HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: msibbern@nyx.cs.du.edu (Michael Sibbernsen)
Newsgroups: rec.audio.high-end
Subject: FOR SALE: Magnepan SMGa, Infinity RS 2000, Boston Acoustic A70
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 92 00:56:58 GMT
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix (sponsored by U. of Denver Math/CS dept.)
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.89.7.4
Disclaimer1: Nyx is a public access Unix system run by the University of
Disclaimer2: Denver for the Denver community.  The University has neither
Disclaimer3: control over nor responsibility for the opinions of users.
Originator: tjk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu

HOME SPEAKERS FOR SALE

Infinity RS 2000's $125
Boston Acoustics A70's (with stands) $175
Magnepan SMGa's $250

BO accepted, you pay S&H

Email Michael if you would like more information or if interested in
purchase.
From: abrams@cs.columbia.edu (Steven Abrams)
Newsgroups: rec.audio.high-end
Subject: Re: Why digitize: some bunk
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 05:52:17 GMT
Organization: Columbia University Department of Computer Science
	(queueing-rmail) id 011254.26778; Wed, 11 Nov 1992 01:12:54 EST
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.89.7.4
Originator: tjk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu

Boy, has this discussion wandered...

Digital vs Analog:  What do they mean?

A digital recording is quantized in both time and amplitude.  It
contains 44,100 samples per second, each of which can take on one of a
finite value.  The method of storage is typically to encode these
pieces of data in some magnetic, and/or optical pattern on some tape
or disk storage device.   There is no direct analogy between the
pattern on the medium and the original sound.  After you decode
the stored pattern into a bit pattern and apply the error
detection/correction algorithms to the bit patterns to get the
amplitude values again, you now have a sequence of numbers which are
analogous to the original sound.

In an analog recording, you can directly examine the medium and detect
something analogous to the original sound.  On tape, there's magnetic
particle densities which are analogous to air pressure.  On records,
there are grooves.   Not to mention the fact that there in an anolog
recording, there is no inherent bandwidth reduction or compression of
dynamic range.   By *inherent* I mean "implicit in the definition of
the process."  Of course there are all sorts of physical processes
which cause losses of resolution and compression in analog recordings
too.  Not to mention the addition of noise as a byproduct of the
physical act of making the recording (surface noise, tape hiss, etc.).

None of this is meant to say that analog is better than digital, or
the other way around.  Just  trying to clarify the terms.

Now: can we get back to talking about music and sound, rather than
physics and numbers?


~~~~Steve


--
/*************************************************
 *
 *Steven Abrams             abrams@cs.columbia.edu
 *
 **************************************************/
#include <std/dumquote.h>
#include <std/disclaimer.h>
From: gallian@tellabs.com (Doug Gallian)
Newsgroups: rec.audio.high-end
Subject: FOR SALE: Audible Illusions Amplifier
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 15:00:52 GMT
Organization: Tellabs, Inc. Lisle IL
	(queueing-rmail) id 131745.26406; Mon, 9 Nov 1992 13:17:45 EST
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.89.7.4
Originator: tjk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu


	AUDIBLE ILLUSIONS S-120 AMPLIFIER FOR SALE

	New: $2000.00   Asking: $1350.00

	* Perfect Condition (no scratches,runs quite)
	* High Current 120 watts/channel
	* 120w into 8 ohms, 240w into 4 ohms, 420w into 2 ohms, 750w into 1 ohm
	* Great reviews in several high-end magazines (reprints available)

	If interested call Doug at (708)955-3062 or (708)739-0719 evenings
	You can also email me but include your phone number and I'll call you.
From: <U37426%uicvm.uic.edu@OHSTVMA.ACS.OHIO-STATE.EDU>
Newsgroups: rec.audio.high-end
Subject: any VTL owners out there????
Date: Tuesday, 10 Nov 1992 17:50:08 CST
Organization: University of Illinois at Chicago
 BSMTP id 4808; Tue, 10 Nov 92 18:51:00 EST
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.89.7.4
Originator: tjk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu

      If you own a pair of Vacuum Tube Logic 225 mono block tube amps AND
would like to answer a few questions about them please drop me a note.
                    thanks!


       tom   u37426@uicvm.uic.edu
From: palane@iastate.edu (Paul A. Lane)
Newsgroups: rec.audio.high-end
Subject: Re: Why digitize: some bunk
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 16:21:06 GMT
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames IA
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.89.7.4
Return-Path: <news@news.iastate.edu>
Originator: tjk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu

In <1dlq81INNjtb@uwm.edu> kharstin@mtholyoke.edu (Ken Harstine) writes:

>I think that there is a basic mis-understanding of what the term analog
>means.  To have an analog of something, is to have a representation of
>that something in another form.  If that something is a 20-20kHz audio
>signal, it has been proven mathematically that all of the information
>present can be represented by samples taken at a rate greater than 40kHz. 

I think that you're a bit off-base here. The term analog is being used in
two different ways. With reference to analog vs. digital, the term refers
to a signal which has unlimited variability within a given range. 

The best analogy is the real numbers. You can take any interval, no matter how
small, and there will be an infinite number of real numbers in that range.
A digital signal is quantized into discrete options. The integers are
the best example of this. Between 1 and 12, there are ten integers.

One has to be a little careful with words that can have two different meanings
when used in different contexts. Digitizing a signal with no components above
20 kHz does require a 40 kHz digitized signal (NyQuist theorem.) However, this
does require perfect A/D and D/A converters. Thus, the main argument against
digital is not that the mathematics are bad, but that the converters are
imperfect.

Your other points are quite valid.

Paul
From: "Andreas G. Yankopolus" <ay0i+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Newsgroups: rec.audio.high-end
Subject: Pioneer Legato Link
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 19:27:24 -0500 (EST)
Organization: University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.89.7.4
Cc: 
Originator: tjk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu

Has anyone listened to one of the Pioneer Legato Link CD players?  The
technology certainly has merit; I'm curious to hear Pioneer's execution
of it.


Andreas Yankopolus
Carnegie-Mellon University
Junior, Electrical Engineering
Sigma Tau Gamma Fraternity
From: caf@omen.UUCP (Chuck Forsberg)
Newsgroups: rec.audio.high-end
Subject: Re: DAT is King of Audiophile Digital Recording
Date: Sat, 07 Nov 1992 09:27:20 GMT
Organization: Omen Technology INC, Portland Rain Forest
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.89.7.4
Originator: tjk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu

>>Did _Mix_ measure the jitter of the bits of the tape, and out the
>>SPDIF or AES/EBU output of the DAT player?  If they didn't do this,
>>their "it will sound the same becuase the bits are the same" argument
>>is a heap of nonsense.

The jitter of raw bits read from the tape is irrelevant provided
the bits are recovered well enough to reconstruct the data.  If
not, the error rate will be too high.

Most if not all DAT and CD players clock the data into their
DACs under control of a stable internal clock, which may be
crystal controlled.  In television this process is called Time
Base Correction.

So the only relevant place to look for jitter is the strobe line
on the digital to analog converter (DAC).

-- 
Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX          ...!tektronix!reed!omen!caf 
Author of YMODEM, ZMODEM, Professional-YAM, ZCOMM, and DSZ
  Omen Technology Inc    "The High Reliability Software"
17505-V NW Sauvie IS RD   Portland OR 97231   503-621-3406
From: bill@rsphy1.anu.edu.au (Bill Alford)
Newsgroups: rec.audio.high-end
Subject: Digital processing of sound
Date: 9 Nov 1992 23:59:58 GMT
Organization: RSPhySE, Australian National University, Canberra
Distribution: world
Reply-To: bill@rsphy1.anu.edu.au (Bill Alford)
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.89.7.4
Originator: tjk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu

Finally I've been able to read the interesting article in the New York
Times, 25th October 1992, about "High Definition CD". I have privately
known that everything printed there about sampling rate, etc was what
had to be done, but various people on the net would take great
exception to this statement (there is a lot more to hearing than steady
state sine waves) and hence I haven't spoken up on this before. The
article didn't specify the actual sampling rate other than several
hundred KHz. Does anybody know the actual sampling rate? A topic that I
have wanted to bring up for some time concerns me more, particularly
when people try to criticise LP's for the RIAA equalisation. In this
article it mentioned that in the real recording world pre-filtering of
the signal the cut-off filter for removing anything above 22.05KHz
affects quite vital overtone information in that it affects the signal
below 22.05KHz. Does anybody have any further information on this? I've
expanded out the sentence in the article that mentioned this, but it is
something that has bothered me for sometime because, for example,
digitally recorded pianos don't sound quite right (compared to analog
and the real world) because of their complex overtones. In the case of
the piano the sampling rate also comes into this because of the rise
times involved.

I'm interested in this posting at getting at the truth and don't want
to start a netwar, with no commercial interests that Philips/Sony had
in formulating the original CD standard.  I know that "Professor"
Johnson of Reference Records in the NY Times article has commercial
interests also, but in this case they appear to be working in our
interests.  I'm looking forward with great interest to the promised
releases before the end of the year using this new digital recording
process (I hope it doesn't start another format war).

===========================================================================
| Bill Alford,                            | Email: bill@rsphys.anu.edu.au |
| School Computer Unit,                   | Tel: 61 6 249 2143            |
| Research School of Physical Sciences    | Fax: 61 6 249 1884            |
|     and Engineering,                    |                               |
| Australian National University,         |                               |
| GPO Box 4,                              | "Life's a chain reaction"     |
| Canberra City, ACT 2601                 |                               |
| Australia                               |                               |
===========================================================================
From: hendra@cs.columbia.edu (Hendra Soetjahja)
Newsgroups: rec.audio.high-end
Subject: Duntech Crown-Prince speakers
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 21:43:41 GMT
Organization: Columbia University Department of Computer Science
	(queueing-rmail) id 171910.18477; Wed, 11 Nov 1992 17:19:10 EST
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.89.7.4
Originator: tjk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu


  I have a pair of Duntech Crown-Prince speakers but unable
to locate the manual.  The information I need to look up is 
how the switches at the back of the speakers work.
  Could anyone who has the manual kindly send me a copy or 
let me know how it works.  I will reimburse the cost naturally.

Thanks,

Hendra
From: milo@dorm.rutgers.edu (james mielo)
Newsgroups: rec.audio.high-end
Subject: Need info on M&K /Velodyne sub
Followup-To: rec.audio.high-end
Date: 11 Nov 92 03:03:39 GMT
Organization: rutgers university
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.89.7.4
Originator: tjk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu


    I need to know the principles behind the M&K and Velodyne sub systems.
I am interested in knowing how the woofers, which are in-phase and 90
degrees off axis from one another, can channel and blend the output into a
single signal without a delay between the two woofers. Also, how can a
woofer have adequate transient response with no enclosure to "load" the
woofers.( The isobaric portion between the woofers does nothing to resist
the motion of the woofers.)


I am trying to apply this box design to car-audio, will it work?

James Mielo
Rutgers College of Pharmacy '94
milo@dorm.rutgers.edu
From: jas@proteon.com (John A. Shriver)
Newsgroups: rec.audio.high-end
Subject: output stage redisgn (was bias)
Date: Wed, 4 Nov 92 14:19:39 EST
Organization: University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.89.7.4
Cc: info-high-audio@csd4.csd.uwm.edu
Originator: tjk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu

>I have a pair of tube amps which are being rebuilt hopefully for optimum
>performence. They use EL34s in the output stage and are origionally rated
>at 40W. If I rewire the tubes for triode connection and increase bias for
>class A operation can a parallel output stage be inserted into the
>circuit? How can I determin the correct bias for class A operation in the
>output stage and for tubes in general?

No, it's not that simple.

First, if you increase the bias, you will increase the current through
the transformer primary.  It is designed for, and rated for, a
particular maximum level of primary current.  Use more current, and it
won't work as well.

Second, if you parallel the output tubes, they will need to see a much
lower load impedance.  About half.  Moreover, with two pair of tubes,
you'll have twice the current in the primary.  If you're lucky, there
will merely be worse peformance.  More likely, you'll fry the primary
winding (meltdown).

The "correct" bias is that at which you can afford to keep replacing
the output tubes when they burn out.  The closer to class A, the
shorter their life.

You're running class A so long as the dynamic input grid voltage does
not go below the cut-off value (relative to the cathode), this is on
all tube data sheets.

With plate voltages appropriate to class AB1 operation, you are almost
certain to exceeed the plate dissipation limits on the EL34 output
tubes well before biasing true class A.  On a Dynaco Stereo 70, the
EL34's will start to glow cherry red at about 150 mA bias (per pair).

One should fully understand tube data sheets before trying to redesign
output stages.

>Also, are any companies still selling modification kits for the "NEW" AR
>turntable?

Well, Merril used to be the source.
From: tonyb@juliet.ll.mit.edu ( Tony Berke )
Newsgroups: rec.audio.high-end
Subject: Re:  Why digitize: some bunk...
Date: Wed, 4 Nov 92 15:51:21 EST
Organization: University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.89.7.4
Cc: tonyb@juliet.ll.mit.edu
Originator: tjk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu


Richard d Pierce <DPierce@world.std.com> writes:

>In article <1cgtl9INN1dg@uwm.edu> "Sheldon  Stokes" writes:

>>Don't forget about the phase changes induced by the RIAA filters when
>>records are cut.

>Which are EXACTLY the opposite of the phase shifts introduced by the RIAA
>conpensation in your phon preamp, thus completely eliminating the phase
>shift from that source. 

Good point.  But how about the phase shift caused by the low-pass
characteristic of the cartridge (stylus tip resonance?)  And the one
at the other end, caused by the LF resonances in the arm/cartridge
system, plus the one that must result from the velocity sensor's
finite bass response.

Is the ear more or less sensitive to phase anomolies at LF, or HF?
If it's the former, it would seem that perhaps LP's are worse than
CD's in this department, despite the fuss made over anti-aliasing
filters.

Tony Berke
From: bower@pecan.cns.udel.edu (Tyson Bower)
Newsgroups: rec.audio.high-end
Subject: Re: Hum Problem
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 18:51:04 GMT
Organization: University of Delaware, Newark
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.89.7.4
Originator: tjk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu

I just wanted to add that I have noticed the same thing.  If I have
the TV cable connected to my VCR, and then connect the VCR into the
stereo, everything starts hummin'.

I've also noticed that it's worse if I have the cable connected to
my cheap VCR.  I also have a nice Sony SLV-575UC that seems to take
a little of the buzz out.  Go figure...

On the topic of noise, does anyone know of a good way to remove
the occasional pop or click that happens when a motor or compressor
starts up? (The click doesn't come from the motor, it comes through 
the stereo...) Would a power wedge help this?  I spoke with a guy
at the local hi-fi store, and he suggested the Adcom ACE, but he didn't
seem to sure that it would fix the problem.
From: strong@tc.fluke.COM (Norm Strong)
Newsgroups: rec.audio.high-end
Subject: Re: DAT is King of Audiophile Digital Recording
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 18:12:19 GMT
Organization: John Fluke Mfg. Co., Inc., Everett, WA
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.89.7.4
Originator: tjk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu

In article <1ddu9eINNl3v@uwm.edu> hafner@ifi.unizh.ch (Michel Hafner) writes:
}In article <1db95hINN8m0@uwm.edu> bilver!bill@peora.sdc.ccur.com (Bill Vermillion) writes:
}>What was not mentioned is that Mix did one better.   Their critical
}>measurements were made by recording engineers who were intimately
}>familiar with the music and made their judgement on how it sounded.
}>
}>And it was NOT 10 digital copies, but 20 ANALOG generations.  In the
}>end - there was a slight difference between the 20th generation analog
}>and first generation digital.    The consensus was that it did sound
}>'different' - but nothing anyone could pinpoint in the listening tests.
}>And the real kicker was that the audience was about evenly divided.
}>Some prefered the digital original while other preferd the copy. 
}
}You must be kidding. If these people listened to a 20th generation analogue
}tape and found the difference to the digital master to be slight, there are
}only a few possibilities:
}
}- they have very bad hearing
}- they used very low playback volumes
}- they used a very unrevealing kind of music 
}- they used very unrevealing playback equipment
}- combinations of the above

Oh?  Not necessarily.  Let's say the noise and distortion through
the recording/reproduction process was .05%  This is not implausible.
After 20 cycles, the distortion is up to .05% * sqrt 20, or 0.225%

I would be hard pressed to pick out distortion of 1/4%  
-- 

Norm Strong  (strong@tc.fluke.com)
2528 31st S.   Seattle WA 98144   USA
From: iping%mindseye.Berkeley.EDU@ucbvax.Berkeley.EDU (IPing Chen)
Newsgroups: rec.audio.high-end
Subject: price quote for Mac MR78 tunner
Date: 5 Nov 1992 02:10:19 GMT
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Distribution: na
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.89.7.4
Originator: tjk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu

Hello,
  Can anyone out there tell me what the fair price is for an used MR78 tunner?
Any pointer would be very much appreciated. Thanks.


I-Ping Chen
From: bilver!bill@peora.sdc.ccur.com (Bill Vermillion)
Newsgroups: rec.audio.high-end
Subject: Re: DAT is King of Audiophile Digital Recording
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 03:03:00 GMT
Organization: W. J. Vermillion - Winter Park, FL
  (5.67a/IDA-1.5 for uunet!rec-audio-high-end); Thu, 5 Nov 1992 00:25:49 -0500
	id <m0mmy06-0001QDC@tous.oau.org>; Wed, 4 Nov 92 22:35 EST
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.89.7.4
Originator: tjk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu

In article <1d5v3eINNbfc@uwm.edu> jas@proteon.com (John A. Shriver) writes:
>Arhcer Sully responds:

>   In <1coqfiINNbet@uwm.edu> hsu@ecf.toronto.edu (HSU TITUS HENG-HSUEH) writes:

>   * It is
>   *said that even in digital domain, the tape won't sound quite the
>   *same anymore after it's been played more than ten times.

>   Didn't Mix lay this one to rest a few months ago?  They sampled the same
>   portion of digital copies of digital tapes (all of which had had multiple
>   plays) and found no differences in the data, even after multiple generations
>   of copies.  

>   The only sonic differences you should encounter will be differnces
>   in playback systems and environment.

>Did _Mix_ measure the jitter of the bits of the tape, and out the
>SPDIF or AES/EBU output of the DAT player?  If they didn't do this,
>their "it will sound the same becuase the bits are the same" argument
>is a heap of nonsense.

What was not mentioned is that Mix did one better.   Their critical
measurements were made by recording engineers who were intimately
familiar with the music and made their judgement on how it sounded.

And it was NOT 10 digital copies, but 20 ANALOG generations.  In the
end - there was a slight difference between the 20th generation analog
and first generation digital.    The consensus was that it did sound
'different' - but nothing anyone could pinpoint in the listening tests.

And the real kicker was that the audience was about evenly divided.
Some prefered the digital original while other preferd the copy. 
-- 
Bill Vermillion - bill@bilver.oau.org  bill.vermillion@oau.org
                - bill@bilver.uucp 
                - ..!{peora|tous|tarpit}!bilver!bill
From: rhoades@ll.mit.edu (Captain Chaos)
Newsgroups: rec.audio.high-end
Subject: $3k budget system for US/UK
Date: Wed,  4 Nov 92 17:47:12 -0500
Organization: University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.89.7.4
Return-Path: <rhoades@ll.mit.edu>
Cc: rhoades@ll.mit.edu
Originator: tjk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu


I certainly don't qualify as an audiophile, and $3000 would certainly buy
brand-new listenable components for me, so you may wish to politely excuse
my input, but here goes:  Would it make more sense to get a 125 to 250 V
power converter of good quality and then get whatever the best components
available are (whether they're switchable or not)?  Or is this an unreasonable
solution for some reason?

Andrew
rhoades@ll.mit.edu
From: <MPA15C!ARTHUR@TRENGA.tredydev.unisys.com>
Newsgroups: rec.audio.high-end
Subject: Re: INFO. REQUESTED ON MCINTOSH 7300 AMP
Date: 04 NOV 92 13:07
Organization: University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.89.7.4
Comments: Automatic Return Receipt Requested
Originator: tjk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu

The reason Stereophile (and everyone else) fails to review McIntosh
stuff is simply because McIntosh doesn't cooperate with the underground mags.
They don't supply review samples and don't encourage the magazines to otherwise
obtain and comment upon their merchandise.  As a result, the equipment is
really not in the mainstream of audiophile thought.  My personal impression is
that McIntosh is no longer true high-end equipment, and the stuff is of
interest more for durability and being built well than it is for any particular
sonic attributes.  Indeed, at the April Stereophile show, I thought some huge
Mac dipole speakers gave the WORST sound at the show- it was such dull, lifeless
reproduction that it was almost like they were spoofing us.

Perhaps its a philosophical issue here, but why would I want to seek out,
audition, and consider the pricey stuff from a manufacturer who fails to work
with the medium on means of which most of us rely for advice?  Without the
undergrounds, we'd never hear of most of this small-production equipment.

  Arthur L. Shapiro        ARTHUR%MPA15C@TRENGA.TREDYDEV.UNISYS.COM
  Software Engineering
  Unisys Corporation       Speaking as a civilian, rather than for
  Mission Viejo, CA        Unisys, unless this box is checked: [ ]
From: reedg@ucsu.Colorado.EDU (Greg Reed)
Newsgroups: rec.audio.high-end
Subject: FOR SALE: Hales, Rowland, more....
Date: Wed, 4 Nov 1992 17:54:01 GMT
Organization: University of Colorado, Boulder
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.89.7.4
Originator: tjk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu

Hales System Two for sale, with stands. Natural oak finish.
$2000.00 or best offer.
Rowland Model 1. Black finish. $2000.00 or best offer.
Mod Squad Deluxe Line Drive. Has latest update, Cardas jacks, new pot,etc...
but in old case. $600 or best offer.
A/D/S M12's great value. Seen locally used for $1300.00 will sell for $1000 or
Best offer.
2 pairs of Staight Wire Maestro speaker wire. 5 ft. each. $300 each or BO.
2 pairs of A. Q. Lapis, silver interconnects. Awesome sounding. $225 each.
Small Infinity sub-woofer. $600 new, $350.
2 NAD 2600A power amps. Great Value. $450 each. 150watts/channel. Bridged 
300. Have driven very demanding speakers with no problems.