HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: bo@yenta.alb.nm.us (Bo Farley)
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
Subject: YES!!!!
Summary: none
Keywords: none
Date: 29 Sep 92 05:04:14 GMT
Organization: yenta unix pc, rio rancho, nm

YYyyyyyyyyyyyyyeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeessssssssssssssssss!!!!!!!!

I Love My Lexicon Effects!!!!!

just had to say that!
From: ats@phoenix.udev.cdc.com (alex t stagg x4718)
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
Subject: Re: Heard about the Atari Falcon?
Date: 25 Sep 92 13:56:19 GMT
Reply-To: ats@phoenix.udev.cdc.com (alex t stagg x4718)
Organization: Control Data Corp., Arden Hills, MN

In article <annius.717410095@freyr>, annius@nanna.research.ptt.nl
(Annius Groenink) writes:
...
|>sequencing. The DSP in the Falcon can be programmed as a (though limited)
|>synthesizer (how powerful this is exactly going to be I do not know;
|>I don't know for example how many DSP56001 some synthesizer units use
|>to produce their sound, but if you know that then you've got some
|>impression about its capabilities).

The Peavey DPM3 has 3 56001 chips in it. So I'd suspect that just
one isn't gonna do a lot of synthesis + effects on the fly.

Alex.

----------------------------------------------------------------
A. T. (Alex) Stagg/ARH215      | INTERNET: ats@udev.cdc.com
Control Data Systems, Inc.     |
4201 Lexington Ave.N.          | fax:      01-612-482-4455
Arden Hills, MN USA 55126-6198 | Voice:    01-612-482-4718
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
From: jay@cmn19.Stanford.EDU (Jay Kadis)
Subject: Re: AES Convention Index
Organization: DSO, Stanford University
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 92 17:31:18 GMT

> -----
> 
> 
> Anyone know if the guy who collapsed at the TEC awards is OK?
> 

I talked to the Ampex guys...the guy who collapsed had a cardiac  
arrhythmia which was apparently OK in the hospital.  (He was one of theirs  
I guess...)

Jay
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
From: muller@world.std.com (James L Muller)
Subject: Re: L-C-R Panning Survey
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 02:04:13 GMT

In <1992Oct5.222500.18015@guinness.idbsu.edu> Dave Jensen
   <djensen@claven.idbsu.edu> writes:
>Q.  Assuming you had access to the three clusters, would you value the
>ability to have true Left-Center-Right (L-C-R) panning and output
>capability? (This means when then the channels pan control is panned to
>center no signal goes to either left or right outputs; if panned to hard
>left, there would be no signal to center or right outputs; halfway
>between center and left would result in equal output to left and center,
>etc.) Please briefly qualify your answer.
I can think of several problems with this, just from a pragmatic point of
view, not to mention the cost of a third amp and speaker cluster and the
problem of where to put it.  (Speaking of live-show mixing, of course.)
One is that there already is a problem with how some mixers pan.  In
the usual (i.e. less expensive?) system, when you pan to one side, the
opposite is attenuated, but that side is not boosted.  The problem is
that if you ever pan to the middle, there is a 3 dB boost of that channel.
This means you may have to change your mix as a result of re-panning
something.  It's a minor point, but your system could make it worse.

The second problem is one of when to use and when not to use stereo anyway.
The precedence effect can make the closest speaker seem like the source
of the sound unless panning is extreme.  The problem then is that if you
don't pan enough, or if the speakers are too far apart compared to the
audience seating, then a lot of people just won't hear any stereo effect
at all.  Instead of creating a stereo effect, panning just makes everyone
closer to one speaker hear one mix and everyone closer to the other speaker
hear a different mix.  Adding a center channel won't help this, and in
general will make the entire phenomenon harder to figure out.  When do
you want stereo and when don't you want it??  I must admit I haven't
really spent much time thinking about this, but it seems to me that your
system won't help much.  Then too there is the option of taking the L+R
sum and driving a third (center) cluster.  It won't be quite the same
because the options of L+C or C+R won't be there...  Interesting...

-- 
Jim Muller  muller@world.std.com
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
From: rlescarbeau@williams.edu
Subject: For Sale
Keywords: For Sale
Organization: Williams College
Date: Sun, 27 Sep 1992 16:02:22 GMT

Sorry to waste bandwith but I forgot to post an additional item along
with the DBX's. I also have a Delta Lab DL4 Echo/Delay unit with
doubling/flanging/echo and time base modulation for sale. The unit is
old and has been used on the road but is in perfect working condition.
Make an offer by E-Mail to rlescarbeau@williams.edu or (413)458-4080 EST 
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
From: glen@tegra.com (Glen Osterhout)
Subject: Re: dbx dynamic range expander - help
Organization: Tegra-Varityper, Inc. Billerica, MA
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 18:01:42 GMT

In article <9210020121.AA24470@bottom.magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> Mike J. Brown <mjbrown@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> writes:
>Some time ago I inherited a piece of audio equipment I'm not fully
>sure what to do with.  It's a dbx dynamic range expander.  Apparently

This sounds like a dbx "3bx" expander.  Like any expander it is the
opposite of a compressor,  making any input below the transition
level quieter and any input above it louder.  Unlike most expanders
it splits the input into three frequency bands and sends each band
to its own expander stage (hence the light show).  When I worked at
dbx (many years ago) it cost about $500.  You might want to use it
for any audio source with low dynamic range and/or high background 
noise level,  such as cassette tapes or vinyl records.  In a studio
you could use it to restore punch to compressed bass or vocal tracks
when mixing.  It is obviously a good idea to select a transition level
that is higher than the background noise.
-- 
/*++**************************************************************************
*   Glen Osterhout	  Tegra-Varityper, Inc.      Billerica, Massachusetts  
*			  email to:  glen@tegra.com
**--*************************************************************************/
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
From: dbailey@cix.compulink.co.uk (Diane Bailey)
Subject: The portable DAT "consumer" choice
Reply-To: dbailey@cix.compulink.co.uk
Date: Sat, 3 Oct 1992 16:07:28 +0000



The following appear to be the current UK selection of "consumer"
portable DATs:

                        List        Lowest
                        pounds sterling incl tax
Aiwa HD-S1               ?          299
Aiwa HD-S100            450         349
Casio DA-7              400         339
Casio DA-R100           400         323
Sony TCD-D3             499         452

I do not seem to be able to find any objective comparisons or
tests that would assist me in choosing between these models.
Also US prices are more difficult to come by than computer
prices.

A letter in the September What Hi*Fi talks of using a Sony TCD-D3
professionally and of experiencing battery death and quirkiness,
finding the built-in mic amps "too noisy for live recordings with
low-impedence reporter mics" (quite what sort of mics is
unclear), and finally a failure to analogue record.

Personally I'm wanting a DAT to replace my Uher for research
interviews and other material that might end up as wildtrack on
film, and potentially for FM radio documentary.  So the mic inputs
and amps, and the batteries are important factors.  Built-in or
devoted nicads that cannot be replaced with other batteries would
be a disadvantage.

Does anyone have have access to comparison tests or experience
with any of these machines that could assist me, and perhaps
others in making a choice?

And what are the US prices on these machines, and where are those
best prices to be found - for example somewhere around Oakland,
CA, where a friend will be visiting in the next week, or by mail.

Mail to me please as the Usenet feed to CIX is unreliable.  I
will summarise.

Diane Bailey
dbailey@cix.compulink.co.uk
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
Subject: Help - obscure Microphone
From: Mike_Diack@kcbbs.gen.nz (Mike Diack)
Date: 7 Oct 92 02:20:14 GMT
Organization: Kappa Crucis Unix BBS, Auckland, New Zealand


I picked up a pair of really strange condenser mics at a junk sale
they are Telefunken condenser types, M221B bodies, and switchable
omni/cardiod M943B heads. They are about the same size as a 451
(possibly a little smaller), and have a 6 pin 270 degree din plug
(lockable) on the base. They contain a tiny valve , type AC701K
and the usual transfommer. Regrettably i DIDNT get the power supply.
Have figured out the connections (i think) , but have no idea of the 
required heater and B+ voltages, hence would appreciate any insight 
into this data, as they look likr nice mics.
cheers, Mike

Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro,alt.stagecraft
From: bernstei@romeo.cs.colorado.edu (Michael Bernstein)
Subject: Re: Theatrical Sound
Organization: University of Colorado at Boulder
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 21:44:53 GMT

In article <m0#pakq.wisner@netcom.com> wisner@netcom.com (Bill Wisner) writes:
>bernstei@ophelia.cs.colorado.edu (Michael Bernstein) writes:
>>                                                Classical theatre
>>companies expect to rely on the hall and the power of their own
>>voices, while more modern companies (with lazier actors, or too-big
>>theatres) will more happily mic the performers.
>
>This depends to a large degree on the type of play being performed.
>An intense drama is not likely to be reinforced (that is, after all,
>why actors are trained to project) but for musicals reinforcement
>is a virtual must (particularly when live music is used).

It didn't use to be.  But as amplification became first possible and then
practical, and actors got more expensive, it became more and
more attractive..especially so for musicals, because it's hard to get
actors/singers who can be loud enough and musicians who can be quiet
enough so that all can be heard in a large hall.  This gets harder and
harder with more musicians.  If you have enough elements present at
once, it is much easier to set the volume of each performer at a mixing
console than by training them.

As well, I think it's cheaper to bring in sound reinforcement than to
build the space so that it has decent acoustics.  Only the classical
world still seems to be pretty set upon the idea of acoustic music, which
is why the "real" operatic singers don't use reinforcement, and why
they still build real concert halls.  

Michael
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
From: tonyb@juliet.ll.mit.edu ( Tony Berke )
Subject: Re: AKG 414 vs Neuman U87
Organization: M.I.T. Lincoln Lab - Group 43
Date: 5 Oct 92 12:12:23

In article <24061@sybase.sybase.com> carl@sybase.com (Carl Resnikoff) writes:

   In article <1992Sep14.042329.6428@intacc.uucp> zerobeat@intacc.uucp (Ferenc Szabo) writes:
   >As a vocal (close) mic, is there a big difference between
   >a 414 and an (AKG) 535?
   >
   Yes, the 535 is one, the 414 is not.
   The 414 really can't be used on a strong singer
   (especially female) at less than 12", or you get horrible clipping
   out of the mike (not the board), even with full padding and bass rolloff. 
   I've used it OK at 6" on weaker singers, like myself.


Huh?  The 414TL is good for something like 154dB peak levels with the
pad on, if I remember correctly.  The 414B/ULS that I have isn't too
much worse.  My guess is that either your board isn't putting out
phantom power with high enough voltage, or what you're really hearing
is "popping", which isn't clipping, it's an over-excursion of the mic
diaphragm.

People with Potential Problems with Plosives come my way a lot, as I
primarily record peole with stage, and not studio, experience.  I use
the AKG windscreen/shockmount (expensive, impressive looking, limited
blast protection, changes the sound) in conjunction with a Popper
Stopper (cheap, useful, transparent) for the worst cases.  Even then,
some people just don't get along with the mic.  For them, I've found
that some combinations of vocal coaching and different positioning
(distance, incident angle, etc) can usually cure the problem.

I bet the 414 has a lot less trouble with this problem in Omni mode,
but the particular miking that I use for accapella sessions requires
a hypercardioid pattern for the soloist mike.
From: bender@oobleck (Duke of Canterbury)
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
Subject: Re: Power Mosfet Amplify
Date: 2 Oct 1992 04:40:50 GMT
Organization: SPARK's R US
Reply-To: bender@oobleck.eng.sun.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: oobleck
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL3

500 LIBRARY-NOTICE-NOINFO: your request for information about SUBJECT:

			Thanks.

CAN NOT BE COMPLETED AT THIS TIME FOR THE FOLLOWING REASON(S):

501 LIBRARY-ERR-NOINFO: no information was found for the specified search
			criteria

THANKYOU FOR USING THE USENET ON-LINE LIBRARY SYSTEM.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
From: gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Gabe M Wiener)
Subject: Re: Does spaced omni ever really work?
Reply-To: gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Gabe M Wiener)
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 1992 16:44:29 GMT

In article <brent.717469213@cc.gatech.edu> brent@terminus.gatech.edu (Brent Laminack) writes:
>
>Excellent points. I've talked to recordists who favor the so-called
>"remote-control" mics such as made by Sony and a couple of others
>that allow the recordist to vary the pickup pattern of the mics. This
>allows a single mic to be changed from omni through the cardiod and
>hyper-cardiod patterns all the way to figure-8. Thus the recordist
>can change from omni to the above-mentioned hyers to Blumlein on the
>fly. I've always wanted to play with a couple of these. Can anyone
>lend us their experience on this count?

I've never played with one of these things for more than a few minutes,
but remember, it's really only of benefit if you have rehearsal time.
If you're doing a "one shot" live recording, you sure aren't gonna monkey
around with the pattern *during* the recording.  So even with one of the
remote control mics (AKG makes an excellent one I believe...basically two
414's in one shell), you're still relegated to eyeballing it, picking 
a pattern and spread, and crossing your fingers.

Of course, the exception to this rule is MS arrays, where you can of course
just record the unmatrixed audio and matrix it later when you get the tape
back to the studio.


--
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
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
From: huopio@lut.fi (Kauto Huopio)
Subject: Re: Monitors for small control rooms
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 03:37:36 GMT
Disclaimer: Opinions expressed below are writers own.
Peruutus: Mielipiteet ovat omiani.
Organization: Lappeenranta University of Technology, Finland

In article <1992Sep30.131610.10981@rambo.atlanta.dg.com> rjm@atlanta.dg.com (Randy Myers) writes:

> There are a confusing number of offerings in the range of $400-$800/pair.  Are
> there any clear preferences, I wonder?

If you can reach these, and you need just passive speakers, try to
find who imports Genelec speakers and try to find if they have Genelec
Biway in their line. Small units, marvellous sound. They need quite a
lot of power to sound nice but anyway, IMHO, Good Speakers.

--Kauto
--
****************** Kauto Huopio (huopio@kannel.lut.fi) **********************
*  Mail: Kauto Huopio, Punkkerikatu 1 A 10, SF-53850 Lappeenranta,Finland   *
*****************************************************************************
From: carl@sybase.com (Carl Resnikoff)
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
Subject: Re: AKG 414 vs Neuman U87
Date: 1 Oct 92 21:36:50 GMT
Organization: here

In article <1992Sep14.042329.6428@intacc.uucp> zerobeat@intacc.uucp (Ferenc Szabo) writes:
>As a vocal (close) mic, is there a big difference between
>a 414 and an (AKG) 535?
>
Yes, the 535 is one, the 414 is not.
The 414 really can't be used on a strong singer
(especially female) at less than 12", or you get horrible clipping
out of the mike (not the board), even with full padding and bass rolloff. 
I've used it OK at 6" on weaker singers, like myself.

You can put your mouth directly on a 535 and yell with no problem.
The 535 is also much less susceptible to breath noise/pops and 
foot tapping transmitted though the floor.

Unfortunately, the 535 doesn't sound anywhere near as good as a 414 -
To me it has a "grainy" quality on the highs, while a 414 has a beautiful
"silky" quality. I'd like to try using the 414 with a thick windscreen
and see what happens.

I tend to use the 535 more at home, since my room where I record
has some weird sounding resonances, which don't get picked up when
close miking with the 535. A question for the mike experts out there?
is there any condensor mike that you can use for close miked vocals
that sounds as sweet as a 414? (not withstanding that close miking
is not as good as far).
	Carl Resnikoff
From: blai@eniac.seas.upenn.edu (library)
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
Subject: Power Mosfet Amplify
Date: 1 Oct 92 21:58:22 GMT
Organization: University of Pennsylvania


                 Thanks.


Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
From: nguyen@aladdin.eng.hou.compaq.com (Nghia Nguyen)
Subject: Loudspeaker
Organization: Compaq Computer Corp.
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 20:50:24 GMT




Greetings,

Can someone help?

- I am going to purchase some loudspeakers. To save some money , I am planning on
  ordering them from a mail-order house. I have found two houses that have the
  stuff I want. Has any of you had any experience (good/bad) dealing with
  them? They are: USA Media Junction, West Caldwell NJ and Sound City, Kinnelon.
  Would someone recommend some other houses/phones?

- I like the ALTEC-Lansing 300s/500s Carbon Fiber Series because they produce
  pretty tight sound at higher volume for classical listening. Can someone
  recommend equivalent/better speakers. Please specify maker and model?

Thank you very much for your help!

nvn
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
From: tonyb@juliet.ll.mit.edu ( Tony Berke )
Subject: Re: Printing cassette J-cards
Organization: M.I.T. Lincoln Lab - Group 43
	<1992Sep29.223306.17324@ultb.isc.rit.edu>
Date: 30 Sep 92 10:53:03

In article <1992Sep29.223306.17324@ultb.isc.rit.edu> cms2839@ultb.isc.rit.edu (a.stranger) writes:

   In article <1992Sep27.163008.18971@news.columbia.edu> gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Gabe M Wiener) writes:
   >Does anyone make die-cut J-cards suitable for laser printers?  Avery makes
   >great laser cassette labels, but now I need J-cards....
   >
				   my experiences with this have generally
   been in much larger quantities than you seem to be referring to , but
   here's a suggestion :

				   most print shops have giant hydraulic
   paper cutters that they use to trim stacks of printed material , such as
   business cards ( the cutters can trim something like six inches of paper
   at a time [ high ] , and do it accurately ) . it would only take a
   minute , maybe less , to have them trim a stack of cardstock to the
   correct size , and you'd have enough cards to last you for some time to
   come . the printer might be more apt to do this for you if you bought
   the cardstock from them ( they usually have a good selection ) .


I have print shops cut J cards for me all the time -- and they never
seem to mind that I didn't buy the stock or do the printing at their
shop.  They charge about $5.00 to make the cuts, and it takes about 5
minutes, so why should they care?

Getting back to the suggestion, the problem with it is that many laser
and inkjet printers (well, mine, anyway) aren't interested in handling
4"x4" or 4"x6.5" pieces of paper accurately.  Even if they were, the
finished cards aren't scored.  I've been getting *really* sick of
folding them by hand!

My graphic designer (ie housemate with an art degree) and I have been
playing with an idea that would banish my color inkjet to the basement
forever.  We're having a printer do up a big batch of two-color
J-Cards on interesting stock with some generic gradient fills, my
logo, etc, as background.  I'll have these scored and perforated, and
then use a laser printer to print the song titles, etc for each job.
Color and non-vanilla stock make a huge difference in the
professionalism of the finished product, but my poor little DeskJet
500C takes forever to print the things, the ink cost is huge, and it
just isn't feasible unless the client is paying for a full-custom job.
These generic-background color J's will look almost as good, and cost
next to nothing to print.

So Chris, are the pinfeed cards from PolyLine done with MicroPerf or
something?  How do they look once you've torn them apart?  What flavor
laser printer do you have that doesn't gag when you feed it 100#
cardstock ? (I think that's what PolyLine's J Cards are made of, anyway).

Tony
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro,alt.stagecraft
From: rmontgom@orlith.bates.edu (Robert Montgomery)
Subject: Re: Theatrical Sound
Organization: Bates College, Lewiston, Maine
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 23:19:29 GMT

In article <1992Sep29.195103.10892@colorado.edu> bernstei@romeo.cs.colorado.edu (Michael Bernstein) writes:
>>>harder with more musicians.
>>
>
>Uh-uh.  I'd negelected rock and roll shows, as you said.
>
>I talked to a friend of mine last night who trained as an operatic singer.
>She explained that modern halls are so large that no human voice could
>fill them -- and the singers who work these places "don't have lungs --
>they have bellows, and *then* they mic them.."  In the renaissance the
>halls were small enough.
>
>So reinforcement is not only necessary for rock and roll shows, but
>apparently (and in contradiction of my previous blather) even for 
>"big time" opera.
>
>Michael


   Also, audiences have changed in the last fifty or so years. Back in the 
days of greek tragedy actors were able to entertain audiences of over 
10,000 in an outside theatre with only a carefully shaped mouthpeice to
help them. How did this work? Part of it was that the actors were picked for
vocal power as much as anything else, but quite a bit of it has to do with
the expectations of the audience. Today audiences expect to be able to hear
every little nuance. In the "good ol' days" audiences only expected to hear
enough to get the gist... especially those in the cheap seats.

    Essentially, what I'm getting at is that sound has found it's way into
theatre not as a necessity, but rather as a luxury. Only now that the audiences
have been spoiled has it become a necessity. Not that I'm complaining....
it put's dinner on the table. ;-)

     BTW. As the original poster on this strain, all the info is being really
helpful in my persuit of a diploma. Now for the big question, how to I cite
the net in a footnote? :-)

                   Thanks,
                        Rob

-- 
 ----------------------------------------------------------------------
| rmontgom@orlith.bates.edu  ROB MONTGOMERY  rmontgom@abacus.bates.edu |
|         IF AT FIRST YOU DON'T SUCCEED, TRY A BIGGER HAMMER.          |
 ----------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro,rec.music.synth
From: g_house@goes11.enet.dec.com (Greg House)
Subject: Re: PC-Based Hard Disk Recording
Reply-To: g_house@goes11.enet.dec.com (Greg House)
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 16:51:10 GMT


One of the recent issues of Home & Studio Recording had an article on the
CarD hard disk recording system.  Their review of the product was quite
positive.

Greg
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro