HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: andrewb@suite.sw.oz.au (Andrew Bettison)
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
Subject: Re: Headphones for Monitoring Recording
Date: 16 Apr 92 00:37:29 GMT
Organization: Softway Pty Ltd

In <1992Apr13.141102.13182@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu> prj@gamba.lcs.mit.edu (Paul R. Johnson) writes:

> What is the rec.audio.pro wisdom on the best headphones to use for
> live recording of concerts (in my case Early Music concerts)?

I use Sennheiser HD 540 headphones when doing O.B. recordings for
an FM radio station.  Nominally flat from 20 to 20k Hz, not free-field
equalised.  This results in a very hard, bright, yet accurate sound.
In my experience this makes it easier to evaluate tonal balance
between instruments and identfy sources of intrusive environmental
noise.  They're expensive, though.

--
Andrew Bettison - Softway Pty Ltd

Phone	+61-2-698-2322	  Internet	andrewb@softway.sw.oz.au 
Fax	+61-2-699-9174	  UUCP		uunet!softway.sw.oz.au!andrewb
From: gt3281c@prism.gatech.EDU (TABLER,JOHN ALEXANDER)
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
Subject: Re: Shure SM98 mini-condensor
Date: 16 Apr 92 17:30:52 GMT
Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology

>i'm still looking for a great snare mic, and i've heard about the new-ish
>Shure SM98 mini-condensor.  has anyone out there used one?  it's designed to
>handle high SPLs (155 dB) for close mic'ing of drums. the response curve has
>a very nice presence peak around 8 KHz and is pretty flat otherwise.


  I have two of the Shure SM-98's.  They are great microphones, I have used them with a
DAT and am very imperssed with the results.  
  I have used them to mic chiors, jazz ensembles, orchestras, and as overheads for durm
kits.  However, I don't think that they are the best choice for a snare, as they do
have a problem with high SPL.

Bye 

John T.

.
   




Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
From: jrusby@darkwing.uoregon.edu (Jim T. Rusby)
Subject: Re: SHURE SM-58's Does anyone still use them???????
Organization: University of Oregon Network Services
Distribution: rec.audio.pro
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 92 17:24:17 GMT

The fact that the manufacturers continue to mention the SM58 either
directly or through inference is proof enough of the popularity of this
mic. Here at the UO School of Music, we use the 58 for our vocal jazz
ensemble. Certainly there are better mics, but these do the job.

They are very rugged, and reasonably consistent.  Mix magazine featured an
article on the most popular mics under $200 (or was it $500, I dont remember).
The 58 and  57 were both still very popular.

However,  this doesn't mean that I endorse the 58 or 57 as my favorite
microphone.  Just don't throw it away. Its a real workhorse of a PA
microphone .  The 57 is still used in many studios for miking drums, amps,
etc. Some performers are choosing to use them for their vocal recording
mics. I don't concur with this decision, but its their recording and if
they like the sound.......guess who pays the rent?
From: gt3281c@prism.gatech.EDU (TABLER,JOHN ALEXANDER)
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
Subject: Re: VCA's
Date: 16 Apr 92 20:10:42 GMT
Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology


>This company called Solid State Music (SSM) made an excellent VCA

>SSM was acquired by Precision Monolithics, which in turn, in the last
>year, was acquired by Analog Devices.  I believe Analog Devices is
>continuing the SSM line.  They are a huge company, but it may take you a
>while tao track down exactly who can send you the catalog and
>description of the device you want!



  I have the information on who to contact to obtain a catalog, aplications 
literature, and possibly a diskette of the Analog Devices SPICE model library.
  I have in front of me some SSM2220p's (low noise matched bjt's) which I
used in the design of an ultra low noise front end.  I got them through:
   
     CURRIE, PEAK and FRAZIER, INC.
     (electronic marketing specialist)
      1-800-234-0166

They were very helpful, and will have AD literature.

Bye

John T.
From: gt3281c@prism.gatech.EDU (TABLER,JOHN ALEXANDER)
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
Subject: Re: How to mic drums.
Date: 14 Apr 92 19:11:26 GMT
Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology


  I feel that to mic an instrument effectively, the INSTRUMENT must first sound good.
If it doesn't, all the micing in the world won't help (this is my 'you can't polish
a dirt-ball' theory). 
  The snare and kick are two of the most important aspects in the sound reinforcement
of a live (rock) band.  I tend to treat them with a bit of extra care. 

    Here is what I do in many cases for kick drum; 

       1) mic the front head with an AKG-212
               this gives bottom, I often roll the top end off a bit on this input.
     
       2) mic the back (beater) head with an SM-57 close to the beater. This gives a 
               high crisp attack sound, and I often roll the low end off of    
               this input. The phase of this mic should be reversed.     
       
       3) use a digital delay to double some combination of the two mics.

  In any case, I find that the above approach is especially helpful if the drummer 
has let the kick drum heads become too old.


  The snare had better sound great with no mic on it.  If it does, then I use a SM-57
from the top, and sometimes an Alisis midiverb to add a touch of gated reverb.


 I like to use limiters and compressors. I work with a lot of semi-pro musicans, and 
they often give levels which move around a lot.  I have a 12-channelcompressor./limiter
which I built. It was designed as a cell of a multiband proscessor for FM brodcasting.
I mix the drums to a sub group which goes through a compressor/limiter, pre-fader. 
This is mostly for auto-gain control, and to keep the drums from digging into the main
front of house compressor/limiter and causing the mix to 'pump'.


Bye

John T.
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
From: glantz@enable.tay1.dec.com (Mike Glantz)
Subject: Re: Speaker Enclosures for Auto
Reply-To: glantz@tay1.dec.com
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 92 15:31:13 GMT


In article <bdm1.703215909@Ra.MsState.Edu>, bdm1@Ra.MsState.Edu
(Billy D. McNair) writes:

>Hi.  I'm not sure if this is the correct group, but .....
>
>I am considering designing a speaker enclosure for my brother's
>Volkswagon Beetle ( '67 ).  Any constructive comments on the

It's not the right group. You really want rec.audio.car.
From: labella@envmsa.eas.asu.edu (DOM LABELLA)
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
Subject: Miking a Snare with a '57
Date: 12 Apr 92 21:09:00 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Arizona State University - Computer Science Dept
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41


	I'm new to this 'posting thing,' but not so new to miking snares.

	With respect to using two mic's (one on top and one on the bottom)
to mic a snare drum, I recommend running the two mic's out of phase.
Depending on the orientation of the mics (i.e. how "face to face," with the
snare in between them, the mics are), they will begin to cancel each other
out (not a good way to obtain a fat snare sound!) unless the phase on one
mic has been reversed.

	I don't recommend changing the phase of a microphone by rewiring it
internally.  Instead, wire up a simple adaptor and 'cross wire' the signals
in question.  This way, the phase on any mic can be easily reversed without
creating a "special" mic.  

	Again, depending on the orientation of the mics, the degree to
which they cancel each other out may or may not be a problem.  Using two
mics on a snare can produce some good results, and when I have done this,
I've always run the mics 180 degrees out of phase with one another.


	Hope this helps....
From: jgj@ssd.csd.harris.com (Jeff Jackson)
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
Subject: Re: Alesis ADAT?
Date: 16 Apr 92 20:00:36 GMT
Organization: I would rather be windsurfing.
In-reply-to: v035550@stortek.com's message of 15 Apr 92 02:47:25 GMT


The ADAT is being discussed in rec.music.makers and rec.music.synth.
--
============================================================================
Jeffrey Glen Jackson  _|_Satan jeered, "You're dead meat Jesus, I'm gonna
jgj@ssd.csd.harris.com |     bust you up tonight."
x5120                  | Jesus said, "Go ahead, make my day."
                   ~~~~~~~~~ -- Carman, "The Champion"
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
From: jmsellen@watdragon.waterloo.edu (John M. Sellens)
Subject: Re: Matching Microphones to DAT
Organization: DCS Software Activists Squad
Date: Sun, 5 Apr 1992 22:19:30 GMT

In article <1992Mar31.175649.8163@b11.ingr.com> medin@catbyte.b11.ingr.com writes:
|Yeah, it can be embarrassing to use a balanced-to-single end adapter that
|expects pin 2 to be hot and instead finds it common'ed to ground...
|Of course, a transformer would avoid this together with providing
|ground loop protection.

Or, along with the XlR gender-benders that everyone carries, one could carry
XLR phase reverse adapters that swap 2 and 3 between a male and female
connector.

|I find a bigger frustration is the installations (found in churches
|most often) where all permanent panel jacks (input and output) have the same
|sex XLR connectors with the argument, "Well, it doesn't matter which end
|of the cable we plug in where." While cables with the same sex connector
|on each end can be viewed as a convenience, it usually means lots
|of adaptoring SOMEWHERE and occasional inputs and outputs looped
|or cross-wired. Then, most of the cables themselves are homebuilts due to the
|difficulty of finding same-sex cables.

I know of an amateur theatre group that had two adapter cables, one with
two male connectors, and one with two female connectors.  They were u-ground,
15 amp AC cables.  (Dismantled as soon as someone with half a brain saw them.)
From: chrisc@gold.gvg.tek.com (Chris Christensen)
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
Subject: Re: Balanced lines to unbalanced...
Date: 7 Apr 92 17:32:03 GMT
Organization: Grass Valley Group, Grass Valley, CA

In article <kjb.702642934@godzilla> kjb@ (Kendall Bennett) writes:
>I need to convert a number of balanced lines to unbalanced and vice versa.
>There are a number of ways to do this, one of which is to guy a number of
>small inline DI's containing a simple transformer to do the trick for 
>you. The other is to get an active DI box to do the trick.

You do not need a transformer to convert a balanced line to an
unbalanced line. Unless you really want to!

If you are connecting to a balanced input, first try connecting the unbalanced
lines center conductor to pin 2, the shield to pin 3.  if there is no
hum run with it.  If there is hum try connecting pin 3 to pin 1.  If
there is still hum you have a problem....

If you are connecting to an active balanced output, connect the center
conductor of the unbalanced connection to pin 2 and the shield to pin
1.

If the balanced output is a transformer, ground pin 3.

In a rare case the active balanced output may perform best with a
termination resistor.  Put this resistor between pin 2 and 3. 10k, 600
or 150 ohm depends on the design output impedance.

If the output is an active balanced srevo output then you can ground
pin 3 also but it (usually, see above) isn't necessary.

>I have two questions. Firstly, what is the transformer that they use for
>the conversion? I want to be able to build a box with approx. 8 DI's in
>it, rather than have 8 inline versions hanging around (oh yeah, what 
>is the impendance of balanced lines and unbalanced lines?). Secondly
>when converting from balanced to unbalanced you can get the signal by 
>simply ignoring the cold line and taking the hot line directly through
>as your signal. Someone told me that I should ground the cold line, which
>in my opion could cause earth loops. Can I do this or do I need to go
>through a transformer?

1.  If you want to convert balanced to unbalanced with a transformer
use a 1:1 ratio transformer.

1a.  The impedance of balanced and unbalanced lines vary fron low Z to
high Z.  It depends on what you are doing.

A mic input for a "600" ohm mic is usually about 5k ohms. A bridging
input for mic or line will be 25k ohms or higher.

An active output stage will be between 30 and 200 ohms actual.

A transformer input will  be about 6k ohms or so.

A transformer output will "typically" be 600 ohms or 150 ohms
depending on the rated output impedance ('cept for the certain
European countries that like 2k ohms....).

2.  You can't ignore the "cold" connection unless it's an active
balanced output.

I hope this info helps.
-- 
Chris Christensen                  The opinions I express are my own,
chrisc@gold.gvg.tek.com            and sometimes they are wrong!
916-478-3419 FAX 916-478-3887      After all, I AM only human.
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
From: data@cs1.bradley.edu (Mark Hall)
Subject: Re: Miking a Snare with a '57
Organization: Digilog Technologies : Music/Midi software that works for you.
Distribution: usa
Date: 14 Apr 92 07:04:42 GMT

In <12APR199214092115@envmsa.eas.asu.edu> labella@envmsa.eas.asu.edu (DOM LABELLA) writes:

>	I don't recommend changing the phase of a microphone by rewiring it
>internally.  Instead, wire up a simple adaptor and 'cross wire' the signals
>in question.  This way, the phase on any mic can be easily reversed without
>creating a "special" mic.  

How would one go about doing this?  Just swapping the signal in the XLR
connector?  Would that work properly?
--
| I'nt: data@{bucs1,buhub,heartland}.bradley.edu, al632@cleveland.freenet.edu |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| F'net : 1:232/28 1:2250/9  (fname.lname@f<node>.n<net>.z<zone>.fidonet.org) |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| "He sees you when you're sleeping, he knows when you're awake, but Captain, |
| it makes no sense!"    "But Spock, with Santa, ALL things are possible!"    |
| Kirk and Spock...Hallmark Greeting Cards                                    |
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
From: kludge@grissom.larc.nasa.gov ( Scott Dorsey)
Subject: Re: Headphones for Monitoring Recording
Organization: NASA Langley Research Center And Storm Door Company
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1992 18:14:02 GMT

In article <4272@gold.gvg.tek.com> chrisc@gold.gvg.tek.com (Chris Christensen) writes:
>In article <1992Apr13.141102.13182@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu> prj@gamba.lcs.mit.edu 
>(Paul R. Johnson) writes:
>>What is the rec.audio.pro wisdom on the best headphones to use for
>>live recording of concerts (in my case Early Music concerts)?
>>I need ones that have closed/isolated earpieces so I don't
>>disturb other people (I'll be in the audience), and that give an
>>accurate representation of the sound (of course).
>
>I have used my Sony MDV-V6's for many years in the manner which you
>describe.  I have yet to be dissapointed.

I will second that.  The MDR-V6 has a very good sound to it overall, and
while the high end is very harsh, it's also extended enough that you won't
miss anything.  I don't think I could live with the sound of the V6 for
very extended listening without irritation (after about three hours, the
shrill high end starts to get on my nerves), but they are great monitors.
--scott
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
From: STATRAA@YaleVM.YCC.Yale.Edu
Subject: Need sturdy CD Player's
Organization: Yale University
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 92 01:30:07 EDT

I need to purchase two CD players for use in a pretty low quality sound
reinforcement application.  My primary concers are (in descending order
of importance):  price, durability, tracking stability, handy DJ
features, sound quality.  Sound quality is least important since the
rest of the system is pretty rough.  Price IS very important, since I'll
be working on a limited budget.  Does ANYONE have any brand/model
recommendations?  I'm not looking for industrial commercial players (too
spendy), but rather probably low-fi consumer gear that just happens to
have bullet-proof construction and tracking (does this EXIST?)... Thanks
in advance....
 
--
  ==================================================
  [   Travis Stansbury, Yale University - ES '94   ]
  [   statraa@yalevm.ycc.yale.edu                  ]
  ==================================================
 
Xref: sparky rec.audio.pro:410 comp.dsp:1087
From: ee88jmf@brunel.ac.uk (J M Fielder)
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro,comp.dsp
Subject: Re: Article on Audio Restoration Process
Keywords: snap crackle pop
Date: 8 Apr 92 16:43:43 GMT
Reply-To: ee88jmf@brunel.ac.uk.brunel.ac.uk (J M Fielder)
Organization: Brunel University, Uxbridge, UK

In article <1992Apr2.233240.10213@monu6.cc.monash.edu.au> pringle@yoyo.cc.monash.edu.au (GLen Pringle) writes:
>When I was in London I saw in the Science Museum a display on an
>old wax cylinder with the voice of Queen Victoria on it which they
>restored (to a degree).  Much of it is still indecipherable, but I
>think they actually used a laser to read the tracks.

I saw a similar thing at an exhibition at Canary Warf in London Docklands.
Not Queen Victoria this time but some early music recording.

To say the recording was bad is an understatement, but it was made even
worse by the fact that the laser passed through a tank full of gold fish which
stopped the laser randomly! It was all in the name of Art apparently :-)

On cleaning up old records, what do people make of putting green ink around
the edge of CD's to make them sound better? Maybe you should just put pink ink
around the edge of old wax cylinders and forget about using a DSP etc. to
clean it up :-)

Justin M Fielder
ee88jmf@brunel.ac.uk
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
From: bj251@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Peter E. Dinin)
Subject: Re: Headphones for Monitoring Recording
Reply-To: bj251@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Peter E. Dinin)
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, OH (USA)
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 92 02:03:45 GMT


In a previous article, chrisc@gold.gvg.tek.com (Chris Christensen) says:

>In article <1992Apr13.141102.13182@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu> prj@gamba.lcs.mit.edu 
>(Paul R. Johnson) writes:
>>What is the rec.audio.pro wisdom on the best headphones to use for
>>live recording of concerts (in my case Early Music concerts)?
>>I need ones that have closed/isolated earpieces so I don't
>>disturb other people (I'll be in the audience), and that give an
>>accurate representation of the sound (of course).
>
>I have used my Sony MDV-V6's for many years in the manner which you
>describe.  I have yet to be dissapointed.
>
The SONYs are good for this application since they are efficient enough
so you can hear your tape monitor over the actual performance.  However,
I like to bring a second pair of phones, the AKG 240.  They have a better
sense of space to them and they aren't terribly expensive ($110). 
The main drawback is that they aren't very efficient and I have to rely
on the SONY for performance monitoring.  The AKGs are great for evaluating
your sound check.

-- 
Peter E. Dinin  bj251@cleveland.Freeet.Edu
From: lionel@cs.city.ac.uk (Lionel Tun)
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
Subject: Re: Headphones for Monitoring Recording
Date: 15 Apr 92 13:38:41 GMT
Organization: City University, London

In article <1992Apr13.181402.10585@news.larc.nasa.gov> kludge@grissom.larc.nasa.gov ( Scott Dorsey) writes:
>In article <4272@gold.gvg.tek.com> chrisc@gold.gvg.tek.com (Chris Christensen) writes:
>>In article <1992Apr13.141102.13182@mintaka.lcs.mit.edu> prj@gamba.lcs.mit.edu 
>>(Paul R. Johnson) writes:
>>>What is the rec.audio.pro wisdom on the best headphones to use for
>>>live recording of concerts (in my case Early Music concerts)?
>>>I need ones that have closed/isolated earpieces so I don't
>>>disturb other people (I'll be in the audience), and that give an
>>>accurate representation of the sound (of course).
>>
>>I have used my Sony MDV-V6's for many years in the manner which you
>>describe.  I have yet to be dissapointed.
>
>I will second that.  The MDR-V6 has a very good sound to it overall, and
>while the high end is very harsh, it's also extended enough that you won't
>miss anything.  I don't think I could live with the sound of the V6 for
>very extended listening without irritation (after about three hours, the
>shrill high end starts to get on my nerves), but they are great monitors.
>--scott

For a modern day Sony try the Sony MDR-CD550. I use it in live
recording and it is an excellent monitor. Very bulky and totally
enclosed. The bass is very good and the treble is not harsh.
Costs 50 pounds in the UK. PS Not the same as the MDR-CD555 -
more expensive and not so good.

--
Lionel Tun   (lionel@cs.city.ac.uk)
Vision Group, City University, London, EC1V 0HB. 071-477 8000 x 3889
From: chrisc@gold.gvg.tek.com (Chris Christensen)
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
Subject: Ampex Tape Machine History
Keywords: MM1100
Date: 6 Apr 92 23:57:30 GMT
Organization: Grass Valley Group, Grass Valley, CA

I am researching the wills and ills of the "vintage*" Ampex MM1100.
Specifically from someone who may have been "out there"  when thay
came out (Bill ya out there?).

I have spoken to some former Ampex Audio Div types who worked there
and sold 'em.

From what I am told the MM1100 was a basic work horse machine that was
stable and reliable,  it did not have autolocator tupe capablilties.

The sucessor was the MM1200 wich had all those additional bells and
whistles including the ability to automatically, and at random, go into
record.......

My needs are simple and the price is reasonable.......

*= OLD!

-- 
Chris Christensen                  The opinions I express are my own,
chrisc@gold.gvg.tek.com            and sometimes they are wrong!
916-478-3419 FAX 916-478-3887      After all, I AM only human.
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro,rec.audio.highend
From: kludge@grissom.larc.nasa.gov ( Scott Dorsey)
Subject: Meeting of two worlds
Originator: kludge@grissom.larc.nasa.gov
Organization: NASA Langley Research Center And Storm Door Company
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 1992 13:33:30 GMT

   I don't ordinarily do any rock stuff, but recently I was asked to cut a
demo tape for a group called the "Nembutol Packers" by a friend of mine.  It
was an odd experience.

   We set the band up, and did a straight recording with a single mike pair
and no vocals, using the outside tracks of a 1/2" 3-track deck.  I was going
with the B&K mikes with a cardioid pattern, and an NOS configuration.  I
started with something close to ORTF but kept widening the separation to
get more ambiance.  There was a single drum set, one electric guitar, and 
one electric bass.  It took quite a bit of positioning to get the bass amp
so that it didn't sound too boomy; I eventually wound up pointing it toward
the back wall and placing some foam around the sides.  The guitar amp was no
problem at all, except to set the levels so it blended in well with the
drum set (which of course could not be altered in level).

   After cutting all of the instrumentals, I gave the vocalist a mike and
recorded all the vocals onto the center track with sel-synch.  We fiddled
around with different mikes and eventually settled on an ancient Shure 
ribbon mike.  In this case, I put the mike fairly close in, and put the
vocalist in the hallway across from the bathroom for a slight echo.  It
was much closer to a slap echo effect than a reverb, but it wasn't offensive
sounding (like the tape echo in Great Balls of Fire is).

Mixdown was done on a 1950's vintage Collins board, basically just potting
the vocal to the center and adjusting the level on the vocal.

   The overall effect was pretty good.  The musicians were shocked that it
actually sounded like they did on stage, and they enjoyed playing a lot more
than they would have if they had been laying down individual tracks.  The
vocals weren't spectacular; I would have liked to have had a decent plate
reverb hanging around, as well as to be able to record the vocal in stereo.
The four-track Scully amplifiers are still piled up in the living room waiting
to be worked on...
--scott