HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: tucker@bedford.progress.COM (Kyle Tucker)
Subject: WANTED: Old ADS Speakers
Reply-To: tucker@bedford.progress.COM
Organization: Progress Software Corp.
Distribution: ne
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 13:54:02 GMT

I have a pair of ADS 810-2s circa 1981. I love these speakers and I'm now
expanding to DSP. To keep tonal quality the same, I am looking for the 
bookshelf models of the same line. I called ADS yesterday and they believe
these are the model 630-2s and 730-2s. I think it's a different number.
Anyway, these are oak veneer with solid oak box corner frames and perferated
bronzish/black metal grills. Probably has their 6 or 8 inch Stifflite
woofer. If you have a pair of these, I'd be interested in seeing them
and making an offer. I'll drive 1 1/2 hrs out of Boston area to see them.

Thanks, Kyle
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Kyle Tucker - Email Administrator  | 		Progress Software Corporation
tucker@bedford.progress.com 	   |		14 Oak Park
(617)280-4565			   |		Bedford, Mass. 01730
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: brambo@eco.twg.com (Mark Bramblett)
Subject: Re: Sony TA-E2000ESD DSP A/V Surround Preamp
Followup-To: rec.audio,rec.video
Organization: The Wollongong Group (East Coast Operations)
Distribution: rec
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 93 15:14:24 GMT

In article <C12s7M.2Ku@ampex.com>, dna@ampex.com (David Altekruse) wrote:
> 
> Michael J Kobb writes:
> >  (Michael escribes his Sony TAE-2000ESD A/V pre-amp discovery.)
> >
> >  So, anybody got one of these?  Do you like it?  Did you look at it
> >and get something else?  If so, why?  Anybody got comments on the
> >issue of power amps and surround/center speakers?  Are the Adcoms
> >really better than the Sonys?
> >
> 
> There has been a discussion of this unit (and the previous similar version
> the TAE1000ESD) in rec.video at various times over the past three years.
> Here is part of a note I recently posted there:
> 
[stuff deleted...]
> 
>   7) (As has been pointed out), one of the TAE2000ESD more impressive features
>      is its digital parametric equalizers for not only the front L-R
>      channels but for the center and rear channels as well.  But I don't
>      think it is possible to do a good job of setting them just by ear, 
>      especially if you are trying to equalize all five channels for the
>      same in-room frequency response.  What is really needed is a built-in 
>      spectrum analyzer. 
> 
> This may sound like I'm not very happy with my Sony TAE2000ESD but all
> the features Steve described meet most of my needs and then some.  This
> Sony appears to be very well made, all the controls have a good solid feel
> to them, it runs cool, and most importantly, the audio from all channels 
> sounds outstanding, the video switching adds little if any noticable
> noise to the signal, and the all-digital Pro-Logic works very well with
> extremely high channel separation. 
> 
> - David Altekruse, dna@ampex.com


Sorry for the previous post, with the TAE1000ESD you can't set up a custom
equalization curve when you are in Dolby Surround Mode and I wanted to know
if this is possible with the TAE2000ESD.

Thanks,
	           Mark

Mark Bramblett

VMS Program Mgr
The Wollongong Group

brambo@eco.twg.com
From:  (Mahavishnu Swami)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: MUSIC of THE DIVINE MASTERS
Date: 27 Jan 93 20:50:47 GMT
Organization: Truth and Light, Inc.
Originator: brad@buck


In article <1993Jan25.192632.3325@cnsvax.uwec.edu>, mcelwre@cnsvax.uwec.edu writes:

[just a wee bit deleted]

|>                The "SOUND CURRENT" manifests differently for different 
|>           Initiates, and can sound like a rushing wind, ocean waves on 
|>           the sea shore, buzzing bees, higher-pitched buzzing sound, a 
|>           flute, various heavenly music, or other sounds.  In Eckankar, 
|>           Members start hearing it near the end of their first year as 
|>           a Member.  This and other experiences (such as "SOUL TRAVEL") 
|>           REPLACE blind faith. 
|>     
Ah, my son, you neglected to mention the sacred chant:

	OWHATANASSIAM

You must utter this chant once every 3.14156 minutes for the rest of your
worldly existence if you wish to reach the highest plain.

Peace be without you,

Mahavishnu Swami
From: myers@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM (Bob Myers)
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 20:09:04 GMT
Subject: Re: Comments on analog music
Organization: Hewlett-Packard, Fort Collins, CO, USA
Newsgroups: rec.audio

>Therefore my conclusion is that the new CD players have improved VERY MUCH
>over the old ones, which of course also let's me believe that the old players
>were B-A-D, and that the 'pure perfect sound forever' marketing hype was
                           ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ 
>pure BS. And no, it didn't take this long for me to find that out, but the fact
 ^^^^^^^
>that new players seem better is just another evidence.

But Sture, that's NOT what your evidence means at all - if you are now getting
greatly improved sound from the newer players, but *with the same recording
format* as before (i.e., the 44.1 kHz CD standard), then there is no reason
to suspect the "pure perfect sound forever" claim.  (Actually, I myself would
never make this claim in such absolute terms as "pure" and "perfect", but
you get the idea.)  All you have shown is that the faults you heard before
were NOT in the notion of digital recording, but in the particular player
auditioned (and likely in the analog sections of said player), which is all
the "pro-digital" camp has been saying all along!


Bob Myers            | "Man will occasionally stumble over the truth, but  
myers@fc.hp.com      |  most of the time he will pick himself up and continue."
                     |                        - Winston Churchill
From: jeh@cmkrnl.com
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: turntable to aux input black box wanted.
Date: 21 Jan 93 23:42:33 PST
Distribution: world
Organization: Kernel Mode Systems, San Diego, CA

In article <1jjkcbINN9fs@huon.itd.adelaide.edu.au>, rbatt@adam.adelaide.edu.au (Richard Batt) writes:
> I would like to connect a record player turntable to a hi-fi system that
> only has an 'aux' input.  I understand that this cannot be done directly
> as the signal 'levels' are different  (I'm not sure in what way).

The signal from a conventional (moving-magnet or moving-iron) phono cartridge
is down in the 10 mv range, while the aux input is looking for something around
a few hundred millivolts to a volt.  From a moving-coil cartridge you get even
less signal, just a few mv.  In addition the output from the phono cartridge
must be run through an RIAA equalization network or the tonal balance will
be all wrong.  

> Does anyone have information about doing this.  For example can you buy
> a black box that will act as a 'converter' or could an audio technician
> make up such a thing?

What you want is a device known as a "preamp" with an input expressly 
designed for the purpose.  These used to be extremely common.  

It is possible to make one, but the tiny signal levels mandate a very clean
design, or the noise from the circuit will swamp the signal from the cartridge.
I think you'd do better to just buy one.  Check used audio equipment dealers
-- used preamps of reasonable quality (if you aren't a vinyl-phile) can be had
for $100 or $200 here in the states.  (Preamps are still made for vinyl-philes,
and the sky is the limit on price.)

	--- Jamie Hanrahan, Kernel Mode Systems, San Diego CA
Internet:  jeh@cmkrnl.com, or hanrahan@eisner.decus.org  Uucp: uunet!cmkrnl!jeh
From: lstowell@pyrnova.mis.pyramid.com (Lon Stowell)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: Preamp and Amp
Date: 26 Jan 93 01:53:28 GMT
Reply-To: lstowell@pyrnova.pyramid.com.pyramid.com (Lon Stowell)
Distribution: world
Organization: Pyramid Technology Corporation

In article <shetline-250193184001@128.89.19.90> shetline@bbn.com (Kerry Shetline) writes:
>
>If measurement is ruled out, and A/B testing is ruled out, what do we go
>by? Our ears, of course. But that isn't reliable all the time.
>
   
     And unfortunately most self-nominated golden ears always
     presume that THEIR listening preferences are the end-all and
     be-all of audio.  

     This opens up quality judgements to the scalawags, scoundrels,
     and snake oil salesmen.  

     They then pontificate at length with fallacious technical
     statements.  Once those get crucified, they resort to personal
     attacks or such self-serving statements as "Well, MY ears say 
     XXX is better.  If you don't agree, your ears, equipment, or
     YYY must obviously be inferior."    

     If any of these tactics sound like TV evangelists, its no
     wonder, the ability of the human mind to fool itself and
     attempt to spread the ignorance is amazing.   



>Hearing things that aren't there is normal. Thinking it doesn't happen to
>you is delusional.
>
 
     Definitely.  I have yet to meet, or read papers from ANY
     self-proclaimed "Golden Ear" that were not filled with
     paranoia and delusions of adequacy.   
     The instant you proclaim yourself a "Golden Ear" you've stuck
     your ego in the way of your ears and your brain...

     
>Anyway, we don't have the opportunity to hear everything. So do we let
>unaccountable and self-proclaimed audio gods who write reviews to do it for
>us?
>
    Meanwhile the REAL audio gods just quietly snicker at the folly.
    Never knew one of them who really thought they had any kind of
    special hearing talent.  

    And have never met any self-proclaimed golden ear who couldn't
    be fooled easily by simple signal processing they really should
    have been aware of.


Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: cb@tamarack13.timbuk (Chris Brewster)
Subject: Re: What happen to dbx?
In-reply-to: kega@nobeltech.se's message of Mon, 25 Jan 1993 12:35:46 GMT
Organization: pubs
Date: 26 Jan 93 14:42:49 CST

Satya Vardhan Reddy writes:
   
   >What ever happen to the dbx noice cancellation. I believe that it is still
   >better than Dolby S or Dolby HX Pro. I bought two tape decks with it in the
   >middle 80's but I don't even hear of it anymore.

I was once a DBX booster, but I found that it tends to fall short of its
promise, because the playback machine has to be adjusted exactly like
the recording machine.  For me, DBX's best use is simply to compress the
sound.  I mostly listen to classical music, whose dynamic range is too
wide for many situations (cars, places where others might be disturbed).
A tape that's recorded in DBX but played back without it is ideal for
these situations.  You still have dynamics, but they're just more
manageable.  On that subject, do any current preamps allow control of
the dynamic range?

Chris Brewster
cb@cray.com

Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: avrum@waterloo.hp.com (Avrum Warshawsky)
Subject: Re: Sony STR*70 problems not fixed in the STR*90 line
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 20:15:59 GMT
Organization: HP Panacom Div Waterloo ON Canada
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1.4 PL6]

PRIMUS SUCKS! (hm002b@uhura.cc.rochester.edu) wrote:
: In article <19709@mindlink.bc.ca> Frank@mindlink.bc.ca (Frank I. Reiter) writes:
: >Shortly after buying a Sony STR-990 I read here about the problems people
: >were experiencing with the STR*70 line.  The story went something like this:
: >
: >1) Person buys Sony surround sound receiver
: >2) Receiver works fine for several weeks or several months, then becomes
: >noisy when surround sound decoding engaged
: >3) Person exchanges unit for new unit ---> go back to step 2
: >
: >Despite my hopes to the contrary it seems they maay still have the problem in
: >the new line.  My 990 started putting out LOUD static along with any bass
: >sounds in both front speakers in "Normal" prologic mode (no bass to center
: >channel) and to both front and center speakers in "Wide" mode.  TV, VCR, and
: >CD sources were affected, and the problem dissappeared entirely when
: >pro-logic decoding was disabled.
: >
: I have had my Sony STR-D1090 since early August so I have had it almost half
: a year now and I have had zero problems. I drive 5 speakers with the amp and
: run it in the Normal mode have not had any hiss or static. I have been very
: happy with the reciever.


   I have had a slightly different problem with my STR-D990. From the day
I bought it, there was a very slight hum coming from the main speakers. This
hum (probably 60Hz noise) was there in any mode (any input source, any
sound field mode - better or worse in some). You could only hear it at very
low volumes, or particularly when the volume was turned all the way off (of
course a stereo is not useful in that mode :-) ).

   I brought it back to the store that sold it, and they stared at it for a 
while (admitting that they DID hear the noise and that it WAS not normal). 
Furthermore, they then tried their floor model in the same quiet environment
of their repair lab and heard the same thing. They also tried a new one out
of the box (same thing). After chatting with Sony several times they finally
upgraded me to a STR-D1090. While quieter, the noise is still there. I am
surprised to see such an obvious problem in such a wide variety of Sony
equipment. I have done the obvious grounding and filtering of the power line
since my wiring is all VERY old (although a Stereo should be immune to
power line noise). Has anyone else encountered this and/or heard of a 
solution. I must point out that with the exception of this minor nuisance
noise, the STR-D1090 has some wonderful features and is a nice unit.

--

Avrum Warshawsky

Hewlett-Packard (Canada) LTD.
Panacom Automation Division                  avrum@waterloo.hp.com
From: myers@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM (Bob Myers)
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 18:10:33 GMT
Subject: Re: Jitter Simulation Program
Organization: Hewlett-Packard, Fort Collins, CO, USA
Newsgroups: rec.audio

> Modulation index is the peak phase deviation in radians in frequency or
> phase modulation.  It's usually designated beta in books and papers.

Minor nit, Jim: I believe that FM/PM modulation index is the peak 
deviation DIVIDED BY the frequency of the modulating signal.



Bob Myers  KC0EW   Hewlett-Packard Co.      |Opinions expressed here are not
                   Systems Technology Div.  |those of my employer or any other
myers@fc.hp.com    Fort Collins, Colorado   |sentient life-form on this planet.
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: faiman@cs.uiuc.edu
Subject: Re: CD player through old amplifier sounds terrible
Organization: Dept. of Computer Sci - University of Illinois
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 16:18:37 GMT


I'm with Bill Vermillion.  A month or so ago a friend of mine called me up
to tell me he'd bought his first CD player, connected it to his amplifier,
and, alas, the sound was awful.  I asked him to describe exactly how awful,
and his response was very similar to what the writer of this base note
related.  After he unplugged the player from the phono input and connected
it to an auxiliary or "tape" input, everything was fine.

 -- Mike Faiman

.
From: tingcha@ducvax.auburn.edu
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: NAD 705 matching speaker/NAD 7100X
Date: 27 Jan 93 21:22:10 GMT
Organization: Auburn University, AL





Hello:

I recently bought a NAD 705, and the salse told that this machine
outputs 40W.  I did not know what would be a suitable loudspeaker
for that.  This is my first time to buy the audio equipments, any
piece of information is valuable to me.  By the way, I prefer
the English loudspeaker companies.

Here is another question.  Is it worthwhile to upgrade the NAD 705 to
NAD 7100x?

Thanks
From: johng@informix.com (John Galloway)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: Digital critics - sampling argument is nonsense
Date: 21 Jan 93 08:42:02 GMT
Organization: Galloway Research

>In article <1993Jan20.211233.37643@watson.ibm.com> zellers@22_clancy.manassas.ibm.com (Cevin M Zellers) writes:
>I recently witnessed another case of the analog sentimentalist trying
>to use the 'sampling' argument to lodge a complaint against Digital.
>
>It was MTV, with they're nifty diagrams showing how sampled digital sound
>loses information because of the 'choppy' digital waveform. Unfortunately,
>critics are pressing this argument and misleading the public, due to their
>ignorance of the Nyquist Sampling theorem. All of you digital skeptics, 
>please note that CD's capture ALL frequencies up to 44.5 KHz, reproducing
>them faithfully (butter than vinyl, I argue). Frequencies above 44.5 KHz
>don't matter, that's far above the threshold of hearing anyway :)
>
>Cevin
I think you ment 22KHz which would be the Nyquist rate for sampling
at 44KHz.  One might argue that the Nyquist rate only assures frequence
not wave shape so that a 20KHz cut off would not distinguish a 12KHz sine
wave from a 12KHz sawtooth, and that human hearing might not be strictly
frequence response bassed, but I will not since my real purpose here is
to shamlesly slide into a commercial announcement: for all those analog
lovers, I have a fantastic 10 year old SOTA Saphire tunrtable (Grace arm,
and Vanderstien head amp) that I would love to sell so I can buy more CDs!!
call me.
	-jrg

internet    jrg@galloway.sj.ca.us  John R. Galloway, Jr  795 Beaver Creek Way
internet    johng@informix.com     CEO...receptionist    San Jose, CA   95133
applelink   D3413                  Galloway Research     (408) 259-2490

-- 
internet    jrg@galloway.sj.ca.us  John R. Galloway, Jr  795 Beaver Creek Way
internet    johng@informix.com     CEO...receptionist    San Jose, CA   95133
applelink   D3413                  Galloway Research     (408) 259-2490
From: mcilwain@eng.auburn.edu (Frank H. McIlwain)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Home Theater Advice
Keywords: JVC Infinity
Date: 25 Jan 93 20:55:59 GMT
Article-I.D.: news.1993Jan25.205900.1405
Distribution: usa
Organization: Auburn University


I need some opinions on the following home theater system:

JVC RX-807VTN           (A/V Receiver)
Infinity Reference Five (Mains)
Infinity Video One      (Center)
Infinity Reference E-L  (Rear)
JVC HR-DX62U            (Hi-Fi 4-head VCR)
Pioneer CLD-D301 or 501 (LD/CD Player)
JVC AV-31BP3            (31" TV)

Any comments (good/bad) on any of the above components would be greatly
appreciated.
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: winalski@adserv.enet.dec.com (Paul S. Winalski)
Subject: Re: DAT, DCC and MD
Reply-To: winalski@adserv.enet.dec.com (Paul S. Winalski)
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation, Nashua NH
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 02:43:11 GMT


In article <1993Jan21.202804.5343@nynexst.com>,
rsilvers@nynexst.com (Robert Silvers) writes:
|>
|>>industry.  A very large segment (I hesitate to say the majority) of the mass-
|>>market for tape decks is driven by the availability of pre-recorded tapes.
|>>This is why DAT didn't get very far when Sony did its consumer deck push a
|>>year or two ago.
|>
|>	I disagree.  Anyone that can afford a DAT recorder already has a CD
|>player and therfore would never buy a prerecorded DAT.  I claim that DAT never
|>made it as a consumer format only because of price.  Most people want to spend
|>under $150.00 for a tape deck. (as sorry as that sounds).

Then how is DCC expected to survive?  DCC decks are currently at least $200
more expensive than DAT decks, often much more.  Blank DCCs are twice as
expensive as blank DATs.  DAT uses the same basic technology as a VCR, and you
can get VCRs for quite cheap, so with volume manufacture one could reasonably
expect DAT prices to drop to the magic price point.

No, there are only two real differences between DCC and DAT that may end up
making the former succeed in the volume consumer market where the latter failed:

1) DCC decks will play existing analog cassettes, and thus can be marketed as
   an upgrade from ACC, and

2) pre-recorded tapes are available for DCC.

--PSW
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: tpearson@titan.trl.OZ.AU (Trevor Pearson)
Subject: Re: Inline attenuator (RCA-->reduce volume-->RCA)
Organization: Telecom Research Labs, Melbourne, Australia
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 01:34:59 GMT

lairdb@crash.cts.com (Laird P. Broadfield) writes:
> Can somebody point me to a source for an inline attenuator (preferably
> by mail order)?  Some friends have a *very cheap* integrated system,
> plus a standalone CD player, the problem is that the entire range
> of listenable volume is between 0 and 1 on the control. 
> 
> (No, the CD player does not have an adjustable output, but thanks for
> asking.)  What would be ideal is a cable, about three feet, with
> two RCAs on one end, a little box with a trimpot in the middle, and
> two RCAs on the other end.  Yes, I could make something, but I was
> hpoing for something a *little* tidier.  Thanks!
>

I think your friend must of connected the CD to a Phono input to get
this affect. Tell them to connect it to an aux input. If they still need
attenuation I find putting a single resistor inside the RCA plug works
well as it provides a divider with the input impedance of the amp.
Before I get flames about response errors due to capacitance etc. let me
state this is for non critical applications like that described.
From: mal2n@fulton.seas.Virginia.EDU (Matt Leonard)
Newsgroups: rec.audio.high-end
Subject: Speaker Popping with Adcom GFA 535 Amp
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 02:09:19 GMT
Organization: University of Virginia
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.89.7.4
Originator: tjk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu

I am experiencing some "popping" in the tweeter in my NHT 1.3s on the 
right speaker.  I just got a Adcom GFA 535 and Adcom GTP 400 and I have
never had this problem before.  It is very noticable at low volume levels
and when the system is on but no music is playing.

Have any ideas?  All the componants are connected to an ACE 515 line enhanser
and the pre amp is grounded to that.  The CD player is a Denon DCD 810.

I can't figure this one out.  I didn't have this problem when I was using my
cheap Sony reciever....

Any help is greatly appreciated.  Is "popping" bad for your speakers?
From: ryo@oakhill.sps.mot.com (Ryo Inoue)
Newsgroups: rec.audio.high-end
Subject: Re: Comments on Thiel CS2's?
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 00:32:18 GMT
Organization: Motorola Inc., Austin, Texas
Reply-To: ryo@oakhill.sps.mot.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.89.7.4
Originator: tjk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu

I friend of mine just bought a pair of used CS2s for $900.
The sound through his B&K ST-140 was very extended in the
highs and very detailed, but did lack some bass punch (probably
due to the amp). An amp more capable of driving them to their
potential is recommended.

ryo