HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: CD lens cleaners
From: erkamp@janus (Bob Erkamp)
Date: 21 Dec 92 14:08:07 MDT
Reply-To: erkamp@janus
Organization: Alberta Research Council

In article <1gmo18INNk4f@charnel.ecst.csuchico.edu>, msiegall@OAVAX.CSUCHICO.EDU (MARC SIEGALL) writes:
>What's the consensus on CD player lens cleaners?  I believe in good
>maintenance, but I'm hesitant to put a spinning brush in my player.
>I never use "home" VCR head cleaners (I have it professionally cleaned),
>and only clean my computer disk drives when there's an error (i.e., never).  
>Am I being too shy about the lens cleaners?

Well as the lens doesn't touch anything, about the only thing that can affect 
it's performance is dust. The only time I clean my CD lens is when it starts to 
act up (about twice in 3 years). I simply remove the cover (voids your warranty) 
and give it a quick blast or two with compressed air. Note that you want to keep 
the can upright so as not to get Liquid Oxygen on your lens. This has worked 
well for me.

Bob
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: nau@ssesco.com (William Nau)
Subject: Re: Carver and the FAQ
Organization: SSESCO
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 13:58:10 GMT

In article <92357.203715U37426@uicvm.uic.edu>, <U37426@uicvm.uic.edu> writes:
|>      Just reading the new faq today and was confused about one thing.  Why is
|> Carver singled out for a question?  That does not make sence.  Do the FAQ
|> writers have a grudge against Carver?  They are not the only company that can
|> be questioned about their products.

There are lots of companies that can be questioned.  You are correct in that.
It's just that netters questioned Carver more often.

I did not see the question as an attack against Carver.  It is a frequently
asked question.  Hence a FAQ.  It deserves to be in the list.  They mentioned
what Carver is known for and tell you to listen for yourself.  Sounds like
good advice.

|> For that matter, it seems that many netters like to beat up on Carver.
|> Is this because they do not belive that something good can be purchased for
|> less money?

No, it's because many believe something better can be purchased for the
same money.

!> i am a quite confused Carver owner.   (another example of people listening
!> without their ears!)

Congratulations on your purchase.  If you like it then screw what others
think.  However, don't claim that others are not using their ears just
because they don't like what you do.
-- 
William R. Nau
Supercomputer Systems Engineering and Services Company (SSESCO)
511 11th Avenue South, Suite 216
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55415-1536
(612) 342-0003

nau@SSESCO.com
From: dchou@husc11.harvard.edu (David Chou)
Newsgroups: rec.audio,rec.music.marketplace
Subject: REAR AND CENTER SURROUND SPEAKERS ON SALE
Date: 4 Jan 93 04:55:17 GMT
Article-I.D.: husc3.1993Jan3.235518.18976
Distribution: usa
Organization: Harvard University Science Center

Hello Netfolx.  My last post generated a lot of responses for my speakers,   
and after having thought that I had sold them, it turned out that my buyer   
thought otherwise.  Anyway, here I am again, hopefully to sell these         
speakers once and for all.  Again, I am selling a pair (2) of rear SURROUND  
Yamaha speakers and one (1) Center Channel SURROUND Realistic speaker.       
The Yamahas are the model NS-A95, rated at a maximum of 30 Watts into an     
impedance of 4 ohms.  The Realistic is the Minimus 2.5 rated at a maximum    
of 10 Watts into an impedance of 8 ohms.  All figures are continuous power   
ratings; peaks will be higher, and usually, surround channels seldom exceed  
the above ratings.  In anycase, these are great surround speakers for        
a low-budget system if you want quality surround sound; I had used them for  
almost a year before I got my new set of speakers about 6 months ago; they've
been in storage since then.  Again, to avoid any confusion, let me stress    
that these are rear and center channel SURROUND SPEAKERS, and not front      
channel speakers.  You can use them as front speakers, but I wouldn't do it. 
Price?  I will ship these speakers to you anywhere in the U.S.A. in exchange 
for a $55 check, obo.  O.k., thank you all for your time.  I look forward    
to your responses.                                                           
                                                                             
                                                        -David Chou          

--

This Is Not A Love Song...
-PIL
		I'm here, you're there, but you can reach me:
		dchou@husc8.harvard.edu
From: msiegall@OAVAX.CSUCHICO.EDU (MARC SIEGALL)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Polk 5 Jr. for Sale
Date: 22 Dec 92 01:13:56 GMT
Reply-To: msiegall@OAVAX.CSUCHICO.EDU
Organization: California State University, Chico
NNTP-Posting-Host: oavax.csuchico.edu

Anyone want to buy a Polk Audio 5 Jr. speaker?  It would be great as
a center speaker in a surround setup with Polk Monitor main speakers.
(I used to use it for that purpose, but then got new main speakers.)

Please e-mail replies.
******************************************************************************
Marc Siegall                     MSIEGALL@OAVAX.CSUCHICO.EDU
Department of Management
California State University      (916) 898-5421
Chico, CA 95929-0031
******************************************************************************
From: jeh@cmkrnl.com
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: 'Bookshelf' Speakers???
Date: 23 Dec 92 18:57:11 GMT
Organization: Kernel Mode Consulting, San Diego, CA

In article <1992Dec22.135719.13721@panix.com>, moskowit@panix.com (Len Moskowitz) writes:
> Brendan Perry writes:
> 
>>I'm in the market for a pair of so called 'Bookshelf' speakers in the $200
>>to use as my secondaries. ...  Any suggestions?
> 
> PSB Alpha and Celestion 3.
> Len Moskowitz
> moskowit@panix.com

I strongly agree.  Personally I found the PSB Alphas to be more to my liking
than the Celestion 3 -- I thought the C3's were a little thin in the upper
midrange -- but both are fine speakers, designed to be used against a wall (ie
in a "bookshelf"), and both are *spectacular* bargains (the Alphas go for
$200/pair, the C3's for about $280). 

	--- Jamie Hanrahan, Kernel Mode Consulting, San Diego CA
Internet:  jeh@cmkrnl.com, hanrahan@eisner.decus.org, or jeh@crash.cts.com
Uucp:  ...{crash,eisner,uunet}!cmkrnl!jeh
From: jcm11@po.CWRU.Edu (John C. Mackey)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: My impedances don't match!
Date: 2 Jan 1993 01:06:08 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Reply-To: jcm11@po.CWRU.Edu (John C. Mackey)
NNTP-Posting-Host: hela.ins.cwru.edu


Hmmm... Okay, I, the audio fool, have yet another seemingly basic
audio question...
I just bought a Paradigm center channel speaker which is rated at 6
ohms nominal impedance, 4 ohms minimum impedance.  My Sony STR-D1090
receiver says it "accepts speakers of 8-16 ohms."  (Elsewhere in the
specs it gives dynamic power output ratings for 4 or 8 ohms.  Does that
mean the amp will accept speakers at 4 ohms, or should I just ignore that?)
Anyway, since my center speaker is only rated at 6 ohms while my amp is
designed for 8-16 ohm speakers, what's going to happen?  I'm not hearing any
audible distortion, but I have neither $600 for a new amp, nor $180 for a
new speaker.  Should I be concerned, or should the speaker be able to handle
an 8 ohm input even though it's rated for "6 ohms nominal impedance."

Thanks again, everybody...  Hopefully you won't tell me that I need to
exchange the speaker for an 8-ohm-er.  I really like the Paradigm...
-John
-- 
John C. Mackey  -  Music Composition major at Cleveland Institute O' Music
-----------------
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: bp@cs.brown.edu (Boris Putanec)
Subject: Re: Sony CDP-X111ES
Organization: Department of Computer Science, Brown University
	<1992Dec18.084412@trc.amoco.com> <1992Dec23.113904.994@cmkrnl.com>
Date: Wed, 23 Dec 1992 23:06:51 GMT

In article <1992Dec23.113904.994@cmkrnl.com> jeh@cmkrnl.com writes:

   Nor did I mention the Sony XBR tv sets, 27" and larger, which are
   among the highest priced in each size category but which can
   apparently absolutely NOT be adjusted to eliminate pincushion
   distortion.  (ask on rec.video)

Ask for a recommended 27" or 31" TV on rec.video and probably
something like 70% of the respondands will say Sony. Bashing Sony TV's
is stupid.  They have flaws, but as far as overall package (picture,
features, look, etc) they are really hard to beat.

Sony has become like BMW and Mercedes. A brand name. They can charge
more than the competition and get away with it. Sometimes they have a
truely superlative product, like the Sony's TVs/Camcorders/Recording
Walkmans or the BMW M5 or Mercedes 500SEC. Sometimes they have lemons.
The God of Marketing is very fickle indeed. Look at what happened to
BMW and Mercedes when Lexus and Infiniti build equal quality cars at
60% precent of the cost. 

I would be overjoyed if another company started beating the pants of
Sony with new and innovative products. Hasn't happened yet. We shall
all be better of when it does.

   Unfortunately, reliability and repairability are not things which
   can be evaluated when you're buying.  Manufacturers (not just Sony)
   have learned how to build equipment with subtle external cues that
   say "this unit is well made" to most shoppers, without necessarily
   building a reliable, repairable product.

Completely agree. But then, good industrial design feel is fiercly
coveted by manufacturers. Look at all the computer companies that hire
firms like frog design. Look and feel has become more important than
substance, and not just in manufacturing. ;)

Take care.

boris
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: dave@news.ccutah.edu (dave martin)
Subject: Opinions on Fosgate THX speakers?
Organization: University of Utah Computer Center
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL3
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 93 03:05:28 GMT

I am looking for info on the Fosgate (and snell or other) THX speakers.
How well do they do on music?  How accurate are the subs?
Are there other speakers in this price range that would be better?
I watch more video than listen to music, but I do do both.

dave@csulx.weber.edu (ignore the header, its probably wrong)
From: zerobeat@intacc.uucp (Ferenc Szabo)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: MiniDisc is here!
Date: 29 Dec 92 00:29:11 GMT
Organization: Inter/Access' Matrix BBS

In article <1992Dec15.143059.9149@news.cs.brandeis.edu> weitzman@chaos.cs.brandeis.edu (Adam J. Weitzman) writes:
>
A
>(c) Let's say you have a DCC with some tunes you like on it. If you want to
>    record over one in the middle with a different song, you have to redo 
>    the rest of the tape unless the times of the songs match up exactly. With 
>    the MD, it's no problem at all, like recording a file onto a floppy disc.
>    You just delete the old one and put the new one in its place. Doesn't 
>    matter how long it is (up to the total blank time of the disc, at any 
>    rate).

Hmmmm.......  It's hard to believe that the audio on MDs would be kept in
a truly random access location.  Wouldn't it be like a CD, where you *can*
randomly access any tune you like, but would have to wait out whatever
the access time is for the player?  (70ms or so????).  

However, I can imagine a clever use of the 3 second buffer being used to
truly have random access recording & playback with NO access time delay.

ANybody know anything about this???????????

ferenc
Organization: Stanford Linear Accelerator Center
Date: Wednesday, 30 Dec 1992 13:36:47 PST
From: Youngjoon Kwon     (415)926-2761 <YKWON@SLACVM.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU>
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: is pre-amp necessary for line-level input?

If I don't use a phono input, is separate preamp necessary for
line level inputs such as CD, D/A, or tape? (Of course, except for the
control functions.)

To be more specific, I am thinking of purchasing an Acurus amplifier
and I have two choices:
One is more conventional - get a pure power amp, such as A250 and a
separate line preamp, L10.
The other is to purchase a "direct-input-amp" DIA-100, which contains
passive control sections including source-switching and input attenuation.

For now, I don't think I would ever need a 250w/ch capability of A250.
The only concern I have is whether a separate line-level preamp gives
any long-term benefit to the system.  (For a short term, I don't think
I can easily hear a sonic difference between the A250/L10 and DIA-100.)

I would appreciate any help from the net fellows. (either technical or just
subjective)
                                      -Youngjoon
...................................................................
# what I said has nothing to do with Stanford Univ, SLAC, nor DOE.
From: igb@fulcrum.co.uk (Ian G Batten)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: Recorded using B&W speakers
Date: 23 Dec 92 15:04:58 GMT
Organization: Fulcrum Communications

In article <BzptF8.DD5@dcs.glasgow.ac.uk> jack@dcs.glasgow.ac.uk (Jack Campin) writes:
> Somewhere I read that recording companies in the 60s took the exactly
> opposite approach when mixing-down pop tracks: the last stage in the chain
> was the sort of speaker you'd find in a cheap trannie on the beach.  Since
> that was where their product was aimed, that was what they balanced it for.

That's current practice, I'm afraid to say.  On rock material it's a
lottery what's happening below 100 Hz.

ian
From: ch218@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Erik A. Horn)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: Sony STR-790 *problems*
Date: 1 Jan 1993 04:10:15 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)
NNTP-Posting-Host: hela.ins.cwru.edu


Don't buy Sony.  Their entire STR line seems to have 
problems.  I ran the one I had into the ground and now
have to buy a new reciever. If you can, I would take it
back.  The problem with mine though, was in the heat
sink I believe, due to the massive heat it produced,
and it constantly shorted out.  Good luck with yours
though.
From: ventura!chris@UCSD.EDU (Chris Ma)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Need comment on the Mirage speakers
Date: 29 Dec 92 01:09:17 GMT
Reply-To: ventura!chris@UCSD.EDU
Organization: Ventura Software, Inc., A XEROX Company


I went to a local professional stereo store, and looked for 
a stereo system in the $2000 range.  The owner of the store 
showed me this system listed below (this system is a little 
bit over my budget) --

     Tuner/Pre-Amp.	(Adcom GTP 500II)
     Power Amp.		(Adcom GFA 535)
     CD Player		(Adcom GCD 575)
     Speakers		(Mirage 460)

I have read some articles (from Stereo Review) about Adcom's 
products, but not Mirage speakers.  Does anybody have experience
with Mirage speakers?  Do you think this stereo system is a good 
combination?  If not, what you would suggest?

Your comment is greatly appreciated.


+=================================================================+
|   Chris Ma                 internet: ventura!chris@UCSD.EDU     |
|   Ventura Software Inc.        uucp: uunet!ucsd!ventura!chris   |
|   15175 Innovation Drive                                        |
|   San Diego, CA 92128                                           |
+=================================================================+
From: kirk@hpcc01.corp.hp.com (Kirk Lindstrom)
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1992 01:52:28 GMT
Subject: Re: Just got my new Yamaha RX-V850 -- a few questions
Organization: Shredding the water of SF Bay, HP-OCD
Newsgroups: rec.audio

>2) I tried to cheat on the center channel--by hooking the center pre-amp
>   output to an old boombox, but the signal from the boombox is VERY low.
>   I have never had this problem hooking other components to this boombox
>   through line level inputs.
>
I believe the sub out on Yamaha only puts out power below 100 Hz.  It
could be your boom-box speakers are too small to do anything with that
low a signal.

>3) The signal from the rear (Minimus-7's) is also a bit low.  I have
>   to turn the surround channel volume up to ~94-96% for acceptable
>   results.  I haven't been able to find any sensitivity numbers on
>   the Minimus-7's--could it be that low??
>
You should only hear the rear channels on some movies.  Some people say
"if you can hear the rear channel, then they are too loud".  You should
calibrate with a noise source.  Check rec.video for the FAQ on how to do
this.

>
>Thanks!
>Mike Suter

Good luck
Kirk out
From: lv0e+@andrew.cmu.edu (Lisa Laverne Vaughan)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: DAT summary FAQ?
Date: 29 Dec 92 09:50:20 GMT
Article-I.D.: andrew.kfE_jwa00WB7IBJFVz
Organization: Psychology, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA

now that I've come into some $$$$, I find myself interested in DAT's.  
There was some discussion awhile back.  Anyone keep a copy of all relevant
posts about portable DAT's they would kindly forward to me??  thankx, ...lisa
Xref: sparky rec.audio:17715 rec.video:15344
From: tlode@nyx.cs.du.edu (trygve lode)
Subject: Re: polarity inversion
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix @ U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Thu, 31 Dec 92 23:58:58 GMT

In article <1hvai7INNt2c@transfer.stratus.com> rsud@sw.stratus.com (Rajiv Sud) writes:

>	Absolute phase does matter and is easy to hear. You and other
>non-belivers might try it for yourself on something better than a mass
>market system. Better than mass market is the key (but spare me the
>arguements about not being able to afford $2000 components. If mass
>consumers weren't so complacent and demanded better they'd get it).

Can you perhaps suggest a few recordings on which absolute phase is easy
to hear?  I have several stereos, ranging from a Rotel 955 driving a 
Musical Fidelity A-1 20WPC pure class A integrated amp with a pair of
Chartwell LS3/5a speakers to one that includes the latest revision models
of EAD transport & processor, Threshold amp, and Apogee Stage speakers
(this week, anyway) and several others, including ones where I have designed
the speakers and some of the electronics.  I can hear the difference when
moving a tweeter forward or backwards an inch or two when making
an enclosure, the (frequently dramatic) difference between two high-end
amplifiers, the effects of changing speaker or listener position by an inch
or so, and the differences between different op-amps, but I've never been
able to detect absolute phase, even on the Stereophile test disks that are
specifically designed for testing this ability.

Trygve
From: andrey@cco.caltech.edu (Andre T. Yew)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: CD Sound Quality
Date: 26 Dec 1992 17:56:33 GMT
Organization: California Institute of Technology, Pasadena
NNTP-Posting-Host: punisher.caltech.edu

vanz@tragula.equinox.gen.nz (Martin Nieuwelaar) writes:

>Thanks also to Adre Yew for the text on the sampling theorem.
>Everything seems straight-forward up to the part at the end
>to do with the inverse transforms.  If I have this right, what
>you do is point sample the signal, do a Fourier transform,
>remove all components above half your sampling rate, and do
>an inverse Fourier transform.
>This is then convolved with the inverse transform of the box filter. ???

	Right so far.  I guess I should have made this clearer.
The only reason we're Fourier transforming (FTing) and
inverse-FTing back is because many times, especially in
things like this, FTing a signal and the operations we're
performing on it gives a clearer view of what's going on.

	Now, if I only said, "No, you need to interpolate the
points with a sinc, not a line", then who knows where we might
have been.  Since you clearly understand what a lowpass
filter does (sorry if I seemed demeaning of your intelligence),
I'll say this instead:  the box filter is a low pass filter.
If you multiply it against the FT of your signal, you let
only the lower frequencies pass through and you wipe out
all the higher frequencies.  Now, to see what the effect of
lowpass-filtering our signal has in the time domain, ie.
what it does to our sample points, we perform an inverse-FT
to get back to the time domain from the frequency domain.

	Just a note of caution here:  all those other people
who say you get rid of your higher frequencies in a square
wave by lowpass filtering are correct.  But, you can't
just use a normal box filter to do that, you have to use
a different filter (in fact it turns out to be something
that looks like a sinc function in frequency domain, except
it's not all real, and it gets chopped off after a certain
frequency).  This is called a zeroth-order hold (it makes
your samples look like stairsteps), and point sampling
could be called infinite-order hold.  It's a slightly
convoluted (no pun intended :) exercise to show that as
you increase the order of your interpolation, your
interpolation shape approaches a sinc, ie. point sampling.
Just more party trivia for you.

--Andre

-- 
             Andre Yew andrey@cco.caltech.edu (131.215.139.2)
Xref: sparky rec.audio:17636 rec.video:15289
From: jeh@cmkrnl.com
Newsgroups: rec.audio,rec.video
Subject: Re: Surround speakers--Out of phase vs. traditional
Date: 1 Jan 93 01:49:51 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Kernel Mode Consulting, San Diego, CA

In article <1992Dec31.143637.8584@lmpsbbs.comm.mot.com>, A10035@email.mot.com (Scott Lindsey) writes:
> It is very important to be able to control the relative volume of the
> surround speakers from the listening position. I placed the tiny 7's on
> the floor on one side and very low on a book shelf on the other side.
> The result was generally a more diffuse surround sound, but they needed to be 
> turned up a little more loudly. The surround sound effect is dramatic and
> a welcome change. The most annoying thing about surround sound is that when
> the broadcast signal doesn't support surround sound, it's almost unlistenable!

Are you sure you aren't just being fooled by the "louder is better" effect?

In many cases most or all of the perceived benefit of the "surround sound" is
that the surround speakers are turned up high enough to add additional volume. 

I've ruined the day of many a SS sales dweeb by insisting on comparing the
SS with non-surround, but with the latter being adjusted to a volume similar
to what you get with the SS speakers working.  

	--- Jamie Hanrahan, Kernel Mode Consulting, San Diego CA
Internet:  jeh@cmkrnl.com, hanrahan@eisner.decus.org, or jeh@crash.cts.com
Uucp:  ...{crash,eisner,uunet}!cmkrnl!jeh
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: billn@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com (bill nelson)
Subject: Re: Watts/channel question (Was: Sony ES vs. Sony A/V receivers)
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Company, Corvallis, Oregon USA
Date: Sat, 26 Dec 1992 06:14:21 GMT

twong@civil.ubc.ca (Thomas Wong) writes:

: Talking about watts per channel....
: I'm looking at getting a new receiver (probably one of them new A/V Pro
: Logic ones) and one of the salesguy told me that for the type of music I
: listen to, instrumentals and classical, clipping is of an issue hence I
: shouldn't get any receiver with less than 100 w/ch for the front
: channels at least. I was looking at getting a "no so expensive" unit
: with maybe up to 80 w/ch up front, maybe even down to 70 w would do?
: What do you all think about clipping? 
: 
: I was also looking at the above mentioned Sony but if it's only 75 w
: up front... and clipping is an issue, I might have to rule this one
: out.

Any salesman who tells you that you need a certain amount of power, 
without knowing what speakers you are using, the characteristics of
the listening room, and how loud you listen to the music, does not
know what he/she is talking about.

What power does your present system provide? Do you seem to run it
anywhere near rated power? Are there any indications of clipping?
If not, then you probably would be fine with the same power in a
new receiver. However, if you ever change to new speakers, then you
might need a heavier amp - assuming that the new speakers are less
efficient than the ones you currently use.

By the way, it is doubtful if you could distinguish between the
sound levels of a 70 watt amp and a 100 watt amp. Nor would the
100 watt amp give you much more protection against clipping - it
would be less than 3 db.

Bill
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro