HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Organization: The American University - University Computing Center
Date: Tuesday, 7 Apr 1992 18:01:04 EDT
From: ari solomon <ASOLOMO@auvm.american.edu>
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: Mail Order From Crutchfield
Distribution: usa

I give Crutchfield an "A+" in the mail-order hi-fi category, from my several
experiences with them. The salespeoples' knowledgeability varies, but
extensive courtesy seems to be consistent throughout the staff.  My only com-
plaint about Crutchfield is that I usually end up feeling guilty if I *don't*
purchase from them because they're so helpful and low-pressure.   ;)
   I only had to deal with a return once, and it was handled very smoothly.
They have a great retail outlet in Virginia, BTW, if you're ever in their
neighborhood.
   Summary: A little bit higher prices, but you can be *sure* they're not
 going to try to force you to keep something that's not right for you.

                                 --A.
P.S. Disclaimer -- no affiliation whatsoever.
From: smee@bristol.ac.uk (Paul Smee)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: CD player remote from receiver/amp
Date: 7 Apr 92 13:58:06 GMT
Reply-To: P.Smee@bristol.ac.uk (Paul Smee)
Organization: University of Bristol

In article <1992Apr5.222726.3833@PacBell.COM> bwmohle@pbsdts.sdcrc.pacbell.com (Bruce W. Mohler) writes:
>Is it possible to connect this CD player to a receiver/amp
>that is 60' away?  Any special gauge of cable needed to carry
>the signal that distance?  

I'm not an expert, and haven't tried this myself, but since no one else
seems to want it, I'll have a shot at it.  There are 'multi-room'
systems commercially available which basically ship the signals around
at line levels, so I would expect this to work -- though you might find
it inconvenient having to go 60' to change the CDs.  I'd suspect you'd
have best results using shielded twisted-pair cables, one for each
channel, with the signal and ground-return going through the two wires,
and with the shield attached to the ground at only one end -- probably
the amp end.  When routing them, try not to run them parallel to and
close to your electricity wiring.  Also, check the prices first.  It
might be that 120 feet of such cable would cost enough that thinking
about a second player might be sensible.

>The receiver/amp is a venerable Sherwood from the era prior to 
>CDs and it has only "phono" and "aux" inputs.  We have a cassette
>player from the same era connected to the "aux" input and no
>phonograph.  Is it possible to connect the CD to the "phono"
>inputs or would the differences in signal be too noticible?
>Would it be better to rig an A/B switch to have the CD and cassette
>share the "aux" input?

DON'T use the phono input.  The phono input expects a signal strength
only about 1/1000th of what the other inputs expect, and it's not
likely to appreciate having a CD output pumped down it.  The phono
input circuitry also includes standard equalization (if you don't know
what that means, think of it as being hard-wired non-adjustable bass
and treble controls) to compensate for standard non-linearities in
phono cartridges.  So, even if you dealt with the signal-strength
problem, this would really screw up the sound.  You can get a suitable
A/B switchbox from Radio Shack or most hifi shops.  (Yeah, I know they 
are easy to build, but if you build things the way I do, a commercial
unit will look much neater. :-)

-- 
Paul Smee, Computing Service, University of Bristol, Bristol BS8 1UD, UK
 P.Smee@bristol.ac.uk - ..!uunet!uknet!bsmail!p.smee - Tel +44 272 303132
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: wood@uk.tele.nokia.fi (Peter Wood)
Subject: Re: Thought for the day
Organization: Nokia Telecommunications, Transmission Product Development,
	Cambridge, UK
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 1992 15:39:05 GMT

>>>>> On 3 Apr 92 20:30:50 GMT, lstowell@pyrnova.pyramid.com (Lon Stowell) said:

-> In article <1992Apr3.142522.24187@bristol.ac.uk> P.Smee@bristol.ac.uk (Paul Smee) writes:
>
>In the intro to one of his last numbers he said 'There's one thing
>you've got to understand about us Americans.  We believe that if it's
>louder, it's more real.'  I immediately thought of rec.audio.
->    
->    Wasn't Spinal Tap a BRITISH rock group?   

No.
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
- Peter Wood,   Nokia Telecommunications,  Transmission Product Development -
-                    Cambridge, UK.  Tel:  +44 223 423 123                  -
- External Email: wood@uk.tele.nokia.fi         Internal Email: NTL02::WOOD -
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Xref: sparky rec.audio:7023 rec.video.cable-tv:745
From: sowellrm@memstvx1.memst.edu
Newsgroups: rec.audio,rec.video.cable-tv
Subject: Re: DMX (Digital Music Channel)
Date: 7 Apr 92 03:55:18 -0600
Organization: Memphis State University

In article <ku1ovvINN4un@spim.mips.com>, reddy@mips.com (T.S. Reddy) writes:
> In article <=gpj3v#.anson@netcom.com> anson@netcom.com (Anson Kennedy) writes:
>>reddy@mips.com (T.S. Reddy) writes:
>>
>>What cable system are you on?
>>
>>[I ask because I work for Scientific-Atlanta and am curious...]
> 
>     So do you know how the transmission is modulated? 
> 
>     The remote control is a basic one, with number buttons, tune up and
> tune down, scan, TV and a few others. There is also a button called ID
> which is supposed to bring up a numerical id that can be looked up in a
> DMX guide (which I don't have) for the type of music that I can listen
> to. But it doesn't work on my decoder.
> 
>     I'm on Heritage Cablevision which is actually a front for TCI.
> -- 
> T.S.Reddy (e-mail: reddy@mips.com)

We were on Heritage Cablevision too.  They just changed the name to TCI.
From: chrisc@gold.gvg.tek.com (Chris Christensen)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: Speaker Efficiency of Two Drivers
Date: 16 Apr 92 16:38:01 GMT
Organization: Grass Valley Group, Grass Valley, CA

In article <1992Apr16.132641.25619@uicc.com> neidorff@uicc.com (Bob Neidorff)
writes:

>I started reading Vance Dickason's Loud Speaker Design Cookbook.  I immediately
>hit a snag in my level of understanding/his level of explanation.  On page 10,
>he says:

>"...Rather than double the amplifier power, another solution would be to use an
>additional driver.  The addition of a parallel connected second driver doubles
>the cone area and increases the acoustic power by a factor of four.  The one
>acoustic watt of the combined drivers could produce (6dB more power) in the
>same room driven by the original 50W of output power.  To reach the same SPL
>level with a single driver would require 200W."

>My confusions are:

>1.	Don't you use 2X the power to drive two drivers?

If the impedance was halved you would, assuming the amp could do
that.

What I believe to be the problem is that the text doesn't clearly
state impedance levels.  It's a theoretical statement.

In practice if you add another driver and keep the impedance the same
you will net a 3 dB increase in SPL.  If the impedance drops (as would
be the "normal" case) the amplifier would respond and deliver twice
the power (if it could).  That net increase would be 6dB SPL.

>2.	What about the "parallel driver" system improves efficiency?  Is there
>	something about constructive interference that reduces "back EMF"?

I don't believe that there is "constructive interference"  that
reduces back EMF.  If the impedance is reduced the actual EMF voltage
may be lower but that is dependent on the speakers themselves, and a
host of other influences...

>Thanks for any help at all.

No validity expressed or implied.  Is incomplete or incorrect help of
any value??!
-- 
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.
Xref: sparky rec.audio:7131 rec.audio.pro:419
Newsgroups: rec.audio,rec.audio.pro
Subject: Re: awesome Klipschorns and speaker lifespan
From: stuartw@ccu1.aukuni.ac.nz (Stuart Woolford)
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1992 22:33:41 GMT
Organization: University of Auckland, New Zealand.

kenyee@ksr.com (Ken Yee) writes:

....
>>cheap speakers out there that sound a lot better.  The advancement in speakers
>>has been much greater than the performance improvements in electronics.
>  That I can vouch for...I know someone who has Sansui speakers that
>  sound better than the ancient Bose 300's I have currently.

perhaps we should also consider the fact that SPEAKERS HAVE A LOT OF CATCHING
UP TO DO.. they are still the main limiting factor in audio reproduction!!

( just a thought..... )
QZM.
			>>>>In VI Where Available<<<<

From: kurts@hpnmdla.sr.hp.com (Kurt Strain)
Date: Thu, 16 Apr 1992 16:17:37 GMT
Subject: Re: Blind Listening
Organization: Milky Way Galaxy
From: lstowell@pyrnova.pyramid.com (Lon Stowell)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: A Golden-Ear perspective on CD players.
Keywords: flame bait, CD accuracy
Date: 9 Apr 92 16:27:04 GMT
Reply-To: lstowell@pyrnova.pyramid.com (Lon Stowell)
Organization: Pyramid Technology Corp., Mountain View, CA

In article <22519@alice.att.com> jj@alice.UUCP (jj, just the same old jj) writes:
>When the LP, with much less than 90dB SNR or
>dynamic range, and circa 40dB distortion characteristics in the
>best of times, is touted as "good" by the "experts", what are
>we to do with more than 90 dB?

   Beats me...particularly since I don't know of too many concert
   halls or listening rooms with that kind of range between the
   noise floor and the onset of eardrum damage.  (The Mormon
   Tabernacle comes to mind...)

   Perhaps recording a 747 smashing through a soundproofed recording
   studio--from inside the studio?
From: gt0869a@prism.gatech.EDU (WATERS,CLYDE GORDON)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: Low range
Date: 15 Apr 92 22:38:45 GMT
Organization: Georgia Institute of Technology

In article <1992Apr13.153010.13013@tc.fluke.COM> strong@tc.fluke.COM (Norm Strong) writes:
>}In article <andrewb.702779193@suite.sw.oz.au> andrewb@suite.sw.oz.au (Andrew Bettison) writes:
>}>That would be a 64 foot pipe.  For most people, the 16 Hz fundamental
>}
>}    There are some big organs with 64 foot pipes, but they are few
>}    and far between.  I miss the liner notes of the LP's...they
>}    always detailed such trivia (and it was from a liner note of 
>}    an LP that I got the 16 Hz number for the sustained organ pedal

The Cathedral of St. Philip here in Atlanta has a Skinner-Aeolean (sp?) 
organ built in 1962 that can easily dig down this low. I have a recording,
made there, with Michael Murray and the Atlanta Symphony Orchestra, on Telarc,
which seems to be commonly available, of the Poulenc Organ Concerto in G-
Minor that has plenty of low , even sub-20 Hz information, including a note
or two that from the apparent pitch, must be down near 15-16 Hz. Maybe
I could count the vibrations of the roof of my car when I play it :-)
Seriously, this, and the Dorian version of Mussorsgy's (sp?) Pictures at
an Exhibition do seem to have some good solid sub-20 Hz content, and not
just for sound effect (defect? :-) ) purposes.

Regards,
Gordon.
-- 
WATERS,CLYDE GORDON-Georgia Institute of Technology Atlanta Ga 30332 
******<LANGUAGE IS A VIRUS! - Laurie Anderson-Home of the Brave>******* 
uucp:	  ...!{decvax,hplabs,ncar,purdue,rutgers}!gatech!prism!gt0869a
Internet: gt0869a@prism.gatech.edu
From: matgbb@lure.latrobe.edu.au
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Blind Listening
Date: 14 Apr 92 06:54:07 GMT
Organization: VAX Cluster, Computer Centre, La Trobe University

Just to add some gasoline...
Several magazines now attempt a degree of blind auditioning, EG HI-FI CHOICE,
WHAT HI-FI and (very occasionally) HI-FI NEWS and record review.

However, a few years ago there was an article in the J. AES on testing
speakers for a Swedish consumer magazine. They used 3 groups of listeners:
Hi-Fi experienced, Musicians and Others.

The first group was much better at picking subtle differences, consistently
recognising speakers by sound etc. However, as a group they rated most highly
the speaker which was LEAST LIKED by the other groups (ie musicians and others)

The articled posited that the audiophiles liked what sounded most like what
they were used to, that is their own systems, rather than the closest thing
to live music. Measurements of frequency reponse tended to back this up:
the musicians liked the spekers that measured best, the audiophiles didn't.

Now, what does this say about analogue vs digital sound?
Or such devices as the Wadia DACs, which roll off the treble by 5dB at 20kHz?

I'm interested that the unsighted reviewers hear differences, but frankly
I don't give a lump of doggy doo for their better/worse opinions,
ESPECIALLY when they judge by synthetic music which has no live performance
for comparison. Unless, that is, there is an obviously germane measurement
to back them up.

Cheers,
Graham B

NB Il faut cultiver notre jardin (Voltaire), mais attention au fertilisant (gb)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: rleroux1@sol.UVic.CA (Roger Leroux)
Subject: Re: Sherwood?
Organization: University of Victoria
Distribution: na
Date: 15 Apr 92 19:10:46 GMT

In <collin.703327410@cory.Berkeley.EDU> collin@cory.Berkeley.EDU (Collin Ong) writes:
>Can anyone provide info on the fates of the other grand ole American
>stereo companies?  I know Marantz has been picked up by Phillips, and
>Harmon Kardon is run by Harmon International which also owns JBL.  What is
>the ownership of Harmon International?  Also, which Crown is the old
>American firm, the maker of incredibly cheap cd players/boom boxes, or
>the power amp company?  Was Lloyds ever a real company or just a brand name?

Lessee... Marantz was sold by Phillips to Dynascan (the people who make
Cobra brand radar detectors and such). Phillips Canada has left the market
(same in US?), which is not to say its subsidiaries have, only Phillips
itself.

Sherwood is indeed manufatured in Korea, but is still an American company.

Roger
-- 
Roger Leroux          | "Climate is what we expect; weather is what we get." Me
rleroux1@sol.uvic.ca  |	"Everybody lies about sex." Lazarus Long
----------------------+ "Six of one, half a dozen of the other." Number 2.
rec.motorcycles DoD#43| Be seeing you...
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: Imped. Matching w/ Resistors?!
From: stuartw@ccu1.aukuni.ac.nz (Stuart Woolford)
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1992 23:38:24 GMT
Organization: University of Auckland, New Zealand.

berger@atropa (Mike Berger) writes:

>jstimson@cbrown.claremont.edu writes:
>>I have a pair of Infinity Reference-3s that I am driving with a Yamaha AV-66
>>Integrated amp.  It is rated at 100W, but has an automatic cutout that shuts it
>>down at volumes that I consider much quieter than a 100W amp should deliver,
>>and before any distortion is apparent.  The speakers are nominally 6 ohms.  I
>>just bought some high-power resistors and put 2 ohms in series with each
>>speaker.  The result seems to be extended frequency response, especially on the
>>low end, and greater volume output before it shuts down.  Can anyone explain
>>why this worked, other than "the magic of impedance-matching"?  Could more
>>resistance enhance this effect, or should I just experiment?
>*----
>I would expect that the resistors won't be linear, and that they'll suck
>up 25% of your power.  Maybe that sounds better to you.  But I can't
>believe that they've IMPROVED the sound from a technical standpoint.
>--
GREAT!!! NON_LINEAR RESISTORS!!! GIMME!!!

seriously, as long as they are not WIRE WOUND ( and few 2 Ohm are.. ), and
you are not looking at VERY HIGH (audio) frequencies, RESISTORS ARE LINEAR!!!!
(ps: if they ARE wire wound..REPLACE THEM, as they are also INDUCTORS !)

QZM.
			>>>>In VI Where Available<<<<
From: chrisc@gold.gvg.tek.com (Chris Christensen)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: Blind Listening
Date: 16 Apr 92 05:21:35 GMT
Organization: Grass Valley Group, Grass Valley, CA

In article <1992Apr16.013250.15199@comp.vuw.ac.nz> brian@comp.vuw.ac.nz 
(Brian Boutel) writes:

>Well, Chris, you have really gone over the top with this one. You appear to 
>have completely misinterpreted my posting. Let me offer you some advice:

>1) Cool down before posting
>2) Learn to read carefully what people have written
>3) A good negative indication of the quality of a posting is the number of
>spelling mistakes in it.

Brian has offered some *sagely* advice and pointed out that I mis
understood his posting.  For thiose of you who have read my posting,
realise, as does Brian, now.... That my tirade was directed at
Kurt Strain and not at him.

I am a miserable speller and typist,  I make no excuses.  Take it or
leave it.  

My typing skills have no bearing on my ability to contribute to this or
any forum.

I am a skilled professional.  I don't have to spell correctly to do my job
or to gain the confidence of the prople that I do work for.

"Content is always the most important element"

-- 
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
From: rmf@bpdsun1.uucp (Rob Finley)
Newsgroups: rec.audio,rec.audio.pro
Subject: Re: awesome Klipschorns and speaker lifespan
Date: 13 Apr 92 02:54:44 GMT
Organization: Harris Broadcast Division, Quincy, IL

In article <11319@ksr.com> kenyee@ksr.com (Ken Yee) writes:
>  Any other suggestions?  I'm trying to find a Magnepan and Carver dealer
>  in the area...  That post about oxidizing ribbons also worries me..


I went to a party last night and listened to a pair of Maggies that were
so old that the guy disposed of the covers and put them behind a thin
cloth that was about 8' high and 10' square.  They sounded incredible.
(my first listening experience to speakers that weren't constructed using
 traditional drivers except I really liked his subs too.)

He was driving them (6 ohms) with a ADS system.

We cranked them to ear splitting level (after a few shots and many beers)
and they survived all ten hours of it...

This morning, I wish I could say the same for his sub B-) 

I tried to listen to a pair in New York but the salesdroid steered me into
another room and stuck me in front of a pair of Apogee's.  I can't tell
you how good they sounded.  I can't get into organ music at all...

Robert
From: nessus@media.mit.edu (Douglas Alan)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: Opinion on Cambridge Soundworks Ensemble
Date: 15 Apr 92 18:44:09 GMT
Article-I.D.: twitch.NESSUS.92Apr15134409
Organization: Kate Bush and Butthole Surfers Fandom Center

In article <1992Apr11.005148.19508@leland.Stanford.EDU> bosco@leland.Stanford.EDU (Eric Bosco) writes:

>   Hi, I'm think of changing my speakers to mostly to space and aesthetic 
>   considerations and I was looking into subwoofer-satellte systems. I 
>   wanted to know if anybody had any opinions on the Ensemble. Specifically:

>	   1- Is this a  good speaker system?

Yes, it is very good for the price and convenience.  To my ears, it is
as good as any set of speakers for the price and as good as most
speakers that are up to twice the price.  The Ensemble is also much
more convenient than most speakers and the ability to place the bass
units seperately from the satellite units is also a big advantage that
may make it better than speakers that might otherwise be superior.
Having seperate bass units allows you to tune the bass to the room via
their placement, while allowing you to seperately postition the
satellites independently for good imaging.  With most speakers, you
may have a hard or impossible time making the trade off between good
bass and good imaging.

The flaws I noticed with the Ensembles are modest efficiency (not too
modest though), slightly harsh midrange, average imaging.  All other
speakers I listened to (under $1000) had a comparable set of flaws,
however.

>	   2- What is the difference in sound between the Ensemble II and
>	      the Ensemble? Is the extra $100 dollars worth the fact of having
>	      separate subwoofers?

Yes, it is worth the extra $100.  The Ensemble has deeper and louder
bass than the Ensemble II and the imaging is probably a bit better
because you can place the separate bass units to the left and to the
right.  You can get the bass to be as loud with the Ensemble II's by
stuffing the bass unit into the corner, but then the bass sounds kind
of boomy.

>	   3- Finally, how does it compare to more expensive systems: Bose,
>	      Polk, Infinity etc. I like the ensembles low price, but I would
>	      not want to sacrifice much in the way of sound quality.

To my ears it's better than any of these -- especially the Bose
speakers which sound like they have a big hole in the midrange.

|>oug /\lan

P.S.  I don't own Cambridge Soundworks speakers, so my opinions
      probably aren't too colored by any emotional investment.
From: chrisc@gold.gvg.tek.com (Chris Christensen)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: Improvement to cost ratio of moving speakers
Date: 10 Apr 92 20:30:34 GMT
Organization: Grass Valley Group, Grass Valley, CA

In article <1992Apr10.135319.22398@city.cs> lionel@cs.city.ac.uk 
(Lionel Tun) writes:
>The other day I was polishing the walnut veneer on my speakers. I moved
>them a couple of feet into the room. I did this while music was playing
>through them. My wife immediately noticed the difference in sound.
>After polishing them, I changed the toe in by a few degrees and the
>siting by a few inches. There was a big improvement in sound quality.
>Using purely non technical terms I would describe the new sound as more
>open or airier, the bass less heavy or thick.
>
>Neither my wife nor I can tell apart CD players or amplifiers in A-B
>comparisons in the same room. It seems to me that speaker positioning
>in the room can play a important role in ultimate sound quality.

Bingo! You have discovered just how important the acoustics of the room 
will effect the reproduced sound in that room!

The other items that will effect the reproduced sound is the size,
shape and radiation pattern of the speakers.

THis effect is the reason people spend hours, days even  weeks positioning
speakers in a listening room!  Those same people also relate that
final positions are source material related!  And it is true.  Different
types of music use the audible spectrum differently and the effects of
the rooms modal response will greatly effect the way the music sounds.

Also be ware that even 1/3 octave measurment devices are not able to
detect most room modes........

By any chance are you using a bi-polar radiation pattern speaker?  Or
something that has rear/side/angled drivers?  Just a question.

-- 
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.
From: ledzep@cbnewsh.cb.att.com (carl.w.muhlhausen)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: Terms
Date: 7 Apr 92 15:41:01 GMT
Organization: AT&T

In article <702613415.11504.0@unix1.andrew.cmu.edu> ri09+@andrew.cmu.edu (Robert W. Igo) writes:
>The only person who responded mentioned that you should be able to tell where
>the instruments are in relation to you (the listener).  Well, isn't this highly
>dependent on the source recording?  I didn't think that speakers could create
>something out of nothing like that.  Could someone suggest a CD or tape to buy
>which would enable us to test to see if our systems have good imaging?  Maybe
>a walk-through?

The Chesky Jazz Sampler has some imaging tests as well as some superbly
recorded music that is very revealing about imaging.

Carl Muhlhausen		"(Searching for a snazzy quote)"
att!honet9!ledzep	
Newsgroups: rec.audio