HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: nikopalosuo@cc.helsinki.fi
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: Surround Speakers
Date: 12 Nov 92 08:37:00 GMT
Organization: University of Helsinki

In article <1ds86dINNcru@agate.berkeley.edu>, kevinm@ocf.berkeley.edu 
(Kevin Miller) writes:
> It has come time to add some decent sounding surround sound speakers to my 
> system.  I have a Kenwood 7030 Pro-Logic Surround receiver with a pair of KHL
> tower speakers as my fronts (2 12" woofers, 1 5.25" midrange, 1 1" dome 
> tweeter).
> 
> I've been to two places asking about what type of speakers I should get, but I 
> wanted the opinion of the people here.  I looked at two speakers.  One was an
> Audiosource that ran for about $80 per pair.  They were small (30 watts max),
> but the salesman told me that they were very efficient and would work well on 
> my 15 watt rear channels.
> 
> I'm on a limited bedget, but don't want to end up buying something that I will
> regret later.  Ideally, I would also like to mount these speakers to my wall
> (that's why I was shown the Audiosource speakers--they have a small wall mount
> on the back), so an included mount is a plus.
> 
> If you have any suggestions, please post here or send e-mail.  I'm a regular 
> reader of this group.

	I had a similar situation. I have a Pioneer VSA-740 Pro-Logic amplifier
with 23 watt rear channels. After careful studying of the market, I decided for
TEAC LX-8 two-way speakers (40W max.), which are very high quality speakers for
the price of $100 (U.S.) a pair. They are very small, come in different colours
and with wall-mounts.
	
	I have white ones, mounted to the wall behind the sofa slightly above
ear level. They really blend in to the wall and don't create any interior
design problems, but still have a great, clear sound. I so satisfied with
their sound, I listen almost constantly with the "stadium" effect, something
I'd never thought myself saying. The local HiFi-magazine ranked the TEACs as a
winner over a set of ten small speakers, for the second time in a row.

	Cheers,

Niko Palosuo	Niko.Palosuo@Helsinki.Fi	University of Helsinki, Finland 
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: Bill Luciw <luciw@apple.com>
Subject: Re: Wanted: CD Boom Box
X-Useragent: Nuntius v1.1.1d11
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 18:01:55 GMT
X-Xxdate: Fri, 6 Nov 92 10:05:52 GMT
X-Xxmessage-Id: <A71FF4002D02031A@kip-26.apple.com>
Organization: Apple Computer, Inc.

In article <pwai-031192114704@maca519.mv.us.adobe.com> pwai,  writes:
>Looking to purchase a CD boom box.
>
>Must have:
>
>- digital radio tuning
>- cassette player (preferably w/ Dolby B)
>- remote
>- EQ
>
>Prefer but not "must have":
>
>- input / output jacks
>- auto-reverse
>- detachable speakers
>- Mega Bass

I just bought such a box at Fry's [in Palo Alto].  It was a Panasonic
Model RX-DT707.  For a boom box, it has incredible sound.  I bought the
high end model, but there were two others in the same line which sounded
pretty good.  Mine has all the features you want except the detachable
speakers.  It has a 'techno surround' mode for that! [that setting
actually doesn't sound bad for some acoustic guitar, classical, or live
recordings.]  The only negative I've found has been the manual, but
that's consistent with my past experience with Panasonic.

-- Bill

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Bill Luciw                      Voice: (408) 974-3845
Newton Products Group           Fax:   (408) 974-1794
Apple Computer, Inc.    
10300 Bubb Rd.  MS: 50-B        AppleLink:  Luciw
Cupertino, CA 95014             Internet:   luciw@apple.com

"Imagination is more important than knowledge."
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: gvh@metrosoft.com (Gordon Van Huizen)
Subject: Re: Defeating SCMS
Reply-To: gvh@metrosoft.com (Gordon Van Huizen)
Organization: Metrosoft
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 06:07:52 GMT

In article <1dkkpiINNgua@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> jwk3@po.CWRU.Edu (John W.  
Kale) writes:
> 	Do DAT decks place SCMS codes on recordings made from the
> analog inputs?

Nope.

> If they do not, then simply connecting the analog outputs
> on the CD player to the analog inputs on the DAT deck should
> result in a high-quality recording with no limit on the number
> of digital generations it can, uh, generate. I realize that this
> falls short of the holy grail of a perfect digital copy, but I
> would guess that any degradation would be quite small.

True - but if you DO have digital inputs it seems like an uncessesary  
degradation.

> The only problem with this idea is that it would seem
> to make the SCMS useless. And it strikes me as absurd that the
> record companies would have settled for something so silly.

I think it's the notion of infinite 'perfect' copies that upset record  
companies.

> Am I missing something here? _Do_ DAT decks put the SCMS codes on
> anything they record, even from microphones? That seems absurd;
> it would mean that DAT decks are incapable of doing anything
> useful except to make first generation copies of the recordings
> that the whole SCMS system was supposed to protect! What's the
> story here?
> 

Well at least on my DAT deck (a Panasonic 3700 - a "pro" deck) you can set  
whether you want SCMS added to recordings or not. You can also set whether  
that subcode is set to allow one digital copy or no digital copies via  
SCMS.

In the case of the AES/EBU inputs, you can also affect whether the SCMS  
comes through from the original digital recording.

Given all this and the fact that the A/D conevrtors are fairly highly  
regarded (even Stereophile considers it a class-B recorder) AND that it  
can be had for $1200 I don't understand why anyone would buy a "consumer"  
DAT deck. Well I guess it isn't a very "pretty" piece of gear...

Gordon
-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------
Gordon Van Huizen           vox: 619.488.9411  fax: 619.488.3045
Metrosoft                   gvh@metrosoft.com [NeXTmail welcome]
----------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: clueless@bradley.edu (Matthew Simmons)
Subject: MD and DCC
Organization: J. Random Misconfigured Site
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 19:14:03 GMT
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]
X-Posted-From: cs1.bradley.edu
NNTP-Posting-Host: sol.ctr.columbia.edu

Could somebody mail me some information on Sony's MD and Philips' DCC? 
I'm trying to do an informative speech on the two, so I would appreciate
it if somebody could mail me press releases/something else official on the
subject.  Basically, I just need a description of each, how they work, etc..
Nothing technical... 


To mail to me, you need to send mail to clueless@camelot.bradley.edu.... 
For some reason my posts are showing up as being from clueless@bradley.edu...
I have no idea why this is happening tho...
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: bill@bilver.uucp (Bill Vermillion)
Subject: Re: Defeating SCMS
Organization: W. J. Vermillion - Winter Park, FL
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 15:32:09 GMT

In article <1992Nov9.060752.697@metrosoft.com> gvh@metrosoft.com (Gordon Van Huizen) writes:

>In article <1dkkpiINNgua@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu> jwk3@po.CWRU.Edu (John W.  
>Kale) writes:

>> 	Do DAT decks place SCMS codes on recordings made from the
>> analog inputs?

>Nope.

Wrong answer.  They do place an SCMS code on things made from analog.
The code (I forget which one it is) will permit to make a digital copy
of that analog recording.    Those copies can NOT be duplicated.

Perhaps you meant to say - the SCMS code does not prevent you from
making a digital copy.

>> If they do not, then simply connecting the analog outputs
>> on the CD player to the analog inputs on the DAT deck should
>> result in a high-quality recording with no limit on the number
>> of digital generations it can, uh, generate. I realize that this
>> falls short of the holy grail of a perfect digital copy, but I
>> would guess that any degradation would be quite small.

>True - but if you DO have digital inputs it seems like an uncessesary  
>degradation.

False - see above.

>> The only problem with this idea is that it would seem
>> to make the SCMS useless. And it strikes me as absurd that the
>> record companies would have settled for something so silly.

They didn't!

-- 
Bill Vermillion - bill@bilver.oau.org  bill.vermillion@oau.org
                - bill@bilver.uucp 
                - ..!{peora|tous|tarpit}!bilver!bill
From: rgonzal@gandalf.rutgers.edu (Ralph Gonzalez)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: Are Record Club CD's The Same Quality?
Date: 11 Nov 92 14:44:41 GMT
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.

cs108069@pandora.sdsu.edu (John DeRose) writes:

>A friend of mine told me he heard somewhere that the CD's sold through
>companies such as BMG, etc. are inferior to store-bought ones!

I signed up for Columbia House CD club. Several of the CDs I've received
have damaged jewel boxes. I don't know whether this happened in shipping
or not. Also, I noticed that the liner notes usually have "manufactured
for Columbia" or something like that printed on them. I called Columbia
House and the person who answered wasn't sure. She said that the cases
and liner notes were manufactured for Columbia House but the CDs them-
selves are the same as you get at retail stores. I wonder...

In any case, I haven't noticed any problems with the discs, just with
the cases.

-Ralph
-- 
Ralph Gonzalez, Computer Science, Rutgers Univ., Camden, NJ
Phone: (609) 757-6122; Internet: rgonzal@elbereth.rutgers.edu
--
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: tom@capalo.ingr.com (Thomas Cheung)
Subject: Re: Are Record Club CD's The Same Quality? 
Organization: Intergraph, Palo Alto, CA
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 22:44:54 GMT

In article <1992Nov12.182645.25110@mprgate.mpr.ca> mcvey@mprgate.mpr.ca (Iain McVey) writes:
>In article <1992Nov11.122316.26927@acd4.acd.com>, jwg@sedv1.acd.com ( Jim Grey) writes:
>|> In article <1992Nov11.003456.25424@newshub.sdsu.edu> cs108069@pandora.sdsu.edu (John DeRose) writes:
>|> >A friend of mine told me he heard somewhere that the CD's sold through
>|> >companies such as BMG, etc. are inferior to store-bought ones!
>|> >
>|> >Support or refutations?
>|> >
>|>
>|> False.     
>|>
>
>The CD's are often pressed (right term?) by the mail order club, using 
>a leased factory.  Often the liner notes from a club CD are different than
>those printed by the original recording company.
>
>I have ordered CD's from Columbia House and have seen differences, including
>slightly different labelling on the CD itself.  I noticed this because I had
>to replace my CD's after a theft.
>
>So in general, if you think there is a difference in CD's from different 
>factories, there may indeed be a difference between club CD's and normal ones.
>
>- Iain -  
>-- 
>Iain McVey (mcvey@mpr.ca)      | "Join the army, they said, see the next
>Software Designer              |  world..." - Carry on up the Khyber
>MPR Teltech Ltd.               | "This bottle of whisky is awful.  I'll be
>8999 Nelson Way, Burnaby, BC   |  glad when it's done" - One Scot to another


I ordered a CD from BMG call "Legend  of Moody Blues"(not sure about 
the title).The songs have the same title but they are different versions
from my LPs from the 70's. Could be another take from the studio(throw away?).
It's just not as good as the LP's.             
-- 
Thomas K. Cheung
tom@capalo.capalo.ingr.com
(415) 973-4140

Newsgroups: rec.audio,rec.audio.pro
From: bill@bilver.uucp (Bill Vermillion)
Subject: Re: DAT recorders with mike input
Organization: W. J. Vermillion - Winter Park, FL
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 15:31:53 GMT

In article <1992Nov11.070948.22126@news.columbia.edu> gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Gabe M Wiener) writes:
>In article <1992Nov10.154309.9627@bilver.uucp> bill@bilver.uucp (Bill Vermillion) writes:

>>It shows that I have been out of the business awhile.  What is T
>>powering?

>T-powering is just another method for powering condenser mics.  I don't
>remember which pins of the XLR it uses, but it doesn't use the same as
>phantom.  Schoeps microphones, for instance, are available in both 48V
>phantom and 12V T configurations.

And here is a bit of trivia.   At one time (and it still may be
true) "Phantom Powering" was a registered trade mark of
Neumann.

Along the same line "Sel-Sync" was a registered trademark of
Ampex.

-- 
Bill Vermillion - bill@bilver.oau.org  bill.vermillion@oau.org
                - bill@bilver.uucp 
                - ..!{peora|tous|tarpit}!bilver!bill
From: stratton@lynx (Ninja Programmer)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Sub. Choice
Date: 12 Nov 92 19:15:17 GMT
Organization: Ultra Sound Engineering - GE Med. Systems, Milwaukee, WI, USA
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL6]



Given the choice between the following, I would like to know which
you would choose, and why. I have the option of buying one of these
babies, but I can't find a place to do an A/B. I know there seems
to be alot of people out there that have a good feeling about this
stuff, hence my request. If you have a comment let me hear it. I
will probably buy one of these beast next week so if you can, reply
soon!!

1) M&K      - MX70        125 watts @ $630.00 w/tax
2) Velodyne - VA1012 MKII 65  watts @ $560.00 w/tax


+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Greg Stratton                     | (414) 647-4516   (w)
GE Medical - Ultra Sound          | stratton@sol.med.ge.com
+--------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: dna@ampex.com (David Altekruse)
Subject: Re: Pro Logic Center channel speakers
Keywords: pro logic
Organization: Ampex Corporation, Redwood City CA
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 01:09:45 GMT

>|> 
>|> What do you use for a center channel if your mains are Magneplanar
>|> MG-III's.  At 6' high by 2' wide, I can't just stick one of these
>|> in the center if I want to see the screen.  ....
>
>  Well, this is just a thought, but couldn't you get a front projection
>tv and place the center speaker _behind_ the screen.  
>
Several people have mentioned this possibility so I thought I'd join in. 
I also have MG-III's (see a previous posting) and I have a front projector
(Runco 750T) with a 100" screen.  Theaters use porous screens.  Screens 
normally used for video projectors are not of this type.  It is my 
understanding that even theater screens absorb much of the very high 
frequency content which is one reason why a lot of people have better 
video sound systems in their homes than found in even the best theaters.

Even if high-quality porous video screens were available, it wouldn't do 
me much good.  My screen is on the wall and my MG-III's are positioned 4-5' 
out from the front wall.  Even if I chopped a hole in the wall for the front 
speaker (which would open it to the outside!), the resulting sound would be 
dramatically different from the L-R speakers.  And if I hung the screen
5 feet into the room, I'd have to move the seats into the next room. 

- David Altekruse, dna@ampex.com

Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Gabe M Wiener)
Subject: Re: Impedance matching components
Reply-To: gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Gabe M Wiener)
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 15:05:52 GMT

In article <1992Nov9.173554.6953@seas.gwu.edu> phamtom@seas.gwu.edu (Dzung L. Pham) writes:
>I have a question on the impedance matching of audio components.  In most
>applications, in order to provide maximum power transfer and minimize
>reflections, the output impedance of a component should equal the input
>impedance of the device receving the signal.  However, it seems in audio
>that you just need to have the output impedance much lower than the input
>impedance.  What is the rationale for this ?

In audio we use a technique called constant-voltage coupling.  We stopped
using power-matched some time ago, since the idea of the 600 ohm balanced
line over the entire cascade is more or less a thing of a bygone era.

Anyway, the modern system works on the principle of the voltgae divider.
Thus, you want most of your voltage to be dropped across the input of the
next stage of the cascade, and not lost at the output of the previous 
stage.  As such, the input impedance of the next stage should be at least
ten times the output impedance of the previous stage.  


--
Gabe Wiener - Columbia Univ.     "This 'telephone' has too many shortcomings 
gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu       to be seriously considered as a means of 
N2GPZ in ham radio circles        communication. The device is inherently of
72355,1226 on CI$                 no value to us." -Western Union memo, 1877
From: bthompso@reed.edu (Benjamin Thompson)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: CD Wobble causing errors in playback?
Date: 12 Nov 92 07:56:06 GMT
Article-I.D.: reed.1992Nov12.075606.8360
Organization: Reed College, Portland, OR

Recently five specific CD's in my collection have started to show
errors in play back.  They errors manifest themselves as periodic
bursts of high frequency static.  Is there a common cause for this?
One possible explanation I came up with is that these particular CD's
wobble and rotate more unevenly than other Cds that I own.  The kicker
is that these disks don't have any problems in any other players other
than my home deck.  Are there products to counteract wobble and do
they work?

Thanks

-- 
Benjamin Thompson                     My views are my own, as far as I know...
bthompso@reed.edu                     I go to Reed College --- You can trust me
From: lstowell@pyrnova.mis.pyramid.com (Lon Stowell)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: HELP!  With Cosmetic Repair... PLEASE
Date: 10 Nov 92 00:48:40 GMT
Reply-To: lstowell@pyrnova.pyramid.com (Lon Stowell)
Organization: Pyramid Technology Corp., Mountain View, CA

In article <1992Nov8.071013.7210@scott.skidmore.edu> jreiser@scott.skidmore.edu (Jason Reiser... Asleep) writes:
>Well, I screwed up.  
>I am borrowing some B&K equiptment from a store in my area for the
>week (until Thursday) and I scratched the top surface in a couple of
>spots where my CD player was sitting.

  [goes on to detail possible ways to conceal the damage.]


>Might a car wax work?  I'll consider just about anything.
>
    Including HONESTY?!

    The dealer just may have a way to touch up that finish...that
    you would screw up if you tried a homemade hack.
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: rodiers@JSP.UMontreal.CA (Rodier Stephane)
Subject: MORDAUNT-SHORT 3.10 ?
Organization: Universite de Montreal
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 04:33:46 GMT

   I want to puchase some 3.10, before I do so I would like some
comments about these speakers.....
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: znpt01@trc.amoco.com (Norman P. Tracy)
Subject: Re: Low Price DAC
Originator: znpt01@gpss43
Organization: Amoco Production Company, Tulsa Research
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 21:36:14 GMT


In article <1992Nov10.111307.28653@doug.cae.wisc.edu>, loj@cae.wisc.edu (Lo Jeffrey) writes:
> In article <1992Nov10.094830.2078@leland.Stanford.EDU> kong@leland.Stanford.EDU (Kong Kritayakirana) writes:
> >
> > 
> >CAL Sigma D/A                Tubes??? Are they reliable? More expensive than
> >			     the DDE v2.0 and the cosmetics isn't attractive
> 
> I have never opened up a CAL Sigma myself, but I have heard that it uses
> the Crystal Semiconductor CS4328 D/A chip which has *line level outputs*
> on it, instead of the traditional current output which goes to an op-amp.
> This means that the tube output stage is nothing more than a unity gain
> op-amp which does nothing more than chew up the sound with more analog
> circuitry.  It looks good in an advertisement, though.
> 
> Jeff Lo
> loj@cae.wisc.edu

I have opened up the CAL Sigma and examined the circuit, and measured it on
the Audio Precision One DSP, and listened to it.

Jeff is correct that with the CS4328 you get a line level output.  What you
do not get is a de-emphasis filter. So for CD applications some form of output
amp/buffer is needed as a place to implement the de-emphasis filter.  CAL
uses what appears to be a hybrid tube/transistor output stage with discreet
transistors around a 12AU7A (I think that is the tube type).  Looked like they
are also using an op-amp as a DC servo.  The entire curcuit inc. power supply
is on a single circuit board.  Good quality fiberglass double sided board
populated with quality parts.  Given the low parts count allowed by the
Crystal chip set about the only compromise evident inside the unit is the
smallish (by hi-end audio standards) power transformers.

As for the output stage "chewing up the sound" on the Audio Precision One
using the DSP to generate S/PDIF test signals the results were what I would
call outstanding.  Total harmonic distortation + noise was better than -80db
down (< 0.01%) from 20 to 20 kHz.  The output vs. input linearity @ 500 Hz
showed 16+ bit linearity, at -100 db in the output was -100.86 db.  The freq.
response was perfectly flat up to 4 kHz where a gentle roll off starts which
is -0.7 db at 20 kHz.  Keep in mind when auditioning the Sigma its output is
+3.7 db above the 2 volt standard.

In my system using a Sony 507es as a transport the Sigma sounded great. Clean
clear and detailed.  No warm wooly sound, you would never guess a tube was
part of the circuit.  In common with a DIY DAC I built using the CS4328 the
Sigma tends to slightly emphasize the overtones in relation to the notes
fundamentals.  This becomes a system matching issue, on a speaker like the
Vandersteen 2ce its great.  The outstanding things about the Sigma are its
imaging, detail recovery, and clean hi-end.

Norman Tracy (znpt01@trc.amoco.com)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: kong@leland.Stanford.EDU (Kong Kritayakirana)
Subject: Re: Why filter D/A output?
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 92 05:19:42 GMT

In response to Jeff Lo's article about why filter D/A output:

I think the main reason to filter out D/A output is to reduce the RF
output from the line output. Most DACs use 1st order hold, thus generating
some ultrasonic garbage. If RF input into preamp/poweramp etc. is too high,
the amplifier could oscillate and give out a lot of distortion.
From: brad@buck.viewlogic.com (Bradford Kellogg)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Celestion and Ensemble (was Re: Coupon for Cambridge Ensemble II?)
Date: 11 Nov 92 19:30:32 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Viewlogic Systems, Inc.
Originator: brad@buck


In article <1992Nov11.160146.2339@wam.umd.edu>, leonpoon@wam.umd.edu (Leon Poon) writes:
|> I am thinking of buying a set of Cambridge Ensemble II Speakers
|> (the one with only one subwoofer). I recently received their
|> catalog and was about to order when someone in this newsgroup
|> mention something about getting a coupon if I wait a couple
|> of weeks. My question is: is this coupon good for Ensemble I
|> or II or both and if it is good for II, how much of a savings
|> is it? Any help would be greatly appreciated. Please contact
|> me at leonpoon@wam.umd.edu

I don't know about coupons, why not call them and ask? I 
don't have the number offhand, but if you dial information
at 1-617-555-1212 and say "Newton" for "what city please",
they can tell you the # for Cambridge Soundworks.

Before you buy, see if you can find a Celestion dealer, and 
listen to their single woofer with the model 1, 3, or 5
satellites. The cost (at least with the 1's) should be similar 
to the Ensemble II. I heard this setup recently, and it was 
very good indeed.

I have heard the Ensemble II, and the original Ensemble. The 
original Ensemble is definitely better. I think it's worth the 
difference ($400 for the II, $500 for the original).

I haven't done a side-by-side with the Celestion and either
Ensemble, but this might be a toss-up.
From: sh09@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (STEVEN HIGGINS)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: Home Subwoofer Drivers
Date: 11 Nov 92 19:55:50 GMT
Organization: Lehigh University

In article <1992Nov10.163352.15357@daffy.cs.wisc.edu>, litzer@snake30.cs.wisc.ed
u (Brent Litzer) writes:
>
>Does anyone have a recomendation of subwoofer drivers for home use?
>I am looking for a 12"-15" high power type driver.
>

    You might find some of Dynaudio's drivers of interest.  Check the back of
    an Audio for resellers; you could probably get more info from them.


    
-- 
--Steve Higgins
  sh09@lehigh.edu