HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: kautz@research.att.com
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: dual cassette for unattended recording
Date: 6 Nov 92 05:11:24 GMT
Reply-To: kautz@research.att.com
Distribution: rec
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories

I'm looking for a dual-cassette deck for unattended recording of radio
shows.  Requirements are dual autoreverse relay record and wireless remote
control (i.e., has it's own infrared sensor, not just a cable that
attaches to a same-brand receiver -- I plan to use a Memorex universal
remote with built-in timer to activate it).

The only model I found so far is the Sony TC-WR690, which I've found
for $249 locally.  Misfeatures are no bias control, no headphone
volume control, no external timer switch, no quick reverse, and fairly
grungy sound (maybe I'm spoiled by my other deck, a Nak).  Any
recommendations for specific other models to consider (or for a better
mail-order price for the TC-WR690) would be appreciated.

--
---- Henry Kautz

:internet: 	kautz@research.att.com
:uucp:		allegra!kautz
From: collin@angelo.amd.com (Collin K. Ong)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: Does anyone know why JVC MX90 bookshelf stereo system is discontinued?
Date: 13 Nov 92 02:53:39 GMT
Organization: Advanced Micro Devices, Inc.


>In article <BxK88G.685@acsu.buffalo.edu>, v999r36x@ubvmsb.cc.buffalo.edu (Yao Sen Ko) writes:
>|> Does anyone know why the JVC MX90 bookshelf
>|> stereo system is discontinued? That model is the only bookshelf system with 
>|> Dolby Surround I can find so far.
>|> 

There is also a pioneer model that has dolby surround.
From: gcf@spd.eee.strathclyde.ac.uk (Graham Freeland)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: So? Anyone have dcc yet? (long)
Date: 13 Nov 92 11:00:40 GMT
Organization: Signal Processing Division, University of Strathclyde. Glasgow
Originator: gcf@ossian

In article <KAUTZ.92Nov12132921@hunny.research.nj.att.com> kautz@research.att.com writes:
>Yesterday I played with a Phillips DCC unit at the 6th Avenue
>Electronics on Rt 22 in NJ.  There was a price tag ($799) on it, but I
>don't know if they actually had it in stock. 

[much deleting later...]

>last as long as (e.g.) that of a CD player.  Next, you have eliminated
>the dubbing "problem": high-quality dubbing, probably even for a
>single generation, will be impossible, due to the losses entailed by
>repeated compression and decompression --- much more securely than
>with a serial-copy protection scheme.  Next, I predict that we will
>*never* see inexpensive dual-well DCC decks --- so you have simply
>eliminated the low-end dubbing crowd.  So everybody gets rich(er).  Far
>fetched?
>--
>---- Henry Kautz
>

Having seen a Panasonic/Technics DCC presentation last night, the 
implication was that DCC, generically, allows direct digital to digital 
copying on DCC {\em encoded} information. There is however a Serial Copy
Management Scheme onboard which allows only first generation direct
digital copying.

A motivation explicitly given for the introduction of DCC was a projected
decline in the sales of all music carrying media (pre-recorded and otherwise)
past 1995!! DCC was seen as a way of reversing this projected trend. 
I took this as implying that the `industry' believes that music is generally 
bought not simply to listen to but also a very loose hobby-like way of 
shedding spare cash through a Nintendo `buy the latest machine then the 
software until you get bored' admission; sufficiently new hardware has to 
be introduced to help reinforce the very purchase of music (I wasn't able 
to ask whether it was thought that after 1995 less people would be taking
some kind of interest in music, or if there might be an increase in the 
number and attendence of live environments (a diversion of the `club'
idea) or increased emphasis on radio etc.).

Since all I buy is `new' music, from free Jazz to techno, to listen to
it and its development (too much of a (hobby-like) preoccupation with 
originality probably!) this was a weak, in the sense of loose, conspiracy 
theory that had never occured to me before. And in approaching the end of 
the century, an increasingly long time since Elvis and The Beatles, I think 
there is some truth to it.

Graham.
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: janik@gfx.engga.uwo.ca (Janik Joire)
Subject: Re: Defeating SCMS
Organization: Univ. Western Ontario, London Ont. CA
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 17:30:35 GMT

In article <1dkkpiINNgua@usenet.INS.CWRU.Edu>, jwk3@po.CWRU.Edu (John W. Kale) writes:
|>
|> 	Do DAT decks place SCMS codes on recordings made from the
|> analog inputs? If they do not, then simply connecting the analog outputs
|> on the CD player to the analog inputs on the DAT deck should
|> result in a high-quality recording with no limit on the number
|> of digital generations it can, uh, generate. I realize that this
|> falls short of the holy grail of a perfect digital copy, but I
|> would guess that any degradation would be quite small.
|> 	The only problem with this idea is that it would seem
|> to make the SCMS useless. And it strikes me as absurd that the
|> record companies would have settled for something so silly. Am
|> I missing something here? _Do_ DAT decks put the SCMS codes on
|> anything they record, even from microphones? That seems absurd;
|> it would mean that DAT decks are incapable of doing anything
|> useful except to make first generation copies of the recordings
|> that the whole SCMS system was supposed to protect! What's the
|> story here?

	As far as I understand, DAT decks *do* place SCMS codes on recordings
made from the analog inputs! Unfortunately...

	Apparently, there are several different status codes for SCMS. One of
them, I do believe, allows unlimited digital copies of any recording. I assume
that anti-SCMS devices remove the existing status code from the data stream
to replace it with one of those "unlimited copies" codes.

				Janik
-- 
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Janik Joire                          The University of Western Ontario, Canada
Programmer / Systems maintenance                        Faculty of Engineering
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Office Tel: (519) 679-2111 Ext. 8112    | Home Tel: (519) 434-7601
                                        |
E-Mail:	janik@gfx.engga.uwo.ca          | Fax: (519) 661-3292
        janik@melmak.engga.uwo.ca       |      c/o Janik Joire
        janik@charon.engga.uwo.ca       |
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: huibingz@acpub.duke.edu (Huibing Zhang)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: best CD players under $300
Keywords: Single disc CD players
Date: 12 Nov 92 02:05:48 GMT

Hi, I'm about to purchase a single disc CD player. The models and brands
that I'm looking at are the following:
1. Denon DCD590,690
2. Harman-Kardon KD7400
3. Onkyo DX703,705
4. Sony CDP591
5. Yamaha CDX560
Bells and whistles are not important but I do want a remote control. As
I said in the title I am asking what the best single disc CD player is
for under $300, If you have any other suggestions please post in the 
net or e-mail me. Also I would like to know which model you would choose
among the players listed above. All recommedations and suggestions are
welcome.
Thanks in advance.
Huibing 
e-mail: huibingz@acpub.duke.edu
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: caf@omen.UUCP (Chuck Forsberg)
Subject: Re: Infinity Speakers - Any Comments
Organization: Omen Technology INC, Portland Rain Forest
Date: Wed, 11 Nov 1992 03:40:32 GMT

>><   The best killer of tweeters is a crummy amplifier.
>><   [...]
>><   What were you doing when you blow them up?

I have a pair of 15+ year old Infinity 2000 II speakers.  I did
fry one of the tweeters with a Heathkit AR-15, about 75 watts
per channel.  I didn't notice the blown tweeter until sometime
later, so I can't say exactly what did them in.  In my case it
was more likely an accident (oscillation, etc.) than overdriving
with music.

The next amp was a Carver cube with its anti-tweeter-fry
circuitry.  I'm sure my Carver saved my tweeters many times.

The cube started blowing fuses about a year ago, and I replaced
it with a newer Carver amp.  The manual for the new amp doesn't
mention any protection circuitry and frankly I'm a bit nervous.
With all the junk I've got hooked up to my system accidents
*will* happen....

Replacing the dead tweeter with a part from Infinity would have
been very pricey, but I found a tweeter locally that looks about
the same.  Now that I have a pair of Ohm 4.9's the Infinitys'
have been demoted to the rear channels where their tweeters
aren't so critical anyway.

-- 
Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX          ...!tektronix!reed!omen!caf 
Author of YMODEM, ZMODEM, Professional-YAM, ZCOMM, and DSZ
  Omen Technology Inc    "The High Reliability Software"
17505-V NW Sauvie IS RD   Portland OR 97231   503-621-3406
From: lstowell@pyrnova.mis.pyramid.com (Lon Stowell)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: How 'bout a new group for the rest of us?
Date: 12 Nov 92 18:58:24 GMT
Reply-To: lstowell@pyrnova.pyramid.com (Lon Stowell)
Organization: Pyramid Technology Corp., Mountain View, CA

>In article <1992Nov11.020415.8305@dunix.drake.edu>, kjt001@dunix.drake.edu (Devi
>l Bunny!) writes:
>>How about making a new group called something like
>>rec.audio.college.student or rec.audio.penniless.  Almost every
>>conversation that occurs here is pointed to those who have $10k to spend
>>on audio equipment.  It would be nice to know that maybe somewhere out
>>there are other people with as little money as I.  <sigh>
>>
>>
>>--
In article <1992Nov12.003105.69226@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu> ptb2@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (PETER TALAN BERGEN) writes:
>
>I could not agree with you more, I am f**cking sick and tired of listening to
>people ask questions whether they should a stereo for $10,000 or $13,000.  I
>am personally a little offended that someone would spend that much money on a
>stereo when there are so many bigger problems today.  We definitely need a
>college audio board.
>  

I don't think you are being fair to the group as a whole.  Yes,
there are a lot of the audio snobs on the group, but you will notice
that they get flamed royally every time they post such garbage.  

There are also posters willing to admit that you can get pretty
doggoned good sound for budget bucks if you buy used or the "entry
level" audiophile components.    

But maybe a rec.audio.cheap group would discourage the 
rec.audio.snobs and rec.audio.mortgage_your_wife crowd a bit.   


From: sheppard@hpnmdla.sr.hp.com (Roger Sheppard)
Date: Mon, 9 Nov 1992 23:01:38 GMT
Subject: Solid State Tubes!
Organization: Hewlett-Packard, Santa Rosa, CA
Newsgroups: rec.audio



Electronic Engineering Times, 2 Nov 1992 has an article called
"Chip sounds like an old Fender". Eric Pritchard has founded a company
called Deja Vu Audio to market the "Tube Emulator". It is a circuit 
that emulates a 12AX7 tube using discrete solid state components. 
Who will be the first to offer this to the audio market?
From: grego@bit.UUCP (Greg Sanguinetti)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: PNP vs NPN Output Stages
Keywords: Lock
Date: 10 Nov 92 16:53:22 GMT
Article-I.D.: bit.471
Reply-To: grego@bit.UUCP (Grego Sanguinetti)
Organization: BIT  Portland, OR

In article <BxGEJK.2FL@world.std.com> DPierce@world.std.com (Richard d Pierce) writes:
>In article <1992Nov9.113458.16272@EE.Surrey.Ac.UK> R.Bish@EA.surrey.co.uk (Rob Bish) writes:
>
>> <hardly believable stuff about using NPN v.s. PNP transistors to reproduce
>>  different idioms of music...delightfully deleted>
>PLEASE, GOD, LET THERE BE A SMILEY FACE SOMEWHERE IN THIS POSTING!

Yeah, I looked Dick. I read it twice just to make certain I wasn't
missing something! Now let me get this straight,

NPN's are for Chopin
PNP's are for acoustic folk (Perfectly Natural Phenomina (C))
FET's are for Heavy Metal, or was that oxidized metal?

But where does that leave NPN/PNP comp pairs and what about my good
buddy Darlington?

B^)   |^)   *<B^)  -grego

-- 
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Grego Sanguinetti, Bipolar Integrated Technology | Water, water everywhere,
grego@bit.uucp or grego%bit%ogi.cse.edu          | but I'd rather drink
or bit!grego@ogi.cse.edu or ...!ogicse!bit!grego | beer.
From: etsang@skat.usc.edu (Eric Tsang)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Wanted: DAT mail order info
Date: 10 Nov 1992 12:00:26 -0800
Organization: University of Southern California, Los Angeles, CA
NNTP-Posting-Host: skat.usc.edu

Hi, Can somebody tell me where to mail order a cheap DAT machine.
I am currently looking for a Sony non-PRO and non-portable one. 
(or do you have any other suggestion ?)
The price is pretty high in some of the local stores.

Thank you in advance.

Please reply to my email address.  

Eric

etsang@skat.usc.edu
From: system@hale.cts.com (System Administration)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: DIY Cutting holes for woofers
Date: Sun, 08 Nov 92 10:22:43 PST
Organization: Hale Telecommunications Inc.

bremmer@stsci.edu (Marc H. Bremmer,S402,4458,ADD.11-14-91) writes:

>    The best way to do (only) is to make a circle cutting or get one for your 
> It is very simple, you just need a pivot to swing the router around, remember
> using this method you can recess the drivers. it is the only sane way.
> 
> Marc
> 
> 


That may be a sane way, but the right way is to use a circular saw,
(Not the power type!)  Yoy can get them in a variety of sizes and they 
attach to a drill press.  The most common sizes are those used for 
setting door knobs.

We have a set at work we use in our installation shop for making custom
boxes through 18".


I don't know how much they cost off hand, but I imagine they are not 
cheap.

Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: dna@ampex.com (David Altekruse)
Subject: Re: HSU subs
Organization: Ampex Corporation, Redwood City CA
Date: Sat, 7 Nov 1992 00:37:41 GMT

T.S.Reddy writes:
>
>     Check out this month's Audio magazine for a sub shootout between
>Velodyne, Hsu research and a few others. Their feeling was that the Hsu's
>were excellent value for the money but the Velodyne F1500 (?) was the
>best overall.

It isn't clear to me that Audio's statement about the Hsu being excellent
value is really true.  Let's compare it to the Velodyne F1500.  Audio
magazine drove the Hsu with 60 Watt amp, as I remember, but said it really
needed a lot more power to drive it to full output at lower frequencies.
I don't have an extra high-power amp floating around, so I'd have to spend
another $500 or so for an amp.  

The crossover supplied with the Hsu is a simple passive low-pass filter.  
No high-pass is supplied.  This won't work for me since my speakers 
(MG-III's) will bottom out if I supply them with lots of low bass.  
In fact, one of the advantages of adding a subwoofer to almost any system
is to free the main speakers from having to try to handle the very low
frequencies.  This advantage is lost with the Hsu low-pass only configuration. 

The Velodyne F1500 comes with an active low-pass and a passive high-pass 
filter.  An active subwoofer crossover which is inserted ahead of the main 
preamp is surely a better way to go than Hsu's passive crossover inserted 
at the output of the main amp.  Hsu does sell an active crossover for $350.
(I talked to Dr. Hsu last week about this and he said the active crossover
wouldn't be ready for a couple months yet.)

To configure the Hsu 10" subwoofer pair similar to the Velodyne 15"
F1500 subwoofer costs more like $1600.  Plus shipping.  No discounts.  Mail
order direct only.  No auditing in a store.  On the other hand, there are 
lots of Velodyne dealers in this area and some of them sell offer discounts 
on Velodynes.  So I would expect to pay rather less than the $1500 list for 
the F1500.

Is the Hsu worth more than the Velodyne?  I don't know, I never heard
one.  (No Hsu dealers, remember?)  The servo'ed Velodyne clearly produces
much lower distortion at higher volume levels.  (Refer to the Audio magazine
article.)  Another advantage to the Velodyne mentioned in Audio is that
it automatically limits maximum power to the speaker.  The Hsu doesn't
have this capability and leaves it to you to scramble for the volume control
as the Hsu 10" speaker reaches its excursion limit and severe distortion. 
The Hsu does come as a pair, however, and that might offer some sonic
advantages.  This wasn't discussed in the Audio magazine article.  They
did state, however, that they like the Velodyne the best of the 4 sub's
they auditioned.

- David Altekruse, dna@ampex.com
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: Why filter D/A output?
From: MATGBB@LURE.LATROBE.EDU.AU (BYRNES,Graham)
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 05:17:55 GMT
Organization: La Trobe University
X-News-Reader: VMS NEWS 1.24

In <1992Nov8.222911.27702@doug.cae.wisc.edu> loj@cae.wisc.edu writes:

> I was wondering if someone out there could answer a question about filtering
> the output of a D/A converter.  Analog filtering, that is.  Why do it?
> If you can't hear anything above 20KHz anyway, why bother going through
> all the trouble of getting rid of the noise up there?  Maybe that's
> cutting it a little close.  But most of the D/A converters made today
> have 8X oversampling or more which puts the noise up around 160KHz.
> Even if you could hear this, I doubt that your equipment could reproduce
> it.  What am I missing here?
> 
> Jeff Lo
> loj@cae.wisc.edu
If amplifiers and speakers were perfect, it wouldn't be a problem (except
that your speaker leads would be acting as antennae to broadcast the noise
to the neighbourhood...)

However most aren't. Amplifiers can react in various ways to RF, either
increasing their noise level, or worse demodulating the RF to produce
audible outputs. Similarly tweeters driven hard with ultra-sonics can
easily be non-linear enough to produce audible garbage (Dick Pierce
and JJ have mentioned this in various past posts, see DP's on piezo tweeters).
Depending on the frequency and level, you could risk over-heating the tweeter
voice coil as well.

Also, your pets may leave home forever if there is lots of 44kHz being
radiated.
Graham Byrnes
From: snguyen@orion.oac.uci.edu (Desperately Seeking Sarah!)
Subject: Wanted:  Counterpoint SA100 or SA220
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Organization: University of California, Irvine
Date: 5 Nov 92 16:55:54 GMT
Distribution: usa

If you have either an SA100 or SA220  and you're in the mood to 
upgrade/change, let me know.

Thanks,

Son Nguyen
Office of Academic Computing
snguyen@uci.edu
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: eldred@rrunner.jpl.nasa.gov (Dan Eldred)
Subject: Need motor/parts for Dual 1229 turntable
Organization: Jet Propulsion Laboratory
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 17:59:00 GMT

The title says it all.  My trusty 20 year old Dual 1229 turntable is
suffering from old age.  In particular, I need a motor in good condition,
as mine has developed a very noticable bearing rattle despite the fact
that I disassembled it and relubed it.  I could also use another cartridge
shell, idler wheel, plastic cam for the anti-skate spring, and other assorted
plastic parts (most of which have rotted or cracked).  Hopefully someone
out there has a broken 1229 gathering dust in an attic which I might have
for real cheap. I'm not willing to spend much money on this as it's
ultimately a losing battle and I mostly listen to CD's anyway.  Many thanks,

	- Dan		eldred@rrunner.jpl.nasa.gov

Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: torgd@perch.lerc.nasa.gov (Russell DeAnna)
Subject: For Sale: Oracle Turntable
Organization: NASA Lewis Research Center [Cleveland, Ohio]
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 1992 14:15:14 GMT


I purchased the following turntable, tonearm, and cartridge
two weeks ago from my local audio store.  After two weeks I
realized that I still prefer the convienience of CDs; I didn't
like having to get up every 20 minutes and flip the album.
The combination is in perfect condition and was checked out
by the audio store before the sale. I had no problem with
the sound quality---actually sounded much better than my Sony
CDP 302 compact disk player---but I can't see starting an
album collection at this point. If I had a collection of
albums I may think otherwise.  

    Turntable: The original Oracle, 10 years old.

    Tonearm: Unitrac I, 10 years old.

    Cartridge:  Azden GM-P5L, used only a couple months according
                to the seller.

    Price: Combination $900.00, may sell separate pieces if I can't
           sell the combination.

This is what I paid two weeks ago, and the store owner, who sold the
turntable on consignment for another customer, said that at that price
"I could call two people today and it would be gone by the weekend," so
I think it's a good deal. And, like I said, it has been checked over
completely.
-- 
  Russell G. De Anna            
  E-mail:  torgd@perch.lerc.nasa.gov 
  phone:  (216) 433-3385
From: randyd@csd4.csd.uwm.edu (Randall Elton Ding)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: Recommendations for bookshelf speakers???
Date: 9 Nov 1992 21:41:29 GMT
Organization: Computing Services Division, University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.89.7.4

In article <1992Nov9.023503.24787@constellation.ecn.uoknor.edu> swkong@midway.ecn.uoknor.edu (Sieg Wooi Kong) writes:
>
>I'm writing in for a friend of mine.
>He's thinking of getting a good pair of bookshelf size speakers.
>He's willing to part with $350++ on it but doesn't know what's the best
>deal on it.

The Aria Five is an great speaker system designed by D'Appolito and can
be obtained in kit form.  It uses two Focal 5 inch midbass drivers and one 
3/4 inch concave dome tweeter with a fourth order crossover.
Write to Focal America Inc.  1531 Lookout Drive  Agoura, CA 91301
cost about $600 per pair, less in kit form.
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Gabe M Wiener)
Subject: Re: INFO WANTED: Tascam 103 Tape Deck
Reply-To: gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Gabe M Wiener)
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 20:46:07 GMT

In article <Uf0zq0i00YUoR1Lsx2@andrew.cmu.edu> "Jeremy G. Mereness" <zonker+@CMU.EDU> writes:
>
>Could someone mail me any info/recommendations they might have about the
>Tascam 103 3-Head Cassette Deck?

I've always heard good things about in.  I don't have one myself in my
studio, but then again I don't work with cassettes much.

I believe it can be biased from a little trimpot on the front panel.  I'm
not sure if it comes standard with Cannon connectors or just plain ol'
single-ended jobs, but you'd be advised to check that out.  I believe it
runs at professional levels (+4 dBv) but I may be mistaken on this one.

I've not done a side-by-side comparison between the Naks and the Tascam,
but Tascam products have traditionally been good values for the money in
the semipro/low-end pro world, so as long as you know what you want and
what you're getting, I don't think you'll go wrong with it.

>Specifically, I am looking for a mechanically durable deck, relatively good
>recording specs, and that doesn't tend to lose or gain tape speed over time.

*All* decks gain or lose tape speed over time unless you align them with
a scope or frequency counter, but if you have a studio already, this should
obviously already be part of your regular maintenance routine.


--
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