HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: guru@camelot.bradley.edu (Jerry Whelan)
Subject: Re: Sony STR-790 *problems*
Organization: The Smelly Ditch
Date: Wed, 6 Jan 93 06:54:44 GMT

In article <C0Ey1L.KG9@news.cso.uiuc.edu> ptg2351@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Panos Tamamidis ) writes:

-}  Now, since SONYs can handle two pairs of 8 ohm speakers, then two pairs of
-}  8 ohms speakers connected with this receiver will be like having two 
-}  resistances in parallel.  This will give a total resistance of 4 ohms!!
-}  Which means that regular SONYs can handle impendances lower than 8 ohms.

	The only problem with this analysis is that Sony amplifiers
(at least in the STR series) connect the A+B speakers in series,
not in parallel.  Don't believe this weirdness?  Try it yourself,
hook up only the A speaker pair and set switch to A+B, there will
be no sound on a Sony and plenty of sound on most any other brand
of amplifier.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
``written by a drunken insane pathological liar''        guru@stasi.bradley.edu
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: ianchan@leland.Stanford.EDU (Ian Hin Yun Chan)
Subject: tuner kit
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 93 20:26:08 GMT

I'd like to build a reasonably good FM tuner (AM optional). Does anyone know
a good book/article/kit out there that will help me out?
- ian
From: gmaltby@unpcs1.cs.unp.ac.za (Gavin Maltby)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: How can different digital cables sound different?
Date: Sun, 10 Jan 1993 10:45:41 GMT
Organization: University of Natal, Pietermaritzburg, South Africa
NNTP-Posting-Host: pc019.cc.unp.ac.za

In article <3340373@hpcc01.corp.hp.com> kirk@hpcc01.corp.hp.com (Kirk Lindstrom) writes:

>To add gas to the flame war:
[some deleted]
>Is a digital cable worth more than $30 to me?  Probably not.  I'd
>build my own or replace the SONY cables every so often if they are
>moved alot.

>Is an analog interconnect (1meter) worth $200 or more to me?  Not
>sure yet.  I can't hear any differences between $50 and $200 cables,
>but I'm still trying to be open minded and will listen to some more
>before I run off at the mouth.

>Is 12 AWG Monster Cable @ $1/ft better than 18 or 16 AWG speaker
>cable?  YES, YES, YES.

>How about more expensive speaker cable?  Probably not - haven't
>heard anything yet with ABX that would convince me to upgrade.

>Kirk out

In my experience, trying to tell the difference between cables in a small
system was pointless.  I guess there were to many other faults for the
subtle differnece they make to show through.  But try it on a really
revealing system and you're in business.  Interconnnects have always had
rather subtle influence on my sound; speaker cables seem to make a bigger
difference.  Still, once you're past very cheap cable it seems that you have
to get enormously expensive (solid silver etc) cables before things are
substantially improved; otherwise you seem to be trading one aspect of sound
quality for another.  

Anyway, my point is that you should be sure to make your comparisons on
as bigger system as you can lay your hands on.

Cheers

Gavin


Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: huff@hercules.rtp.dg.com (Jerry Huff)
Subject: Re: How Hear This Opinions
Date: Fri, 8 Jan 93 18:14:19 GMT
Organization: Data General Corporation, Research Triangle Park, NC


I have been looking into NHT speakers for the last month or so and so far it has been mostly positive.  I'm interested in setting up a Dolby ProLogic home theater system and two local mid-high end audio shops enthusiastically recommend the VT-1 Home Theater system by NHT consisting of the VT-1 towers, VT-1C center channel, HDP-1 dipole surrounds and the SW2P powered subwoofer.  I have only had a limited time to audition the system but my first impression was favorable.  I have listened to the 1as and 1.3s 


both of which sounded very good.  The 1.3s are around 2db less sensitive than the 1as which made it difficult for me to objectively a/b them.  My final impression was that the 1.3s were more natural in the midrange and up.  Both speakers lack the bass that I desire.  I did go to the library and grep for NHT.  I read about a half dozen articles dating back to 1988 when NHT was founded and they were all very positive.  Here is the address and phone number incase you need it:

	Now Hear This, Inc.
	537 Stone Rd. Bldg. "E"
	Benicia, CA 94510
	1-800-NHT-9993
From: rmp@crashnburn.Eng.Sun.COM (Richard Pottorff)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: long patch cord TV-to-receiver ?
Date: 6 Jan 1993 00:15:16 GMT
Organization: Sun
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: crashnburn

In article <1992Dec26.055656.701@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com> billn@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com (bill nelson) writes:
mjv8557@eafs000.ca.boeing.com (Mark J. Vandiver) writes:
: 
: > cable to run under the floor (in the basement ceiling).  I went to my local
: > radio shack and bought some raw two-conductor with sheild cable, and four of
: > the solder-type RCA plugs.  I ran the cable, wired the plugs, and under the
: > advice of the radio shack guy, did not connect the shielding to anything
: > (this would have been physically difficult anyhow) on the RCA connectors.
: 
: > Problem:  I now have a noticibly loud "hum" along with the sound coming from
: > the TV (hum is only through receiver, not from the TV speakers at all).
: > Is my problem related to 1) the length, 2) the fact that the
: > sheilding is not connected, or 3) that fact that I had to physically run the
: > cable alongside household AC wiring for about 10' of the 35'?
: 
: No! No! No!!!. You must use the sheilded part of the cable! Connect it to
: the outer RCA connector on both th eleft and right side. This provides a 
: ground shield for all wires. Check to see if you are parrallel to a house
: wire in close proximity. That will induce hum as well, but not as much as
: with an unsheilded cable.

I would ground the shield at one end only. Otherwise, you may end up with
what is called a ground loop. We encounter the problem all the time in our
telecommunications cabling.

Bill

I concurr with Bill.  The current hum is definitely due to your 10' run
in proximity to AC wiring.  Grounding one side of the shield will shunt
the induced EMF to ground, and prevent the possibility of ground loops.

I've seen this happen in computer hardware, as well.

Rick
--
Stolen signature:
GILLETTE'S PRINCIPLE:
  "If you want to make people angry, lie. If you want to make
   them absolutely livid with rage, tell the truth."
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: kong@leland.Stanford.EDU (Kong Kritayakirana)
Subject: Stereophileeeeeeeeeeeeee
Organization: DSG, Stanford University, CA 94305, USA
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 93 02:53:07 GMT

From: cal@gsbux1.uchicago.edu (Cal Lott)
 
>whereas Stereophile reviewers will not
>hesitate to write that they think component "x" is clearly better
>and/or a better value. Stereophile also has clearly stated criteria
>for their reviews.
 
That's exactly why I don't buy into what they say. Their review "philosopphy" 
is the most pathetic thing I've ever seen when people make arguments. Robert 
Pirsig and his "Zen" book is their god where the arguments are based. Not to 
say that Pirsig is bad, but they miss his point entirely.
 
>        Besides, Stereo Review doesn't have Corey Greenberg! 8-)
 
Stereophile doesn't have Rodriguez. He's a lot more entertaining than CG IMO, 
although I find pretty much everything else (except maybe their classified 
ads) in Stereo Review useless.
----------------------------------------------
Kong Kritayakirana  (kong@leland.stanford.edu)
Remotely reading and posting to rec.audio from
a nice beach somewhere in south pacific.  Damn
the technology that helps  us to get in touch.
----------------------------------------------

Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: bill@bilver.uucp (Bill Vermillion)
Subject: Re: Eumig Parts?? - Cassette Deck FL1000
Organization: W. J. Vermillion - Winter Park, FL
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 02:05:20 GMT

In article <QfGkF=C00WB_E8FUUt@andrew.cmu.edu> eb15+@andrew.cmu.edu (Edward D. Berger) writes:
>I'm looking for a source of mechanical parts for an Eumig FL1000 cassette
>deck.  The capstan bearing appears to be worn out.  The heads are in good
>shape, so it would otherwise be worth reparing the machine.  I know the
>company stopped producing consumer audio products, but I think they may
>still exist in some capacity, or have sold their inventory of parts, etc.
>to a third party.

>Any information would be helpful.
>Thanks in Advance.

What a great cassette player that was.       For those who have never
seen one it was a rack mount, had an auto-locator that could return to
the second on the tape you marked, and was CPU controller and could be
controlled by a computer.  Originally designed for radio station
automation.  About $1500 new in 1979.   It's the only cassette recorder
I ever liked, except the Nakamichi Dragon.

Now the bad news.  Eumig went bankrupt in the 1980/81 great inflation
wars.

A friend of mine had the same problem and knows the name of a place
that did some work on it.  They wound up building new captant bearings
from what I understand.

Try (407) 292-0021 - that's PARC Studios in Orlando.  Ask for Andy
DeGanahl.    He's the friend of mine.    He had one too and told me
about the work.


-- 
Bill Vermillion - bill@bilver.oau.org  bill@bilver.uucp
                - ..!{peora|tous|tarpit}!bilver!bill
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: demaine@ee.ualberta.ca (Cal Demaine)
Subject: Re: Those b*s*a*ds in the white van - I hope they got them.
Organization: University Of Alberta, Edmonton Canada
Date: Tue, 12 Jan 1993 23:47:39 GMT

philip@think.com (Philip Mucci) writes:

>	I got taken quite a number a years ago by the very same people.

-- Stuff about guys in a white van selling speakers off the tailgate,
claiming that they are something they're not --

>will probably let them off, so they can keep selling they crap. They've
>been doing this for over TEN YEARS NOW! 

Obvious this is an international company, because a couple of years ago,
I was solicited by gentlemen with a similar story...

Speakers, expensive, hot, deal now, cash, RIPOFF, etc.

Anyway, since this was in Canada, I'm impressed that these folks are into
the international marketplace in such a big way.  Free trade really _has_
opened up some important new business opporunities.

Of course, I know these were the same guys, because there were driving
the customary... white van!

   - Cal



-- 
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  - Cal Demaine                   | "You shot him in the back!"                 
    (demaine@bode.ee.ualberta.ca) |    "His back was to me!"  - El Diablo    
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: b-grant@nwu.edu (Barry Grant)
Subject: A couple of lesser known hifi mags
Followup-To: rec.audio
Organization: Northwestern University
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 18:43:25 GMT

Someone recently asked about audio magazines. Let me mention a couple of
somewhat eccentricones. 

InTerms of Music. This is put out by two guys in Chicago, both of whom I
know. It's fun to read, a little light on production values, and emphasizes
music reviews. 

ITOM  
PO Box 268590 
Chicago, IL 60626 
312-262-5918

Positive Feedback. Put out by the Oregon Triode Society, but covers all
sorts of equipment, not just tube stuff. Many of the people associated with
the magazine make or sell equipement, e.g., Bob carver, Mike Moffat, George
Tice, Dick Pierce, so you get a feel of being "in the know." Some article
are technical; cartoons are pretty good.

Oregon Triode Society 
4106 N.E. Glisan
Portland, OR 97232

I subscribe to both. ITOM is always very late. I suspect PF is also seldom
on schedule, but I've only gotten one issue so far.

Tower Records carries both.


Barry Grant
Northwestern Univesity
Evanston, Illinois
b-grant@nwu.edu
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: ccrayc@uxmail.ust.hk (Raymond Chau)
Subject: Any comments/information on Motif MS1001
Organization: Hong Kong University of Science and Technology
Date: Sat, 9 Jan 1993 03:50:29 GMT


I'm considering buying an Amp and will audition Aragon 4004 and Motif MS1001
earlier next week. Do anyone have any experience with the seldom heard MS1001
(or MS2001) ? Better still, do anyone have experience modifying any of the 
above amps ?

Thanks in advance for any reply.
:-)
_Ray  
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: tlode@nyx.cs.du.edu (trygve lode)
Subject: Re: Wanted to know bi-amp speakers advantages
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix @ U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Sat, 9 Jan 93 07:59:19 GMT

In article <C0Eq4u.BCE@world.std.com> DPierce@world.std.com (Richard D Pierce) writes:
>>>     I have a pair of m-1 mirage speakers. It bi-amp.
>>>Can anyone tell me what's the advantage of a bi-am speakr?
>>
>
>For example, there are classes of response functions that are
>unachievable with passive circuits. This is probably the only real
>advantage of active networks, but one that no commercial system takes
>advantage of, to the best of my knowledge. It's not clear if these classes
>of functions are useful to a particular loudspeaker application or not.

[rest deleted]

I recall hearing a while back on rec.audio that it was possible to
design an active crossover (though not a passive one) that had perfect
phase response throughout the passband; is this among the things you're
speaking of above?  (If so, I'm curious about how it's done--after reading
it on rec.audio last time, I've asked a number of EEs that I know and
none of them were familliar with it.)

For the home tinkerer like myself who lacks Dick Pierce's expertise and
test equipment, active crossovers are often an easier approach; for
example, by placing the crossover upstream of the amplifiers, I know
that the crossover will be driving a relatively well-behaved load, which
simplifies the design somewhat.  Since the crossover components aren't
going to have to deal with either high voltages or currents, keeping a
stock of parts to use to change filter types and values is easier and
it's cheaper to get them in higher precision values.

Something else that I've done on occasion is to combine an active
crossover with a passive preamp--using the crossover to "buffer" the
preamp output, allowing me to use a fairly high-value pot and still
not have to worry too much about the cable lengths and the input 
impedence of the amplifiers.

Incidentally, some of the recent speakers with active crossovers that
I've whipped up I've tried using bessel filters instead of butterworth or L-R
types with, I thought, reasonably good results.  Provided that the drivers
are used well within their operating limits, is there a reason that 
I so rarely see bessel filters used for this purpose?

Trygve 
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: DPierce@world.std.com (Richard D Pierce)
Subject: Re: Bose Speakers
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 23:11:37 GMT

In article <1993Jan11.193057.9492@tc.fluke.COM> strong@tc.fluke.COM (Norm Strong) writes:
>In article <726650872.AA00128@ship.wimsey.bc.ca> Matt.Ion@p106.f7040.n153.z1.ship.wimsey.bc.ca (Matt Ion) writes:
>}I hear JBL burns in its large sub drivers by hanging them in an anechoic
>}chamber, hooking them up to 120VAC/60Hz and running them for 24 hours. V^2/R
>}or 120^2/8 gives you about 1800W power dissipation, CONSTANT.
>
>The latter is probably apochryphal; when I was young it was Altec that
>supposedly did this (and the drivers were 16 ohms.)
>
>As for the Bose, how do they achieve their power limit?  Anyone in
>rec.audio really know?  My guess is a PTC thermistor.  It's a cinch that
>the bare drivers can't dissipate that much heat. 

They do so because the impedance of the speakers at 60 Hz is pretty high
(their system resonance is still higher, as I can recall), so not much
power is dissipated. Presuming about 250 watts total, each driver need
only see about 30 watts, which a small driver can do for a minute or so
(but the system doth make a fearful noise unto the heavens, to be sure!).

Now, having seen that the Bose can do this little trick, who the hell cares?

-- 
|                Dick Pierce                |
|    Loudspeaker and Software Consulting    |
| 17 Sartelle Street   Pepperell, MA  01463 |
|       (508) 433-9183 (Voice and FAX)      |
From: kirk@hpcc01.corp.hp.com (Kirk Lindstrom)
Date: Thu, 7 Jan 1993 16:31:52 GMT
Subject: Re: A receiver as a wake-up alarm?
Organization: Shredding the water of SF Bay, HP-OCD
Newsgroups: rec.audio

>Is it possible to use a stereo receiver as a wake-up alarm?
>
>I have a Nikko receiver with remote control in my bedroom.  It seems
>not too far-fetched to imagine a generic, inexpensive bedside alarm
>clock that will send a signal to the receiver to turn it on at a preset
>time.  Does such a device exist, or did I just give away an idea that
>will be the invention of the decade? :-)
>--
>Rouben Rostamian
----------
I did this for a bit using one of those lamp controllers people use to
turn lamps on and off to keep intruders away while they are on vacation.
Costs $5 on sale.

Kirk out
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: flower@rtsg.mot.com (Tom Flower)
Subject: Polk RM3000 Sat./Subwf System
Organization: Motorola Inc., Cellular Infrastructure Group
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 22:19:23 GMT

 

  Any comments or recommendations on the Polk RM3000 Satellite/Subwoofer system?
  I listened to this system and found it very comparable to traditional boxed
  speaker pairs; something not found in the Bose, Infinity, Energy, or Boston
  systems.  The RM3000 systems seems to have a very smooth cross-over.  The other
  systems seem to heavy and more efficient in the high and middle frequencies with 
  subwoofers that don't provide a balanced output (less efficient) at the low frequencies.

  I'd much rather get the Definitive Technology BP10's but the wife isn't to crazy 
  about the size of them.  Another condender on my list is the Paradigm 7seMkII.
  The RM3000 doesn't sound too bad thought.

  Any opinions or experience would be appreciated
 
                                        Thanks,    
                                        Tom Flower -> flower@rtsg.mot.com

Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: DPierce@world.std.com (Richard D Pierce)
Subject: Re: How can different digital cables sound different?
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA
Date: Tue, 5 Jan 1993 16:21:34 GMT

In article <C0DCtn.4vL@CAM.ORG> pascal@CAM.ORG (Pascal Gosselin) writes:
>
>Rise and fall times have to do with TRANSISTORS, NOT CABLES!!!!
>

Nonsense, rise and fall times are related directly to bandwidth, no matter
how that bandwidth is achieved. For example, take a signal that has
precisely 0 rise and fall times, then stuff it through a simple RC filter
of, say, 50 ohms series and 100 pF parallel capacitance, then tell me you
see 0 rise and fall times on the outout.

>
>If you stay within the specs of the respective lan's topology, you
>should be getting error-free transmissions 99.99999% of the time. Collisions
>are another story, and aren't effected by cabling (I have installed my
>fair share of LANs). 
>

Take it from someone who is heavily involved in the design of a
professional digital audio editing workstation. An error-free rate of
99.99999% implies a sample error once every 10 million samples which, at
44.1 kHz sample rate stereo implies a wrong sample once every 113 seconds.
If we delivered our product with that kind of error rate, the customers
would have every right to reject the product. Say the one sample you got
wrong has the most significant bit flipped, the means you'll get a one
sample polarity reversal. That will manifest itself as quite and audible
click.

The only figure that is acceptable to our customer base is an error free
rate of precisely 100.000000000000%. nothing less is acceptable. We've
spent literally tens of thousands of hours making sure the system achieves
and maintains that spec.

As someone else pointed out, while errors coming of the media are
corrected for, that's not necessarily true of transmission errors. From my
own experience, less than optimum cables that had pretty horrific
microphonics problems would cause very audible errors on an outboard DAC I
was reviewing. Simple acoustical pickup was enough to trigger it. In some
cases the DAC lost synch and went into SAFE mode. Simply swapping the
cable was sufficient to remove all audible effects.

-- 
|                Dick Pierce                |
|    Loudspeaker and Software Consulting    |
| 17 Sartelle Street   Pepperell, MA  01463 |
|       (508) 433-9183 (Voice and FAX)      |
From: znpt01@trc.amoco.com (Norman P. Tracy)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: More Sony MZ-1 weirdness
Date: 12 Jan 93 15:08:01 GMT
Article-I.D.: trc.1993Jan12.090801
Organization: Amoco Production Company, Tulsa Research
Originator: znpt01@gpss43


In article <1993Jan9.204055.25877@nstn.ns.ca>, daniel@nstn.ns.ca (Daniel MacKay) writes:
>
>  - I wish I knew what the "Plug In Power" notation under the stereo mic
>    jack means.  Is it SonyTalk for some specific feature?
>
>    I'm shopping for a reasonable
> priced mic for it.  May try the Rat Shack stereo mic- it's a small loss if
> I hate it.  Apparently Aiwa makes a good value stereo mic as well.  If
> anyone has any suggestions -- DAT people I assume would want more or less
> the same thing -- I'd love to hear them.
> --
> Daniel MacKay					daniel@nstn.ns.ca
> Homo habilis					Nova Scotia, Canada
> 
> 

The Plug In Power jack provides a DC voltage (3 volts?) used to run electret
condenser microphones.  The TCD-D3 DATman has the same jack.  Anybody out there
in netland know of a source for the smaller than 1/8" plug that fits this jack?
Failing that do you have a Sony mic with the power jack in question (NOT the
audio signal plug on 1/8" standard) that you could measure and share the size
with me to aid in the hunt.  Just to keep things complex Sony also has products
like the TCD-WMD6 WalkmanPro with mic power on the same 1/8" jack as the audio
signal.  So mic power options become: 1) internal battery 2) from deck on 1/8"
audio jack 3) from deck with audio on 1/8" jack and power on second jack.

Despite the complexity I recommend Sony's little M/S stereo mics for use with
these and other portable recorders.  With prices starting around $75 (and up,
way up if you go to the Pro division) and small, convenient set-up they are
an excellent product for the occasional live recordest.  Don't compare with
a pair of B&K 4006s (not many mics do) but you save $2725 plus the cost of a
48v power supply :-).

Norman Tracy
znpt01@trc.amoco.com
Newsgroups: rec.audio,rec.radio.shortwave
From: wasg@cs.rice.edu (Eric Salituro)
Subject: Sony mini-component stereo w/shortwave?
Followup-To: rec.radio.shortwave
Organization: Rice University
Date: Mon, 4 Jan 1993 20:18:18 GMT

While out perusing the audio section at the local Pace, I noticed a Sony
mini-component system (actually a boom-box designed to look like a small
component stereo system) that featured a shortwave tuner. 

Unfortunately, the timer doesn't control the tape deck portion, just the
tuner and the CD player.

My question is: Does Sony make a version of this unit where the timer does
control taping? They make an MHC (?) series that does, but the tuner is
only AM/FM. I don't remember the model number of the one I was looking at,
but it did have an "F" in it.

The other obvious question is: If the answer is yes, who has it?

Thanks.

Eric Salituro
wasg@rice.edu
"My monster has a secret...He has an elf in his head!" - Crow