surround speakers for 
a low-budget system if you want quality surround sound; I had used them for
almost a year before I got my new set of speakers about 6 months ago; they've
been in storage since then.  Again, to avoid any confusion, let me stress
that these are rear and center channel SURROUND SPEAKERS, and not front
channel speakers.  You can use them as front speakers, but I wouldn't do it.
Price?  I will ship these speakers to you anywhere in the U.S.A. in exchange 
for a $60 check, obo.  O.k., thank you all for your time.  I look forward
to your responses.

							-David Chou

--

This Is Not A Love Song...
-PIL
		I'm here, you're there, but you can reach me:
		dchou@husc8.harvard.edu
From: kosmatoo@JSP.UMontreal.CA (Kosmatos Odisseas)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Various questions
Summary: See below
Date: 28 Dec 92 17:27:03 GMT
Organization: Universite de Montreal

Lots of questions accumulated over the weeks, finally asked here:

         general questions:

1) What is the first thing one can do to improve the sound of
   a room, once the speakers are placed?

2) Does anybody have the plans for building a 'decent' subwoofer?
   Oh, also, it has to have its own amplifier because it has
   to work with even a 25W amplifier.

3) "Pointy feet" or "tiptoes", what is their purpose, and do
   they work well fulfilling that purpose? If one has a set
   of them, should one put them on the stand, or individual
   components?

         non-general questions:

4a) Does anybody know of any tweaks to improve the sound on
    the Rotel 955AX CD player, that are do-it-yourself-able?
  
 b) Same question for Thorens TD166 Mk II?

 c) Where does one get the metal support for the cartrige
    "Sumiko Blue Point"? (to replace the plastic support)

-- 
___                                ___               ,   ^             ,
=*=        Odisseas Kosmatos       =*=  "Cul bien vide, tete plein d'idees."
=*=    kosmatoo@jsp.umontreal.ca   =*=
=*= shammer@mafalda.math.mcgill.ca =*=
From: myers@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM (Bob Myers)
Date: Mon, 21 Dec 1992 17:36:48 GMT
Subject: Re: analog pride
Organization: Hewlett-Packard, Fort Collins, CO, USA
Newsgroups: rec.audio

>>This makes me think of TV shows that are filmed (using movie film) rather
>>than video (like Cheers as opposed to most sitcoms).  Film gives a more
>>unrealistic, softer look.  The crispness of video makes shows look "cheap".
>>Maybe this is just because we are conditioned by movies...
> 
> I don't think that film gives a more unrealistic look; in fact,
> i believe that film reproduces colors much more realistically
> than videotape does.  Bright colors tend to dominate too much
> in videotape, and lighting conditions affect it a lot more than
> film.  

A little off the subject (this IS wreck.AUDIO, isn't it? :-)), but:

Yes, film IS the better medium for recording images; it has far higher
resolution, greater dynamic range, and a much wider color pallette than
any current video standard.  About the only area where film has a problem is
fast motion (and that's only true of the standard 24 fps speed; certainly,
film CAN be pushed a LOT faster than, say, NTSC video, which is locked
forever to a 30 fps rate.)

The film vs. video "look" as seen on TV has more to do with the problems
of converting between two basically incompatible formats than it does with
anything inherent in film.  Remember, you've got to go from 24 to 30 fps
(typically via a technique called "3:2 pulldown", which introduces its own
artifacts), lose a LOT of resolution, change aspect ratios (although TV shows
shot to film will generally be composed for the "little screen", since the
director & cinematographer know where they're headed), and give up a LOT of
color.


Bob "Not a TV guy, but I argue with 'em a lot" M.

Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: cal@gsbux1.uchicago.edu (Cal Lott)
Subject: Re: Poor college student seeks center speaker
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Date: Mon, 28 Dec 1992 04:26:14 GMT

jcm11@po.CWRU.Edu (John C. Mackey) writes:

>I darned near have my audio/video system complete (I just purchased a
>Sony SLV-585HF Hi-Fi VCR to go along with my Sony STR-D1090 Pro-Logic
>amp, Bose 301 II's {front L,R speakers) and old, cheapo Realistic
>speakers {surround channel, needless to say})... anyway, all I really
>need now is a good center channel speaker that will match fairly well
>with the rest of my system.
>As I said in the message subject, I'm not really loaded here (especially
>after buying the receiver and VCR both within the past month).  So, my
>center speaker budget is about $200 or (hopefully) less.  I know that
>Kenwood makes a darned inexpensive center speaker ($129), and Infinity
>makes one ($169) that would probably go quite well with the Bose speakers.

>Does anybody have any thoughts on either of these speakers, or on any other
>center speakers in the <$200 range?  (My other option would be to purchase two
>low-priced speakers and have a 6-speaker set up, but finding two reasonably
>good speakers for <$200 total seems a little unlikely.)
>Also, what kind of frequency response will I need for a center speaker?  It
>seems that the main output is just the vocal track.  Would 60-20000Hz be
>sufficient?
>Thanks for your help once again, everybody!
>-- 
>John C. Mackey  -  Music Composition major at Cleveland Institute O' Music
>-----------------

	You might also try the Polk CS-100. It retails for ~$170.

						-Cal 
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cal Lott          "Oh, I see-- I thought 'no' meant 'spoon'!" --Dan
Email me, baby!   cal@gsbux1.uchicago.edu   cjl1@midway.uchicago.edu
----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: luciw@apple.com (Bill Luciw)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: Which CD boombox is best?
Date: 30 Dec 92 23:41:52 GMT
Organization: Apple Computer, Inc.

In article <1992Dec27.020018.22830@mixcom.com> Caughill,
Caughill@mixcom.mixcom.com writes:
>me if I'm not. I'm looking to buy a reasonably expensive CD boombox with
dual
>tape cassette players. Can someone recommend something? Thanks! E-mail
me at

Listen to the Panasonic RX-DT707.  Can be had for about $400 US if you
haggle.

-- Bill

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Bill Luciw                      Voice: (408) 974-3845
Newton Products Group           Fax:   (408) 974-1794
Apple Computer, Inc.    
1 Infinite Loop  MS: 301-2D     AppleLink:  Luciw
Cupertino, CA 95014             Internet:   luciw@apple.com

"Second star on the right and straight on till morning."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
From: mike@banana.fedex.com (Mike Bearden)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: recommendation for power amp
Date: 31 Dec 92 14:35:29 GMT
Organization: Federal Express Corp.










In rec.audio you write:

>Hi, I'm posting for a friend who doesn't have Usenet access.
>Please reply to cycm@cs.utexas.edu.

>----------------------------------------------------------------
>I just purchased Apogee Stages loudspeaker and now looking
>for a matching power amplifier (under $3000). Any kind soul
>out there with recommendation?

 to me, the obvious choice is Classe'.  i chose classe' after evaluating
 levinson, spectral, forte, aragon, etc. to go with my apogees centaurs.
 tube amps are nice with apogees,
 but i don't think you can find one in your price range to drive the
 stages.  i don't care for the much touted krell/apogee combo.

 the classe' 15 lists for $3K and would probably be fine for the stages.

 two classe' tens should be better if you can find them on the used
  market.  they typically sell used for about $1250.  i have been told that
  1 classe ten will do fine with the stages about 95% of the time.

 btw, i asked jason bloom at apogee about the mccormack dna-1.  his reply
 was that i would probably be happier with the dna-1 over the classe 10
 driving the stages, but it would kind of be a waste of good stages :-)
 he said GET the Classe' 15 and do it right!

 good luck from 'one who lusts stages',   :-)

 mike
From: rhoades@ll.mit.edu (Captain Chaos)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: Optimization dilemma...
Date: 21 Dec 92 19:52:10 GMT
Organization: MIT Lincoln Laboratory

In article <1992Dec20.201807.12202@en.ecn.purdue.edu> syd@en.ecn.purdue.edu (Dennis P Hilgenberg) writes:
>Bruce Gan writes:
>
> ...  Both chrome and metal tapes utilize the same 
>(70us) equalization, ...

I've wondered about this for some time.  It was also my understanding that
the Type II and Type IV selection were both at 70us.  So why then do my tape
decks have a separate position for II and IV?  Both of mine use the same
dual-toggle approach (out-out=I, in-out=II, in-in=IV) -- does this mean the
second switch does nothing?  I doubt it since I can _hear_ a difference...

What is/was Type III?  My father's old Pioneer deck has an additional tape
type called, I think, Ferric Oxide, which appears as though it might be
Type III.  What are Type I and Type IV made of (the term 'metal' has always
struck me as odd since last I checked, chrome was a metal)?

Andrew
rhoades@ll.mit.edu
From: shetline@bbn.com (Kerry Shetline)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: Selecting an LD Player
Date: 31 Dec 92 04:50:16 GMT
Followup-To: rec.audio,rec.video
Organization: BBN
NNTP-Posting-Host: bbn.com

In article <1992Dec30.073038.14692@uhura.neoucom.edu>,
wlrc@uhura.neoucom.edu (William R. Cruce) wrote:
> 
> In article <1992Dec29.171405.1480@lsican.uucp> michael@Canada.lsil.com writes:
> >
> >[...]Error correcting comes to mind here).  If the only "audible" differences
> >between players comes from the DAC portion (plus power supplies, etc), then with
> >an outboard DAC, all CD/LD players should sound identical.  Is this a true
> >statement?
> 
> No.  It is not true.  Theta makes a "CD Transport" which is a modified
> Philips LD player [major mod is to correct for 'jitter'in the digital
> output, according to their literature].  Fed into their ~$1000 outboard
> D/A (I forget the model #) it sounds better than a Pioneer CLD-3070
> LD player fed into same.  Unfortunately the Philips video is no match

I haven't heard a Theta unit, so I can't tell you whether or not it
actually sounds better than any other laser disc player. But I do know that
the *reasons given* for it sounding better were completely bogus
techno-hype. The manufacture made claims regarding improved
error-correction and mechanical stability as reasons for a gigantic leap in
audio fidelity. The review I read in Video magazine prompted me to write
this (unpublished) letter:

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
To the editor:

After reading your review of Theta DigitalUs Theta Data Universal Transport
(Videotests, Sept. U92), I  must say that not only am I disappointed that
you were taken in by baseless high-end hype, but that you are helping to
uncritically promote it. Even the cheapest CD disc transport will usually
deliver error-free transfer of data, and certainly none but a damaged unit
reaches the error rates that would effect continuous sound quality (as
opposed to occasional and quite noticeable pops, clicks, or skips). Data
read from a laser pick-up is digitally buffered and clocked out at a
precise, quartz-crystal timed rate from the buffer. There is no way for
mechanical jitter to affect sound quality in the way described in your
review Q no way for all of this talk of massive high-torque motors and
positive disc clamping to make a bit of difference.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

-Kerry