HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: lstowell@pyrnova.mis.pyramid.com (Lon Stowell)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: Question about record cleaning.
Date: 16 Nov 92 18:29:00 GMT
Reply-To: lstowell@pyrnova.pyramid.com (Lon Stowell)
Organization: Pyramid Technology Corp., Mountain View, CA

In article <1992Nov15.051849.27622@cs.mcgill.ca> narpet@cs.mcgill.ca (Greg WARD) writes:
>I have a question that has probably plagued mankind for decades, and (I
>fear) will become increasingly hard to answer: what's the best way to
>clean my vinyl LP's?  I've got a nice little anti-static brush that's
>good for getting everyday dust off, but for those worse-off albums,
>I don't have much.

   Warm but not hot water and DILUTE dish detergent works on really
   dirty grooves.  Use one of those felt-based record cleaners with
   it.  

   You can use tap water for the wash, but I'd recommend rinsing
   well with distilled.

   This shouldn't be necessary more than once in the life of a
   record if you take care of them.
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: kimnach@lims02.lerc.nasa.gov (GREG KIMNACH)
Subject: Wanted
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    
Organization: NASA Lewis Research Center
Date: 23 Nov 1992 14:06 EST  

I am looking for an SL-HF1000 or a CANADIAN/JAPANESE GCS-50.  These GCS-50s 
are the same units as the American GCS-50s with the exception that they record
at the B1 speed.  The 1000 is, of course, a classic, consumer editing-VTR.

Also, I am looking for a BMC-1000K BetaMovie Pro.

If you have either of these or know of someone selling such, please e-mail.


Greg
--------------------------------------------------------------------------- 
                         ED-Beta: Simply THE BEST!
"ED Beta is simply the best consumer videotape format available."
                                     --VIDEO Magazime, Nov. 1992, page 30.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: A10035@email.mot.com (Scott Lindsey)
Subject: For Sale: HK Pre Amp 825
Organization: Motorola Land Mobile Products Sector
Distribution: usa
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 18:34:08 GMT


I would like to sell my HK 825 Pre-amp.
Approximately 5 yrs old, with MC and MM cartridge options
2 phonos, two tape loops, DAD, Tuner, Aux, etc.
Subsonic and high filters.

All original boxes, foam, documentation, etc. 

I am interested in selling or trading for a less capable
tube pre-amp (ie, without MM preamp, etc.).

Asking $200 but will entertain offers.
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: pcw@flutter.tv.tek.com (Patrick C. Wilkins)
Subject: Re: Amplified SubWoofer
Organization: Tektronix TV Products
Distribution: usa
Date: 17 Nov 92 10:16:54

If you just want to buy a powered subwoofer complete, listen to the Yamaha
SW100. It is designed for surround applications but it works well in
a stereo system. Otherwise, the kit route is probably the best for 
boom per buck.
 

--

-------------------------------------------------------------------
    Pat Wilkins II
    A.K.A. Clif
    Email pcw@flutter.tv.tek.com
    Work 503-627-6525

-------------------------------------------------------------------
    Is Deja-vu real or is life just redundant???????
-------------------------------------------------------------------
From: msiegall@OAVAX.CSUCHICO.EDU (MARC SIEGALL)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Klipsch Forte II - Opinions?
Date: 19 Nov 92 03:52:36 GMT
Reply-To: msiegall@OAVAX.CSUCHICO.EDU
Organization: California State University, Chico
NNTP-Posting-Host: oavax.csuchico.edu

Any opinions on Klipsch Forte II speakers?  How good of a value at
$800 vs. other options?

Thanks!
******************************************************************************
Marc Siegall                     MSIEGALL@OAVAX.CSUCHICO.EDU
Department of Management
California State University      (916) 898-5421
Chico, CA 95929-0031
******************************************************************************
Newsgroups: rec.audio,aus.hi-fi
From: walduck@mpr.ca (Andrew Walduck)
Subject: Tape head demagnitizing...
Organization: MPR Teltech Ltd., Burnaby, B.C., Canada
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 92 03:24:23 GMT

Here's a question that I've been meaning to ask for awhile...
How often and how, should a tape head be demagnitized...

I use my tape deck quite a bit (for both playback and recording...)
and I'm wondering if tape head demagnitizing is even necessary??
(of course...I've looked in the manual...it ain't there!! ;-)

Andrew
P.S. Maybe its time for a rec.audio faq!!???
-- 
Andrew Walduck, MPR Canada, walduck@mprgate.mpr.ca
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(I hope someone will flatter me by using this as a .sig quote...)
 -- Reid Kneeland
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: wkb@cbnews.cb.att.com (wm.keith.brummett)
Subject: Re: Amplified SubWoofer
Organization: AT&T
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 17:39:45 GMT


    In article <joet.1.721971687@>, joet@ (Joe Tooman) writes:
    > 
    > I am looking around to find a great sounding amplified subwoofer for
    > around $ 300 to $400.

    Hmmm.  Tall order, unless you can find some clean, used stuff.

    > I was told that if I put together my own setup I would save a lot of
    > money and get a better results from the subwoofer.

    Quite possible.

    > I am intrested in finding out what amp and speaker I could use for
    > optimal results.  I want clean non-distorted bass.

    Ah.  Well, now, that's the new holy grail, isn't it?

    > What would you recomend?

    I can tell you what I did, though it comes in a little above your price
    range.  My subs are basically home-made Audio Concepts Sub-1's.  I got
    two of their DV12 dual-coil, 12" drivers for $80 apiece.  For $10, they
    sent me the plans for the Sub-1 enclosure; I built two out of 3/4"
    particle board.  I used some sundry foam and poly stuffing from AC, and
    some hardware store and Radio Shack parts for feet, connections, etc.
    Since I have two subs, each driver's coils were wired parallel to give
    a 4-ohm load on each channel.  Total cost was about, oh, maybe $220.
    (Note: my cabinets are still unfinished.  Veneer will add to the final
    cost.)

    Next was amplification.  I bought a used Soundcraftsmen PCR-800 stereo
    amp -- 300w/chl into 4 ohms.  Cost $200.  You're on your own for this
    part.

    Lastly: the crossover.  AC's real Sub-1's use hideously expensive
    passive xovers made of (I assume) high-quality caps and coils.  It would
    have doubled my total cost to use them.  I bought two Marchand XM1
    active xover modules, and built a power supply and cabinet for them.
    About $70 total, perhaps.  Fed by my preamp, they feed my main amp and
    the PCR-800.

    The results are very, very good for the cost.  Deep, extended bass.
    And, most importantly (for me), I got to play around with all this neat
    DIY stuff.  For more info, get the following catalogs:

	  Audio Concepts, Inc.            Marchand Electronics, Inc.
	  901 South 4th Street            1334 Robin Hood Lane
	  La Crosse, WI 54601             Webster, NY 14580
	  608-784-6367                    716-265-4930

    -- Keith

-- 
    | (614) 860-3187         Copyright (C) 1992, by       AT&T, Room 3B202 |
    | att!cblph!wkb  or,     W.K. Brummett and AT&T      6200 E. Broad St. |
    | wkb@cblph.att.com       All rights reserved.      Columbus, OH 43213 |
    `----------------------------------------------------------------------'
From: eds@po.CWRU.Edu (Ethan D. Siegel)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: blank tapes
Date: 19 Nov 1992 18:37:41 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)
NNTP-Posting-Host: thor.ins.cwru.edu


Hi,

I was wondering if anyone could help me here.  Lately I've seen
on the market some really inexpensice type IV tapes, like the
SONY SR-90 and the Denon S-Port 90.  What I was wondering, is
whether I'm better offf using a cheap type IV or an expensive
type II like the XLIIS or the Denon HD8?  From experience, I 
know that these type II's sound real good and have a decent
longevity.  The cheap metals also sound good, but I was 
wondering if maybe they are on cheaper tape or in less good
cases.  Any opinions?  Email is best way to reply.

Ethan

-- 
*****************************************************************
*  Ethan Siegel             *  "If I told you all that went down*
*  Case Western Reserve U.  * it would burn off both your ears."*
*****************************************************************
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: eilifl@dhhalden.no (EILIF LIEN)
Subject: Re: Digital Amps -> next???
Organization: Ostfold College
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 21:22:21 GMT

In article <4310@cvbnetPrime.COM> dhukill@esprit.prime.com (Dave Hukill x4056 5-1) writes:
>From: dhukill@esprit.prime.com (Dave Hukill x4056 5-1)
>Subject: Digital Amps -> next???
>Date: 19 Nov 92 14:07:42 GMT
>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.
>

Why is this a logical step? Why all this digital mania? The digital format 
has its advantages in easily *storing* information, like music, yes, 
but there is NO reason for digital amplifiers or speakers, other than as a 
marketing gimmick (like "digital" headphones....Hahaha!)

>
>Dave Hukill <dhukill@esprit.prime.com>
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Newsgroups: rec.audio

>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?
>
>Regards Scott.

Seems reasonable at first glance.  Question is "how come it isn't happening
with cassette tape now with high speed dubbing decks that are available?"
The only tapes I know of are "Greatful Dead" and those are encouraged by
the band - they even allow underground recording at their concerts - 
setting up areas for recording even!  For really good sound, you need a
studio (most times) and that would be expensive with any equipment.  To
me, it just sounds like the powerful record industry saw an other way to
get more money from consumers and went for it like sharks with their own
sharks.  I have several 1 hr spoken word tapes that nonprofit groups do
of lectures and they cost $5 each - much less than a CD or store bought
tape - and they are done in very low volumes.  I believe that the 
record industry was/is looking to maximize short term profits.

I wouldn't be surprised to see home PCs storing music and playing it
back with all the DSP of a Yamaha DSP-A1000 and more in five years.

Kirk out
From: ma168faf@imath7.ucsd.edu (Matthew Guarnotta)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: **WHERE'S THE MD???****
Date: 18 Nov 92 01:41:05 GMT
Organization: Univsersity of California, San Diego


I BEEN LOOKING FOR SONY'S MD PLAYER AND RECORDER....WHERE IS IT???

WILL IT EVER COME TO THE U.S.?????? WHEN?????? HOW 'BOUT IN THE RECORD

STORES??? THEY SON'T SEEM TO KNOW .... ABOUT THE SYSTEMS...WHAT'S

STOPPING PROGRESS!!!!!


PLEASE REPLY I'M MAD AND HEADS ARE GOING TO ROLL!!!

MATT

ma168faf@sdcc16.ucsd.edu
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: caro@adobe.com (Perry A. Caro)
Subject: Re: DCC -- JUST SAY NO!  (was: The end of cassettes,
Reply-To: caro@adobe.UUCP  (Perry A. Caro)
Organization: Adobe Systems Incorporated, Mountain View
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 01:51:50 GMT

In article <27682@oasys.dt.navy.mil> curt@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Curt Welch) writes:
>Let's be clear here.  If you make a DIGITAL to DIGITAL copy from
>one DCC (or MD) to another, you don't get a perfect copy of the
>tape either.  This is because the data on the tape has to be
>converted to the format of the interface (i.e. uncompressed) and
>then converted back again.  And we are being told that these
>compression algorithms add more noise to the signal every time you
>do this.

That's what I get for saying "Let's be clear." :-)

The point I was trying to make was that SCMS will prevent digital to
digital copying with DCC anyway (thus making the issue of lossy
copying irrelevant), but this may only be the overriding restriction
that I was making it out to be for pre-recorded DCC tapes.  If you are
making your own master tapes with DCC, and then want to make
digital copies to either DCC or MD, you indeed will go through the lossy
sub-band encoding/decoding (how's that for a better term than
"compression"?), just as you said.

I suppose you could copy from DCC to DAT, and then for any number of
generations of DAT, with only the initial DCC encoding loss (assuming
the source does not assert copyright).  I wonder if there will be
"professional" DCC decks, analogous to SCMS-free professional DAT
decks?  Seems pointless, given the arguably superior quality of DAT.

Anyway, I'll go on record predicting that DCC will be to CC (analog
cassette tapes) as CD was to LP, in terms of mass market pre-recorded
material--"pop music".  The sound quality is superior, making the
artists happy, and the decks are backwards compatible with the
installed base (all DCC decks will play CC tapes, and probably pretty
darn good, given the thin-film heads and superior tape transport
mechanisms), making the majority of consumers happy.  The consumer
audio manufacturers are happy, since they get more product to push.
Purists and audiophiles have DAT to keep them happy.  The only hiccup
is that Sony will probably force MD down CBS's throat, even though the
lack of backwards compatibility seems the doom of MD.

The only folks who are unhappy are us poor computer software vendors,
who don't have the clout to get Congress to pass a tax on floppy disks
and QIC tapes, to make up for our losses from those nasty software
pirates! :-)

Perry
-- 
caro@adobe.com	...!{sun,decwrl}!adobe!caro   Contents: my opinions, no others
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Gabe M Wiener)
Subject: Re: Dolby C
Keywords: Dolby 
Reply-To: gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Gabe M Wiener)
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 17:22:26 GMT

In article <1992Nov16.220518.348@cypress.com> ssr@cypress.com (Bapcha/FPGA) writes:
>In article <1992Nov16.140041.23154@news.columbia.edu> gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Gabe M Wiener) writes:
>>
>>Dolby C is dynamic, Dolby B is static.  The compression effect changes
>>throughout a Dolby C recording.  As such, you *cannot* readily play it
>>back on a machine without Dolby C, whereas you certainly can play a Dolby
>>B tape back on a machine sans Dolby.
>>
>>Playing a Dolby C tape back w/o Dolby C will give, ah, less than desirable
>>results.
>>
>
>NOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!  Dolby B and C have similar ways of compensating
>for the hiss on a tape (assuming a zero noise source).  B compensates by
>10dB and C; by 20dB.  Hence if you record Dolby C,  and play it back on Dolby
>B,  just use the treble control to cut 10dB (oh well - till it sounds less
>"shrill"),  and you'll be all set !!

BZZT!  Sorry amigo, but that won't work.  Here's why.

Dolby B is a fixed-gain compander (with a variable bandwidth, of course).

Dolby C is actually a pair of companding circuits with variable gain.
There's a -30 to -10 dB section for high levels followed by a -50 to
-30 dB circuit.  These levels are variable, unlike Dolby B which is
fixed at -10 dB.

Dolby called this a "staggared action, dual-level format" if I recall
their paper.  I call it dynamic noise reduction, as opposed to Dolby
B, which I call static.  Of course, Dolby B is a side-chained format
like anything else, and the less HF content in the program material,
the less the effect will be heard, but that's not the same thing as
a variable gain stage.

I'm not at my desk, so I can't cite a chapter and verse in Woram or
Ballou, but you're free to check them out if you don't believe me.

Either way, Dolby C material will not sound good through a Dolby B
processor, and you will be far from "all set" if you switch on your
Dolby B circuit and then fiddle with your tone controls.  It won't
sound anything like the original.

The moral of the story is: Don't record in a noise reduction format
that you can't play back.


--
Gabe Wiener - Columbia Univ.     "This 'telephone' has too many shortcomings 
gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu       to be seriously considered as a means of 
N2GPZ in ham radio circles        communication. The device is inherently of
72355,1226 on CI$                 no value to us." -Western Union memo, 1877
From: kirk@hpcc01.corp.hp.com (Kirk Lindstrom)
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 15:56:59 GMT
Subject: Re: Cable Design Proposal
Organization: Shredding the water of SF Bay, HP-OCD
Newsgroups: rec.audio

>If I were experiencing some trouble with a particular interconnect,
>I would be inclined to consider other factors before suspecting
>reflections as the cause.  
>
>I thought I'd post this to show how I'd approach the question, given
>my engineering training.  However, I recognize that I may have
>overlooked something, or even be completely wrong.  Given that
>many readers think reflections are important, and my analysis
>leads me to believe that they're not, I'm interested in reading
>and learning from any discussion which follows.
>
>Tom Matthews
>----------

I agree with your analysis.  After I posted the thought experiment, I went
home and looked up the impedances of several amps as well.  I believe the
Zout (preamp):Zin (amp) ratio is such that very little energy would be
reflected back to the amp (2nd bounce?) which only further diminishes the
effects I postulated.  Also, I think the interconnects need to by 100 Meters 
or more for reflections to be a problem in even the first order.

My "current thinking" is that the factors that make for good interconnects
are:
1)  VERY GOOD shielding
2)  VERY GOOD connections
3)  VERY GOOD assembly

With that and profit, $50 for an interconnect isn't bad for just GOOD
stuff and I guess the VERY GOOD stuff above gets to the $100-$200 cables.
I bet alot of the extra cost if the VERY GOOD stuff is profit so I'm
investigating making some of my own to compare to the VERY GOOD stuff in
my local store that will let me demo their cables to find which sounds best
with my gear once it has broken-in.

Some other cable stuff:
1)  I measured conductor-to-shield resistance of el-cheapo interconnects
    supplied by Yamaha and it was 1 to 2 Meg Ohms.  Some of my 4 yr old
    Sony supplied el-cheapo cable was 6-9 Meg Ohm. 
2) Audioquest Topaz interconnect ($60/meter pr) >300 Meg Ohm *I think that 
   was the limit of my HP DVM as it just read "OVERLOAD".

Any other ideas on what "sound engineering design" makes for a good 
interconnect?

Kirk out
=> "We are what we pretend to be."  -  Kurt Vonnegut Jr.
+---------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Kirk Lindstrom - OCD Product R & D | Hewlett-Packard Co.  M/S: 91UA |
|   Engineer/Scientist, Hardware     |                                |
|------------------------------------| Optical Communication Division |
|       kirk@hpoclpa.hp.com          |                                |
|    Kirk Lindstrom / HP0100/UX      | 370 W. Trimble Rd.             |
| ph 408 435 6404 | fax 408 435 6286 | San Jose, CA  95131-1096       |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------+


r
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: paspro@.ic.ac.uk (Mr P.N. Asproulis)
Subject: Comparison of Headphones 
Organization: Imperial College
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 92 13:44:37 GMT

I want to buy a new set of headphones and I would like a comment
from the group on the Sennheiser HD 560 Ovation II compared to
the AKG K400 / K500 all in the same price range. Any other
suggestions ?

Thanks.

---------------------------------------------------           / \
 Department of Aeronautics                                    | |
 Imperial College of Science, Technology & Medicine   ________| |________
 Prince Consort Road, London SW7 2AY, U.K.           |________| |________|
 Room E355, Tel. : (071) 589 5111 Ext. 4028                   | |
 E-mail: p.asproulis@uk.ac.ic.ae                           ___| |___
---------------------------------------------------       |___\_/___|
 P. N. Asproulis
From: lstowell@pyrnova.mis.pyramid.com (Lon Stowell)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: Digital Audio on VHS Tape
Date: 24 Nov 92 02:02:41 GMT
Reply-To: lstowell@pyrnova.pyramid.com (Lon Stowell)
Organization: Pyramid Technology Corp., Mountain View, CA

In article <92328.160720ADB103@psuvm.psu.edu> ADB103@psuvm.psu.edu writes:
>Does anyone know anything about devices made by Technics and Sony that permit t
>he storage of digital data on the video track of a VHS machine. The Technics sy
>stem is 14 bit PCM.Im not sure of the sampling rate. The existence of the Sony
>unit is only "heard of." If any of these machines can do 44.1 or 48 khz they wo
>uld seem to solve my digital delema. Digital sound on inexpensive,long playing
>tapes  EDB


   Well, the Sony was designed to record digital on the video track
   of a Beta machine....   However you are talking about a PCM
   encoder.  It records digital data on the video track of ANY type
   VCR.  

   The Sony units included the PCM-F1, etc.

   They are to my knowledge no longer sold, but I have seen used
   units in the back of audio magazines.

   Also Toshiba used to sell a VCR that offered the choice of either
   PCM audio or video on the video tracks.   

   Performance wasn't as good as a modern RDAT on any of them...

Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: gvh@metrosoft.com (Gordon Van Huizen)
Subject: Re: DCC -- JUST SAY NO!  (was: The end of cassettes,
Reply-To: gvh@metrosoft.com (Gordon Van Huizen)
Organization: Metrosoft
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 00:10:33 GMT

In article <1992Nov19.005415.888@cmkrnl.com> jeh@cmkrnl.com writes:
> In article <1992Nov18.003930.519@metrosoft.com>,
> Off the topic for this thread, but:  I don't think this is always true!  Some
> of the best "driving music" isn't rock by any stretch of the imagination.  
> Consider, for instance, the _Back to the Future_ theme by Alan Silvestri, 
> or any of several pieces from _Star Wars_, such as the T.I.E. Fighter 
> dogfight from the first film's ("Episode IV") soundtrack, or "The Asteroid
> Field" from TESB... I wonder how many speeding tickets each has contributed  
to?
> 

I didn't make my point clear. I meant that the material must have some driving  
factor behind it - not that it be rock'n'roll. Sometimes I like Ginastera in  
the car. The point I meant to make is that not all material that I like at home  
translates well in the car.

-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------
Gordon Van Huizen           vox: 619.488.9411  fax: 619.488.3045
Metrosoft                   gvh@metrosoft.com [NeXTmail welcome]
----------------------------------------------------------------