HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Newsgroups: rec.audio

>>How about if I have listened to $5000+ turntable system and still thinks
>>CD sounds better. Email me if you want detail about my dad's system. I don't
>>want to sound like a braggart to post what he has.
>
>M'dear, spending $5000 on a system isn't going to impress much of anybody--
>I've got a couple of systems that cost considerably more than that and one
>of my brothers has a stereo in which most of the components cost that much
>apiece.  Worst of all, you can quite easilly buy a whole lot of crap for
>$5000 and even $50,000 worth of very good components can sound abyssmal if
>they're set up improperly (especially if it's a tricky room--and for
>bipolar speakers, all rooms are tricky).
>
>Trygve 
----------
I just knew someone would bring this up.  Do you suggest that Kong's Dad
has two systems:  one for LP and another for "those infidels that prefer
CD"?  I MIGHT be able to imagine that the TT "isn't set-up" right, but I
know that for $5000, I'd have SEVERAL experts from the store I bought it
from over at my home setting it up "properly".  Hell, they are even now
doing this for inexpensive AV gear as most can't figure out how to do
it.  My guess is that Kong's dad either 1) has it set-up properly or 2)
has it around as art of status and I tend to lean towards door #1.  IF I
were Kong, I'd sneek in and put a CD player in the system just to see if
It sounded better even if that were against my Dad's religion, but that
is just the way I am.....  Getting to the point, How could he say something
was better if the room acoustics were bad?  Are they only bad a problem
for TT and not CD?  Jeeezzzz.

Kirk


Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: lauusitalo@tnclus.tele.nokia.fi
Subject: Sony 670 A/V-amplifier comments needed!
Organization: Nokia Telecommunications.
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 06:43:25 GMT


        What do you think about Sony's 670 A/V-amplifier?
        Any user comments? Same problems than with other Sony A/V things?
        e-mail please, thanks.

        Lauri

-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Lauri Uusitalo                 I          "Life is hard,          
lauri.uusitalo@ntc.nokia.com   I                then you die..."  
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: winalski@adserv.enet.dec.com (Paul S. Winalski)
Subject: Re: DAT, MD, DCC war
Reply-To: winalski@adserv.enet.dec.com (Paul S. Winalski)
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation, Nashua NH
Distribution: usa
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 21:35:14 GMT


In article <1993Jan22.183354.8397@news.columbia.edu>,
dbl10@cunixb.cc.columbia.edu (Dominic B LoTempio) writes:
|>
|>	1)  Can you record a track onto a DAT that spans the break between
|>sides? (Do DATs even have two sides?)  For instance, if I recorded a 90
|>minutes song on a 90 minute tape, could it play back uninterupted?

DAT only has one side.  It records using helical scanning, like a VCR.  The
data is recorded in bands that go diagonally across the width of the tape.
So yes, if you record a 90-minute song on a 90-minute tape, you can play it
back uninterrupted.  What a joy that is when recording a 2-hour long concert
on a 120-minute tape!

|>	4)  Does anyone have recommendations on deck or portable DAT
|>players < $600???  (i.e. non-professional system)

The Sony DTC-670 is in this range, and is a good unit.

--PSW
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: Dave Dal Farra <gpz750@bnr.ca>
Subject: Re: Advice for the budding speaker designerRe: WANTED: Info on building speakers, speaker software, etc.
X-Xxdate: Fri, 22 Jan 93 17:06:50 GMT
Organization: BNR Ltd.
X-Useragent: Nuntius v1.1.1d9
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 16:57:28 GMT

In article <bill.727655871@sarge> William Spencer, bill@verdix.com writes:
>Dave Dal Farra <gpz750@bnr.ca> writes:
>>In article <m7=3fdb@rpi.edu> dinsmm@aix.rpi.edu (Michael Dinsmore) writes:
>>>I am interested in building some speakers.  At the moment I 
>>>am just trying to get some preliminary work done - basic 
>>>knowledge of acoustics that would be beneficial.
>
>>The best avenue for the beginner is to first understand the
>                         ^^^^^^^^^            ^^^^^^^^^^
>>Theil/Small papers printed in the Journals of the Audio Enginnering
>>Society (JAES). 
>
>Ha Ha! Good one!
>
>Bill s

Sorry, I assumed some back-ground in electrical engineering and/or
acoustics.

If you don't have this background and don't understand these concepts,
it's best to build speaker's from pre-designed kits.  It's very
easy to screw up your own design if you don't have a firm grasp at the
concepts involved.  The Theil/Small papers are a pre-requisite IMHO towards
having a "firm grasp".

Mind you, designing and building one without the proper knowledge can be
rewarding, say, like building an end table.  Just don't expect it to sound
great.  The potential pitfall's in uninformed crossover design, especially,
are too staggering to even mention.
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: ahchan@rd.hydro.on.ca (Arthur Chan)
Subject: Re: Pre-amp/Tuner & Amp recommendations
Organization: "Ontario Hydro - Research Division"
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 93 15:31:28 GMT

reeve@steam.Xylogics.COM (Scott Reeve) writes:
: I'm seriously considering upgrading from my receiver to seperates.
: I'm looking to spend a total of 1K on the pre-amp/tuner and amp.
: If anyone could recommend a make, I would appreciate it.
: 
: btw, my speakers are Vandersteen 2Ce.
: 
: Also, if there's a FAQ, please let me know.
: 
: Thanks - Scott


I use the Adcom 500 preamp-tuner and 555 amp to drive my Vandersteen 2Ce.  It
sounds ok.  I think the new 555II is better than the my old one.  If you use
the Adcom 545, you will probably make it under 1K.  My friend uses a NAD
receiver to drive his 2Ce and he is satisfied with it.

I listened to a pair of 2Ces driven by the B&K amp and preamp at one store. 
They sounded just as good if not better.  The best sound I have heard from the
Vandersteen is when they were driven (at a store) by a (50W) Krell amp.  IMHO,
the Adcom is your best bet if you include the tuner in your budget.

Arthur

-- 
Arthur Chan
Operations Research
KR297 (6173)
From: cal@gsbux1.uchicago.edu (Cal Lott)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: Amps:- What make for how much?
Date: 27 Jan 93 00:36:00 GMT
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations

peterb@compnews.co.uk (Peter Brooker) writes:

>Hi, i am after an amp, roughly 250w rms a channel, two channel would be fine but for would be better (but at much cost) so i am wondering if any one knows of a good quality amp ie, 2channel 250-300w rms a channel...and how much it would cost.

	What are you going to use this for, Peter? If you give the net
a little more info, you might get a better suggestion.

	The Acurus A250 is a stereo 250wpc RMS into 8 ohms
(manufacturer claims) amplifier. It is made by Mondial designs, the
same people who design and make the highly regarded Aragon line of
products. The A250 retails for $800-$900 list.

	For that much money, you could also buy two Parasound HCA-800
100wpc stereo amps bridged into mono. These retail for about $425
apiece, list price.

	I beleive that Adcom has recently put out a stereo 300wpc
model that may be cheaper than the Acurus, but somebody who is more
knowledgable will have to spot me on this one. 

						-Cal
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cal Lott          "Oh, I see-- I thought 'no' meant 'spoon'!" --Dan
Email me, baby!   cal@gsbux1.uchicago.edu   cjl1@midway.uchicago.edu
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: The Bose flame war
From: <MHUGHES@MIAMIU.BITNET>
Date: Friday, 22 Jan 1993 11:23:57 EST
Organization: Miami University - Academic Computer Service

In article <80693@hydra.gatech.EDU>, jnewsome@prism.gatech.EDU (John Newsome)
says:
>
>If this man's (Bose) concept is so flawed, then how does his 901's stay so
>popular, and why do I see them in such a wide range of applications such
>as; in clubs, theatres, concert halls and a lot of other places?  I see
>them more than I see any other speaker listed here in this group.

One reason: Marketing, my friend, marketing.

Of course, it doesn't hurt that he caters to a public that, by-and-large,
listens to consistently poorly engineered (and performed, IMHO) popular
music, and as a result, have very undisciplined ears which are
unable to distinguish between excellent and mediocre reproduction.  The
mere fact that 901s are sold with an equilizer is testament to their
poor design.  But, to a public who wants to *crank up the bass* to
realistically unnatural levels, etc., what could be more appealing?
Car stereo for the home!!

Why do you never see Bose systems being sold in audio-exclusive boutiques?
I only see them next to the refrigerator department, just down the ailse
from the microwave ovens.  If Bose were only sold side-by-side next to
brands such as Theil, Vandersteen or Definitive Technologies, you wouldn't
see Bose in business for long.

Mike Hughes
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: dna@ampex.com (David Altekruse)
Newsgroups: rec.audio,rec.video
Subject: Re: Sony TA-E2000ESD DSP A/V Surround Preamp
Date: 21 Jan 93 19:55:43 GMT
Distribution: rec
Organization: Ampex Corporation, Redwood City CA

Mark Bramblett writes:
>
>On the TAE1000ESD you can't set up a custom equalization curve for your
>room, but you can for the other digital sound processing modes. To me that
>is screwy.  Is this possible on the TAE2000ESD?
>
I'm not sure I follow your question.  There are ten user programable 
selections so you can set the equalization on any or all of them.  You
can disable the other DSP functions on any of them, of course, leaving
one of them just for equalization, if you want.  If you want the same
equalization on all selections you do have to program each one of them
separately which is more work than ideal.  

- David Altekruse, dna@ampex.com
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: gre253@its.csiro.au (Steve Green)
Subject: Grounding tuners
Followup-To: rec.audio
Organization: Comms group, ITS branch, CSIRO
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 06:48:26 GMT

Hello fellow techno-junkies!,

I have a NAD 4225 tuner. I've had it for about 8 months and have been
mostly happy with it. I've had a annoying "fuzz" over the top of several
weaker FM stations for some time now.

I put this down to just bad luck and poor signal, since move the indoor
dipole antenna around didn't help and using the external UHF ( Yes that
IS supposed to be a "U" ) made things FAR worse. ( Dont worry - Ive had
THAT discussion )

Then about a week ago I switched on the cassette deck, which is DIRECTLY
below it ( when I've got the $3000 the carpenter wants to constuct my
"idea" hi-fi/video unit ( with NO glass doors ) - they will have plenty
of room between them ), I got a very distinct interfrence !?

I thought "but isn't the tuner grounded" - answer - NO! It only had a 2-pin
plug. However, on the back of the tuner there was a _ground_ connector
beside the AM antenna connector. So I hastily grabbed a bit of wire and
connected this to the ground connector on the back of the amplifier.

It worked IMMEDIATELY - No interference - no annoying "fuzz", even on the
weakest FM stations! 

I poured thru the NAD manual looking for some reference on this, to no
evale. It only talked about the _ground_ signal in respect to poor AM
reception ( who listens to AM any more ? ).

Has anybody else had a similar experience with FM tuners or is this a NAD
feature? If it is they should at least tell us about it in the manual!


========================================================================
| Steve Green     |  "Hey Rocky, watch me pull a rabbit outa my hat !" |
| Comms Group     |  "That trick never works"                          |
| ITS Branch      |  "Nothin' up my sleeve - PRESTO !"                 |
| CSIRO Australia |  "No doubt about it - I gotta get another hat"     |
========================================================================
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: kega@nobeltech.se (Kent Gabrin)
Subject: Re: DAT, DCC and MD
Organization: NobelTech AB
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 07:12:04 GMT

In article <C1Eun7.3y8@fulcrum.co.uk> igb@fulcrum.co.uk (Ian G Batten) writes:
>In article <1993Jan22.190811.28768@e2big.mko.dec.com> winalski@adserv.enet.dec.com (Paul S. Winalski) writes:
>> In article <C19CFs.Fw1@fulcrum.co.uk>, igb@fulcrum.co.uk (Ian G Batten) writes:
>> |>DAT also requires highly accurate helical scan heads.  These will always
>> 
>> And DCC requires highly accurate thin-film fixed heads.
>
>Helical scan heads must be accurate, and the means of moving them must
>be accurate.  Fixed heads requires a stable tape path, but that's much
>easier to arrange.

   To avoid to have too much accurate alignment of the rotating head
you can use a technique used by SONY in its tiny little machine called
SCOOPMAN. The system is called NT (Non Tracking) and when reading the
track it reads more tracks at the same time and uses memory buffers to
determined how to assemble the bits in the right order.

Yes I know it's a dark horse and some maybe bet that it will take the
same way as the ELCASSETTE did.

Another problem (small though) is that DAT uses time interleaved
method when storing bits on the tape. That makes it sometimes a bit
tricky when you edit music (especially in LP mode). One little time
fraction of the music is scattered in time on several tracks on the
tape. I don't recall how much this 'time delay' is but I guess it is
in the neighborhood of 0.5 s in standard play mode (44.1 & 48 kHz).
Some one more involved in RDAT should comment on that.

Come to thinking, PASC and ATRAC must also suffers from above
mentioned 'time delay'. Anyone know how long that delay is?

/Kent

P.s. With 'Time delay' I mean the smallest fraction (in time) of music
you can record on a tape without loosing information. D.s.

Kent Gabrin   NobelTech Systems    ! My thinking is not as great as
S-175 88 Jaerfaella      Sweden    ! Oliver Berendinus Bumble /Will Try
KEGA@nobeltech.se ! Following the discussion of Digital technique.


Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: lstowell@pyrnova.mis.pyramid.com (Lon Stowell)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: Dolby S vs. DCC etc.
Keywords: nr, compression
Date: 28 Jan 93 03:39:06 GMT
Reply-To: lstowell@pyrnova.pyramid.com.pyramid.com (Lon Stowell)
Organization: Pyramid Technology Corporation

In article <1993Jan27.214034.12304@dgbt.doc.ca> ted@dgbt.doc.ca (Ted Grusec) writes:
>
>I presume everyone knows that one unstoppable event is digital radio
>and this will use lossy compression (bit-rate reduction) that is
>similar to that in DCC - unstoppable because of bandwidth
>restrictions.  I presume this means that digital radio will be
>condemned for a long time to being less than an ideal medium.

   I take it you've never listened to a typical American
   Album-Oriented Pop/Rock station?   

   Sadly American courts prohibit the recording engineers and
   artists from suing these stations for slander.
From: shetline@bbn.com (Kerry Shetline)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: CD vs. LP again (was Re: Preamp and Amp)
Followup-To: rec.audio
Date: 27 Jan 1993 22:43:04 GMT
Organization: BBN
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: bbn.com

In article <24721@alice.att.com>, jj@alice.att.com (jj, curmudgeon and old
grouch) wrote:
> I'd go beyond that.  Just let me say that reducing channel separation
> is one way to ENHANCE imaging, to a point.
> 
> Just think a bit.

Especially if the crosstalk is polarity-reversed.

-Kerry
From: hoford@gynko.circ.upenn.edu (John Hoford)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: DAT, DCC and MD
Date: 21 Jan 93 21:25:16 GMT
Organization: Cardiothoracic Imaging Research Center

In article <1993Jan20.165333.1241@cmkrnl.com> jeh@cmkrnl.com writes:
>In article <C15zHt.D3C@hfglobe.intel.com>, jlo@hfglobe.intel.com (Jeffrey Lo)
> writes:
>> ritc0003@student.tc.umn.edu (Kent Ritchie) writes:
>Yeahbut.  
>
>- DCC and MD offer *no* sonic advantages over CD, quite the contrary, yet the
>prerecorded media costs more than CD, and the decks cost *much* more than do
>inexpensive CD players. 

Their is no competition on audio quality CD wins.
CD's lack the ability to record.

If I want a High quality recording system. that stands
a chance of comming down in price. 
That can offer cheap prerecorded media.
Then MD or DCC are it.
both can be made cheper than RDAT.
both players can be made cheper than RDAT
current prices are heigh because its new.


If you only look at audio quality you don't get the whole picture.
The best audio quality is not what you want to take jogging, in your car or 
portable.
Price, convince, resilience are what come to mind.


>
>	--- Jamie Hanrahan, Kernel Mode Systems, San Diego CA
>Internet:  jeh@cmkrnl.com, or hanrahan@eisner.decus.org  Uucp: uunet!cmkrnl!jeh

John
From: cczjct@vax.nott.ac.uk
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: CD vs. LP again (was Re: Preamp and Amp)
Date: 22 Jan 93 14:02:41 GMT
Reply-To: cczjct@vax.nott.ac.uk
Organization: University of Nottingham, UK

Im a bit fed up of this CD/LP argument. No matter what anybody thinks
DIGITAL is the source of the future. Eventually you LP freaks (and me)
will have scratchy records and no way of replacing them, so youd better
get used to the idea of Digital. I also own a CD player, nothing fancy
just middle of the range, whats the point of buying expensive equipment
when the format is still evolving, and remember the analogue format is
dying. There that sums it up, I think....
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: tlai@cs.toronto.edu (Tony W H Lai)
Subject: Re: CD vs. LP again (was Re: Preamp and Amp)
Followup-To: talk.bizarre
Organization: Department of Computer Science, University of Toronto
Date: 23 Jan 93 03:29:43 GMT

In article <1190792@hpnmdla.sr.hp.com> kurts@hpnmdla.sr.hp.com (Kurt Strain) writes:
>In rec.audio, jj@alice.att.com (jj, sick and tired of all this nonsense) writes:
>> Kurt, you seem to be incapable of accepting the well-established
>> fact that there are euphonic distortions. It's no judgement on
>> your preferences, after all, arguing personal preference is pointless.
>
>> Such distortions have been shown since the days of the rotating
>> wax roll recording.   They do not judge the person who likes
>> them, they just ARE.  If you like them, fine, but when you
>> start to argue about "digital looses the music" and so on,
>> you're going beyond preference to making factual statements.
>
>You still don't get the simple fact that we are trying to remove the
>goddamn euphonic distortions from the record. We are not interested in
>them.  That's why people spend upwards of $25K for a turntable system,
>TO REMOVE THE UNWANTED DISTORTIONS, GET IT?!!!!!!  [stuff deleted]

So euphonic distortions are unwanted?  Does this mean you want accurate
sound, and not pleasant sound?  Isn't that an argument the pro-digital
people use?  :)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: Linn Kalidh Speakers
From: ashley@trident.datasys.swri.edu (Ashley Gorakhpurwalla)
Date: 26 Jan 93 15:57:07 GMT
Organization: Southwest Research Institute

In article <C1F3C7.BBn@hpuerca.atl.hp.com> sfk@hpuerca.atl.hp.com (Steve Katz) writes:
...
>But (there's always a but), one of the dealers I have been auditioning
>at got in a new series of speakers - the Linn Kalidh's (~1300).  Wow!  
>I am impressed.  Has anyone else listened to these speakers?  What was
>your reaction?
>

I auditioned these particular speakers recently at a local hifi shop and
was less than impressed.  During that visit I also listened to some Maggies
and Dalqhist models.  All were driven by Linn equipment with both LP and
CD sources.  ( BTW the Linn Delta/Sigma CD system is worth auditioning
if you like a laid-back, "lush" CD sound ) The dealer even insisted in
having only one pair of speakers in the room at a time.  Poor Linn dealers
have to work so hard. :)  The Kalidh's sounded much smaller than they are
and had a compressed boxy sound.  Note that this "thinness" ( dealer's words )
was somewhat rectified by bi-amping the speakers.

As a data point as to where my preferences lie, my speaker search has me
choosing between a used pair of B&W 802 s.II and a particular ( and at 
the moment forgotten ) model in the Genesis line.

Oh well, to each his own.

-ash
ashley@trident.datasys.swri.edu
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: Jack_DuMoulin@mindlink.bc.ca (Jack DuMoulin)
Subject: Re: Audio Amateur
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 00:50:16 GMT

Audio Amateur and Speaker Builder Magazines:
Phone: (603) 924-9464   (Circulation Dept.)
Fax  : (603) 924-9467
Address:
        Audio Amateur
        PO Box 576
        Peterborough, NH 03458

--
Jack DuMoulin                                           Burnaby, B.C. Canada
JMD Consultants
Jack_DuMoulin@mindlink.bc.ca
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: jwright@geonet.rice.edu (Jim Wright)
Subject: Good Morning
Organization: Rice University
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 05:30:54 GMT

Good Morning audiophiles
From: jj@alice.att.com (jj, curmudgeon and old grouch)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: CD vs. LP again (was Re: Preamp and Amp)
Date: 27 Jan 93 18:02:28 GMT
Article-I.D.: alice.24721
Reply-To: jj@alice.UUCP (jj, curmudgeon and old grouch)
Organization: NJ State Home for Bewildered Terminals

In article <1993Jan27.051948.9556@leland.Stanford.EDU> kong@leland.Stanford.EDU (Kong Kritayakirana) writes:
>Looking at poor spec (esp. channel separation) and try to attribute this to
>LP imaging quality is not quite logical.

That's for sure!

>I have heard LPs with very good imaging although the cartridge in use has
>channel separation of only 25-30dB. Yes, "Numbers by themselves mean zilch."

I'd go beyond that.  Just let me say that reducing channel separation
is one way to ENHANCE imaging, to a point.

Just think a bit.
-- 
Copyright alice!jj 1993, all rights reserved, except transmission by USENET and like facilities granted. Said permission is granted only for complete copies that include this notice. Use on pay-for-read services specifically disallowed.
---------
Member HASA - Athiest Scum Division
"Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice" - AuH2O for President
From: tal@yvax.byu.edu
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Component Suggestions $3000 approx.??
Date: 23 Jan 93 13:07:11 -0700
Organization: Brigham Young University

Hi everyone,

    I'm hoping for your thoughts on some equipment I've been looking at these
last six months.  This system will primarily be used with CD's, but also ought
to have the flexibility as an occasional home theater system.  Here is some
of what has been considered.

Receivers

Onkyo TX-SV909PRO or 70
Carver HR-895
Yamaha RX-V1050 or 850
others including: Kenwood, Pioneer, Sony (quality components only)
might go with seperates.

Speakers

Definitive BP10's or 20's
Definitive Home theater package
Polk LS70's or 90's
Carver AL-III's

CD/LD Combi players

Yamaha CDV-1700
Carver MD/V-500
Onkyo DX-V801
Pioneer CLDD701-301


And of course...any other suggestions are welcome.  Appreciate your time-thom.