HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: barothwe@floyd.cca.cr.rockwell.com
Subject: Tax DEDUCTIONS for 1992 MIDI Donations
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 92 08:51:57 -0600
X-Received: by usenet.pa.dec.com; id AA00347; Wed, 16 Dec 92 06:52:20 -0800
X-Received: by inet-gw-2.pa.dec.com; id AA27910; Wed, 16 Dec 92 06:52:19 -0800
X-Received: by floyd.cca.cr.rockwell.com (5.57/Ultrix3.0-C)
	id AA27076; Wed, 16 Dec 92 08:51:58 -0600
X-To: rec.audio.pro.usenet
X-Mts: smtp


		------======<<<<<<(((((     )))))>>>>>>======------

		   You can get TAX DEDUCTIONS on MIDI/Audio Gear
		        if you donate by the end of 1992

		------======<<<<<<(((((     )))))>>>>>>======------

		     Got MIDI/Audio Gear you don't use anymore?

		------======<<<<<<(((((     )))))>>>>>>======------

		Got enough money that you can afford to be generous
		    with that which others can put to good use?

		------======<<<<<<(((((     )))))>>>>>>======------


        I am co-chairman of the "PTF Education Committee" (PTF is
Parent-Teacher-Fellowship) for a private, non-profit, Christian elementary/
middle school in Cedar Rapids, Iowa. We have two known-to-be-working Apples
and one IBM PC. We also have an Apple that I have not looked at yet. The
school's name is Isaac Newton Christian Academy. Money is tight, and
the roof needs repair, so usually fund raising tends to be directed towards
things other than computers. :-(

        We are, right now, working on establishing a "Computer Lab", which
will include at least 1 of the systems set up for MIDI applications, and have
been talking about soliciting donations.

	We ask that if you have ANY Apple II or MS-DOS MIDI/Audio items, that
you would SERIOUSLY consider donating these to our school. Even if it is an 
item that needs repair, we'd be happy to accept it IF we know the repair costs
involved before it is shipped to us. We currently have one Yamaha (forget the
model) basic full-size, 61 key, 4-voice piano that has MIDI in/out/thru.

	Even though we will appreciate any donation, here are some specific
	things we are looking for at this time:

		o  MIDI Capable Full-Size Keyboards
		o  MIDI cards
		o  Music Education software such as Ear training, music
		    reading, music theory, keyboard skills, etc.
		o  Sequencing software
		o  Sound modules or cards (perhaps someone is sick of
		    their MT-32?)
		o  Amplifier/Speakers for Audio monitoring
		o  Programmable Drum machines with built-in sounds

	REMEMBER... this is a BONA FIDE non-profit organization!

Thank you for your consideration and support,

Bruce Rothwell

===============================================================================
  Bruce Rothwell                            \ /~~~~~~\     Opinions expressed
  barothwe@floyd.cca.cr.rockwell.com         X        )    are mine, but they
  Rockwell Int'l - CCA                      / \______/     might be shared by
  Cedar Rapids, IA                                              multitudes !!
===============================================================================
From: jrusby@darkwing.uoregon.edu (Jim T. Rusby)
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
Subject: Re: Monitor System Peaks
Date: 17 Dec 92 17:06:28 GMT
Article-I.D.: pith.1gqc2kINNpvf
Organization: University of Oregon Network Services
NNTP-Posting-Host: darkwing.uoregon.edu

In article <BzD4I4.KnF@hpwin052.uksr.hp.com> mow@hpwin052.uksr.hp.com (Mark Payne) writes:
>
>My 93 Canford catalogue (Big UK gear distributor) just came through and 
>in it is an "automatic feedback eliminator". I have only scanned the info 
>on this but it has 9 different notch filters which it adjusts and assigns 
>to the unstable frequencies that it detects. It works inline.. all the while.
>

This is probably the Sabine Feedback Exterminator. I tried one out and was
quite impressed with the results. Its in mono, so you need one per feed.
We used it on a vocal jazz setup last year and had no problems at all. 
The only thing it takes is a few minutes to memorize the resonant freqs
and after that it is pretty smart.

The only thing I found was that the control of monitor eq was taken from
me.  Even using a board parametric to crisp up the mix (at the artist
request) or other such tweaks requires re-setting the device to the new
conditions.  They arent cheap,  whereas you can buy perfectly reasonable
eq for less.

Otherwise,  its about time something like this came up.
jim
>
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
From: tj@fnbc.co.uk (Tim Clarke)
Subject: Studio monitor amps
Keywords: amps,monitor
Organization: First National Bank Of Chicago, Chicago IL, USA
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 92 14:14:29 GMT

I am in the process of setting up a 'home' studio and would appreciate
any comments netters may have wrt suitable amps for monitoring.

Musical style is hard to define, it will be mainly contemporary church
music. I guess that 'light rock' would be as good a description as any.

High sound levels are not a main concern, transparency and good dynamics
are.

I have been offered things like the RAMSA WP1200 but I would rather not
have fans running if I can get away without.

I realise that there are many factors to take into account here but
any thoughts would be appreciated.

   Tim Clarke
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
From: is297105@umbc2.umbc.edu
Subject: TEST
Organization: University of Maryland Baltimore County
Date: Mon, 14 Dec 1992 05:55:03 GMT

HELLO NET,

THIS IS ONLY A TEST.

RICHARD THOMAS
IS410409@UMBC2.UMBC.EDU
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro

In rec.audio.pro, nathan@laplace.csb.yale.edu (Nathan F. Janette) writes:

> In article <130680005@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM> ruska@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM (Dave  
> Ruska) writes:
> 
> > 
> > Well I got mine two weeks ago. I chose it over the Mackie 1602 due to
> > the additional sub1/sub2 outputs which can be routed back into the  
> mains.
> > I will use this capability for doing vocal group processing when I use
> > the board in a live sound system.
> 
> Not to start a war over mixers, .....

No need to load your guns. I think the Mackie 1604 is a great, high quality,  
afforable, and popular mixer. I certainly wouldn't mind having a Mackie
for home studio use, and dedicate the DOD board for live sound reenforcement.
Unfortunately I could only afford one board for both uses, so I got the DOD.

>  .................................  I can think of several
> ways I could do the same thing with my Mackie 1604 using the
> alternate stereo bus routed back to the main stereo bus. 

The alternate stereo bus is nice, excect using it precludes the use
of the mute button (since mute really is the the alternate bus select).
In my application of sending the vocals to a separate subgroup, I
still really need the mute buttons to shutdown unused mics. The DOD
board lets me keep the mute button. With the DOD I can also assign
any channel to BOTH the mains and the subs. I can also turn off both
main and subs and hear only the effects returns in the mix. 

On the Mackie I'm also not quite sure how you would get the alternate stereo
bus routed back into the main stereo bus without using up a set of aux
returns.  Both the DOD and the Mackie have four sets of returns, and I use
up all four. On the DOD I do vocal group processing through the sub
inserts and then select subs to main to get my final stereo mix.

There are a few other feature differences between the Mackie and DOD which
made me choose the DOD: The Mackie has 6 XLR mic inputs, while the DOD
has 8 (and I have 8 vocal, guitar-stack, and drum set mics total). The
Mackie has 8 channel insert points while the DOD has 16. The Mackie 
only has one selectable pre-EQ aux send for a monitor, while the DOD
comes preconfigured with 2 pre-EQ sends. Also on the DOD the Aux 1 & 2
sends can be reconfigured as pre-EQ, post-EQ, or post-fader, and the
Aux 3 .. 6 sends can be reconfigured as pre-EQ or post-fader. The Mackie
only allows you to reconfigure Aux 1 as pre-EQ or post-fader. For my
application I need to separate monitor mixes.  On the Mackie the channel
gain control is on the connector panel, which when rack mounted would make
them somewhat inaccessable on the *back* of the unit. I prefer the gain
control at the top of each channel on the *front* of the board.

Again, I have nothing against the Mackie 1604 mixer (If I had the 
money I would *love* to own one of their new 8-bus mixers!).

But I picked the DOD because it best suited my application(s).

> 
> --
> Nathan Janette
> PPP link from hilbert.csb.yale.edu
> 
> Please reply to: nathan@laplace.csb.yale.edu (NeXT)

Regards,
Dave                         (preferred addr: daver@hpgrrd.gr.hp.com)
From: Mike.Oniffrey@launchpad.unc.edu (Mike Oniffrey)
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
Subject: AT4462 Mixer
Date: 18 Dec 92 03:43:22 GMT
Organization: UNC EBBS

Before I make my final purchase decision, I'd like to hear any comments,
good or bad, concerning the Audio-Technica 4462 field mixer.

I would be using it mostly to mix anywhere from two to four channels to
feed to a BetaCam (Ikegami HL-55A with a Sony BVV-5 piggybacked) in
television EFP setups.

Would the AT4462 have any advantage over the Electro-Voice FP32 in the
above configuration?

Thanks in advance,

Onif


mike.oniffrey@launchpad.unc.edu
is Mike Oniffrey at
North Carolina Public Television
Research Triangle Park, North Carolina, USA
--
   The opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the University of
     North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the Campus Office for Information
        Technology, or the Experimental Bulletin Board Service.
           internet:  laUNChpad.unc.edu or 152.2.22.80
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
From: gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Gabe M Wiener)
Subject: Re: DAT and using DDS Tapes
Reply-To: gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Gabe M Wiener)
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1992 06:37:07 GMT

In article <BzD502.KtH@hpwin052.uksr.hp.com> mow@hpwin052.uksr.hp.com (Mark Payne) writes:
>
>Are there any bad effects of using Digital Storage (DDS for computer system backup) Tapes in yer DAT machine.. I have used a couple with no problems that 
>I can hear. 

As I understand it (and this is unconfirmed, so correct me if I'm wrong), DDS
tapes are certified at significantly higher standards than are DAT's.  They're
also about twice the price.  I don't know why you'd want to use them in your
DAT machine unless you get them for free.

Other than the price, there's no reason not to use them for audio if you've
got them...


--
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: jhenders@jonh.wimsey.bc.ca (John Henders)
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
Distribution: world
Organization:  One of these days for sure
X-News: HERMES MMAIL 1.10 Rev. Nov 25 1992
Subject: Re: Monitor System Peaks
	<1992Dec14.210722.9568@ac.dal.ca> <3968@wyse.wyse.com>
	<Dec15.220432.32528@yuma.ACNS.ColoState.EDU>
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 23:18:04 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

In <Dec15.220432.32528@yuma.ACNS.ColoState.EDU> gw214790@LANCE.ColoState.Edu (Galen Watts) writes:

>>BTW: anybody got a good way to figure out the peaks in a monitor system

>Yes, we do it all the time with a readily available acoustic measuring system:
>Our Ears.
>You need to FLATTEN the eq, turn it up until it squeals at ONE frequency, then
>pull down the band on the eq.  The first time is trial and error, so maybe you
>shouldn't do it at a gig.  

	As an alternate method, I often flatten the graph, turn the monitors
up until before feedback, back them off a bit, then check the mike,
while listening both for tone, and peaks. This can give you a really
good sounding monitor that will cut for the vocalist through the stage
sound. After getting a sound I like I'll run the volume up to check for
squeals, in case the vocalist wants more after the set begins. Of course
to do this efficiently, you need you're monitor graphs on stage, whether
you have an onstage monitor mix or not, but this isn't usually a
problem.
	I've also found that being able to listen to what the singer
actually wants to hear from their monitor is important. Some vocalists
prefer to have a lot of bottom end on their voices, while others
(females especially), prefer none.


-- 

 "If Rush fans were braindead, why are there so   Bruce Bufalini
 many people posting to alt.music.rush?"              PSU
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
From: fdeck@vyasa.helios.nd.edu (francis deck)
Subject: PA Tweeter Advice?
Organization: OUC, University of Notre Dame
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 01:11:55 GMT

I got a new amp for my string bass, and would like to relegate my
old amp for use as a very small PA.  The kit consists of a Peavey
130 watt head and an EV 15" driver in a small cabinet.  I'd like
to add some sort of extra box which contains appropriate tweeters
or horns or whatever to give this thing some high end (plus a
crossover built in), but want it to be inexpensive and very
portable.  Any ideas?

f.deck
physics dept
u. of notre dame
From: drx@chinet.chi.il.us (Scott Whittle)
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
Subject: What do you charge for a night out?????
Date: 18 Dec 92 21:46:23 GMT
Organization: Chinet - Public Access UNIX

Just curious concerning those who "do" sound for local talent (used loosly :) )
What do you normally charge and for what services? Do you provide a pa and an
engineer? Just rent the PA, just engineer?  Let me know. Also I would be
curious to know how you figure in replacement, expansion, insurance What
kind of return (no pun intended) do you get on you investment?  Is it all
for fun?? or fun and profit????/

-- 
Scott Whittle (drx)                       drx@chinet.chi.il.us
Ground Zero Sight & Sound, inc.          
Two Wheaton Center #1111         * Ding-a-Ding-Dang my Dang-a-long-ling-long 
Wheaton, IL 60187 708.899.6567   * Ministry, JBMH, as edited by IceIce Beno
From: jvb@wyse.wyse.com (Jack Van Breen x2666 dept220)
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
Subject: Re: The merits of Power amps!  was: Peavey, etc!
Date: 14 Dec 92 18:48:23 GMT
Organization: Wyse Technologies San Jose, Ca

I just wanted to compliment Mur and Chris on the Very Gentlemanly why thier
discussion is going.  I find it very enlightening to read about thier
experiences and 'why they feel the way they do'.  

Good job. This is the way the net should work. 

(BTW: I happen to now like Crown's for bang4buk vs. weight, but I have used
the 'new' peavey's w/ good results as well:)
-- 
Jack Van Breen (standard disclaimer, these are my own ...)
Product Support, Wyse Technology, San Jose, CA
...!uunet!wyse!jvb
jvb@wyse.com
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro,sci.electronics
From: duff@phenom.physics.wisc.edu (Adam Duff)
Subject: WANTED:  audio amp junker
Keywords: audio amplifier wanted
Reply-To: duff@phenom.physics.wisc.edu
Organization: University of Wisconsin-Madison, Department of Computer Sciences
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 20:37:57 GMT

I'm looking for an audio amplifier for component testing purposes.
It doesn't need to sound good (I'm not going to listen to it), nor
does it even need to work (as long as it isn't completely toasted).

Will pay shipping + ?

Thanks,
Adam.  <duff@phenom.physics.wisc.edu>

Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
From: shawn@thor.atd.ucar.edu (Shawn Copeland)
Subject: Re: QSC1500, was Re: 800W Power Amps (Peavey CS800)
Organization: National Center for Atmospheric Research
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 03:11:45 GMT

In article <1992Dec8.183244.27472@news.media.mit.edu>, das@media.mit.edu (David Sheppard) writes:
|> 
|> I recall QSC's wiring (model 1400), is tip=negative, ring=positive,
|> sleeve=return/shield.  This is a modular input pc board which is
|> used in several of their amps so I think that it is more-or-less
|> standard in their model line.  

The MX "a" series sports a redesigned input circuit, just for clarification.

|> I'm fairly impressed with the construction & robustness.

I agree.  I've never had any problem with any or our QSC MX-1500's.  They've
just always worked.

|> The QSC sounds better, but isn't internally limited (hard clipping
|> causes pops, much like terrible old Carver amps).  

The MX "a" series (i.e. MX-1500a, MX-2000a) have a space for
inserting an optional limiter circuit (similar to Crown's PIP 
slot).

The EX series (a step up from MX) come standard with input limiting, I believe.
-- 
	Shawn B. Copeland
	National Center for Atmospheric Research
	NCAR  Mail Stop MAR, P.O Box 3000, Boulder, CO 80307-3000
	Internet: shawn@thor.atd.ucar.edu
                  shawn_copeland@ncar.ucar.edu
From: bobdavis@scumbag.viewlogic.com (Bob Davis)
Subject: Spice Macro models for speaker impedence
Originator: bobdavis@scumbag
Keywords: models
Organization: Viewlogic Systems, Inc.
Date: Thu, 17 Dec 1992 18:47:07 GMT


I'm investigating the viability of a pulse-width-modulated amp
for use as a mondo subwoofer amp, in order to get high power to
weight and performance.  This isn't a new idea, but I haven't
seen any work done specifically for the bass apps, which have
a few things which make this design particularly applicable.

So, I'm looking for spice models for some "typical" bass bins.
These should be semi-simple, as there should be no "crossover"
parts involved.  I've read a few AES papers on this topic, and
they are helpful, but they are rather abstract and lacking in
detailed examples.

I don't know a convenient way to go directly from a data sheet's
impedence chart to a simulatable model without some framework, but
if you do, that would also be very helpful.
-- 
Bob Davis -- bobdavis@viewlogic.com
"VISUALIZE WHIRLED PEAS"
From: kludge@grissom.larc.nasa.gov (Scott Dorsey)
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
Subject: Re: Turning pro - getting an audio-related job
Date: 16 Dec 1992 14:45:50 GMT
Organization: NASA Langley Research Center and Reptile Farm
NNTP-Posting-Host: grissom.larc.nasa.gov

In article <85436@ut-emx.uucp> logan@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Logan Shaw) writes:
>
>  I *don't* know how to convince singers to hold microphones correctly.

If you deal with good, well-trained singers, you don't need to convince
them.  If you deal with bad vocalists, the habits are probably too ingrained
for you to do anything about them (and maybe they are better of not being
heard anyway).

>  I'm not sure I can restrain myself from killing any performer who decides
>to put the microphone down on top of the main speakers when exiting the
>stage area.

Don't worry.  Nobody else does either.
--scott
From: cullen@ac.dal.ca
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
Subject: The merits of Peavey HDH whatevers, was Merits of Power.
Date: 16 Dec 92 23:03:44 -0400
Organization: Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada

Jack Van Breen writes:

> One of the BEST sounding systems I've heard in a LONG time was all
> Peavey:):() (No REaLLY:):)  It was at a locals stores anniversery party in
> the parking lot.  They were using the Peavey Mark VII (psudeo studio board)
> and the HDH1(2???)(the big 3 way processed jobs:) Anyway, Very Clean, Clear
> and Punchy ('till one bands soundman decided to mix in the red:):) I was
> impressed to the point that if I ever get to write a 'rider' I'd spec it
> as my system of choice;)

Just to prove that I don't hate Peavey, I really don't mind these cabinets.
The only problem I've ever heard about with the cabinet is that there is
a tendancy for the phase plug in the horn to disintegrate. I've heard them
a few times, (never mixed) and I think that you can get a pretty good
sound from them. The cabinet is available, I guess, as a one piece,
or as a sub and mid/high combo, basically cutting the cabinet in half.

Note: I'm not endorsing the box as a fidelity box, but as a rock box.
Apogee 3X3, Meyer MSL3 = Fidelity, Martin RS1200, Elite MX2000 = Rock Box.
Just for those who are wondering if I'm lowering my standards.8-)
						Mur
						Cullen@ac.dal.ca
						Cullen@ug.cs.dal.ca

Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
From: kauff@neit.cgd.ucar.edu (Brian Kauffman)
Subject: Re: The merits of Power amps!  was: Peavey, etc!
Organization: NCAR, Boulder CO
Date: Tue, 15 Dec 1992 21:52:34 GMT

> =  nathan@laplace.biology.yale.edu writes:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
>My experience has been with small clubs in this area for the most part,
>and I often get strange looks from house soundfolks when I want to use a
>different mic on our female vocalist.  Why do I insist on using an EV 
>ND/757 on her voice rather than a SM58?  The answer is, with no flames
>intended, that if I have to explain it to you you just wouldn't get it.
>One either hears the difference, or not: crisp high end vs. no high end.

With no flames intended, your response seems unduely insulting & patronizing.
Why don't you simply state the difference & your preference?

-Brian
From: moskowit@panix.com (Len Moskowitz)
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
Subject: Re: Soundcards
Date: 21 Dec 92 04:24:05 GMT
Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix & Internet, NYC

In article <DkLXVB1w165w@tfsquad.mn.org> mike_d@tfsquad.mn.org (mike
diack) writes:

> whats the best soundcard around for the PC

Gravis Ultrasound.  No comparison to anything else up to the Turtle
card.


-- 
Len Moskowitz
moskowit@panix.com
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
From: gw214790@LANCE.ColoState.Edu (Galen Watts)
Subject: Re: Woodstock PA
Date: Sat, 12 Dec 1992 18:39:53 GMT
Organization: Colorado Concert Sound

In article <o9RmVB1w165w@tfsquad.mn.org> mike_d@tfsquad.mn.org (mike diack) writes:
>Well its almost 25 years since the event, and ive read numerous
>books, seen the movie a few times, and studied the record cover
>and i'm still none the wiser - 
>Q : What sort of PA system did they have at woodstock ?
>Stage photos all seem to miss it , as does the movie
>Back then, locals were using 4560s+D130s and 375s+ 90deg flares
>wondering of they had anything different ?
>cheers. Mike.

I've seen some articles and spoke with a few who were there and they all say
they used Altec A-7's and lots of 'em.  Power amps were McIntosh and those big
tube Altec's.
When the Grateful Dead played their catastrophic set, they set up their PA
along with the festival PA.  I think they actually made it thru three songs
before some of the stage platform fell (no one injured) and Jerry Garcia said
"F*** this!".

Mix magazine may have been one of the magazine articles, but I can't find it
right now.

Galen Watts, KF0YJ

Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
From: mow@hpwin052.uksr.hp.com (Mark Payne)
Subject: Re: Monitor System Peaks
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 17:19:17 GMT
Organization: Hewlett Packard Response Centre, England
 
 >>>BTW: anybody got a good way to figure out the peaks in a monitor system
 >>>(with out a spectrum anylizer:):)
 >>>Jack Van Breen (standard disclaimer, these are my own ...)
 >> Yes, we do it all the time with a readily available acoustic measuring system
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1.4 PL6]

My 1993 Canford Catalogue (Big UK gear dist) has just come through and in the 
"new product" section is a unit that is an "automatic feedback eliminator".
I only had a quik squint at this but the basic idea is that it can detect up to
From: bchase@bigwpi.WPI.EDU (Bret Jared Chase)
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
Subject: power amp scematics
Date: 12 Dec 1992 01:20:20 GMT
Organization: Worcester Polytechnic Institute
NNTP-Posting-Host: bigwpi.wpi.edu

Hi, 
Sorry about that last post, anyways does anybody have any schematics for
solid-state power amps that they would be willing to send me a photocopy of?
My band needs a new power amp (the last one had DC leakage that fried one of my
JBL's).  I need schematics for amps in the range of 200-400W/ch.  Please email me at bchase@wpi.wpi.edu to make arrangements to send it to me via snail-net or
to find some way to send it over the net.

				Thanks in advance,
				Bret Chase
				bchase@wpi.wpi.edu