HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: sss@castle.ed.ac.uk (S S Sturrock)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: Comments on analog music
Date: 21 Jan 93 10:29:35 GMT
Organization: Edinburgh University

In article <1jjtgdINNiee@transfer.stratus.com> rsud@sw.stratus.com (Rajiv Sud) writes:
>.....
>In article <1190785@hpnmdla.sr.hp.com>, kurts@hpnmdla.sr.hp.com (Kurt Strain) writes:
>> 
>> But it also means you like noise and distortion and any benefit you perceive 
>> is attributed to the placebo effect.
>
>	What did I tell you! Here's an "engineer" whose telling you that
>what you find to sound more life like is distortion and he implies that
>you should like what sounds less like music! Har har!

Another newbie :-)

Kurt was just parroting the usual responses, Hey, Kurt!  You reading this?
Or are you in pain through laughing so hard!!!!??? :-)

Hehehehehehe


-- 
Shane Sturrock, Biocomputing Research Unit, Darwin Building, Mayfield Road,
University of Edinburgh, Scotland, Commonwealth of Independent Kingdoms.  :-)

Civilisation is a Haggis Supper with salt and sauce and a bottle of Irn Bru.
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: joe@avs.com (Joe Peterson)
Subject: Re: Anti-aliasing on the recording end?
Organization: Advanced Visual Systems Inc.
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL8]
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 23:44:35 GMT

Gabe M Wiener (gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu) wrote:
: In article <shetline-210193103508@128.89.19.74> shetline@bbn.com (Kerry Shetline) writes:
: >It has obviously become popular in digital playback systems to use
: >oversampling as a way to provide digital-domain filtering, allowing for the
: >use of much less severe analog filters. But what's going on these days on
: >the recording side?

: ...
: above that would alias.  In an oversampling system, the clock rate is run
: much higher, say 88.2 or 176.4.  Now, you simply sample everything four
: times, and discard three of the four samples.  The advantage here is that
: now your clock signal is much, much higher, and you can have a much
: gentler slope filter.  If you have a 2X system, your clock is 88.2, so
: you can attenuate gently until 66.2 (or 60.2 usually... a 2 kHz guard
: band is standard).  The same applies for higher rates.

: Once the data is sampled, the extra samples are decimated and then the
: 44.1 kHz signal is recorded.

: There are more modern techniques (1bit, etc) which you can read about in
: Pohlman if you're really interested :-)

I doubt you would want to simply "discard" the extra samples.  You then would
lose the advantage of oversampling!  I assume you mean you would digitally
filter down to 44.1...
					Joe

Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: znpt01@trc.amoco.com (Norman P. Tracy)
Subject: Bose lawsuit, was Re: The Bose flame war
Originator: znpt01@gpss43
Organization: Amoco Production Company, Tulsa Research
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 15:49:44 GMT


In article <MJKOBB.93Jan20123343@media-lab.media.mit.edu>, mjkobb@media.mit.edu (Michael J Kobb) writes:
> 
>    What about Dr. Bose's well established history of agreeing to engage in a
>    fair technical debate, then, when he is repeatedly cornered about the
>    shaky technology and dubious sound of his products, rather than retrorting
>    on technical groudn, he responds with "I'll have my lawyers deal with you!"?
> 
Said Richard Pierce in a previous post.  To which Mike Kobb replies:

> I really couldn't say.  I've never seen anything like what you
> describe, nor have I ever even heard anybody say anything remotely
> similar.
> 

The most notorious case was when Bose Corp. took that radical bunch of under-
ground reviewers at Consumers Union to court over a less than favorable review
of the 901.  (Yes Mike, I know you don't like 901s, just 10.2s.  And not point
1s.)  Talk about suit happy, have you ever heard of anybody else sueing CU ?!?!

Its the Bose Corp's known track record of letting their lawyers do their talking
that keeps all Bose products from being reviewed in the audio press.  The only
reviews I can recall of Bose have been in Stereo Review, and of course the editor
and publisher of SR did not have to worry that the review would be negative ;).
-- 
Norman Tracy

znpt01@trc.amoco.com
From: shetline@bbn.com (Kerry Shetline)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: Why would CD carousel sound worse than single-play?
Date: 23 Jan 93 04:51:15 GMT
Followup-To: rec.audio
Organization: BBN
NNTP-Posting-Host: bbn.com

In article <1993Jan22.104313.15975@microsoft.com>, davidl@microsoft.com
(David Long) wrote:
> 
> It seems to me that with CD players, designing the unit as 
> a carousel changer shouldn't result in any degradation of
> sound quality compared to a single-play  unit.  However, 
> some salespeople have told me that the single-plays sound 
> better.  I don't understand why.

Because it's too convenient, and obviously if you don't make sacrifices and
go through elaborate rituals you can't expect to appease the Audio God so
that he will grant you the True Sound.

You see, carousels hurt in the same way that green magic marker and plastic
stick-on rings help. The connection should be obvious ;-)

More seriously, because a bias against changers already existed from the
days of LPs (when it was justified), it carried on without any good reason
into the CD world. It has become a self-fulfilling prejudice, however,
because many manufacturers making high-quality CD players don't want to
have to fight market perceptions, whether they are justified or not.

-Kerry
From: omf@pyros.hacks.arizona.edu (Oscar Fowler)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: Old CD Player and New CDs
Date: 23 Jan 93 20:49:41 GMT
Reply-To: omf@pyros.hacks.arizona.edu
Followup-To: rec.audio
Distribution: world,local
Organization: Sirius Cybernetics Corporation
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.4-a4

In article <shetline-230193110939@128.89.19.90>, shetline@bbn.com (Kerry Shetline) writes...
>In article <22JAN93210325@pyros.hacks.arizona.edu>,
>omf@pyros.hacks.arizona.edu (Oscar Fowler) wrote:
>> I've noticed that I have problems playing CD's bought in the last few
>> months, however!  There are about four CD's which my player just
>> keeps spinning around and around trying to get the track info from,
>> but never making it.
> 
>Do the new CDs that don't play have play times of over 74 minutes? Some CDs
>push their play time up to 80 minutes (maybe even longer). Anything past 74
>isn't really according to Hoyle, however, and some older machines might
>have problems with extra-long discs.

Thanks for the suggestion - I'll have to check out that possibility,
however, I think some of my old CD's also push 74 minutes, so I doubt
that that is the problem.  The 'narrow track width' you mentioned
sounds more likely - is this really being done?  I thought the CD format
had a fixed track width...

Oscar
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: bvanhof@pvlab2.eecs.wsu.edu (Barry Vanhoff)
Subject: How to phase a fixed tweeter??
Reply-To: bvanhof@pvlab2.eecs.wsu.edu (Barry Vanhoff)
Organization: Washington State University
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 93 05:43:41 GMT


I recently replaced the voice coil/dome assembly in my Focal T120K tweeter.  There are no marks on the leads which specify the proper phasing.  I would have expected to see a red lead on the new "faceplate" like the old one had.

So how can I figure out the phase before screwing the whole thing on??  Will it be obvious if the I hook it up in reverse polarity??  What kind of tests can I run to insure proper phasing??

Thanks,

--

Barry Vanhoff
bvanhof@pvlab2.eecs.wsu.edu
509-335-1437
From: tom@afthree.as.arizona.edu (Thomas J. Trebisky)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: Roll on the argument : -) ( was Re: Enough w/LP v.s. CD! )
Date: 22 Jan 93 22:45:36 GMT
Organization: University of Arizona, Tucson, AZ

In article <gre253-220193112634@152.83.8.10> gre253@its.csiro.au (Steve Green) writes:
>In article <shetline-210193113122@128.89.19.74>, shetline@bbn.com (Kerry
>Shetline) wrote:
>> 
>> In article <199301211433.AA11230@europa.eng.gtefsd.com>,
>> whiting@europa.eng.gtefsd.com (claude whiting) wrote:
>> > either side. Let's stop wasting bandwidth and time on this silly argument. 
>> > Face it, some people love cd's, others love their lp's. Leave them alone!
>> 
>> If someone merely expresses a preference, it doesn't bother me a bit. But
>> when the statement of preference is coupled with bogus technical arguments
>> and unjustified attacks of the other side, it is quite reasonable to want
>> to respond.
>> 
>
>[ stuff about arguing about CDs vs LPs deleted ]
>
>I really enjoy reading the CD vs LP, analog vs digital threads. What a bun
>fight ! :-)
>
>Both sides get so wound up that they forget to just relax and listen to the
>music.
>
>Keep it up guys!  I enjoy a good fight - especially when neither side can
>win!
>
>==============================================================================
>| Steve Green     |  "Hey Rocky, watch me pull a rabbit outa my hat !"     
> |
>| Comms Group     |  "That trick never works"                              
> |
>| ITS Branch      |  "Nothin' up my sleeve - PRESTO !"                     
> |
>| CSIRO Australia |  "No doubt about it - I gotta get another hat"         
> |
>==============================================================================


--
	Tom Trebisky	ttrebisky@as.arizona.edu

This program posts news to thousands of machines throughout the entire
civilized world.  Your message will cost the net hundreds if not thousands of
From: plg3723@zeus.tamu.edu (Hello there)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: Seeking "Color Bar" sound to light device.
Followup-To: rec.audio
Date: 22 Jan 1993 10:54 CST
Organization: Texas A&M University, Academic Computing Services
Distribution: usa
NNTP-Posting-Host: zeus.tamu.edu
News-Software: VAX/VMS VNEWS 1.41    

Steve Meloan writes...
>I'm looking for a device, quite common in the 60's and 70's, known as a
>"color bar," or "color organ."  This was an electronic gadget, who's input
>was an audio signal, and who's output was an accordingly modulated 120
>volt electrical current.  It's purpose was to create audio driven "light
>shows," sort of a pre-Laserium.  Usually, the audio was filtered into three
>eletrical outputs - one for bass, one for mid-range, and one for treble.  A
>version even existed for the car.     
> 
>Anyone knowing of where I might locate one, please contact me at:
>steve@wet.com.  Thanks.

I occasionaly get a catalog that sells all kinds of surplus equipment and
nifty electronic gadgets from all over the place.  I think the name of the
catalog was something like "American surplus and scientific".  It is always
printed on newsprint, and usually contains 80-100 pages.  The writters of
the descriptions of the products usually use a humorous tone towards the
stuff they sell.  I don't have a copy with me, and can't find one.  However,
I know the last catalog had a device that Steve is describing, although
it was a 120vac version.  The price, I belive, was under $20.  Does anyone
get this catalog?  If I can get the address, I'll post it.  I have ordered
from these people before, and have had no problems with them.


plg3723@zeus.tamu.edu


Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: mjv8557@eafs000.ca.boeing.com (Mark J. Vandiver)
Subject: Re: Is a subwoofer output for YAMAHA a1000?
Keywords: YAMAHA A1000 
Organization: be41t
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 17:57:36 GMT

wc2q@weyl.math.Virginia.EDU (Wan-Ying  Chang) writes:

>	Is a subwoofer out for the YAMAHA A1000 ?

Yes, there is a subwoofer output on the rear of the A1000 unit.
It's crossover is 200Hz. I think it is prehapps a little high, IMO.
I use a active bi-Amp crossover from my mains, at 96HZ which is
fine for my DQ1W subs.

			Mark

>Barry
From: shetline@bbn.com (Kerry Shetline)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: Old CD Player and New CDs
Followup-To: rec.audio
Date: 24 Jan 1993 03:42:16 GMT
Organization: BBN
Distribution: world,local
NNTP-Posting-Host: bbn.com

In article <23JAN93134941@pyros.hacks.arizona.edu>,
omf@pyros.hacks.arizona.edu (Oscar Fowler) wrote:
> Thanks for the suggestion - I'll have to check out that possibility,
> however, I think some of my old CD's also push 74 minutes, so I doubt

I don't think it was until sometime during the last 3-4 years that any CDs
were made that far overran 74 minutes.

> that that is the problem.  The 'narrow track width' you mentioned
> sounds more likely - is this really being done?  I thought the CD format
> had a fixed track width...

Yes, it really is done. And yes, there is a standard for a fixed track
width. It gets ignored sometimes. The way the laser pickup tracks a CD,
however, does not depend on precise track width. It's more a matter of
tolerances in the tracking mechanism. Most machines have no problem with
fudging the track width a bit. Some older ones... well...

-Kerry
From: lancer@wpi.WPI.EDU (Stephe Lewis Foskett)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: DAT, DCC and MD
Date: 27 Jan 93 07:14:49 GMT
	<1993Jan25.183723.3085@e2big.mko.dec.com>
	<1993Jan27.030152.6069@labtam.labtam.oz.au>
Organization: ZikZak Corporation
NNTP-Posting-Host: wpi.wpi.edu
In-reply-to: graeme@labtam.labtam.oz.au's message of Wed, 27 Jan 1993 03:01:52 GMT

>>>>> On Wed, 27 Jan 1993 03:01:52 GMT, graeme@labtam.labtam.oz.au (Graeme Gill) said:
> I came across an article recently from Sony in which they
> describe a play only DAT mechanism that uses a non-tracking
> technique combined with memory buffering.

This would be the mystical Sony NT-1 "Scoopman".  Somehow they fit 90
minutes of 32KHz uncompressed digital stereo on a "stamp-sized"
casette.  The machine apparently runs six hours on a AA battery and is
the size of a microcasette recorder.

Now don't you wish Sony had designed an NT machine using CC-sized
casettes (like the DCC) which could record 44.1 KHz uncompressed
digital stereo?  They could kill the DCC and appease the
non-compressionists out there in one fell swoop!

I'd settle for NT microcasette recorders if they'd become more common
here in the states! 12 bit wouldn't sound _that_ bad in a walkman...

.s.
--
- so spake lancer@wpi.wpi.edu -   - so says the Beautiful South: -
-  Im walking through these pastures, Im picking up sweet fruit  -
-      Im shaking hands with people that previously Id shoot     -
-Nothing will disuade me, nothing will dilute - I want to execute-
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: gre253@its.csiro.au (Steve Green)
Subject: Re: Comments on analog music
Followup-To: rec.audio
Organization: Comms group, ITS branch, CSIRO
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 1993 23:42:43 GMT

In article <3340422@hpcc01.corp.hp.com>, kirk@hpcc01.corp.hp.com (Kirk
Lindstrom) wrote:
> 
> >Why do I like it more ? Well, it sounds more like my recordplayer (not only
> >the Linn CD, but also other brands). So what did they do ? Put a lot of
> >LP distorsion on the discs, or a special 'analog distorsion' circuit in the
> >players ?
> >
> >Sture
> ----------
> Well, what I think has happended is you might have gotten some CDs that
> were mastered properly.  A few yrs ago, I blew my brother away by
> walking into a room at my house when he was visiting and listening to
> some of his rock CDs on my old system.  10 seconds and I'd say "sounds
> like an analog mastering".  He'd pick up the CD jewel box and drop his
> jaw and say "how could you tell?"  I'd say "sounds like shit".  Most of
> the CDs he owned were CDs of his favorite rock records.  Few that I heard

I have a term for this "class" of CD - "shovelware"
You can pick it a mile away. Photo-reduced copy of the LP cover as CD cover
on
a thin tacky bit of paper! Look-out - it's likely to sound EXACTLY the same
as the LP pressing.


> sounded very good when they were transferred to CD.  They are getting
> better now.  Furthermore, I owned many "LaserLight" CDs of
> classical music that I'd purchased for $3-$5 each and they sounded bad
> to my ears also.  I then started to get CDs made by GRP and Schefield
> and could hear that they knew what they were doing.  Even now I'm leary
> of buying CDs unless I trust the engineering:  GRP, Chesky, Schefield
> and Telarc though I think the first 3 are "more musical" as a whole at
> times.  I've heard some good remastering done on the "Verve label" that
> I'll probably start buying also (Joe Henderson).

Many new AAD CDs sound very very good.

> 
> Anyone agree and have other labels that are pretty sure bets to be well 
> mastered?
> 
> Kirk out

How about Naxos - haven't heard anything bad from them as yet.

========================================================================
| Steve Green     |  "Hey Rocky, watch me pull a rabbit outa my hat !" |
| Comms Group     |  "That trick never works"                          |
| ITS Branch      |  "Nothin' up my sleeve - PRESTO !"                 |
| CSIRO Australia |  "No doubt about it - I gotta get another hat"     |
========================================================================
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: shiv@bnr.ca (Shiv Naimpally)
Subject: Re: Pro-logic amp/speaker recommendations wanted
Reply-To: shiv@bnr.ca (Shiv Naimpally)
Organization: Bell-Northern Research Ltd.
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 93 17:56:37 GMT

In article <TJWU.93Jan23000754@marinara.mit.edu>, tjwu@athena.mit.edu (Thomas J Wu) writes:
|> I am attempting to build a decent A/V system from scratch.  I already
|> have a CD player and a VHS Hi-fi VCR, but my amp is currently a boom box.
|> I'm planning on spending under $800 for the receiver and $500 for the
|> speakers.
|> 
|> For the receiver, I'm interested in Dolby Pro-logic; extra DSP modes are
|> also nice.  The number of A/V inputs is important, since I'm considering
|> a second VCR, a tape deck and/or DCC/MD unit, or LD player, in addition
|> to what I have now.  I have narrowed down my selection to the Yamaha RX-V850
|> and the Onkyo TX-SV70PRO.  They seem to offer just about the same set of
|> features and carry about the same price.  Does anybody have any experience
|> or advice concerning either of these units?  Are there any other units
|> I should consider?
|> 
|> As for the speakers, I'm interested in the Paradigm 3se and 5se, as well
|> as their center-channel speakers.  Would these be a good match for my
|> receiver?  Thanks for the help!

Get the Yamaha 850. It is discontinued so prices should be good :-)
Speakers: Get the Paradigm Phantoms for the front and Atoms for the rear.
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: graeme@labtam.labtam.oz.au (Graeme Gill)
Subject: Re: Digital critics - sampling argument is nonsense
Organization: Labtam Australia Pty. Ltd., Melbourne, Australia
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 02:11:32 GMT

In article <1993Jan22.130811.1@tnclus.tele.nokia.fi>, lauusitalo@tnclus.tele.nokia.fi writes:
> In article <1993Jan22.053032.18507@labtam.labtam.oz.au>, graeme@labtam.labtam.oz.au (Graeme Gill) writes:
> > If you want to have "warm"
> > analog sound on CDs you have to add that to the master recording
> > artificially, rather than relying on analog tape and vinyl record
> > distortion to do it for you.
> 
>         Is that why they are adding Snap, Crackle and Pop (tm)  to
>         new CD's? Imagine CD snapping like LP.

	Mostly they seem to be referring to the sound imparted by
analog tape machines. Analog tape recording has fairly high distortion
and a rounded saturation characteristic. The other interesting thing
in the making of vinyl records is that (as I understand it), once the
master tape is complete, the sound is then tweeked by the cutting Engineer
to make sure that the groove stays within the mechanical limits of both
the cutting and typical reproduction gear. This entails compressing
large amplitude low frequency signals, and limiting the maximum
slew rate, which amounts to curtailing high energy high frequencies.
This is one explanation for why CDs are criticized for being to "bright" -
the master tape hasn't been processed for vinyl and therefore retains
more of the high frequency energy that was there in the original mix.
Another twist is that maybe the master tapes are too "bright" because
they are mixed by people whos hearing has been burned out by too
much high level sound, and in the past this has been corrected by
the cutting Engineer. Now that master tapes go straight to CD, this
bias shows up in the final recording.

	Graeme Gill
	Design Engineer
	Labtam Australia
From: vanepps@engin.umich.edu (Keith Skronek)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: Thiele cs2.2 opinions wanted...
Followup-To: rec.audio
Date: 25 Jan 1993 07:01:48 GMT
Organization: University of Michigan Engineering, Ann Arbor
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: anvil.engin.umich.edu

In article <1jtatuINNmds@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu>, co940@cleveland.Freenet.Edu
(Nicholas E. Damato) wrote:
> 
> 
> Hello, my neigbor is buying new speakers, he has narrowed his choice
> down to three:
> 1. paradigm studio monitor
> 2. vandersteen 2ce
> 3. thiele cs2.2
>  
  I had they opportunity to listen to the Theol 2.2 about a year ago.  They
are a very nice speaker.  Personally, I found the bass to loss some control
at higher volume levels.  If you tend to regularly listen to music at
moderately loud levels, it may be of some concern.  This is only one small
area, overall the Theils are a very fine speaker.
  I have also had the pleasure to sell the Paradigms.  I find that untill
they are pulled a couple of feet (a good 2 feet) away from room boundaries
the sound can be quite muddy and boomy. Once again, I'm nit-picking a very
good speaker.
  I have not listened to the Vandesteen extensively, but I beleive your
friend has narrowed it down to three very fine speakers.  Set up carefully,
in a well matched system, any one should be very musically satisfying.

Keith
From: kirk@hpcc01.corp.hp.com (Kirk Lindstrom)
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 1993 18:28:11 GMT
Subject: Re: The Bose flame war
Organization: Shredding the water of SF Bay, HP-OCD
Newsgroups: rec.audio

>I also wish that people would refrain from posting unelaborated,
>inflammatory criticisms of the entire product line for no apparent
>reason, in reply to questions that had nothing to do with it!  What
>purpose does that serve, besides provoking flame wars and stroking
>the egos of people with 'superior' systems?
>
>--Mike
----------
For me it was my boss and his boss's boss that owned -901's.  I came out
of school and didn't like their sound and bought something else. (maybe it
was a different model # as it was 13 yrs ago).  Anyway, there were two
guys thinking I was nuts for not liking "the best speaker around".  They
had influence on my salary.  Maybe finding out "I was not alone" is what
makes if fun to joke about them.

You have to consider this:

If a manufacturer makes 9 out of 10 products that sound awful to your ears,
why would you trust them for the other 1 - even if it sounds acceptable?  My
guess is residual marketing hype on the old noodle.

I listened to most of the Paradigm line last night from the $75 Atoms to
the $300ea mini monitors.  They are all great buys for the money and show
a marked improvement for each price level.  I'd feel comfortable buying
any speaker in this line (though the salesman I'm familar with said some
were "better values" in his mind than others- like there were better
monitors for $450 ea, etc.)

With the bose line, it sounds like one goes from
#1 "sounds like sh*t"
#2 "uch, blach, ...."
...
#top-1 "lots of stuff at half the cost that are better, but it makes alot
 of loud noise and spreads it evenly about the room"
#top Acceptable - I'll buy it.

For product lines over the years I've gone from Infinity to Boston Acoustic
to Paradigm as products worth listening to for any price if someone asks
me about speakers (doesn't mean I own any either).

Kirk out
Newsgroups: rec.audio