HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: iscstk@nuscc.nus.sg (Siew Teng Kean)
Subject: Why does spiking and Blu-Tak work?
Organization: National University of Singapore
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 02:10:15 GMT

Hi rec.audioers,

The recent discussion on Blu-Tak and my discussion with Ying, the author of the
Blu-Tak thread has prompted me to ask the net wisdom on the purpose of spiking. 
I have become confused over why spiking and Blu-Tacking is supposed to work.
Being an engineer, I have this innate ability to be bothered by things which I
don't understand. Being an audiophile wannabe, (major impediment is gobs of
money, not desire), I want to know the politically correct audiospeak. So 
someone please explain spiking to me, before I go out of my mind ;-).

I used to speculate that the purpose of spiking the speakers to the stands, 
and then the stands to the floor is to couple the speakers to the entire 
floor, thereby killing the cabinet vibrations due to the enormous mass of the 
floor, preferably concrete. This is why you should have good heavy rigid 
metal speaker stands, right?  That's why sometimes people bolt/screw speakers
to stands and/or stands to floor, am I right?

However I was told that spiking the speakers (on stands, stands to floor) is to
isolate the speakers from the floor, so that the floor nor the stands vibrate
together with the speaker cabinet.  Even with heavy materials and extensive
bracing, the speaker cabinet will vibrate to a certain extent. So the purpose
of spiking is to isolate, not to couple?

If spiking is supposed to isolate, I still don't understand why there's no 
coupling.  The spiking points produce so much pressure on such little area 
that some coupling has got to take place.

If Blu-tak is used, then the speaker is not coupled to the greater mass of the
stand/floor, and can vibrate in tiny amounts as reaction to the drivers pushing
air, and hence is detrimental to the sound. So why does Blu-tak work?

Or could it be that with rigid stands, spiked or bolted to the floor, and with
Blu-tak between speaker and stand, we have an arrangement where there is very
vibration from the stand/floor, (due to the enormous
mass), and any movement of the speaker cabinet in reaction to drivers pushing
air is greatly damped by the Blu-tak, resulting in minimal total movement. 
Perhaps this results in even less vibration then coupling the speaker to the 
stand?

Anyone tried Blu-taking between speaker/stand and stand/floor? Is that gonna
work? Predictions/explanations? I would really like your opinions, or better
still, definitive and authoritive answers.

Teng-Kean
-- 
Teng-Kean Siew         Dept. of Information Systems & Computer Science
iscstk@nuscc.nus.sg    National University of Singapore
(65) 772-3120
Newsgroups: rec.audio,rec.video
From: mike%jim.uucp@wupost.wustl.edu (Mike Suter)
Subject: Re: Pro-Logic Recievers (STRAV1070/D1S/etc) Summary!
Keywords: pro logic surround receiver summary sony pioneer strav1070
Organization: BITS, St. Louis, MO
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 16:38:03 GMT

Previously, I wrote:

>	Model				Approx price

>	Denon AVR-610			610
>	Denon AVR-810			550
>	Denon AVR-1010			1010

As several of you have pointed out, the prices for the 610 and 1010
are incorrect.  I didn't have prices for those, so I unconsciously
stuck the model number into the price column.  (Give me a break;
it was the day before my vacation :)

What would be a reasonable (read: low) price for those?

Also, keep the recommendations/comments on feature-laden A/V
pro-logic receivers coming!

Any comments on the above Denons or those listed below (low prices,
or any other comments) welcome.

>	Kenwood 8040			375
>	Kenwood KR-V7030		380
>	Pioneer D1S			700
>	Pioneer D1S-2			???
>	Pioneer VSX-51			???  (Discontinued)
>	Pioneer VSX-4800		300
>	Pioneer VSX-9900S (Digital)	690
>	Sony 2020			600
>	Sony GXT-67ES			550
>	Technics SA-GX710		396
>	Technics SA-GX910		650
>	Yamaha DSP-A1000		1150
>	Yamaha RSX-850			615

Mike
-- 
mike%jim.uucp@wupost.wustl.edu
From: donegan@ctron.COM (Dave Donegan)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: DAK dbx satellite/subwoofer speakers - opinions?
Keywords: DAK dbx speakers
Date: 12 Aug 92 19:00:05 GMT
Organization: Cabletron Systems, Inc.

Has anyone purchased the $299 dbx satellite/subwoofer speakers?  The 
subwoofer has its own 140W amplifier.  

Question - Do you like them?

Question - Do you need to adjust the volume on the subwoofer's amp every
	   time you adjust the volume on your amp?, or is the control
	   on the subwoofer amp more like a bass control?

Thanks in advance.  Yes, I am about to buy some speakers.  No, I do not
want salespeople to call me, although catalogs are always welcome.

-- 

//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
// Dave Donegan      // Cabletron Systems, Inc.       // 603-332-9400 x1399 //
// donegan@ctron.com // Box 5005, Rochester, NH 03867 // fax 603-332-1019   //
//////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////////
From: fwilliam@lab5.smcm.edu (Frank Williams)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Looking For THX Info
Date: 17 Aug 92 18:02:44 GMT


Can anyone E-mail me and address in which to gather information on home  
THX.  Preferably from Lucas's company directly.

Fwilliam@oyster@smcm.edu

Thanks in advance
From: dsnead@bach.udel.edu (David T Snead)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: BMG Club -- Questions
Date: 17 Aug 92 12:39:22 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of Delaware

In article <1992Aug16.053852.1767@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> wcwang@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Wei-Chi Wang) writes:
>
>Three questions about BMG Club:
>
>1.	Is there anyone can tell me BMG's free phone number? (I know someone
>	post in this group couple monthes ago but I just forgot to write it 
>	down.)

The BMG customer service number is 317-542-0414.  
They answer between 8:30 an and 4:15 pm EST.  
When I called them I was only on hold about two minutes and the lady I
talked to seemed to be able to take care of my problem effectively.
(though only time will tell)


>2.	If it is general for BMG to spend 2 MONTHES to send 4 free CD to the 
>	new joiner? (This is my case!)

I wouldn't through the panic button yet.  They took quite a while 
when I joined.  I don't remember how exactly how long now.


>3.	If BMG also carries LaserDisc?  I particularly want to find some items
>	about classical music concert or live performance.

I know that they have a video club.  I don't know if they care laserdiscs.

Dave
From: deanc@hpdmd48.boi.hp.com (Dean Cashen)
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1992 19:17:35 GMT
Subject: Re: Yamaha DSP-A1000 mail-orders
Organization: Hewlett Packard - Boise, ID
Newsgroups: rec.audio

In rec.audio / ojala@funet.fi (Petri Ojala):

>I am currently thinking about setting up Dolby Surround environment.
>
>It seems that Yamaha is the leader on this area.  Are there any
>worth consideration competitors for Yamaha DSP-A1000 ?
>
>[I] would be interested to hear any recommendations for mail-order
>companies  . . . [text deleted]

I'd like to second that.  Here in Boise, there just isn't a great
selection of vendors (if you want Sony, great, but companies like
Yamaha just don't have dealers here).  I too want a Yamaha DSP-A1000,
but unless we get a dealer here, and soon, I have to mail-order.  The 
problem is, I only know of a few mail-order companies (found in the back
of Stereo Review and Audio magazines) and I don't know a great deal
about them.  One such company sells the DSP-A1000, but they aren't
an authorized dealer, and I don't want to buy from such a place.

I'd like to know which dealers sell Yamaha via mail-order, and your
experience, if any, with them.  Please post or e-mail with any
recommendations you might have.

Thanks,

Dean Cashen
-- Boise

deanc@hpdmlfw.boi.hp.com
From: moskowit@panix.com (Len Moskowitz)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: DAK BSR Compact CD Player
Date: 14 Aug 92 12:53:38 GMT
Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix & Internet, NYC

In article <1992Aug13.172322.8187@cs.tulane.edu>
finnegan@navo.navy.mil writes:

>I was recently given a BSR Compact CD player from DAK.  (The
>little one that's slightly larger than a CD).
>The unit seems quite nice, and according to the catalog it was
>purchased from, costs only $89, including the case, headphones
>(earphones, actually), AC adaptor, and component patchcord.  Has
>anyone had any experience with one of these units?  (No DAK-bashing,
>please, I've had good experience with their products and service.) 
>
>My only complaint so far is that the little ear-phones are 
>uncomfortable.  Any opinions?

First of all, buy new headphones.  The BSR ones that come with it are
worth about $2.00 (maybe $2.50).

Second, the ads say that the unit only has an 80-some-odd S/N, so
chances are these have the old 14-bit D/A.  In practice this means
you'll have a bit more background noise and the sound will be a bit
grainier than a better unit.

For $89, it's not a bad unit.  If someone wanted to spend a bit more
they could get a much better sounding box in the Panasonic SLNP-1A
($125 or so).

-- 
Len Moskowitz
moskowit@panix.com
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: ohrd!ahchan@cs.toronto.edu (Arthur Chan)
Subject: Re: Hafler amp kits
Organization: "Ontario Hydro - Research Division"
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 92 17:08:12 GMT

ianchan@leland.Stanford.EDU (Ian Hin Yun Chan) writes:
: I'd like to find out more about Hafler pre/power kits around the range of
: $500 - $600 each. Or between $1000 - $1200 total (if a different split in
: cost is better). Specifically, I'd like to know model nos., a few key ratings
: (eg inputs, response, power, max current, etc), and what people think of
: (or know what others think of) them. And lastly, where are they stocked?
: Muchos gracias! (sp?)
: - Ian

I built the HD200 (amp) and HD101 (preamp) several years ago.  They were well
designed, but used cheap parts.  I still have the HD200.  The HD101 lasted 
only 3 months (cheap switches!)  I can't remember how the HD101 sounded.  But
I remember that I liked it when it was working.  The HD200 was and still is
very good.  Comparing to the Adcom 555 which I am using for my main system,
it is slightly noiser and has less bass.  But this could very well be due to
old age (or my soldering technique) and less power.  I enjoyed building the 
kits (not a very difficult task) and enjoyed listening to them.  However,
I don't think Halfer sells kits anymore.  I could be wrong though.

Arthur
-- 
Arthur Chan
Operations Research
KR297 (6173)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: kaplanr@knish.shearson.com (Roger Kaplan)
Subject: Re: THX migration - many questions
Organization: Lehman Brothers
Distribution: na
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1992 18:22:21 GMT

In article <1992Aug10.212056.29045@cbnewsj.cb.att.com> cauble@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (Troy Cauble) writes:
>	How fast do you expect the cost of THX decoders to drop?
>	Is this cost technology driven or marketing driven?
>	(Any widely available chip sets coming out?)
>
>	Do any of the "enhanced Dolby Pro" modes out there
>	(such as Yamaha's stuff) approach THX?  Do any of
>	them offer improvements without adding "ambience"
>	that wasn't there originally?
>
>	What are the odds there will ever/soon be a THX receiver
>	or integrated amp now that Dolby Pro has swept this
>	section of the market?


This should probably be a FAQ...


THX is **NOT** a technology, or even a standard.  It is
a **CERTIFICATION PROCESS**.  THX is a trademark that
can only be applied after the certification process 
has taken place (and fees paid to Lucas :-).

In theaters, that means that the theater's design, sound
system, speaker setup, etc, must pass the THX test.  The
equipment used in the theater is not "THX" equipment.
Usually, a THX consultant participates in all stages, from
theater design thru construction.

In the home, the same certification cannot realistically 
take place.  Instead, THX certification is given to certain
components.  THX processors start with Dolby Pro Logic,
and add even more processing, namely surround channel 
decorrelation, re-equalization of the front channels,and
"timbre matching" (ref: Bob Niland's article on surround).

My understanding is that only one brand of home processor
has been licensed by THX (Lexicon, or something).  Therefore,
"THX chip sets" are not really on the horizon.  And Yamaha's
enhanced Pro-Logic modes might be THX-compliant, if Yamaha
felt like submitting their stuff to THX (and paying for it).

Also, since THX is 75% marketing (IMHO), and they trade on that
image of exclusivity, I doubt you'll be seeing THX decoders 
in Fisher rack systems. Or even in midrange A/V receivers, for that matter.




--
Roger Kaplan          | "There are two types of people in this world... 
Lehman Brothers       |  Those that think there are two types of people,
kaplanr@shearson.com  |  and those that know better."
 ..uunet!roses!kaplanr|    -- Tom Robbins, "Still Life with Woodpecker"
From: smee@bristol.ac.uk (Paul Smee)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: Sony Mini-Disc Questions/Debate
Date: 21 Aug 92 16:52:13 GMT
Reply-To: P.Smee@bristol.ac.uk (Paul Smee)
Organization: University of Bristol

In article <25081@castle.ed.ac.uk> sss@castle.ed.ac.uk (S S Sturrock) writes:
>In article <MARC.92Aug21091602@mamba.es.ele.tue.nl> marc@es.ele.tue.nl (Marc Heijligers) writes:
>
>Yes yes, very old hat, go teach your grandmother to suck a few eggs will
>you please?

Careful Shane, I'm not sure that translates into American even, far
less into Dutch.  (I never heard it until I came over here.)  For the
non-British audience, and assuming I'm right, that's not as offensive
an idiom as it looks like it might be.

-- 
Paul Smee, Computing Service, University of Bristol, Bristol BS8 1UD, UK
 P.Smee@bristol.ac.uk - ..!uunet!uknet!bsmail!p.smee - Tel +44 272 303132
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: sbradley@scic.intel.com (Seth Bradley)
Subject: Re: Who dat say dey gonna buy dat DAT?
Organization: Intel SCIC, Beaverton, OR
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 22:04:19 GMT

In article <PHILG.92Aug20150558@zug.ai.mit.edu> philg@martigny.ai.mit.edu writes:
>When I multiply 48,000 (sampling rate) by 2 (stereo) by 16
>(bits/sample) by 60 (seconds/minute) by 120 (minutes/tape) and then
>divide by 8 I get 1.38 Gbytes.  This is still one of the highest
>storage densities of any medium.

I use DAT for backups, and by using extra long tapes, and data compression,
I'm able to store 4GB per tape, which is pretty amazing for such a small
package.

-- 
Seth J. Bradley, Senior System Administrator, Intel SCIC
Internet: sbradley@scic.intel.com   UUCP: uunet!scic.intel.com!sbradley
----------------------------------------
"A system admin's life is a sorry one.  The only advantage he has over
Emergency Room doctors is that malpractice suits are rare.  On the other
hand, ER doctors never have to deal with patients installing new versions
of their own innards!"  -Michael O'Brien
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: bower@pecan.cns.udel.edu (Tyson Bower)
Subject: Re: Pro Logic decoder recommendations.
Summary: Really cheap Pro-logic Decoder 
Organization: The Land of UD 
Distribution: na 
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 22:38:31 GMT

Kenwood ss-992 Dolby Pro-Logic Surround Processor ............. $249.95

Built in tone generator for calibration.
30 watt center channel amp
15 watt per channel amp for rear.
Normal, wide, and phantom modes.
Hall and theater modes for non-video use.
Dolby time link digital delay (don't ask me).
Volume control adjusts all speaker volume levels.

Find one at your local Silo (Circuit City?) or call Crutchfield at
1-800-955-3000.

I have had no experience with this unit.  But, if you want/need a truly
inexpensive Pro-logic decoder, this one may fit the bill...
From: al@qiclab.scn.rain.com (Alan Peterman)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: 4 ohm speakers ok? 8 ohm recommended.
Keywords: speakers
Date: 13 Aug 92 16:10:46 GMT
Article-I.D.: qiclab.1992Aug13.161046.1411
Organization: SCN Research/Qic Laboratories of Tigard, Oregon.

In article <77626@ut-emx.uucp> avsoft!wes@cs.utexas.edu writes:
>I have a Technics SA-GX710 and would like to use 4 ohm speakers as the  
>surround speakers. Technics says to use only 8 ohm speakers for surround  
>(4 ohm is ok for the front). What bad effects, if any, would doing this  
>have on my receiver, speakers or sound quality? Has anyone tried this with  
>a Technics SA-GX710?


Many receivers use a mono amp for the surround speakers - since the
surround signal is a mono signal.  If the amp is driving 2 surround
speakers (as is common) and they are hooked in parallel (again 
common) the net result is that the amp sees an impedance of half
the rated speaker impedance.  In other words your receiver is
liekly driving a 4 ohm load with two 8 ohm speakers connected.
If you hook up 4 ohm speakers it is a 2 ohm load - and the amp
may not be able to successfully drive that much current without
failing - perhaps expensively.

There IS a way to use 4 ohm speakers - hook them in series.  This
will result in an 8 ohm load and the amp will have no problem
driving this.  In case you don't know how to do a series hookup,
basically hook the negative of one speaker to the positive of the
other.  Hook the positive of the "combined" pair to the positive
terminal on the receiver, and the negative of the "combined"
pair to the negative terminal.  DO NOT hook the lead that "joins"
the two speakers to anything on the receiver - just to each other.
Note - it won't matter if you use the left surround or right surround
terminals on the receiver - as previoulsy mentioned they are the
same signal.



-- 
Alan L. Peterman                                 (503)-684-1984 hm & work
                       al@qiclab.scn.rain.com
It's odd how as I get older, the days are longer, but the years are shorter!
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: segallis@su1bc.uucp (greg segallis)
Subject: CD Players: Big Vs. Portable?
Reply-To: segallis@su1bc.UUCP (greg segallis)
Organization: GCSD CAE Harris Corp.
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 19:50:59 GMT

My current full size cd player recently died.  I am trying to decide whether
to get a bare bones, full size, single disc unit or a portable player (the
ones I have found are about the same price - so cost is not an issue).  I
already have a portable that I can take to work, in the car, the garage, etc.
So I really don't need the portability (although it would be nice).  But why
should I give up all that wall unit space for a full size, if a portable is
just as good.

So my questions are this:

1)	Is there any performance difference between a portable and a full
	size (low end full size)?

2)	My old unit specified a dynamic range (signal to noise ratio) of
	somewhere around 92 - 95 dB.  Most of the portables seem to spec only
	about 86 dB.  The 16 bits of the data would theoretically make it
	96 dB (regardless of the unit).  I assume the loss is due to the
	anaolog portion of the d/a converter and amp circuitry?

3)	Is this difference really noticable?

4)	If so, to what degree?

5)	And is the extra space, power, and lack of mobility worth buying a
	full size for this difference?

Thanks,
Greg Segallis    segallis@su25d.ess.harris.com
From: finton@lactic.cs.wisc.edu (David J. Finton)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: CD Player window shopping
Summary: NAD 5440/5000 vs. Sony X229ES/??
Date: 14 Aug 92 18:43:44 GMT
Organization: University of Wisconsin, Madison -- Computer Sciences Dept.


This week I happened to look at some CD players while waiting to talk to
a service rep:

         NAD 5000       ~ $450
         NAD 5440       ~ $370
         Sony X229ES    ~ $360

I'm curious about how NAD stacks up against Sony these days.  The X229ES 
is a new model;  the 5000 has gotten some nice reviews (e.g., Stereophile),
and the 5440 is essentially, they tell me, a 5000 minus the headphone 
circuit and NAD system remote link.  (In fact, the saleswoman said NAD
had told them that the 5000 and 5440 were identical, piece for piece, in
the audio circuitry.  And the spec sheets had all the same numbers).

So, what about it?  I'd like to stay below $500 (which is what I paid
for my NAD 5255 in '85) if possible.  Other system components include
NAD 7175 PE receiver and Vandersteen 1B's.

--David Finton
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: simont@meiko.com (Simon Turner)
Subject: Re: Math problem - pitch control
Organization: Meiko Super Computers
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 13:10:23 GMT


I believe it's just under +/- 2.  Semitone spacing (in the equal-tempered scale)
is defined as the 13th root of two or approx. 1.054766.

Two semitones are thus 1.112531 apart, or 11.25%

Simon.

Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: bower@pecan.cns.udel.edu (Tyson Bower)
Subject: Re: The future is now!
Keywords: Spectral DMA 180
Organization: University of Delaware, Newark
Distribution: na 
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 00:09:55 GMT

Spectral DMA-80 100-W/ch Amplifier

Features DC-coupled circuitry; 300 VA power
transformers; hand built Vishay precision resistors;
matched FET output devices. 100 W x 2 cont
avg into 8 ohms, 250 x 2 cont avg into 4 ohms,
180 x 1 cont bridged into 8 ohms, or 250 x 1 
bridged into 4 ohms; S/N 90 dB; distortion 1%;
slew rate 1,000 V/us; input imp 10,000 ohms.
19 x 2.5 x 14 in .................................$2,795

(For those who care about specs.  8-)  )

Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: bill@verdix.com (William Spencer)
Subject: Re: Passive preamps revisited
Organization: Verdix Corp.
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 00:08:50 GMT

In article <16AUG199211011503@zeus.tamu.edu> p0p4018@zeus.tamu.edu (PREMTHAMKORN, PRAKIT) writes:

>>of passive preamps. 

>Accoring to my experience, the high frequency roll off seems to be less 
>problematic in listening than in the paper.  As long as the mismatch is kept to
>minimal and the cable is short, this will be no problem in most system.
>
>IMHO, the major problem with the passive control is the dynamic range.  The
>dynamic transients sound compressed and lifeless.

Anyone care to speculate why this (reputably) is? I can start:

1. The slight high-freq. rolloff is causing this.

2. A certain amount of distortion is actually desirable. This is why the 
active preamp is so important to some in increasing the sense of power and
dynamics. Witness, just as one example, the review of the Sonic Frontiers 
preamp in the last Spile issue. The reviewer preferred using a tube in it 
that resulted in measured increases in distortion. It also reduced frequency
response, without which he considered it too bright.

3. The higher required angular position of the volume control that results from
absence of gain tends to result in listeners listening at unmatched levels --
lower for the passive.

4. Power amps don't load the passive control with a linear resistance,
resulting in distortion.

bill s
Newsgroups: rec.audio