HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: dg@mtqua.att.com (Duane Galensky)
Subject: Re: what have we learned
Originator: tjk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 15:40:41 GMT

In article <9208170232.AA21698@alumni.cco.caltech.edu> chowkwan@alumni.cco.caltech.edu (Raymond Maihin Chowkwanyun) writes:
>
>>Slamet Hendry writes about the natural sound of instruments:
>
>>But what about those electrical instruments such as electric bass,
>>synthesizer, slide guitar, etc. There is no way you can compare their
>>sound reproduction w/ the real thing, since the sound itself is produced
>>by electrical intruments, as opposed to comparing piano reproduction w/
>>the real piano.
>
>This point of view was propounded by HP in TAS.  The rejoinder by
>FD (the worm turns) is that you *can* distinguish between the sound
>of a Fender and a Les Paul.  Going even further, I'd say you can
>distinguish between two Les Paul's.  e.g. Duane Allman and Dicky Betts
>of the Allman Bros Band have quite different guitar sounds even though
>they both play Les Paul (Duane is the one that sounds like Coltrane).

...stuff deleted


indeed, these "electrical" instruments are just as valid
a "real thing" as acoustic instruments.   in terms of
the quality of reproduction in a listening environment,
however, electric instruments seem to be easier to reproduce
accurately, perhaps because of the mechanics with which
the original sound was produced...or because it's much
easier to get hold of a complete signal with relevant
overtones than is readily possible with acoustic instruments
(with much more complex harmonic structure).

duane

Newsgroups: rec.audio.high-end
From: peterca@ento.csiro.au
Subject: Re: CD Player Question
Originator: tjk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu
Organization: University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 15:39:34 GMT

 
>I am trying to decide whether
>to get a bare bones, full size, single disc unit or a portable player... 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.
All other things being equal there should be no difference BUT consider the
extra trouble of making things small.  Some compromises must be made to
accomocate this extra requirement along with the various other design
criteria.  Whether these compromises are large or small compared to these
other design criteria I don't know but the answer is easy.  Go to your HiFi
shop, plug the portable and the standard player into their reference
mega-buck system (don't be shy) and see if you can hear a difference. If no
then buy the convenient one. If yes, then see if your system or any you
might expect to have will resolve the difference.  If no, then buy the
convenient one.  If yes, then...... 
NB Just change this answer as necessary for every other similar component
question.

----------------------------------------
Peter Campbell
C/O Div. Entomology, C.S.I.R.O.
Box 1700 Canberra A.C.T. 2601
Australia  (peterca@ento.csiro.au)
Ph.61-6-2464158 (w), 61-6-2516213 (h)
----------------------------------------


Newsgroups: rec.audio.high-end
From: Jan-Hein.Buhrman@cwi.nl (Jan-Hein Buhrman)
Subject: Re: Counterpoint? Quality?
Originator: tjk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu
Organization: University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1992 13:04:12 GMT


eacj@theory.TC.Cornell.EDU (Julian Vrieslander) writes:

>In article <Bsu519.9vo@solbourne.com> kucharsk@Solbourne.COM (William Kucharski) writes:
>>Can anyone recommend a nice solid state preamp that sounds about the same as
>>the Counterpoint?  I like what I've heard from the Counterpoint, but have a
>>big problem with tubed equipment[...]

This is Henk de Vries replying somebody else's account. I have tried
counterpoint equipment and was amazed by sound, and appalled by
microphonics of the tubes, and rattle and hum of the overall
design; what horror!! ... but the sound was so nice... mediocre
quality of construction spoiling the FUN of enjoying music; a
truly criminal act!!

YES there are good alternatives: try AR hybrid electronics (SP 9 works
well for me with modified dynaco 150 and elipson 1303). Also, I still
have an old Nikko Beta One (FET) preamp with the most amazing
transistor phono pre-amp built in the 80s. (For cd it sucks, however)
Further, AUDIONALYSE makes incredible solid state preamps (at about a
third of Levinson prices..)..

The best preamp is no preamp. For CD, JVC (1010 and successors),
Philips/Marantz models with variable output will do. Phono stages..
mmm.. difficult.. VERY!! Transformers (in general) will NOT do ---
-except with old SUPEX models --- so GET YOUR HANDS ON A SOLID STATE
KENWOOD KHA 50 for MC cartridges (only amplifies up to MM level:
state-of-the-art-by-accident) and the rest TBD.

Henk de vries, through the account of...
-- Jan-Hein Buhrman -- CWI, Amsterdam -- <jh@cwi.nl> --
"May your mailbox overflow with messages" (modern Chinese curse)
-- 

-- Jan-Hein Buhrman -- CWI, Amsterdam -- <jh@cwi.nl> --
NFS server (amd:109) not responding still trying
NFS server (amd:109) ok

Newsgroups: rec.audio.high-end
From: g88s8885@giraffe.ru.ac.za (MR TF SPEARS)
Subject: ROTEL (what does it cost?)
Originator: tjk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu
Organization: Rhodes University, Grahamstown, South Africa
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 13:11:06 GMT
	id <m0mId8g-000MhoC@kudu.ru.ac.za>; Thu, 13 Aug 92 13: 14 EET

I recently bought the following setup for a little less than (SA)R8000:

ROTEL RCD965BX DUAL BITSREAM CD Player,
ROTEL RC960BX  Preamp/Control amp
ROTEL RB960BX  Power Amp
WHARFEDALE 505.2 Speakers
MONSTER CABLE (about 8m)

I am very pleased with my system, but being my first CD player, I'm not sure 
how much of the quality is due to CD and how much it could be improved.

I'm looking for an estimate of what this would cost in (US)$ so that I can 
have some sort of cost comparrison to other equipment discussed in this 
group.

Anyone have an estimate, or any comments about the system?

Newsgroups: rec.audio.high-end
From: mcvey@mprgate.mpr.ca (Iain McVey)
Subject:  What is the deal with s/n and dynamic range of cd players?
Originator: tjk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu
Organization: MPR Teltech Ltd., Burnaby, B.C., Canada
Date: Fri, 21 Aug 1992 13:10:03 GMT
  (5.65c/IDA-1.3.5 for uunet!rec-audio-high-end); Thu, 20 Aug 1992 13: 44:03 -0700


How is it that most manufactures claim to have a higher signal to noise
ratio than the dynamic range?  Should this be possible, or am I missing
something?  It sounds to me like having a negative noise.

On another similar note, who else has had it up to hear with
manufacturers claiming 20 log 2^16 as the dynamic range of their cd
players.  Surely the delivered dynamic range after the preamp stage
should be less than this.

Anyone?

- Iain -
-- 
Iain McVey (mcvey@mpr.ca)    | Kodachrome, gives us those nice, bright colours,
Software Designer            | Gives the greens of summers,
MPR Teltech Ltd.             | Makes you think all the world's a sunny day.
8999 Nelson Way, Burnaby, BC | - Paul Simon

Newsgroups: rec.audio.high-end
From: thk@sgi.com (Tom Kong)
Subject: Re: 5881 Tube Questions
Originator: tjk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu
Organization: Silicon Graphics Inc., Mountain View, CA
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 15:15:17 GMT

In article <1992Aug18.202727.14871@husc3.harvard.edu> rice@scws6.harvard.edu (Ken Rice) writes:
>This is for a VTL Stereo 50/50 basic amp.  I had thought these 
>amps used Russian KT-66 output tubes, but this one contains 
>VTL-labeled 5881 from the USSR.  A couple of questions arise:
>

I believe 5881 is the industrial version of 6L6.  So my
guess it you can use 6L6GC.

/tom




Newsgroups: rec.audio.high-end
From: mfm0@midway.uchicago.edu (martin frederic melhus)
Subject: Re: Speakers for < $500
Originator: tjk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu
Reply-To: mfm0@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Date: Thu, 20 Aug 1992 15:14:33 GMT

>From vogelv@spot.Colorado.EDU (VOGEL VINCENT PHILIP):

>I am looking for the best speakers I can get for under $500.
>I'm not too concerned about bass limitations.
>I have a Denon ___-860 Preamp/amp and an Onkyo CD player.
>I am considering Paradigm 5se/3se or Paradigm Phantom.
>I thought that it might be best to find a soft pair since my system tends to
>
>I would much appreciate a list of any speakers you think I might want to
>listen to.  I have heard that Paradigm has few rivals for the $$$. 
>Thanks.

Also, you might look into the Legacy Satellites.  They run $548 a pair direct
from Reel to Real, so they are a bit outside your budget, but they sound great
for a $1000 a pair speaker.  Getting an audition can be difficult, however, as
they don't have a lot of dealers.  Best way to contact them is to call
1-800-283-4644.  And don't expect some order taker to get the phone; you might
end up talking to Bill Dudleston, the head of the design team.

For other price levels of speakers, RtR is also a good source.  They also mail
order Parasound, Sumo, Fosgate, Soundcraftsmen, Counterpoint, Coda, and Cary,
as well as a few others.

As usual, I have no affiliations with RtR except as a satisfied customer.

-- 
                          | You have all the time from when you remove the |
     Martin F. Melhus     | card(s) from your hand until you put it (them) |
 mfm0@midway.uchicago.edu | on the pile to say "Last Card".  If you don't, |
                          | take your two. - Hidden texts, Book of MauMau. |

Newsgroups: rec.audio.high-end
From: KLUDGE@AGCB1.LARC.NASA.GOV
Subject: Hearing vs. Listening
Originator: tjk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu
Organization: University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 13:06:28 GMT


It's not worthwhile to bring someone with you who can hear better than you
can.  But, it's crucial to bring someone with you who can listen better.
Hearing is a mechanical process that takes place in your ear, the actual
process of sensation.  Listening, on the other hand, is a process of
perception that takes place in the brain, and much of it is learned.

I can't hear above 18Kc or so, and no amount of training is going to fix
that.  But, I can probably hear subtleties in music that others don't hear
because they don't know what to listen for.  I know they are there, because
when I hear them, I point them out, and the others generally say "Wow!  I
can hear that, but I wasn't listening for it" or something more literate to
that effect.  And, I appreciate that there are a lot of others whose listening
skills are far better than mine (because they often lead me into saying things
like that myself).

After you spend some time with good equipment, you'll start becoming
dissatisfied with bad equipment.  I've seen it happen.  That's why it's
important to get equipment that will reproduce the nuances that you don't
currently hear, because after a while you'll start to hear them.

Is this a sufficiently incoherent explanation?
--scott

Newsgroups: rec.audio.high-end
From: checksix@flyboy.EBay.Sun.COM (Al Conte)
Subject: Re: Hibrid Speaker from Eminent Technology
Originator: tjk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu
Reply-To: checksix@flyboy.EBay.Sun.COM (Al Conte)
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
Distribution: na
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1992 13:08:43 GMT

In article <1992Aug11.010113.2652@cbnewsj.cb.att.com>, tsu@io.att.com (Tienhow Su) writes:
>
>	Just auditioned a pair of LFT-VIII by Eminent Technology
>	and was wondering if anyone on the net happened to have
>	some experience on this speaker.

Yes, I have listened to them extensivly when I was demo'ing some MFA
amps.  First off, they are somewhat bright, and this was listening to
them thru tube electronics and an EAD 7000 dac.  They image better than
most speakers I have heard.  They don't have much low end to talk about
but, what is there is very tight and controlled.  They are not much to
look at, bordering ugly (wifes comment).  All in all though, I felt
they offered some very nice sound for the price.  I would add a
subwoofer to them, and run tubes for the pre-amp as well as the power
amp.  I think they would be a perfect match for a nice analog front end
that ran a nice moving coil.

Sooo! I gave them a thumbs up for sound, and a thumbs down for looks.
One more thing, they need to be at least 3 feet away from the rear wall
ala Apogees.


Al

Newsgroups: rec.audio.high-end
From: wiseman@tellabs.com (Jeff Wiseman)
Subject: Adcom GFP-565 vs PS audio 6.1 preamps
Originator: tjk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu
Organization: Tellabs, Inc.
Distribution: na
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 13:04:14 GMT
	(5.61/UUNET-internet-primary) id AB26446; Tue, 18 Aug 92 21: 38:18 -0400
	(queueing-rmail) id 213314.4172; Tue, 18 Aug 1992 21: 33:14 EDT


>From what I can see, these two pre-amps run about the same price. Has anyone
taken a close look at these in a comparison? I have heard that the phono
section in the 565 is very good but my phono use is only about 10% of my
listening.

I am considering getting a preamp/amp combo to replace the receiver that I
currently have. I am looking at the PS audio 100 Delta and the preamp being
either the:
    Adcom GFP-565
    Adcom GFP-555-II
    Adcom GTP-500
    Adcom GTP-400
    PS audio 6.1 (I think that is the model number. Its the one with the phono
                  section anyway)

I really like the idea of having a tuner handy in a preamp, especially when
compared to the cost of getting discreet components but I'm open to different
ideas. Also, if giving it up means getting much better sound for the pre-amp$$$
then I wouldn't have too much of a problem (I don't need as high a quality
sound from my tuner as my LPs, CDs, and tapes).

Anyone have any thoughts?

(By the way, these will be used with Vandersteen 2Ce's)

--
Jeff Wiseman:	....uunet!tellab5!wiseman OR wiseman@TELLABS.COM

Newsgroups: rec.audio.high-end
From: bwdavies@mailbox.syr.edu (davies)
Subject: Re: KEF Status?
Originator: tjk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu
Organization: Hell's Snack Bar (where *ALL* the food is hot)
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 15:38:50 GMT


In article <1992Aug13.201300.18940@mcc.com>, engelke@maximillion.mcc.com (Ned Engelke) writes...
>Does anyone out there have any information about what is
>going on with KEF?

Well, KEF has definitely moved, but I'm not sure it was for the
better.  My dealer has been trying to get me 4 of the posts to hold
the grilles on for about 3 months.  The best he's been able to do is
constantly call them.  It would appear that the new folks don't have
any idea what 104/2s were like before the new grille design.

I was hoping that KEF would have finally gotten their act together and
fixed their distribution problems.  Heck, from the number of posts I
see regarding KEF here and over in rec.audio, I'd begun to believe
that nobody had ever heard of them.

Still, it's possible that the American KEF reps will finally get back
on their feet and actively support their products.  Otherwise, there's
going to be a lot of orphaned pairs here in the States.

	brian




--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
"But when you want money for people with minds		    Hell's Snack Bar
that hate, all I can tell you is brother you	    bwdavies@mailbox.syr.edu
have to wait."  Lennon/McCartney	       bwdavies@godzilla.acs.syr.edu

Newsgroups: rec.audio.high-end
From: gossain@valhalla.sps.mot.com (Raj Gossain)
Subject: Re: Eminent Technology Model 8s
Originator: tjk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu
Organization: Motorola, Inc.
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1992 13:05:19 GMT



In article 3708@novell.com, bbaker@novell.com (Brad Baker) writes:
>
>What was the rest of the system like?

Sorry, I forgot to mention what the rest of the system consisted of.  I'm 
running a Magnavox CDB630 CD, Conrad Johnson PV10 pre (tube), and Acurus A250
power (solid-state).  I actually don't own the PV10 yet, only borrowed it on
a home-demo and it was great!  Anyone out there want to sell a CJ PV10 or PV10A???

>Given that I have come to respect most peoples opinions on this news-
>group, I'll take a guess and say that it probably had to do with
>the rest of the system.  In my case, the VTL amps were driven by the 
>EAD through a passive preamp.  I know the ET's are not very efficient, 
>which would account for their "absolutely dead" sound.  This is probably
>the reason for our disagreement in the sound of the Genesis's also.
>Given that the Genesis's are efficient designs and extremely detailed,
>I can see how they might seem bright or harsh when hooked up to an active
>preamp and solid state amps.  In fact when I have recommended the 
>Genesis to people, I always caution them that I don't know how they 
>sound connected to solid state stuff, and that they might be overly
>bright.  

When I heard the Genesis speakers, they were driven by B&K pre & power equipment.
That could have contributed to the brightness.

> ...
>
>So to summarize, we could say that:
>
>ET's do not mate well with passive systems.
>Genesis's do not mate well with active systems. 
>
>Anyone care to support or refute this generalization?

That would seem to be a fair assessment.

>This is just another example of how tricky component matching can be and
>why in-home trials are so important. It also shows why you should only
>take equipment reviews as guidelines.  Trust only your own ears, because
>only you know what is "harsh" and what is not.

Absolutely correct.  Room interactions, component matching, etc. make a huge
difference in the sound of a system.  I can't emphasize enough how this lead
me to my decision.

--Raj

Newsgroups: rec.audio.high-end
From: bill@verdix.com (William Spencer)
Subject: Re: Need help for buying a $5000 system(rebuts)
Originator: tjk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu
Organization: Verdix Corp.
Date: Wed, 19 Aug 1992 13:05:35 GMT

In article <1992Aug14.151014.429@mcnc.org> kk@mcnc.org (Krzysztof A. Kozminski) writes:
>In article <1992Aug13.154453.7779@fnbc.com> wyatt@othello.fnbc.com (Wyatt Sutherland) writes:
>>In article <1992Aug11.142606.7451@walter.bellcore.com>  
>>> First listen to different loudspeakers. They will be the most important
>>> purchase you will make.
>>> 
>>I strongly disagree!  Start from the source.  Poor recording,  poor listening.

>>Use  YOUR ears and trust them.
>
>Agreed.  Which is why one should choose speakers first. 

The "use your ears" line is the only absolute. Deciding that the
source or the speakers are more important is not something you can do for
somebody -- it is part of the overall decision about priorities that a
person must make when choosing a system. That said, listening to different
speakers is a must when gathering information to make this decision. Listening
to different electronics is also important, but the differences between
speakers may be so great that it is all a person may need to know, especially 
if cash is limited.

Bill s

Newsgroups: rec.audio.high-end
From: So...You've always wanted to be in the circus.  <brambo@eco.twg.com>
Subject: Experience with Definitive Technology BP10 or BP20 Speakers
Originator: tjk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu
Phone:        703-847-4500 (Voice); 703-847-4520 (Fax)
Address:      2010 Corporate Ridge Drive, Suite 550, McLean, VA 22102
Organization: The Wollongong Group, Inc., East Coast Operations
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 13:18:49 GMT


I have been looking at integrating two pair of bipolar speakers
BP20's from Definitive Technology into a home THX system.

I have found out that the company is based in baltimore, Md and
has been in existence for about 2 years.  I went to the library
and pulled up earlier reviews on the BP10 from Stereo Review.

Does anyone have these speakers?  I have heard them and I really
like them, but I am concerned that the company may not stay
in business long enough to make it past the warranty.

Thanks,
		Mark


Newsgroups: rec.audio.high-end
From: eacj@theory.TC.Cornell.EDU (Julian Vrieslander)
Subject: Re: Apogee Centaur Minor, Snell EIIIJ, Theil 1.2
Originator: tjk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu
Organization: Cornell Theory Center
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 1992 15:38:28 GMT

In article <m0mJ1Rx-0002y7C@pebbles.Software.ORG> Skip Osborne <osborne@software.org> writes:
>If you use the system for video, I'd suggest steering clear of the
>Maggies and the Apogees - or any other planar speaker. The image is
>harmed by the big thing in between the speakers.

I'm not so sure that this is a hard-and-fast rule.  I have a fairly large
(25") TV between my Acoustat III speakers.  The Acoustats are full range
dipoles.  To me, the imaging qualities are at least as good as what I hear
in most store demos of dipoles without objects between the speakers.

When I set my system up, I was aware of the possibility that something
between the speakers could serve as a source of early sound reflections.  To
minimize this possibility, I used a well-known property of dipole radiators:
they produce very little output in directions parallel to the plane of the
diaphragm.  So I placed the speakers and TV so that the planes through the
diaphragms go through the center of the TV.  Since the speakers are angled
inward a bit, this puts the TV slightly behind the speakers.
-- 
Julian Vrieslander 
Neurobiology & Behavior, Mudd Hall, Cornell University, Ithaca NY 14853    
INTERNET: eacj@theory.tc.cornell.edu     BITNET: eacj@crnlthry
UUCP: ..cornell!batcomputer!eacj

Newsgroups: rec.audio.high-end
From: randy@uutopia.dell.com (Randy Price)
Subject: Re: Speakers for under $500
Content-Type: text
Originator: tjk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu
Organization: Dell Computer Corporation
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1992 13:04:58 GMT
Content-Length: 555

In article <1992Aug10.215456.19681@ucsu.Colorado.EDU>, vogelv@spot.Colorado.EDU (VOGEL VINCENT PHILIP) writes:
|> I am looking for the best speakers I can get for under $500.
|> 

I would give a listen to the PSB Alpha's.  $300 with stands.  They are 
not an orchestral speaker but other than that they are exceptional.

Randy
-- 
Randy Price                      randy@uutopia.dell.com
The opinions are my own, not my employers, cognito.
"Can the liberties of a nation be secure when we have
removed a conviction that these liberties are the gift of God"

Newsgroups: rec.audio.high-end
From: chowkwan@alumni.cco.caltech.edu (Raymond Maihin Chowkwanyun)
Subject: Re: what have we learned
Originator: tjk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu
Organization: University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1992 13:05:54 GMT


>Slamet Hendry writes about the natural sound of instruments:

>But what about those electrical instruments such as electric bass,
>synthesizer, slide guitar, etc. There is no way you can compare their
>sound reproduction w/ the real thing, since the sound itself is produced
>by electrical intruments, as opposed to comparing piano reproduction w/
>the real piano.

This point of view was propounded by HP in TAS.  The rejoinder by
FD (the worm turns) is that you *can* distinguish between the sound
of a Fender and a Les Paul.  Going even further, I'd say you can
distinguish between two Les Paul's.  e.g. Duane Allman and Dicky Betts
of the Allman Bros Band have quite different guitar sounds even though
they both play Les Paul (Duane is the one that sounds like Coltrane).
Another example is Zawinul of Weather Report who used to run two
Arps because each had a distinctive sonic signature.  Hey, I could
maybe even find a couple of solid state amps that sound *different*.
Nah - Julian Hirsch is right.  They all sound the same. :-)

-- ray




Newsgroups: rec.audio.high-end