HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: rsd@sei.cmu.edu (Richard S D'Ippolito)
Subject: Re: group faq
Organization: The Software Engineering Institute
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 14:16:26 GMT


In article <1992Nov19.032121.16954@news.columbia.edu>, Gabe M Wiener writes:

|> >I wonder if there is a faq somewhere that deals with starting a faq?
|>
|> Not really, nor is it really needed.

Nor would the faq be really useful.  As curmudgeon-at-small (large is taken),
I suggest that it be called the FIA, for "frequently ignored answers".

Rich
From: rbs@uk.ac.ed.aisb (Robert Scott)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: Digital Amps
Date: 22 Nov 92 16:32:18 GMT
Reply-To: rbs@aisb.ed.ac.uk
Organization: Dept AI, Edinburgh University, Scotland

In article <1992Nov21.211211.15034@bilver.uucp> bill@bilver.uucp (Bill Vermillion) writes:

   In article <4310@cvbnetPrime.COM> dhukill@esprit.prime.com (Dave Hukill x4056 5-1) writes:
   >Now that we have CD, MD, DCC, DAT, and even Laser Disc players with digital
   >outputs, and pre-amps that will accept and convert them to analog, the
   >next logical step is digital amps, and obviously, speakers. Is this type
   >of technology possible? Does it even exist? Assuming these are true, what
   >advanatages/disadvantages would this provide? I think a discussion on this
   >subject would be both interesting and educational.

   I read a reviews in a British audio magazine about a year ago of a Sony
   power amp that accepted digital input.

   Advantage is to keep everything digital until the last DA and not have
   problems with analog interconnects.


I think you may be getting the wrong-end-of-the-stick here
or maybe I'm just about to.

Some amps are designated if they have a D-to-A convertor
built in.
There is another form of amp that doesn't use convertors at all,
the class D amp. 
I don't think this has been used seriously on the audio field but
maybe it's time for someone to look at it again.




--
Rob Scott
---
Department of AI              email: rbs@aisb.ed.ac.uk
University of Edinburgh         Tel: 031-650-2718
EDINBURGH, EH1 1HN
From: on@husc10.harvard.edu (Ahmad On)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: CD skipping
Date: 19 Nov 92 02:47:28 GMT
Article-I.D.: husc3.1992Nov18.214728.17585
Distribution: world
Organization: Harvard University Science Center

Is there a correlation between skipping and the length of the CD?
My old Technics refuses to play properly on track 1 of especially
long CDS.  I've oiled the rails of the laser transport (as suggested
here) but it still has problem with the first 2 or 3 minutes of
long CDs (+ 70 minutes).

HELP!

-- 
______________________________________________________________________________
Ahmad Z. Che On                |        'I have the simplest of tastes...  
Harvard College '95            |         I am always satisfied with the best' 
on@husc.harvard.edu            |                                    Oscar Wilde
From: tonyb@juliet.ll.mit.edu ( Tony Berke )
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: AC Sub-1 Design queries (was Re: Amplified SubWoofer )
Date: 19 Nov 92 00:32:32 GMT
	<TONYB.92Nov17165451@oberon.juliet.ll.mit.edu>
	<1992Nov18.032446.6570@cbnews.cb.att.com>
Distribution: usa
Organization: M.I.T. Lincoln Lab - Group 43

In article <1992Nov18.032446.6570@cbnews.cb.att.com> wkb@cbnews.cb.att.com (wm.keith.brummett) writes:

       In article <TONYB.92Nov17165451@oberon.juliet.ll.mit.edu>,
       tonyb@juliet.ll.mit.edu ( Tony Berke ) writes:
       > 
       > Isn't the AC Sub-1 the "synthesized bandpass" (Floor-firing, funky
       > crossover) thingy?

       Yup.  AC has all sorts of marketing appellations scattered throughout
       the Sub-1's literature.  From what I gather, the "Synthesized Bandpass"
       (tm) stuff is a combination of the crossover, and six of what AC calls
       "aperiodic vents" (I call them 3/8" holes) in the cabinet.  And, BTW,
       they don't *have* to be floor-firing, though mine are for convenience.

       > I thought the passive crossover had more to do than just low-pass
       > filtering the output.

       The Sub-1 crossover has a low-pass section for the sub driver, a high-
       pass section for a satellite ("main") speaker, and a terminal that can
       be strapped to the input terminal for "upper bass adjustment"...

       Now an interesting thing is that AC cautions us in the plans to *not*
       defeat the passive crossover in favor of an active crossover box...

My guess is that the "synthesized bandpass" aspect of the AC system
means that the low-pass filter kicks in a bit early relative to the HP
section for the satellites.  That would cost a bit of efficiency, and
make the bass response appear to extend a bit further.  I read the
Speaker Builder article as well, and nothing I saw there explained to
me why one couldn't duplicate this sort of filter behavior (or just
about any other passive filter behavior, for that matter) using an
active box.  Unless the crossover has a really high series resistance
on purpose to change the system Q, what's left that you couldn't copy?

I'm curious to know if it really is a matter of convenience that the
SB-1's are floor-firing.  I would think it would change the woofer's
loading a bit, and the size of the slot made between the floor and the
bottom of the cabinet might make a low-pass filter that at the very
least ought to filter out some of the woofer's higher-order distortion
products.

Yo, where's Dick Pierce when you need him?  Off making money or
something?  What a nerve!


Tony
From: scott@psy.uwa.oz.au (Scott Fisher)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: Shareware Music, was...Re: Defeating SCMS
Date: 23 Nov 1992 06:10:05 GMT
Organization: The University of Western Australia
NNTP-Posting-Host: wapsy.psy.uwa.oz.au

whs70@dancer.cc.bellcore.com (sohl,william h) writes:

>>These are quite possibly true...my own theory is that the recording
>>companies saw a threat to their existence in that if everyone had a
>>SCMS free DAT, then share-ware music (similar to computer software)]
>>and other copy-based distribution methods may kill off their recording
>>studios and present monopoly.   New and undergound bands would no longer
>>have to get a recording contract with a recording company they could 
>>record a DAT and release it as share-ware, soon eveyone has a copy and
>>the recording companies not only miss out on signing up the band but
>>they miss out on sales as well...think about all the new shere-ware,
>>free-ware music that would be avaliable...why buy from the industry?
>>
>>Hows that for a reason for SCMS?

>Since there's no requirement that anyone originating a new recording
>must encode the SCMS with a prohibition code, the idea of "shareware"
>music is still a possibility even with SCMS.  All then an "underground
>band" needs to do is record their DAT album and encode the SCMS 
>with an 00 code that allows unlimited generations of copies.  
>Assuming the band uses a PRO-DAT deck, the SCMS code can be
>set to any of the 4 possibilities, including the 00 code.

Yes this is true...however note above I say...

>>companies saw a threat to their existence in that if everyone had a
>>SCMS free DAT, then share-ware music (similar to computer software)]

I should have emphasised the 'EVERYONE has a SCMS-fee DAT' bit.  I suppose
the SCMS-fee part is not required but it makes life alot easier. 
The recording companies have done their job by killing the widespread 
acceptance of DAT machines and making sure the cheap ones have SCMS.  That way
they discourage copying or CD's, discourage the dissemination of cheap prortable
recording studios in "everyones" houses, discourage share-ware/free-ware music
etc etc.  No flame intended and your point is well taken.   

Regards Scott.
_______________________________________________________________________________
Scott Fisher [scott@psy.uwa.oz.au]  PH: Aus [61] Perth (09) Local (380 3272).                
                                                             _--_|\       N
Department of Psychology                                    /      \    W + E
University of Western Australia.      Perth [32S, 116E]-->  *_.--._/      S
Nedlands, 6009.  PERTH, W.A.                                      v       

Joy is a Jaguar XJ-6 with a flat battery, a blown oil seal and an unsympathetic wife, 9km outside of a small remote town, 3:15am on a cold wet winters morning.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: rgonzal@gandalf.rutgers.edu (Ralph Gonzalez)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: Active crossover curcuits vs. passive.
Keywords: Power Amplifiers Active
Date: 16 Nov 92 21:04:51 GMT
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.

ip217@brems.ii.uib.no (Torgeir Veimo) writes:

>I'm about to build an amplifier to my soon completed two way loudspeaker system. I
>have thought of using an active crossover circuit with two smaller amplifiers with
>each speaker instead of a larger standard stereo power amplifier with passive
>crossover circuits.
>I'm wondering if anyone have any idea of what suitable output these would have 
>in comparision with the passive alternative. I will be using 24 db per octave 
>linkwitz filtering in any case. Will 2x20 watts be enough compared to 1x100 watts
>in the passive system? Or should I go for a, say, 10+40 watts system instead?

Although some people may tell you otherwise, I would say you're ok
using a higher power amp for the woofers than for the tweeters. For
example, use a 100 watt woofer amp which doesn't need to have very
good sound quality at high frequencies, and a very clean-sounding
20 w amp for the tweeters.

-Ralph

-- 
Ralph Gonzalez, Computer Science, Rutgers Univ., Camden, NJ
Phone: (609) 757-6122; Internet: rgonzal@elbereth.rutgers.edu
--
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: whs70@dancer.cc.bellcore.com (sohl,william h)
Subject: Shareware Music,  was...Re: Defeating SCMS
Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 92 02:49:31 GMT

In article <1epe31INNfpv@uniwa.uwa.edu.au> scott@psy.uwa.oz.au (Scott Fisher) writes:
>rkarlqu@scd.hp.com (Richard Karlquist) writes:
>
>>Two other possible reasons for SCMS:
>>*conspiracy theory mode on*
>
[theory deleted...]
>
>These are quite possibly true...my own theory is that the recording
>companies saw a threat to their existence in that if everyone had a
>SCMS free DAT, then share-ware music (similar to computer software)]
>and other copy-based distribution methods may kill off their recording
>studios and present monopoly.   New and undergound bands would no longer
>have to get a recording contract with a recording company they could 
>record a DAT and release it as share-ware, soon eveyone has a copy and
>the recording companies not only miss out on signing up the band but
>they miss out on sales as well...think about all the new shere-ware,
>free-ware music that would be avaliable...why buy from the industry?
>
>Hows that for a reason for SCMS?

Since there's no requirement that anyone originating a new recording
must encode the SCMS with a prohibition code, the idea of "shareware"
music is still a possibility even with SCMS.  All then an "underground
band" needs to do is record their DAT album and encode the SCMS 
with an 00 code that allows unlimited generations of copies.  
Assuming the band uses a PRO-DAT deck, the SCMS code can be
set to any of the 4 possibilities, including the 00 code.

Standard Disclaimer- Any opinions, etc. are mine and NOT my employer's.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Note - If email replying to me with an automatic addressing process
bounces, manually address the resend using one of the addresses below.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Bill Sohl (K2UNK) BELLCORE (Bell Communications Research, Inc.)
Morristown, NJ             email via UUCP      bcr!dancer!whs70
201-829-2879 Weekdays      email via Internet  whs70@dancer.cc.bellcore.com
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: weichung@wam.umd.edu (Weichung Wang)
Subject: Need help on buying audio system
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 00:21:41 GMT

Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Need help on buying audio system
Summary: 
Followup-To: 
Distribution: usa
Organization: University of Maryland, College Park
Keywords: 

Hi,

	I am a very beginner of audio system and considering to buy the         following used (2.5 years) equipments. Any comments or suggestions are 
very appreciated.

	Marantz SR3300 receiver
	Teac R455CHX cassetteX
	Bose 301 speakers
	Sony CDP491 CD player

  	Thank you very much for your help.

							weichung
From: rodiers@JSP.UMontreal.CA (Rodier Stephane)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: reel-to-reel decks ?
Date: 21 Nov 92 00:00:40 GMT
Organization: Universite de Montreal


        Can anyone give me manufacturers name that makes reel-to-rell decks
other than TEAC and REVOX (by the way do they still make them ?). 
Furthermore, some price range would be appreciated....

thanks (`merci`)

Steph...
-- 
--
Stephane Rodier //////////////// | Internet: rodiers@jsp.umontreal.ca 
//////////////////////////////// | //////////////////////////////////
UNIVERSITE de MONTREAL ///////// | //////////////////////////////////
From: ranjank@eniac.seas.upenn.edu (Ranjan Khan)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: FISHER STEREO SYSTEM REDUCED!!!
Date: 17 Nov 92 23:25:35 GMT
Organization: University of Pennsylvania

FISHER Integrated Stereo Amplifier  CA 857
  = 100 Watts-Per-Channel Minimum RMS Power into 8 ohms with no more than .08% 
    Total Harmonic Distortion
  = 5 Band Graphic Equalizer
  = 5 Function:  Tape, CD, Video/Aux, Tuner, Phono

FISHER Digital Compact Disc Player  AD 857
  = Graphic Display
  = Linear Skate Disc Loading System
  = High Quality Sound with Digital Filter
  = Program Play with Memory
  = Scan/Index

FISHER Stereo Double Cassette Deck  CR 857
  = 2 Cassette System
  = Synchronized High Speed Dubbing
  = LED Level Meter
  = Recording Level Control
  = Sequential Play

FISHER AM/FM Stereo PLL Synthesizer Tuner  FM 857
  = 24 Station Tuning System with Electronic Memory
  = LCD Digital Frequency Display
  = Auto Scan

FISHER Servo Drive Turntable
  = Viscous-Damped Cueing
  = Aluminum Diecast Platter
  = Precision Straight Low-Mass Tonearm
  = Automatic Tonearm Return and Shut Off

ALL 5 COMPONENTS FOR $400 O.B.O.  I'LL EVEN PAY FOR SHIPPING!
If you still don't like the price make me an offer!
(215) 573-7832  ranjank@eniac.seas.upenn.edu

Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: tonyb@juliet.ll.mit.edu ( Tony Berke )
Subject: Re: DCC -- JUST SAY NO!  (was: The end of cassettes,   
Organization: M.I.T. Lincoln Lab - Group 43
	<1992Nov12.160517.26983@porthos.cc.bellcore.com>
	<1992Nov14.025211.864@cmkrnl.com>
Date: 16 Nov 92 13:53:26

The previous poster insinuated, probably correctly, that the only
reason DCC was being promoted was that it would lead to increased
profits for Phillips.  I don't doubt it, but I must point out that
that is the same motivating factor for the release of about 99.99% of
all products on the market!  You can't really blame Phillips for being
part of a (semi-)capitalist market system, can you?  DAT would have
been my first choice, but the record companies and lawyers screwed it
all up.  To the extent that Phillips may have contributed to that,
shame on them.

The poster continued on to assert that the analog cassette was good
enough for its "intended uses" anyway, and that there was no benefit
to the consumer from getting near-cd-quality audio in the car, etc.

As a semi-pro studio engineer that currently sees his products
released exclusively on cassette, I couldn't disagree more.  I turn
out great-sounding cassettes, digitally mastered, then duped in realtime
 on Chrome-bias tape with Dolby-B, on good decks.  These sound great
on great home systems, but sound like sh*t on many of my
unsophisticated customers' car systems, which often lack Dolby and/or
a Chrome EQ setting.  Even when they do, many people don't know what
they are, and don't set the switches properly.  From them, I get
complaints that my recordings sound "too shrill".  Gee, I wonder why?

First of all, many (most) of the analog cassette playing equipment
that makes its way into low- and mid-fi setups is so terrible that the
move to digital-quality sound would be a clear advantage.  One might
not always need the signal-to-noise ratio that digital has to offer,
but the lack of wow and flutter, speed error, etc, is almost always
audible.


My guess is that DCC systems will all sound pretty good, and the
problems will all show up in the reliability department.  In the past,
it has seemed to me that it is MUCH easier for a big profit-driven
mass marketer to ignore sound quality than it is for them to ignore
reliability.  Assuming that there is enough consumer demand to keep
the development effort going, my assumption is that there will
eventually be a bunch of not-bad sounding cheapo DCC players built
into car and walkman audio systems.  This will be good for lots of
people (who will enjoy their music more, even if they don't know why),
not just big record companies.

I don't want to specifically endorse DCC -- I am in no way convinced that
the tapes or the players will be reliable in the near term.  However, the
world DOES need an easily recordable digital playback system.  I'd rather
it be a cheap full-bitrate CD-compatible system, but if DCC is what it
takes to get all those boomboxes into a compatible realm of  higher-fi,
I'm all for it.

Tony Berke (A.K.A. President, Full House Audio)



Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: d89marho@odal4.curofix (Martin V. Howard)
Subject: Re: More CD skipping...
Organization: /home/kolix2/elev/d89/d89marho/.organization
	<1992Nov17.103254.881@cmkrnl.com>
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 08:34:49 GMT


Jeh@cmkrnl.com writes
>In article <1992Nov16.235544.24722@raven.alaska.edu>,
> fsgab@ix.acf-lab.alaska.edu (Grant A Beaugard) writes:
>> I've noticed that some of my european import CDs, especially ones from  
>> small record labels, skip on some finicky players.  I have domestic CDs,  
>> some of which are pretty well scratched up, and they seem to work fine on  
>> the same players... 
>> Of course, some of my domestic CDs skip too, and they aren't scratched.
>> 
>> Is this an error in encoding? A slightly different type of encoding?  
>> Error-correction errors? Enquiring minds want to know.
>
>This is due to small differences in the track pitch between European and
>domestic CD mastering plants.  CD players and disks intended for the U.S.
>market are set up based on the Engligh system of measurements, while European
>ones go by metric-based standards.  You can often get a metric CD to play on an
>English player, or vice versa, but it's like trying to use an SAE socket wrench
>on the head of a metric-sized bolt... it just doesn't fit very well. 

I don't see how this can be possible.  I would have thought that since
the system was developed by Philips, specifications would be in
metric, and I can't see how you could manufacture the discs without
sticking to the specifications.  Surely Philips wouldn't allow this?
What is the point of a new medium if the Unites States decides that it
is going to continue to live in the dark ages and manufacture discs
that are incompatible with those of the rest of the world?  Again,
IMHO you explaination doesn't hold water.

/mvH

--
Programming isn't a science,        | Foo:    mvh@lysator.liu.se
it's an art.                        | Bar:    d89marho@und.ida.liu.se
Why is it called common sense,      | Who:    Martin V. Howard
when so few possess it ?            | Voice:  Int +46 (0)13 261 283 (GMT + 1h)
From: bhoughto@sedona.intel.com (Blair P. Houghton)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Bose 4.2
Date: 23 Nov 1992 19:04:12 GMT
Organization: Intel Corp., Chandler, Arizona
NNTP-Posting-Host: stealth.intel.com

I just snarfed a pair of Bose 4.2s from a high-tech
supermarket (Silo; yet another Circuit-City-alike) for
$260 (they list $320; Bose changed at least the external
styling for '93 so I got lucky by walking in early on the
Saturday of the clearance sale and being loaded for bear (I
was hunting the elusive DCC)).

They sound pretty good, but could I do better with the
same $260?

I have seven days (now four) to decide whether to return
them no-questions-asked.  I don't have the proper equipment
(they pull 75Wper and my stereo that works pumps 12...my TV
drives them about 25...) to work them over.  I can return
them later if they prove defective at full power, but even
then I might decide they sound crappy, but I can't tell yet.

So, did I get a deal?  Does anyone consider these the basis
for a long relationship, or will I be relegating them to
stereo-surround duty in just a few years? (They aren't big;
they'd fit on a bookshelf but take about three feet of it.)

Does anyone have specs?  The sales critters could only find
the book on the newer model, and it didn't show any frequency
response curves.

				--Blair
				  "Go ahead.  Fill my mailbox."
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: leejun@pasture.ecn.purdue.edu (Jun H Lee)
Subject: Does anyone have Yamaha DSP-E200 or similar model?
Organization: Purdue University Engineering Computer Network
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 01:13:51 GMT

Hi, Netters:

Does anyone own Yamaha DSP-E200 or similar Yamaha model?
I like to know how you like the model for surround system.

E200 model has 3 channel amps and can the master volume
control the front left and right speakers since it will be
amplified by other amp?

How about the Yamaha surround speakers?

Someone posted that he did not like the sound when he played
CD. Someone suggested to use other mode. Did it work?

Thanks.
From: jj@alice.att.com (jj, curmudgeon and all-around grouch)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: NEWS FROM CONCERNED AUDIOPLEBE (was Re: ELITIST SNOBS)
Date: 17 Nov 92 16:36:23 GMT
Article-I.D.: alice.24216
Reply-To: jj@alice.UUCP (jj, curmudgeon and all-around grouch)
Organization: NJ State Home for Bewildered Terminals

You know, I think these guys with all-caps and all-insults
are probably people who don't want to see a discussion of
inexpensive equipment.  After all, they surely realize that's
what their effect is.

Such disingenuity!  Why am I unsurprised?
-- 
Extremism *Copyright alice!jj 1992, all rights reserved, except transmission
   in the    *by USENET and like facilities granted.      Said permission is
  defense of     *granted only for complete copies that include this notice.
 liberty is no vice.  *Use on pay-for-read services specifically disallowed.
From: buzz@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Serge Pontejos)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: HELP! Info on MD and DCC
Date: 17 Nov 92 03:47:47 GMT
Reply-To: buzz@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Serge Pontejos)
Organization: The University of Texas at Austin, Austin TX
Originator: buzz@pooh.cc.utexas.edu


	Greetings!

	I am doing a report for my radio/television/film class on the upcoming
consumer digital formats DCC and minidisc.  I have already filed an issue
synopsis, and I need to write an update on what
I wrote about for the end of the semester (read: the update is due 4 Dec 92).
I need sources to tell me what has happened since I wrote the first report.
I had things covered up to May 1992.  Any source, business or technical would 
appreciated.  Please mail magazine sources to buzz@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu.
Thank you very much.

					Serge "Buzz" Pontejos
					buzz@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu   
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: dbarker@spang.Camosun.BC.CA (Deryk Barker)
Subject: Pioneer LLC CD players
Organization: Camosun College, Victoria B.C, Canada
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 20:43:04 GMT

Does anyone have any experience with the new Pioneer LLC (can't recall
what it stands for) CD players? Reviews I've seen sound encouraging.

Deryk Barker, Computer Science Dept., Camosun College, Victoria B.C.
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: dong@phage.cshl.org (Benhao Dong in Krainer Lab - CSHL)
Subject: Denon receiver for sale
Organization: Cold Spring Harbor Lab, Long Is New York
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 16:37:52 GMT

Denon DRA325R receiver for sale. 2 yrs old. Rarely used. Brand-new
condition. Comes with original box and manual. Bought for $280.
asking $140. Email me if interested.

-Ben-

Newsgroups: rec.audio