HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro

In rec.audio.pro, v035550@stortek.com (Steve Monroe) writes:

>   I noticed this on rec.music.makers, and thought this would 
>   be the ideal group to post this to:
>
>
>
>   Source: Mosaic Records brochure number 9,
>   interview with Rudy Van Gelder, quoted from a NPR interview:
>   (Van Gelder was a prcticing optometrist in the late 40s when he set up his
>   first, modest recording studio in the living room of his parents' home in
>   Hackensack, New Jersy. In that room he would go on to record most of the
>   major East Coast jazz artists of the 1950s, 
>   including virtually every session for
>   Blue Note and Prestige Records as well as many classical dates for Vox and
>   other labels.)
>
>   [the interview starts with some history, and a number of quotes about
>   why Van Gelder believes in two-track recording, using no headphones,
>   no dubbing. Just straight recording the music.]
>
>   ``If I'm going to do a session and I can choose what I want to choose,
>   I will choose a digital recorder. There's just no question about it.
>   [...]
>   Digital recording has been totally reliable for me. It finally does what
>   a tape machine should do -- really, just store what you're putting into it.
>   No analog machine ever made could do that correctly. None. Not even the best,

 No digital machine ever made could do that correctly either.  None.  Not even
 the best.  Well, I guess it depends on how you define "correctly."  I guess
 I don't know how Van Gelder defines it here, because I feel analogue
 recordings are more correct.

>   the most expensive, could ever do what a properly designed two-track digital
>   machine will do. We're talking about clarity of sound, clean sound, wide
>   range, beautiful, no noise problems.
>   	To me it's made working a pleasure. It's like starting all over
>   again and being excited about things, like being able to play back a great
>   sound to the group right after they've played it, and they can 
>   hear it right then. Everybody knows it's good. Before they go home.''
>
>   This from a guy who has been uniformly praised for making
>   beautifully sounding recordings.
>

 It's also from a guy who's out to sell new digital recordings, and digitally 
 remastered oldies.   I don't know what this article is supposed to do,
 change the opinions of analogue lovers because he says something with 
 some sort of authority?

 Why do you bring this stuff back?  For every so-called expert opinion, there's
 a so-called expert counter-opinion.  I really don't care what Rudy Van Gelder
 says, nor Eargle, nor Pearson, nor J. Gordon Holt, nor Dick Pierce.  They can 
 have their opinions and at the risk of being a snob, and everyone knows I am 
 one because I have an opinion, I'll decide for myself.  You can decide for 
 yourself (and according to standards placed in these groups, that will 
 qualify you as a snob, too, less so if you follow the popular opinion).

Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
From: gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Gabe M Wiener)
Subject: Re: Effects and DAT recording
Reply-To: gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Gabe M Wiener)
Organization: Columbia University
Distribution: usa
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 1992 23:14:04 GMT

In article <1992Aug15.214929.16380@guinness.idbsu.edu> Dave J <djensen@claven.idbsu.edu> writes:
>
>Gabe makes a good case for not using digital reverb... when parameters such as
>mic type and placement, or choice of venue, have little or no restrictions. 
>One might easily mistake his passion for authenticity and accuracy as a sign 
>of aloofness from the more mundane reality of "budget" recording, but I doubt
>this is actually the case. 

Believe me, I too have been "guilty" of doctoring recordings in post more
than I've liked to.  My opinion was just that it's better to avoid doing so
wherever possible.  I am all too aware that there are times when it is 
necessary, even beneficial.


>(gets harsh-sounding). I get a nice balance of articulation (both vocal and
>instrumental) and ambience with only a pair of cardioids. No big deal.

One thing you might try...beg, borrow, or steal a pair of hypers and try
playing with them at about 90-110 degrees depending on acoustics.  You
might find they pull in more front and less of the harshness of the 
room reverb.  Sometimes this works, sometimes it doesn't.

>The dreaded other is a high school auditorium.

UGH!

>the folding-seats of the audience squeak and squeal like banshees. It's
>outrageous, but true.

I've contended with this myself, and at the time I believe I did what
you did...i.e. mike it close and dry.  At the time the performers just
wanted to take the tape and go (this was in the pre-DAT era), so I didn't
get a chance to do anything with it, nor did I particularly want to ever
hear the recording again :-)

>I find it hard to believe that across the length and breadth of the planet
>there aren't a few other situations that beg for a similar compromise. Under
>those circumstances when reality wants to play particularly rough... I think
>it's OK to just change it [reality] with digital reverb. So sue me!

Oh, there *are* plenty of situations where you have to fiddle with the
recording afterwards.  At Columbia one of the halls was designed to be
an "all purpose room."  As a result, it sounds good for nothing in 
particular.  Large symphonic performances lose all bass and end up
sounding, well, dead.  Many recordists who have worked in there have
told me that any recording made in that space needs a little low end
boost and a touch of digital reverb to sound passable.  I have avoided
recording in there, but having heard the sound of that room too many
times, I would probably do the same thing were I to record there.
Repeat after me:  ||: there is no such thing as an all-purpose room :||


--
Gabe Wiener - Columbia Univ.     "This 'telephone' has too many shortcomings 
gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu       to be seriously considered as a means of 
N2GPZ in ham radio circles        communication. The device is inherently of
72355,1226 on CI$                 no value to us." -Western Union memo, 1877
From: ireland@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
Subject: RE: Rudy Van Gelder: D v. A
Date: 21 Aug 92 17:51:58 EST


My two cents worth: If the song and performance is a good one, I don't
think it really matters to most people if it was recorded in Digital OR
Analog. As long as its not so dirty as to distract from the music.

Also, take your pick what bothers you more - analog tape hiss or digital
non-linearity? Nothings perfect. Decide what you can and can't live with.

I get a feeling that the most vocal proponents of either are recording
engineers, purists, and tech heads. The average listener could give a hoot
about the format (i.e., analog or digital tape), just so long as its 
mastered well.

I use an analog mastering deck with good results, but I wouldn't mind 
having a digital deck just because I can make copies without generation 
loss. And I know alot of people who use analog multi-track decks, but mix
down in digital with good results.

Oh, well, three things never to discuss at parties - religion, politics,
and tape recordings formats.

Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
From: jrusby@darkwing.uoregon.edu (Jim T. Rusby)
Subject: Re: XLR-type Connector of choice?
Organization: University of Oregon Network Services
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 92 15:26:50 GMT

On this topic:

Has anyone seen the new Neutrik (I think, could be wrong) that will accept
both xlr and TRS 1/4" plugs in the same socket?  The hole is placed in the
center of the body between the pins.  I saw this in one of the trade mags
last month and thought it had great possibilities.  For one thing,
changeout of equipment from a permanent installation could be much easier.

Regarding connector of choice: I also favor the Neutrik, although my
suppliers seem to fluctuate in price compared to the Switchcraft. As I
mentioned in a direct message I hate the way Switchcraft XLRF pins are
loose from day one and only get worse. Use them a while and they pull out,
even when treated well.

I find the ITT Pomona Canon is a good economy xlr plug for those on a
budget. It looks suspiciously like the Radio Trash...er...Radio
shaft...whatever their name is ...plug but isn't. Its potting material is
very rugged, but the shell will not take the abuse a Neutrik will.
Jim Rusby

Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
From: j1meb@isuvax.iastate.edu
Subject: Re: XLR-type Connector of choice?
Reply-To: j1meb@isuvax.iastate.edu
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 1992 17:40:58 GMT


Brent Laminack (brent@cc.gatech.edu)writes:
>I still like the old switchcraft a3m/a3f series. I've used the Neutrix
>line for a few years and find their strain-releif lacking. The internal
>plastic screw part that cinches down on the cable breaks under strain
>right at the case.
 
We had the same problem with the Neutrik connectors that we bought 
a few years back. We have switched back to switchcraft...no problems
except for the occasional one crushed by a forklift!
 
                 |Henry Ford never built a car that needed a fuel pump.
Mike Broich      |Computers don't say "No User Serviceable Parts Inside"
J1MEB@iastate.edu|If you can't raise the bridge, lower the river.
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
From: jhenders@jonh.wimsey.bc.ca (John Henders)
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
Distribution: usa
Organization:  One of these days for sure
Subject: Re: effects and DAT recording
	<1992Aug5.231830.19652@guinness.idbsu.edu>
	<1992Aug12.033204.16114@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu>
Reply-To: jhenders@jonh.wimsey.bc.ca
X-Software: HERMES GUS 1.03 Rev. Apr 14 1992
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 1992 01:28:58 -0700

In <1992Aug12.033204.16114@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu>, Garland O Burton writes:

>I need some suggestions on the digital reverb unit needed for our soon to 
>be new digital workstation.
>
>I have been reading about some of the processors available, but as a direct 
>to 2 channel, classical recordist, I really don't have a lot of experience
>with audio processers.

>
>there is a yamaha spx1000 (i think) that has digital I/O's in yamaha format.
>that already sounds bogus.  
	
	I have yet to hear a Yamaha unit with "real" sounding algorthms.
>
>great sounding reverb, digital I/Os, one or two rack spaces?

	If your budget can stand it, get the Lexicon 300. You might want to 
check out the Sony Bill Vermillion is talking about in the dat thread,
though he hasn't commented on the naturalness of the reverb sounds.


-- 
jhenders@jonh.wimsey.bc.ca 	

From: kurts@hpnmdla.sr.hp.com (Kurt Strain)
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 00:17:13 GMT
Subject: Re: Rudy Van Gelder: Digital vs Analog
Organization: Milky Way Galaxy
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro

My mail bounced trying to write to a Mr. Jeff Jensen, so I must write here.
It seems he thinks that this forum is the exclusive domain for digital
recording and any comments in favor of analog recording belongs in 
rec.audio.high-end, where he says it's for my "luddite blathering."

So I want this to be a warning that Mr. Jensen has made himself moderator
of this group and only digital proponents are allowed by him to write 
here.  Never mind the fact that this article was duplicated in .high-end
after I read it here (and that goes against rules of .high-end, a truly
moderated group. So get your garbage out of "my group", as Jeff would call it.) 

I think if you want to moderate a group, get it moderated. Don't have some
wise ass make cheap shots on e-mail.  It really makes some of you guys look
particularly mean and snobby.  That's my impression so far.
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
From: schmidt@auvax1
Subject: Re: XLR-type Connector of choice?
Organization: Adelphi University
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 22:53:19 GMT

In article <1992Aug13.150838.14036@guinness.idbsu.edu>, Dave J <djensen@claven.idbsu.edu> writes:
> In article <1992Aug12.223743.2753@uicc.com> neidorff@uicc.com (Bob Neidorff)
> writes:
>>
>>
>>Is there such a thing as a better and a worse XLR-type connector,
>>or are Switchcraft, ITT/Cannon, and all of the others about the same?
>>
>>I care about:
>>
>>	Ease of assembly
>>	Durability
>>	Sound Quality
>>	Compatibility with Different Wire Sizes
>>	Cost
>>	Dependability

Comments about mailing deleted, since we obviously are disregarding them :-)
> 
> You should check out the Neutrik (pronounced noi-trick) brand of connectors.
> IMO, they offer the most recent innovations in all applicable areas mentioned
> above. One major improvement of theirs is a particular model of panel-mounted
> shell that is designed to accept either male or female XLR, or female 1/4 inch,
> inserts.
> 
> Dave Jensen                           You see...what you want to see,
> djensen@claven.idbsu.edu              And you hear...what you want to hear. 
> expressing only myself                    - Harry Nilsson, "The Point"
> 
 
I agree with Dave, we have used the Neutrik connectors at ABC TV (my daytime,
paying job) for about 12 years, with very good results.  You have to know to
really tighten down the strain relief collet on the cable connectors though.

Now if someone could design a connector which would mate with either male or
female XLR CONNECTORS (not just a shell which can be wired with interchangible
connector inserts), then they would really have a product!  Think of it, no
more goof plugs! :-]

*******************************************************************************
John H. Schmidt, P.E.              |Internet: schmidt@auvax1.adelphi.edu
Technical Director, WBAU           |Phone--Days     (212)456-4218
Adelphi University                 |       Evenings (516)877-6400
Garden City, New York 11530        |Fax-------------(212)456-2424
*******************************************************************************
From: gburton@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Garland O Burton)
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
Subject: Re: Effects and DAT recording
Date: 16 Aug 92 15:24:29 GMT
Article-I.D.: magnus.1992Aug16.152429.3534
Distribution: usa
Organization: The Ohio State University

In article <1992Aug15.214929.16380@guinness.idbsu.edu> Dave J <djensen@claven.idbsu.edu> writes:
>As is usually the case, this thread wants to wander away from the original
>poster's intent.
>
>
>But I think the circumstances under which the original poster wished to use
>artificial reverb might have been dismissed a little too readily.  I would like
>to make a case for using post-production digital reverb to enhance a recording
>made under less than ideal conditions. 
>
>
>
>Dave Jensen                           You see...what you want to see,
>djensen@claven.idbsu.edu              And you hear...what you want to hear. 
>expressing only myself                    - Harry Nilsson, "The Point"
>

you make alot of good points in your post.  for some, reality is something
that you have to live with as a documentary.  i always try to capture natural 
'verb whenever it adds to the recording.  OTH, if the 'verb sucks, it doesn't
hurt to make the listeners task more enjoyable by using some of the good 
technology that is available.

To be a "purist" can, at times be to your disadvantage.  using the ears
that you have developed when you started as a purist can make you have 
the tools needed to make a situation better in some instances.  you will be able to set up the 'verb in a way that it makes a lousy situation sound above 
average or even great.

gb

-- 
gburton@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu.............copyright 1992 gary burton........
From: bower@mocha.udel.edu (Tyson Bower)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: 6th Ave. Electronics--OPINIONS?
Date: 14 Aug 92 21:59:03 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: University of Delaware, Newark

If memory serves me correctly, according to the Feb 92 issue of
Stereo Review (the equipment review issue)  a brand new Adcom GFA-555 II
lists for $800.  (I think the 545 was $499).  

I could be wrong on this price, but don't most dealers sell either
at or even below list price?  I'd try to verify the list price and
if it is less than $850, point this out to your dealer and see what
it says.  Then start haggling.  The last hi-fi purchase I made I
received nearly a %17 discount off a $900 item.  That, I feel,
is considerable.  (Yes, it WAS an authorized dealer.)
From: 85p8379@csdvax.csd.unsw.edu.au
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: strong desire to vibrate room
Date: 18 Aug 92 02:05:42 +1000
Organization: University of New South Wales

Hello, I'm a bit confused about connecting a sub-woofer to my amp.  I have an
NAD 7225 PE rig with two sets of stereo speaker jacks at the back.  A pair of 6
ohm NAD 8225's is connected to Speaker A jacks, and I want to connect the
sub-woofer to Speaker B jacks.  The sub-woofer will be a home-made mono
12" job, and I plan to incorporate a filter to reject anything above 100 Hz.
Sound reasonable ?  Reasonable sound ?  QUESTION:  How do i feed the stereo
signal into a mono speaker ?  One guy told me to just tie left and right
outputs of Spkr B together, I somehow don't think this is a good idea, coz it 
will no doubt short out the stereo signal coming out of Spkr A as well !? 
Others have suggested I use a difference signal, i.e. + of left and + of right
connected to sub-woofer, leave earths out of circuit.  Someone said this is
risky.  Why ?  Short ?  Bang ?  Also, does sub-woofer impedance have to be
matched roughly to that of the 8225's ?  Does a choke filter present its own
impedance load ? (No, I'm NOT an electrical engineer :-)  !)  Anybody who can
make any sense of this post is one up on me.  Thanks for reading it,

     Barry Manor, Naturist, Neuroscientist, Bicycle-lover              
                                                            .%%%%.     
     Postgraduate Student in Biomedical Engineering        %% oo %%    
     University of New South Wales, Sydney, Australia     %%\ ][ /%%   
                                                         %%% (~~) %%%  
     Email: 85p8379@csdvax.csd.unsw.EDU.AU   DoD# 620         %%
From: wwc2@quads.uchicago.edu (william wen-tai chen)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Stereo system for sale
Date: 14 Aug 92 05:24:29 GMT
Reply-To: wwc2@midway.uchicago.edu
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations

Stereo System for Sale


1.   Panasonic portable stereo component system - model RX-CT800 (1 year
old)
     Features:
          1.   5-band graphic equalizer
          2.   CD/lin - great for computers
          3.   High speed dubbing with one touch recording and synchronized
start
          4.   phone jack
          5.   radio
          6.   detachable speakers
     Everything is in mint condition.

     For sale only $75 or best offer.

2.   Sony CDP-391 CD player with remote (8 months old).
     Features:
          1.   Play modes - pause, shuffle, and program
          2.   Peak search, fader, repeat, time, clear
          3.   20 track
          4.   phone jack
     Very good CD player to hook up to a stereo like the Panasonic RX-CT800

     For Sale only $115 or best offer.

*Buy both I will ship free.

If interested please e-mail wwc2@midway.uchicago.edu

Thanks a lot.
From: smee@bristol.ac.uk (Paul Smee)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: Wheres the FAQ? (Newbie ??'s)
Date: 14 Aug 92 14:27:48 GMT
Reply-To: P.Smee@bristol.ac.uk (Paul Smee)
Organization: University of Bristol

(Hey, Bob, should this go in the FAQ?)

In article <1992Aug14.112146.8036@alf.uib.no> edmtl@alf.uib.no (Thor Legvold) writes:
>Just found this group - it looks good.  I wondered if there's a FAQ...?
>Maybe a charter? (i.e. is this group only for car/home hi/fi audio or
>are there some studioheads out there that discuss the latest studio/
>engineering topics...?)

A FAQ is under construction.  This group is primarily for 'home' hi/fi
audio, though there are some people in here who are qualified to
discuss studio and engineering, and who occasionally do so (much to my
delight, since it interests me).

There is a child group, rec.audio.pro, which is SUPPOSED to be for
professional-audio discussion, but it doesn't seem to get an incredible
lot of traffic.  There is a child group, rec.audio.car, which is
supposed to be for discussing car hi-fi topics, but sometimes that ends
up in here too.

There's also a moderated related group, rec.audio.high-end, which
discusses the same sorts of things as in here, more or less, but tends
to be a bit slower (and a bit less likely to blow up into flamefests)
owing to the fact that it is moderated.  (Which causes some people,
like me, problems.  We've got a problem with moderated groups, and I
haven't had time to chase it yet.)  NOTE that the rec.audio.high-end
moderator will NOT accept articles which have been crossposted to any
of the other groups as well; and if he spots that you've separately
posted them to other groups, he'll cancel them from the high-end
group.

Finally, due to the growing interest in things like surround-sound,
hifi video, laserdisks, etc, we occasionally overlap into areas which
probably should belong to rec.video.

Suggest you watch a while before saying too much.  There are some
topics which don't go over rationally in here, and bringing them up
simply wastes megabytes of disk space for a few weeks, as people shout
at each other.  Also, we have a number of competent audio engineers
(both electrical engineers working on audio applications as their
profession, and recording engineers) so it's a good idea to be careful
who you decide to call an idiot.  You might be very embarrassed to
discover that, actually, they're right, and have years of experience
to back it up.

-- 
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
Subject: Re: class D power amp
From: stuartw@ccu1.aukuni.ac.nz (Stuart Woolford)
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 02:34:45 GMT
   te.edu><1992Aug10.045231.1144@ccu1.aukuni.ac.nz><1992Aug10.105528.26359@nntp
 .n  ta.no><TILL.92Aug11102831@acid-rain.lucid.com><1992Aug11.230042.394@ccu1.aukuni.ac.nz> <TILL.92Aug14095624@acid-rain.lucid.com>
Organization: University of Auckland, New Zealand.

till@acid-rain.lucid.com (Don Tillman) writes:

....stuff deleted

>Well if you're gonna have a linear regulated power supply, you loose a
>chunk of the efficiency feature of Class D.

>Howzabout a different hybrid approach?  A switching power supply and a Class
>D switching amp used to cascode a linear amp running in Class A or AB.
>This gets you either the performance of Class A with the power dissipation
>of Class B or the performance of Class AB with a lot less power
>dissipation.  Anybody know if this has been done before?

I have been thinking about a system where the power supple 'error' voltages
are taken into account in the PWM stage, this would give the amp a good
low-frequency ( up to 20-40kHz at a guess ) noise rejection, and would enable
very badly smoothed supplies to be used ( even unsmoothed ?? ) as long
as the higher frequencies are filtered out ( which is much easier than
stabalizing with voltages.. ). A normal class-D would have a small amount
of noise rejection ( now that I have thought about it.. ) but this would help
to raise with low end of noise frequencies by increasing with effective speed
of the error feedback for the power supply errors..

I have thought a little about the linear follower, and have seen articles
about the old carver ( I think... ) magnetic-field amps, which worked like
this ( and used few filter cap's.. ), but will leave this VERY INTERESTING
consideration until I get a normal class-D ( or similar.. ) going..

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
stuartw@ccu1.aukuni.ac.nz


			>>>>In VI Where Available<<<<
------------------------------------------------------------------------------