HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: Jonas.Palm@orgk3.lu.se (Jonas Palm)
Subject: Re: What happen to dbx?
Followup-To: rec.audio
Organization: University of Lund, Sweden
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 1993 15:05:21 GMT

In article <1993Jan22.194204.12111@galileo.cc.rochester.edu>,
sr001b@uhura.cc.rochester.edu (s. satya vardhan reddy) wrote:
> 
> 
> What ever happen to the dbx noice cancellation. I believe that it is still
> better than Dolby S or Dolby HX Pro. I bought two tape decks with it in the
> middle 80's but I don't even hear of it anymore.
> 
> 	sr001b@uhura.cc.rochester.edu

In the compact cassette world, DBX noise reduction is dead.
It does live on in the professional environment, at least to some
extent.

DBX NR has one advantage: it lowers noise a lot.

It has also several disadvantages:

It gives very audible noise modulation, especially if the recording
channel has high noise levels, i.e. crummy cassette decks with bad tapes.

It emphasises the problems cassette tape (and open reel) has with reduced
recording level tolerance in the treble and bass, the bass being really
awkward with some material, as it also leads to unmasking of the hiss 
at higher frequencies. (Ex, lone string bass, bass guitar, organ, drums
etc.)

Frequency response errors makes the expansion side mistrack. Because of
the fixed band, all spectrum nature of DBX NR a frequency response error
in one area of the spectrum makes the expander modulate the signal in all
other parts of the spectrum as well.
In tape recording, the bass is eq'ed up in order to lower the hum 
sensitivity, and the trebled is also eq'ed up in order to avoid tape
noise. Now if you have problems with the frequency response in these
areas (and you very often do) then the strongest signals in the music
can be modulated due to response errors where the spectral content is
less strong. This is hard to explain understandably, but the main thing
is that it isn't enjoyable to experience.


Dolby S (and SR) avoids _all_ these problems. (HX Pro is not properly a 
noise reduction scheme)


However, given a recording channel with reasonably low noise to start with
and a flat frequency response, DBX can work very well indeed.
It is just not the norm with consumer cassette decks, unfortunately.

                                                      Jonas Palm
From: lstowell@pyrnova.mis.pyramid.com (Lon Stowell)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: MD sound quality
Date: 22 Jan 93 02:19:48 GMT
Reply-To: lstowell@pyrnova.pyramid.com.pyramid.com (Lon Stowell)
Organization: Pyramid Technology Corporation

In article <199301211444.AA22172@europa.eng.gtefsd.com> whiting@europa.eng.gtefsd.com (claude whiting) writes:
>
>This month's (Feb) Audio magazine reviews an MD player/recorder from Sony. 
>Len Feldman says that Sony claims the sound approaches cd quality but he 
>feels Sony is being conservative here. 
>
   But one of the rags had a letter response which noted that it
   might be easier to hear artifacts of DCC or MD by playing them
   thru surround sound and listening ONLY to the rear channels.

Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: tlode@nyx.cs.du.edu (trygve lode)
Subject: Re: speaker phasing
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix @ U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Distribution: na
Date: Sat, 23 Jan 93 00:19:07 GMT

In article <C18Fow.38w@world.std.com> DPierce@world.std.com (Richard D Pierce) writes:
>In article <1993Jan21.203132.15782@microplex.com> fff@microplex.com (Fred Fierling) writes:
>>Do speaker manufacturers follow a standard for speaker phasing and terminal
>>colours?  In other words, if the red terminal is made positive with respect
>>to the black can you assume the speaker cones move in the same direction
>>regardless of manufacturer?
>
>As a general rule, yes. There are also explicit and de-facto standards
>that say a positive voltage applied to the positive terminal of a driver
>will cause the cone to move outwards.

Hmmmmm...I was under the impression that it wasn't nearly so universal
a standard.  Since it's fairly common for the tweeter of a two-way system
to be wired with a polarity that's the reverse of the woofer, this gives
the manufacturer the choice of which driver should move outwards when a
positive voltage is applied to the red terminal; usually they pick the
woofer (which seems sensible to me anyway) but not always--the Apogee
Stage, for example, is wired the other way around with the woofer 
"backwards."

Trygve 
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: winalski@adserv.enet.dec.com (Paul S. Winalski)
Subject: Re: DAT, DCC and MD
Reply-To: winalski@adserv.enet.dec.com (Paul S. Winalski)
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation, Nashua NH
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 18:37:23 GMT


In article <C1EuKp.3wq@fulcrum.co.uk>, igb@fulcrum.co.uk (Ian G Batten) writes:
|>
|>Au contraire, VCR technology is expensive.  Cheap, nasty cassette
|>players cost ten pounds.  DCC's only expense over a grungy cassette
|>mechanism is the head, which isn't a moving part but is more complex
|>than a standard analogue head.  But in the digital domain problems like
|>wow and flutter can be addressed by buffering, and high mechanical
|>accuracy is what costs money.

Only if you can find the tracks.  DCC has at least 5 times as many tracks on
the same width of tape as ACC.  The mechanical tolerances are much tighter,
and, as you say, that will cost money.

--PSW
From: omf@pyros.hacks.arizona.edu (Oscar Fowler)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Sony CDP-C715: Comments?
Date: 24 Jan 93 17:45:06 GMT
Reply-To: omf@pyros.hacks.arizona.edu
Distribution: world,local
Organization: Sirius Cybernetics Corporation
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.4-a4

I'm considering a Sony CDP-C715 CD player, anyone have any experience
with this thing?  I like the carousel better than the cartridge machines
(quicker loading of idividual discs) and I like the Custom File feature
of the 715... other than that, I don't know what else I should look for.
Does anyone know how many times oversampling this unit does?  Is this
an important question to ask?

Thanks again,
Oscar
Computing from sunny Tucson Arizona!
omf@hacks.arizona.edu
From: jj@alice.att.com (jj, curmudgeon and all-around grumpy skeptic)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: CD vs. LP again
Date: 27 Jan 93 16:21:06 GMT
Article-I.D.: alice.24719
Reply-To: jj@alice.UUCP (jj, curmudgeon and all-around grumpy skeptic)
Organization: NJ State Home for Bewildered Terminals

In article <1k4b32INN469@transfer.stratus.com> Arthur_Noguerola@vos.stratus.com writes:
>if  you  are happy with 3rd rate MODERN technology that EVEN the 
>CREATORS OF have admitted IN PUBLIC is not "perfect" the  so  be 
>it.  it seem obvious to me NOT one person in this group pays any 
>attention  to  the  press that so dearly supposedly follow (well 
>many do!!).  if the had they would already know  that  SONY  and 
>PHILIPS have admitted that current CD technology is not correct. 
Boy oh boy, this guy discounted himself within the first paragraph (well
he doesn't seem to know about paragraphs, but this is enough from the top
to be a paragraph).  First, CD isn't perfect, LP isn't perfect,
NOTHING is perfect, including the absense of everything.  The big
joke, of course, is that LP is a damn sight less perfect than CD,
which this Noguerola person seems to forget.

As to "correct", well, that's not been said either.  Various people
have said that it could  be "improved", but that doesn't mean
that anything is "incorrect". After all, given the papers available
from the 1930's and 1940's on vinyl recording, one COULD point out
that the current methods of vinyl recording are also very, very
incorrect, concerning speed, stylus size, in the way
that compression as opposed to displacement is read, and 
so on.  In fact, LP is much more "incorrect" but  both work
very well, and both technologies are preferred by some people.

Now, I will agree with Arthur that the intemerate article he was
responding to didn't contain either a clear understanding of preference,
OR a good understanding of why one might keep LP's even if one
likes CD's better, and was written in a most annoying fashion.
That's no excuse to go raving about untruths like he's got in his
first "paragraph".
-- 
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: lstowell@pyrnova.mis.pyramid.com (Lon Stowell)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: MUSIC of THE DIVINE MASTERS
Date: 27 Jan 93 20:52:38 GMT
Reply-To: lstowell@pyrnova.pyramid.com.pyramid.com (Lon Stowell)
Organization: Pyramid Technology Corporation

In article <1993Jan27.000951.3356@cnsvax.uwec.edu> strassbm@cnsvax.uwec.edu writes:
>>>
>>>>                                           Robert E. McElwaine
>>>>                                           2nd Initiate in Eckankar
>>                                              ^^^
>>                                              And, we do hope, the last.
>
>   Bob McElwaine attends the same school that I do.  He's been taking one
>class per semester here in order to justify his otherwise meaningless
>existence.  He used to post all this bulls**t that he writes to our local
>notes conference...until we got our news feed.  We apologize for unleashing
>him upon you and we're looking for a way to control him (perhaps with
>Russian mind-control lasers mounted on those nifty cosmospheres... :-) ).
> 
      He will likely feel right at home on this group.  >:-)

	  But since he seems to be SEVERELY out of touch with
	  reality, how about sending him over to the high-end group?


      I wonder where Greg Shergold is when you need him?


>Oh, and to bring this back to something audio...anyone have an opinion
>on the Optimus DCC deck?
> 

    Enough to convince me it might just be worth taking in my own
    phones and CD's....AND listening to the competition.  The demo
    material was carefully chosen to avoid solo piano, flamenco
    guitar, keyboard solo, etc.   And the unit I heard has the bad
    habit of putting a very low volume "brzzzt" noise in the output
    intermittently.  Dunno what a DCC dropout sounds like, so can't
    say what it was...

    But it was better than I expected...enough that I may also just
    give MD a listen in a record/playback cycle for the same
    possible use.  

    I didn't get the impression of the crystal clarity of RDAT or
    the lush sound of a reel-reel, but it sure sounded competitive
    with the best cassette deck I've auditioned.  

>                                 Brian M. Strassman
>                                 strassbm@cnsvax.uwec.edu
From: billyee@vnet.ibm.com
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 93 09:15:20 EST
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: Audio Concepts Sapphire IIti and Sub-1 Speaker kits.

OPTIONS: NOACK    LOG    SHORT    NOTEBOOK ELEL@IEX




Date: 25 January 1993, 09:06:08 EST
From: billyee@rhqvm14.vnet.ibm.com
To:     ELEL at IEXIST.ATT.COM
 Subject: Re: Audio Concepts Sapphire IIti and Sub-1 Speaker Kits.
Reply-To: billyee@rhqvm14.vnet.ibm.com
Organization: Advantis
News-Software: UReply 3.1
X-X-From: billyee@rhqvm14.vnet.ibm.com

In a previous message, you wrote:
>
> Received: from AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU by vnet.ibm.com (IBM VM SMTP V2R2) with TCP;
>    Sun, 24 Jan 93 00:15:19 EST
> Received: from AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU by AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU (IBM VM SMTP V2R2)
>    with BSMTP id 3993; Sun, 24 Jan 93 00:16:33 EST
> Received: from american.edu (ASOLOMO) by AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU (Mailer R2.08) with
>  BSMTP id 5897; Sun, 24 Jan 93 00:16:32 EST
> Date:         Sun, 24 Jan 93 00:11:26 EST
> From:         ASOLOMO@american.edu
> Organization: The American University
> Subject:      Re: Audio Concepts Sapphire IIti and Sub-1 Speaker Kits.
> To:           billyee@vnet.ibm.com
>
>   Hi --
>        Another impressed Sub 1 owner here! But my life priorities have
>        changed recently, and I'm considering -- painfully -- putting my
>        whole system up for sale. If you've received curious inquiries
>        could you pass this information on? I'm located in the D.C./
>        Va/Maryland area, and would MUCH prefer to sell to a local buyer (i
>        have too much admiration for these babies to ship them!). My pair is
>        custom-stained a light white over the plain cherry veneer.  I imagine
>        I'd ask somewhere around $640.00.
>                     Thanks!           Ari Solomon
>                                       ASOLOMO@AMERICAN. EDU
>
From: jj@alice.att.com (jj, curmudgeon and all-around grumpy skeptic)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: CD vs. LP again (was Re: Preamp and Amp)
Date: 27 Jan 93 16:50:04 GMT
Article-I.D.: alice.24720
Reply-To: jj@alice.UUCP (jj, curmudgeon and all-around grumpy skeptic)
Organization: NJ State Home for Bewildered Terminals

In article <1k4fr1INN5vp@transfer.stratus.com> rsud@sw.stratus.com (Rajiv Sud) writes:



>In article <1190795@hpnmdla.sr.hp.com>, kurts@hpnmdla.sr.hp.com (Kurt Strain) writes:
>> In rec.audio, lstowell@pyrnova.mis.pyramid.com (Lon Stowell) writes:

>> >      If any of these tactics sound like TV evangelists, its no
>> >      wonder, the ability of the human mind to fool itself and
>> >      attempt to spread the ignorance is amazing.   

>> You make us roll with laughter.


>	Actually, he's right. He just doesn't realize about who.

>..Rajiv
Ahh, the children at play again.

Strain has already shown conclusively that his only way to try
to argue with JJ is to lie about what "jj said".  I've sent a
stern request for abject retraction of his last article his way,
and I'm currently waiting to see if he will retract his accusations
that run counter to established international public record.
Sud is a bit better, he denies (without fact, based on belief)
the counter-arguments at least.  Of course, he also makes
factual misstatements about technical issues (at least he sticks
to technical misstatements for the most part and doesn't attack
people and their reputations) and continues to argue from
belief.  For Sud, I think, it is something like a religion
that one cannot question.

This, of course, explains why he has such antagonistic reactions
as that shown above.

I submit, again, that it is people like Sud, Strain, and the
like who work hard on their doctrine of helplessness (man
can never understand), who are responsible for the sad state
of audio technology in the world today.  

Of course, in the long run, preventing progress and understanding
never works.
-- 
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: peterb@compnews.co.uk (Peter Brooker)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Amps:- What make for how much?
Date: 26 Jan 93 11:37:54 GMT
Organization: Computer Newspaper Services, Howden, UK.
NNTP-Posting-Host: fennel.compnews.co.uk
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4

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.

--
 
    \_\_\_  \_\_\_
     \_  \_  \_   \_   Peter Brooker (CNS)                        __o
      \_\_\_  \_\_\_    Computer Newspaper Services Ltd         _`\<,_
       \_      \_   \_   Infomation System Operations          (*)/ (*)
        \_      \_\_\_

		      Comin' from the unpolitically correct
                        half of this world refered to as
			       The ProjectZ!
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: faiman@cs.uiuc.edu
Subject: Re: Why Debunk?
Organization: Dept. of Computer Sci - University of Illinois
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 20:49:07 GMT


Hear, hear!

 -- Mike Faiman

.
Newsgroups: rec.audio,misc.forsale,ny.forsale
From: mlm2@crux1.cit.cornell.edu (Mark Lee Margolis)
Subject: Stereo Amp for Sale
Organization: Cornell Information Technologies
Date: 22 Jan 93 16:37:37 GMT

My friend has an amplifier he wishes to sell:

It is a Parasound HCA-2200 (it is a great amp, I oughta know - I own one)
He wants to get a tube amplifier.

Features:

- Designed by John Curl
- 220 WPC
- Speced down to 2 ohms
- True five-way binding posts
- 50 amps current continuous, up to 90 for peaks
- True dual mono design (two 1.2kv transformers, 4 power supplies)
- Massive bipolar outputs
- Mosfet/Jfet drive stages
- Both RCA and XLR (balanced) inputs
- Weighs about 58 lbs
- Massive heat sinks
- Excellent imaging, bass extension, detailing
- Pure Class A operation up to 6 watts

As my friend does not have an account on EMAIL, send EMAIL here and I will 
get in touch with him. I think he wants $1100 for it (retails for $1600) - he
got it a few months ago.


--
**********************************
Mark L. Margolis
mlm2@crux1.cit.cornell.edu
fnox@vax5.cit.cornell.edu
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: kanefsky@halcyon.com (Steve Kanefsky)
Subject: Re: Comments on analog music
Organization: The 23:00 News and Mail Service
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 20:30:55 GMT

In article <1k10heINNju6@transfer.stratus.com> rsud@sw.stratus.com (Rajiv Sud) writes:

>	Distortions from a turntable are generally euphonic and it
>is (you'll love this part) a measured fact that better turntable
>designs minimize these distortions. Ascending to better turntable
>designs (ones with measured reduced distortions) resulting in better
>sound would seem to put a bit of a hole in your "analogue is liked
>because its distorted" theory.


No, it just means that the optimal level of such distortions is somewhere
between zero and the amount that cheap turntables add.  More is not
necessarily better.

There may also be non-euphonic components to the distortion which good 
turntables reduce somewhat.


>	In digital much of the distortion is in the signal itself.
>Some of these distortions have been identified after "prefect sound
>forever" was unleashed. Gain riding is one example. Jitter, known
>about for some time, but now getting lots of attention is another.

Why do you discount the use of measurements completely (we don't measure
hamburgers, so why audio?), and then use measurements to make your case
against digital?  Worse yet, there is a large body of evidence correlating
analog distortions with perceived differences in sound quality, and no
evidence which correlates jitter with any perceived differences. 


--
Steve Kanefsky
From: whiting@europa.eng.gtefsd.com (claude whiting)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Enough w/LP v.s. CD!
Date: 21 Jan 1993 08:34:02 -0600
Organization: UTexas Mail-to-News Gateway
NNTP-Posting-Host: cs.utexas.edu

Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Enough w/LP v.s. CD!
Reply-To: whiting@europa.eng.gtefsd.com (claude whiting)
Followup-To: 
Distribution:world 
Organization: GTE Federal Systems
Keywords: 

This LP v.s. CD thing seems to come around every couple of months or so and 
people on both sides flame the heck out of each other with no ground given on 
either side. Let's stop wasting bandwidth and time on this silly argument. 
Face it, some people love cd's, others love their lp's. Leave them alone! The 
endless and quite a few baseless arguments are a complete waste of time to 
most people on this newsgroup. Most of us subscribe to learn more about audio 
and to help other's with problems, to make suggestions, and to have a 
"sounding board" before venturing out to purchase equipment. 

Let's stop with "mine is better than yours" and get on with real questions 
and issues in the audio world.

Claude

Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: rsilvers@nynexst.com (Robert Silvers)
Subject: Re: DAT, DCC and MD
Organization: Nynex Science and Technology
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 93 20:28:04 GMT

In article <1993Jan20.213028.23989@e2big.mko.dec.com> winalski@adserv.enet.dec.com (Paul S. Winalski) writes:
>
>In article <1993Jan20.181814.7223@bmerh85.bnr.ca>,
>shiv@bnr.ca (Shiv Naimpally) writes:

>industry.  A very large segment (I hesitate to say the majority) of the mass-
>market for tape decks is driven by the availability of pre-recorded tapes.
>This is why DAT didn't get very far when Sony did its consumer deck push a
>year or two ago.

	I disagree.  Anyone that can afford a DAT recorder already has a CD
player and therfore would never buy a prerecorded DAT.  I claim that DAT never
made it as a consumer format only because of price.  Most people want to spend
under $150.00 for a tape deck. (as sorry as that sounds).

						--Rob.
From: johng@informix.com (John Galloway)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: Digital critics - sampling argument is nonsense
Date: 22 Jan 93 01:41:38 GMT
Organization: Galloway Research

In article <1993Jan21.165946.47693@watson.ibm.com> zellers@22_clancy.manassas.ibm.com (Cevin M Zellers ) writes:
>Grant,		
>
>You claim it is 'all below' 22.05 KHz, but John Galloway has a good
>argument here: 
>
>With a 22KHz cutoff frequency, the system would not differentiate 
>between a 20KHz sine wave and a 20KHz sawtooth, i.e. the sawtooth 
>would look like the sine-wave anfter the recording low-pass filter 
>input.
Actually Cevin what I said was:
.......... One might argue that the Nyquist rate only assures frequence
not wave shape so that a 20KHz cut off would not distinguish a 12KHz sine
wave from a 12KHz sawtooth........
Which makes it sound more interesting since one can actually hear 12KHz
tones (and even when I was 18, 20KHz was just sort of a "feeling" not
really "hearing" anything), so it makes it sound more reasonable that you
could differentiate the two wave shapes, but since the difference starts
at 24KHz, the math says you can not (I have not tested it myself though).
And I was really only fooling around trying to sell my turntable, I'm a
digital proponent all the way.
	-jrg

>
>Can the ear differentiate between a 20KHz sine wave and a 20Khz sawtooth?
>If so, us Analog critics may have an achilles heel. Someone, please save
>this argument :(
>
>A confused Cevin 
>
> 


-- 
internet    jrg@galloway.sj.ca.us  John R. Galloway, Jr  795 Beaver Creek Way
internet    johng@informix.com     CEO...receptionist    San Jose, CA   95133
applelink   D3413                  Galloway Research     (408) 259-2490