HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: bill@bilver.uucp (Bill Vermillion)
Subject: Re: Resurrecting Recordings
Organization: W. J. Vermillion - Winter Park, FL
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1992 16:21:18 GMT

In article <1992Jul30.083054.8578@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com> ireland@iccgcc.decnet.ab.com writes:
>Resurrecting old recordings using digital technology has been going on for 
>a handful of years now. I believe the way its done is to sample in
>the record into memory. Then you put a little bit (of the song) at a time
>on your monitor. At this point you are looking at the music waveforms for
>a particular section. You then roll the mouse up to any high amplitude
>transients that look like they could be "pops", and then erase (or cut,
>or whatever) the peak, thus eliminating the pop. I suppose you would want
>to do a before and after comparison at this point to make sure you are 
>happy with the modification. 

>If you were to go this way for an entire scratched up record, then you may be
>at it for a while. There may be a system that will do all this stuff
>automatically - and therefore quicklier - by this time.

...

>Maybe your best bet is to use one of those analog gadgets that removes
>only fast occurring/high-amplitude transients ("pops"). Radio stations
>use 'em. Maybe you could rent one.

The de-click devices work well on something that has high-amplitude
transient noise.   Will remove noise from cracked records like it didn't
exist.

However the best way to start any cleanup is with the best copy you can
make of the source disk.

I have found that the absolute cleanest way to achieve this, with
sometimes almost miraculous sounding results, is to use a 'wet-play'
technique.

There were devices made to do this for home use at one time.  This had
a 'arm' that was a hollow tube, that slowly dispersed liquid onto a
thing band that would next go under the groove.

On some 16" transcriptions I transfered MANY years ago, I used a plain
water solution with just a drop of soap (today you can get wetting
agents readily).   I put the disk on, and kept carefully spraying a
thing mist so that the area under the stylus always had a thin coat of
water.

I showed this trick to someone with an LP that had been left face up on
a shelf somewhere for years.  Microfine dust was embedded in the
grooves.   EXTREMELY noisy.  Played it wet and it sounded like a master
tape.

WARNING!   Be careful of the cartridge you use.  Some can be
permanently damaged.  I found the Stanton series, such as the 681s to
be extremely rugged, and the canatlieve was far enough from the
cartridge that the chance of getting liquid into the cartridge was
minimal.

But of what consequence is a $50 dollar cartridge if this is you only
way to do it.  I was working with 16" glass based acetates that were
the ONLY recordings in existance.

If it's something that was commercially available at one time, you
might be better off looking for a replacement copy before you go to the
all the work of the above.



-- 
Bill Vermillion - bill@bilver.oau.org  bill.vermillion@oau.org
                - bill@bilver.uucp 
                - ..!{peora|ge-dab|tous|tarpit}!bilver!bill
From: chrisc@gold.gvg.tek.com (Chris Christensen)
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
Subject: Re: Remote Monitoring
Date: 27 Jul 92 17:46:24 GMT
Organization: Grass Valley Group, Grass Valley, CA

In article <1992Jul24.070626.9554@lucid.com> lnz@lucid.com (Leonard N. Zubkoff) writes:
>When I record live music away from my home, it would be nice to have speakers
>available for monitoring (particularly for imaging) in addition to headphones.
>Dragging along my Acoustat 2+2's and a pile of electronics is not feasible. :-)

>Are the AR Studio Partners the best choice for this, or is there another system
>short of dragging along a separate amp and speakers.  How good are these AR
>speakers?  Thanks for any info.

In all of the location recording that I have done I have only used
headphones as the reference.  If I am recording a live concert that I
am also doing sound reinforcement for I will mix on the SR speakers
but reference with the headphones.

I set up a live recording many years ago and the person that was
mixing insisted on mixing on speakers so I set that up.  Well the mix
was OK but the EQ and bass level was mixed to compensate for a loss of
low end of the speakers.......

Unless you use really good speakers in a remote recording situation
you have the possiblity of ending up with something less than you
expected.

If you must take a speaker in I would suggest the Yamaha NS-10's (hold
the flames) and be very aware that they roll off below 60Hz.......
-- 
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: chrisc@gold.gvg.tek.com (Chris Christensen)
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
Subject: Re: Soundproofing
Date: 28 Jul 92 16:28:24 GMT
Article-I.D.: gold.4933
Organization: Grass Valley Group, Grass Valley, CA

In article <1520sdINNb2@network.ucsd.edu> mbreen@sdacs.ucsd.edu (Michael Breen) writes:
>I posted recently regarding 'soundproofing' an area of my garage.
>Thanks to all who have gotten me this far.  Now I can ask 'better'
>questions.  Let me set it up again:

>I've got a corner of my rented garage I want to put a band in.  Pretty
>good size PA, guitar, bass (electric), and drums.  I will probably allow
>for some 'comfort' room, like a sofa, and/or some bookcases, etc.  The
>room will be mostly for rehearsal, occasionally to record (roughly) to
>a 4-track.  The space is about 10'x15' (I can get up to 15'x20', if I can
>get enough material to 'soundproof' it).  The way I want to set it up,
>it's two walls, one with a window, a concrete floor, and a slanted roof
>with rafters.  The 'box' is completed by two 'imaginary' walls.  I have
>a bunch of 'foam', stuff from hospital beds, about 4" thick with 'cones'
>on one side. flat on the other. I also have a bit of 'professional'
>acoustic-tile-stuff.  All told, it *might* cover two walls.  I can get to a
>bunch of plywood, and will spend a little if I have too.

There is no free lunch.  If you want ideas that will "guarantee"
containment of the sound, read on!

The best thing that you could do is to build a room within the garage.
If the garage has a concrete slab you have a good base to start with
:-)

Build 2x4 walls with plywood (better yet would be sheet rock) on the
inside and outside of the walls (sheetrock would be a lot better!).

Seal all the cracks.  Use HVAC ducting in the form of a tunnel with at
least one one 90 degree turn and then line the ducts with fiberglass
duct material.

The walls should be set on a dense rubber material, horse trailer
matting (without the holes in it) might be a good start.  There is
architectural material that can be used but it may be harder to find.
Don't for get to seal that "crack" with a rubber gasket (old inner
tube comes to mind).

The important thing  to contain the sound is to provide a barrier that has
mass.  The mas will resist being driven by the sound preasure. The investment
in sheetrock will be well worth it.  If you really want it good, use two
layers (with alternating joints) of sheet rock on the inside of the
inner room.

The ultimate would be to have the inside wall with sheet rock and then
an outside wall that doesn't touch the inside wall (or the garage
wall) with sheetrock on the outside of that.  The insides of the two
walls could be lined with fiberglass, it is unnecessary to fill the
gap. The two walls would have to sit on the rubber matting....

Take all of the foam stuff that you have and put on the walls of the
garage to absorb any sound that might escape from the inner room....
-- 
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.pro
From: friedman@col.hp.com (John Friedman)
Subject: Re: The Lindsay-Geyer Corporation is online
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 15:42:49 GMT
Organization: HP Colorado Springs Division

eacj@theory.TC.Cornell.EDU (Julian Vrieslander) writes:
> calving@netcom.com (The Lindsay-Geyer Corp) writes:
>> friedman@col.hp.com (John Friedman) writes:
>>> calving@netcom.com (The Lindsay-Geyer Corp) writes:
>>>
>>>> The Lindsay-Geyer Corporation is on line.
>>>
>>> Okay.  I'll bite.  What exactly is "The Lindsay-Geyer Corporation?"
>>
>> The maker of the World's best-sounding mic and other audio cables. 
>> With our mic cable, it doesn't sound like PA anymore.
>> It sounds like face-to-face.
> 
> Isn't Lindsay-Geyer also the source for an audiophile cable that caused
> a lot of controversy a year or two ago?  I don't follow these matters
> very closely, but I recall seeing claims about how this stuff used
> "highly magnetic" materials to achieve new performance levels.  I am sure
> that some of the net-skeptics would enjoy reading a technical explanation
> of the physical principles that give this cable its advantages.
> 
> Or alternatively, perhaps you can give a technical explanation of the
> marketing principles used to sell such a product. ;-)
> 
> Note that I am not being totally cynical here - I am glad to see
> manufacturers on the net, and if you can provide a real explanation for
> the alleged superiority of your cables, I would be very interested in
> reading it.

Yes, please post an explanation.  Quotes like "The maker of the World's
best-sounding mic and other audio cables.  With our mic cable, it doesn't
sound like PA anymore. It sounds like face-to-face." tend to make my
stomach turn.  Let's hear some DETAILS.

John Friedman
friedman@col.hp.com
From: jrusby@darkwing.uoregon.edu (Jim T. Rusby)
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
Subject: gotta new board
Date: 23 Jul 92 21:08:22 GMT
Article-I.D.: nntp.1992Jul23.210822.13876
Organization: University of Oregon Network Services

I just finished hooking up our new board in the concert recording studio.
We chose a Soundcraft Spirit, 16-8-2.  I am impressed.  This is a lot of
mixer for the money. It has the same lack of noise as the Delta series,
but it is actually set up for studio operations.  

The only problem is now we can hear how BAD our old board was. What I need
is a way to UNDO the garbage the old mixer put in the recordings.

I'll post a more comprehensive review after I've worked with it a few weeks.
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: acmcde@gsusgi2.gsu.edu (Claude D. Edwards)
Subject: Technics SST-1
Keywords: Speakers
Organization: Georgia State University
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 1992 16:07:44 GMT


Does anyone have any info on the Technics SST-1 three piece speaker system?  These are some of the most unuseual speakers I have ever seen.  The two main speakers are housed in a network of red tubing and sit at about a 30 degree angle off the floor.  The sub  is contained in a four foot silver mushroom and comes with it's own amp which is connected by what looks like an XLR cable.  A store in Atlanta has two pairs it is selling for about $1200 dollars each.  They claim the speakers are about two years old

 and were used for demonstration purposes with a Technics home theater system.  Are these speakers any good and are they worth the price?  For that kind of money I could get a nice pair of Apogees of Mirage M3s.  Any info would be greatly appreciated.
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: jcmiller@hydra.unm.edu (Jeff Miller)
Subject: Technics SA-GX910 A/V Receiver
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 92 16:48:45 GMT
Organization: University of New Mexico, Albuquerque
Distribution: na

I am considering buying the technics GX910 receiver. It received
a favorable review in the July issue of Audio magazine. It appears
to have all of the features I want and is available for about $650
mail order.  A sales person I talked to said I should purchase a
more expensive Onkyo receiver instead because it uses discrete
logic instead of IC's. I had a hard time hearing any differences
between the two because of backround noise in the store. The GX910
was warmer, but it had a built in fan.  I want a good prologic
receiver that will last without spending more than $700. Has anyone
out there purhased the GX910? Is discrete logic a real advanatage
or just an excuse to raise the price?

Any comments would be greatly appreciated.. 


--
Jeff Miller
University of New Mexico
jcmiller@hydra.unm.edu
From: ahaley@eoe.co.uk (Andrew Haley)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: blu-tak
Date: 31 Jul 92 13:51:29 GMT
Organization: EO Europe Limited, Cambridge, UK
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL3

sethb@fid.morgan.com (Seth Breidbart) writes:
: In article <1346@eouk9.eoe.co.uk> ahaley@eoe.co.uk (Andrew Haley) writes:
: 
: > discerning audiophiles claim that a thin coating of Blu-Tack
: >around the edge of a CD noticeably improves sound quality.
: 
: Do you apply it before or after the green pen?
: 
: Seth		sethb@fid.morgan.com

You can do either.  But it's best to use a composite of multiple
layers of both.

Andrew.
From: td@babar.inria.fr (Thierry Despeyroux)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: Class A/B/whatever... What does it mean?
Date: 24 Jul 92 07:51:29 GMT
Reply-To: Thierry.Despeyroux@sophia.inria.fr
Organization: INRIA, Sophia-Antipolis (Fr)

In article <5070308@hplsla.hp.com>, tomb@hplsla.hp.com (Tom Bruhns) writes:
|> The definitions of A, AB, B, C, and D classes is pretty general,

What are class AA, new class A (Technics products) and
optical class A (Denon) ?

-- 
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|     Thierry Despeyroux      | email: Thierry.Despeyroux@sophia.inria.fr   |
| I.N.R.I.A. Sophia-Antipolis | phone: +33 93 65 77 07 fax: +33 93 65 77 66 |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|        walk: 2004, route des Lucioles, 06 Valbonne-Sophia-Antipolis       |
|        mail: B.P. 93 / F-06902 Sophia-Antipolis Cedex / France	    |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: bower@pecan.cns.udel.edu (Tyson Bower)
Subject: Equalizer
Summary: rec.audio.bass-junkies 
Organization: University of Delaware, Newark
Distribution: NA
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 22:42:08 GMT

Has anyone had any experience with the Audio Control Richter Scale III
bass eq?  I'm sorta vaguely half-considering looking at one.

What exactly does it do? (Yes, I know it is a six-band stereo half-octave
eq.)  How well does it do it?  Is it worth a $300 price tag? (That's
the only quote I've found on it so far.)

I'm driving a set of Paradigm 11se's, which already have ample bass to
keep me more than happy.  Most of the time.  Occasionally, I get in
those evil moods when I just want to piss off the neighbors with some
completely unnecessary emphasis in the lower octaves.  I've a friend
of mine who uses a Pioneer 12 band eq to jack about 12 dB of boost
into the 16 and 32 hz bands.  The result, I must say, is amusing.  Not
the sort of thing you would want to listen to on a regular basis, 
but great for getting books and stuff off that hard-to-reach top shelf.
From: wgd@ukc.ac.uk (W.G.Day)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: Cyrus/Mission amps
Date: 29 Jul 92 13:51:58 GMT
Reply-To: wgd@ukc.ac.uk (Warren Day)
Organization: Computing Lab, The University, Canterbury, Kent. CT2 7NF, UK

In article <Bs56nM.A0u@fulcrum.bt.co.uk> igb@fulcrum.bt.co.uk (Ian G Batten) writes:
>>>>>> On 28 Jul 92 09:10:06 GMT, wgd@ukc.ac.uk (W.G.Day) said:
>W.G.Day>  My friend with the Cyrus II and now the
>W.G.Day>  PSX also has a pair of Monitor Audio 14s.  A good amp, a good pair of
>W.G.Day>  speakers and a poor match

>Interesting.  I have a old-style plastic Cyrus One with Monitor Audio
>14s, and it seems to work OK.

We have found that Shane's old Cyrus I with headphone socket sounded better
than Gary's new Cyrus II without.  This was driving both the MA 14s and
the Celestion 3s.

>However, I have found the 14s to be very
>placement sensitive and need careful spiking and mass-loading

Gary has found the same.  He has also stuffed sand in them.

>ian

Warren
From: strong@tc.fluke.COM (Norm Strong)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: double-sided CDs
Date: 31 Jul 92 14:58:37 GMT
Organization: John Fluke Mfg. Co., Inc., Everett, WA

The reason you don't see double-sided CDs is that there would be no
advantage for either the manufacturer, performer or customer.  They
would have to be made by gluing 2 single sided CDs together.  The
gluing operation would add to the cost of the 2 CDs.  Furthermore, you
would no longer have a decent sized label to read.

The cost of manufacturing a CD has almost nothing to do with the selling
price--which is a function of the cost of production and distribution.
If someone produced a 2 hour CD, they would have to charge twice as much
for it.  What would be the point? 

The RIAA is already unhappy with the 75 minute playing time of the CD.
Competition is forcing the inclusion of extra material as it is.  e.g.,
when I bought my first CD of Brahms' 4th it contained just that--Brahms'
4th.  The next one I bought had the Tragic Overture as a bonus.  I just
bought a 3rd one.  Not only does this one have Brahms' 4th, it also has
the Variations on a Haydn theme--AND the choral work Naenie, a total of
76 minutes of music.  

Competition forces this sort of thing; technology makes it possible.  I
think record companies would strenuously resist any increase in playing
time.  
-- 

Norm Strong  (strong@tc.fluke.com)
2528 31st S.   Seattle WA 98144   USA
From: evb@logrus.Eng.Sun.COM (Eric van Bezooijen)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: Good Quality Speakers?
Date: 23 Jul 92 15:59:55 GMT
Reply-To: evb@logrus.Eng.Sun.COM
Organization: Sun Microsystems, Inc.
NNTP-Posting-Host: logrus.eng.sun.com

If bass is all that you are really interested in, try some Cerwin-Vegas.  However,
they won't do much for accuracy... But at 98 dB efficiency or higher, you can get
a ton of noise from these things.  Same goes for Klipschhorns (sp?).  As for a
good speaker with lots of base, you could always buy a seperate subwoofer....
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: sethb@fid.morgan.com (Seth Breidbart)
Subject: Re: blu-tak
Organization: my opinions only
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 22:33:10 GMT

In article <1346@eouk9.eoe.co.uk> ahaley@eoe.co.uk (Andrew Haley) writes:

> discerning audiophiles claim that a thin coating of Blu-Tack
>around the edge of a CD noticeably improves sound quality.

Do you apply it before or after the green pen?

Seth		sethb@fid.morgan.com
From: smee@bristol.ac.uk (Paul Smee)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: Best news about LPs...
Date: 29 Jul 92 10:59:22 GMT
Reply-To: P.Smee@bristol.ac.uk (Paul Smee)
Organization: University of Bristol

In article <WOOD.92Jul27174436@wood.uk.tele.nokia.fi> wood@uk.tele.nokia.fi (Peter Wood) writes:
>
>The reason we're spending those thousands of dollars is because we get feel
>that we enjoy listening to music more when it's been recorded and replayed
>through analogue media.  We feel that digital sound makes music less
>'accessible' to us - that we enjoy it less, and therefore find we play it
>less, and are less likely to explore new avenues of musical taste.

And some of us sit on the fence.  Regulars will know that (a) I am,
generally speaking, a digito-phile, and very much like the sound of CDs
(usually); and (b) I have recently upgraded my turntable (only to the
extent of about 350 pounds, say maybe $600).

'Why?', you ask.  Well, I don't agree 100% with Peter, but I find he is
correct (or at least I agree with him) for SOME music.  Now, thinking
about what I listen to on CD and what I listen to on LP, I think I can
divide it up fairly neatly by saying that I prefer CD for new (really
new) recordings; but that I prefer LP for older stuff, rather than CD
re-releases.  (Of course, I still buy lots of 'blasts from the past' as
well as more modern productions, so that's OK.  And, I'm having lots of
fun as more and more of them turn up, in reasonable condition, in the
local used-record shops.)

Now I can think of several reasons for this.  Most of the stuff I
prefer on vinyl is stuff I've always heard on vinyl, so maybe it's just
that that's what I expect it to sound like.  Or maybe it's a production
problem.  Someone (Bill V, I think, but may be wrong) has said that one
of the problems with early CDs and with re-releases is that CD and LP
need different styles of engineering at the mixing desk.  Engineers who
only understand vinyl, and companies who try to save a buck by pressing
CDs using master tapes mixed for vinyl, will probably make not-very-nice 
CDs.  That would match pretty well with my feelings.  Who knows?  

(Who cares?  I enjoy them both, and take them both seriously in what I
think are their appropriate places.  And I alternate between annoyance
and extreme amusement at all the folks who feel there is only one true
answer, and who thereby cut themselves out of half the fun.)

-- 
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: wash@mamacass.etdesg.trw.com (Michael Washington)
Subject: CD Length
Followup-To: CD Length Question
Organization: TRW Inc., Redondo Beach, CA
Date: Fri, 31 Jul 92 18:11:32 GMT

Everyone keeps commenting on the length of a CD in this newsgroup.  Well, I
for one don't think the length is much of an issue, except for classical CD's.
For popular CD's, an artist will not (for free) fill out the CD.  Remember,
most artists are used to the length of LP's and won't produce albums much
longer than that for the same price that CD's are currently sold for.

I mean, if I were a recording artist, I would not sell my CD's at the current
prevailing price with a full 74+ minutes on the disk.  It would take two LP's
to hold 74 minutes of music (maybe three).  That is a lot more money in my
pocket.  

However, as a consumer, I would prefer the record companies to at least fill
a CD to at least 72 minutes worth of music.  That way, I feel that I get
some of my money's worth of music (feel not being ripped off as badly).

Some people mentioned putting music on both sides of a CD.  I don't believe
the record companies would do that and maintain the current selling price of
the CD.  Recording on both sides would be like getting a two-CD box worth
of music.  Therefore, all CD's would be priced around $22.00 or more.  Most
people wouldn't like that price (USA price, that is).  

I do feel that when we purchase a CD, we should get the most music for the
dollars we pay for the thing.  However, as we all know, the record companies
are in the business for profit, not necessarily for our enjoyment and 
convenience.

Anyway, the articles have been amusing.

"Live Long and Prosper!"
 Michael N. Washington
From: jstimson@jarthur.claremont.edu (John Stimson)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: A/V for under $500?
Date: 28 Jul 92 19:58:23 GMT
Organization: Harvey Mudd College, Claremont, CA 91711

Hey, would everyone who's currently looking for an A/V Dolby surround
receiver please all get together, pool your findings, and stick them
in the FAQ?  This is almost a Daily Asked Question...

						John Stimson
						Harvey Mudd College