HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: rrccnet@ccu.umanitoba.ca (red river community college)
Subject: Surround Compact Disks by ProArte
Summary: Where to get surround cds
Keywords: cd surround proarte
Organization: University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, Canada
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 1992 15:54:55 GMT

I little while ago, someone posted a message about surround
sound CD's from ProArte.  Since then I have looked around
locally, and have found only one store that appears to know
what they are and where to get them.  The person I talked to
said they could order me the CD's in, but that it would take
approximately 6-8 weeks to get them here.  What I would 
like to know, is if there are any mail order places that sell
these CDs.  Or if someone is sick of the ProArte Surround Sampler
would they be willing to sell it?

Thanks.
  Sean.


-- 
| Sean Kormilo                     |        // Only Amiga           |
| E-Mail: rrccnet@ccu.umanitoba.ca |     \\//  Makes it Possible!   |
|     I'm not arrogant.  I'm just a whole lot better than you!      |
From: marc@es.ele.tue.nl (Marc Heijligers)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: Sound quality of DCC
Date: 29 Sep 92 12:24:48 GMT
	<1992Sep25.040101.7709@dgbt.doc.ca>
Organization: Eindhoven University of Technology, Eindhoven, The Netherlands.
In-reply-to: ted@dgbt.doc.ca's message of 25 Sep 92 04:01:01 GMT


In article <1992Sep25.040101.7709@dgbt.doc.ca> ted@dgbt.doc.ca (Ted Grusec) writes:

   You CAN get artifacts in DCC on certain kinds of materials.  Mostly,
   these require very critical expert listeners to detect and so may not
   concern "average" listeners.  Audiophiles and other keen listeners may
   object.  I am highly familiar with true double blind tests that reveal
   artifacts in compression schemes based on psychoacoustically-based
   algorithms.>
   -- 
   -----------------------------------------------------------------
   Ted Grusec - Communications Research Centre, Ottawa, Ont., Canada

I would like some more information on how these tests are done, because
the tests done with DCC I know of and which I did myself didn't reveal sound
differences between original and recorded sound. 

People who claim they hear differences between DCC and CD are not able to tell
which of the 2 is playing in blind A/B tests (including experienced
audiophiles, people who are making recording for big companies etc.). 

In the review of HVT, which Bart Gerritse mentioned earlier in his posting,
people stated they could hear differences between DCC and CD (external DA
convertor, cannot remember other equipment, but all was high-end). People
stated they could hear differences when the test-crew 'switched' among CD and
DCC, but a lot of times they didn't switch at all (just a 'click' could be
noticed when switching to fool the audience). 

On the other hand I could hear difference among MD and CD immediately. So it
is true that the kind of coding used is very important to the sound quality. 

This reveals one of the biggest problems when people are comparing
sound-equipment. Their 'wrong(?)' pre-knowledge about the equipment and their
own conviction often makes people decide they can hear differences, even if
they cannot. Often a psychological issue instead of a psycho-acoustic issue. 

Marc
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: fogarty@erenj.com (Ben Fogarty)
Subject: Wanted: good subwoofers
Followup-To: rec.audio
Organization: Exxon Research and Engineering, New Jersey
Date: Tue, 29 Sep 1992 20:17:21 GMT

	I am in the market for a good pair of sub woofers. I would appreciate the
advic e
of the audio buffs who read this. I would also consider purchasing a used
pair
is it was easy to do. Thanks for your input

Ben Fogarty - Senior Staff Analyst
Computing and Telecom Support Division
fogarty@erenj.com
From: chrisc@gold.gvg.tek.com (Chris Christensen)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: Better Cross-over frequency?\
Date: 30 Sep 92 18:52:26 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Grass Valley Group, Grass Valley, CA

In article <1992Sep29.154338.19672@sei.cmu.edu> jseiler@sei.cmu.edu 
(Joseph Seiler) writes:
>What is the better cross-over frequency for a woofer, not a sub?
>1600hz or 800hz?
>Please respond today before 4:00

There is no answer.  It depends on the woofer and the tweeter.

-- 
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
From: provost@vlsi.polymtl.ca (Benoit Provost)
Subject: Re: Maxell XL-II better than Maxell XL-IIS?!
Organization: Ecole Polytechnique de Montreal
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1992 02:34:47 GMT

wcsanil@superior.carleton.ca (Anil Prasad) writes:
: 
: The new issue of Audio magazine claims that Maxell XL-II cassettes
: are overall, better than XL-IIS. Does anyone know what they're
: talking about?

	I don't know what they are talking about, but I know that I don't
agree with them.  I mean, just by taking a look you can see:  It looks
rougher, it is heavier.  And the sound?  It is better than the XLII, and
I found the bias more stable from one cassette to another (which means a 
better quality control).
: 
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| Benoit Provost                            | Woke up this morning and        |
| Ecole Polytechnique de Montreal           | found myself dead.              |
| Departement de Genie Electrique           |                                 |
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: billn@hpcvaac.cv.hp.com (bill nelson)
Subject: Re: Probably a SIMPLE solution...
Organization: Hewlett-Packard Company, Corvallis, Oregon USA
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 00:38:19 GMT

borowski@hpspkla.spk.hp.com (Don T. Borowski) writes:
: In rec.audio, <MIWHC@CUNYVM.BITNET> writes:
: 
: >If I play certain cds' on my JVC cd player through my JVC amplifier with
: >built in digital effects, I get high frequency clicks at certain spots on
: >the disk out of both speakers. I have reasonable heavy speaker wires hooked
: >up to Mission speakers which I assume are in good shape (they are new and
: >don't sound screwed up with all of my other disks).
: >
: >I dont get the click with the headphones, The clicks only sound once the
: >cd had been spinning a while. The offending disks are clean with no visible
: >scratches. The speaker wires are in phase, the clicks cannot be heard in the
: >surround-sound speakers. Turning on and off the effects (reverb, etc) do not
: >effect the clicks. I do not get these clicks on the tuner or on the JVC
: >cassette-deck. The offending discs click a lot once they have spun for some
: >time and my other discs don't even click once.
: 
: Do you play the music loud, and is the CD player near the speakers.  If so,
: it is possible that the vibrations from the speakers can screw up the tracking
: on marginal discs.  If you still get the clicks at low listening levels with
: the speakers on, them I'm stumped.

How about static buildup and discharge? 

Bill
From: curt@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Curt Welch)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: Recording times of MD and DCC
Date: 26 Sep 92 20:34:16 GMT
Reply-To: curt@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Curt Welch)
Organization: Carderock Division, NSWC, Bethesda, MD

In rec.audio, U58402@uicvm.uic.edu writes:
>I probably missed this, but does anyone know the maximum recording times
>for the Minidisc and DCC systems? 1 hour? 2 hours? 74 minutes?

I don't know what the time for DCC is, but this info was just posted
about MD:

Constantinos A. Caroutas writes:
>Two MD Walkmans will go on sale in early December. A record/playback model
>for $750 and a playback model only for $550. A car playback model will be
>available in January for $890. All models will come with a prerecorded
>demo MD and at least the recorder model will also come with a blank MD. The
>price of 60-minute blank MDs will be $14. In spring, 74-minute blank MDs
>will also become available. (Prices, timetables, and specifications are
>subject to change without notice.)

I think 74 minutes is the max.  If it goes higher, it won't be much more
than that.

Curt
From: chrisc@gold.gvg.tek.com (Chris Christensen)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: Designing Crossovers
Date: 30 Sep 92 20:30:51 GMT
Organization: Grass Valley Group, Grass Valley, CA

In article <1992Sep28.182602.9614@en.ecn.purdue.edu> lauson@en.ecn.purdue.edu
(Patrick W Lauson) writes:

>Thanks for the reply, Chris.  By what you are saying, it sounds like you can
>come up with a pretty good speaker, but not really a perfected one without
>the use of an anechoic chamber...

Thank you,  But if I gave you that impression about Anechoic chambers then I
was wrong.  There is test equipment available that can reduce or eliminate the
need for the A Chamber.  Respectable resulit can be optained with
speactum analyzers, pink noise and an open field.

>In article <5300@gold.gvg.tek.com> chrisc@gold.gvg.tek.com (Chris Christensen) writes:

>>One thing I as well as others has done is to caculate the crossover
>>based, blindly,  on the "nominal' impedance of the speaker.  I learned
>>better a long time ago but for non-"critical" applications I have
>>still done it and they sounded fine.....  

>Actually, I have always taken the impedance of the driver at the crossover
>point...

And if you measured it at the crossover point and the slope width on
each side of the crossover point and designed the crossover for that
impedance then you have done fine indeed......

>One other question.  Is it possible to come up with a time coherent system
>without using a chamber?  And what are the general attitudes of people
>toward designing such a system  (Is it worth the hassle?)

I believe that it is posible to design for time coherence with a tape
measure,  at least to start.  You will need to prototype the cabinet
with the ability to move the speaker that you want to align.

I don't know what other peoples attitudes are regarding time
coherence,  I would have to think that the skilled professional
speaker designer designed (which I am not) would design for time coherence
when ever possible.  Sometimes it is impossible to do the optimum design
because of the restrictions that the person for whom you are designing places
on the design.

*******
Far to many people thing that as engineers we always design for
perfection.

Absolute perfection is a dream,  the reality is that the best
engineers design for the best compromise.
********

You *can* use something as simple as a spectrum analyzer to fine
tune the position at the crossover point.  After you have determined
the correct distance you then build the final cabinet for the correct
dimentions.

The best (easiest) way to design for time coherance is with the use of
electronic crossovers and variable time delay!
-- 
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: rkarlqu@hpscit.sc.hp.com (Rick Karlquist)
Date: Thu, 24 Sep 1992 15:40:21 GMT
Subject: Re: DAT, SCMS
Organization: Hewlett-Packard, Santa Clara, CA
Newsgroups: rec.audio

In rec.audio, whs70@dancer.uucp (22501-sohl) writes:

> >However, there are a lot of ways to get sued for building SCMS-bypass
> >devices built into HR-3204, just coming up for a vote in House, after
> >which it becomes law if President Bush (no new taxes) doesn't veto it.

> Breaking the law (Assuming it becomes law) by designing and building your
> own SCMS bypass box would seem to be a very undetectable act unless
> you go about bragging to the RIAA, etc.  That doesn't mean I support the
> act, just that I always find it ludicrous when politicians think they
> can control technology by outlawing certain electronic devices.

> Seems it would be a great idea for someone to immediately publish a
> design using off the shelf components.  Once in the "public arena,"
> how would the SCMS police ever control the future disemination of the
> design?

> Bill Sohl (K2UNK) BELLCORE (Bell Communications Research, Inc.)
> Morristown, NJ             email via UUCP      bcr!dancer!whs70
> 201-829-2879 Weekdays      email via Internet  whs70@dancer.cc.bellcore.com

Well, what I am waiting for now is for the RIAA to start to try to
police the sale of chips such as the Motorola MC56401 to prevent
people from building homebrew SCMS eliminators.  They may also try
to get the design changed so that SCMS is built into the MC56401.
I can see these chips becoming as difficult to buy as Dolby IC's
are.

In any event, they really don't need to enforce SCMS anyway.  They
can simply jack up the tape royalty tax and then they don't care.

Rick Karlquist
From: hans@smab.se (Hans C Larsson)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Search speeds of DCC and others
Date: 29 Sep 92 11:05:26 GMT
Organization: Saab Missiles AB, RLD-Gbg, Sweden

A Swedish magazine recently tested the search speeds of various
musical carrier formats with some very interesting 
observations as a result.

The search was between two tracks with 30 minutes of music in between,
results below (all times in seconds).

	CD:	2 - 3 (my comment: < 1 for some players I would say)

	DAT:	15

	CC:	50 - 120 (from Nakamichi Dragon to old and tired portable, 
		not searching but fast forward)

	NT:	110	(The Sony Scoopman NT-1 "micro-DAT" dictation machine)

	DCC:	140	(!)

	MD:	N/A (should be about the same as for CD)



What do I do ? Stick with CD & DAT, skip DCC, try to resist MD 
(for now) and dream about (affordable CD-R)  :-)

-- 
------------------------------------------------------------
        Hans C Larsson			Email:	hans@smab.se
	Saab Missiles, Sweden		Motto:	"keep it short"
From: desmondw@merrimack.edu
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Audio Concepts Enigma IV cd player
Date: 27 Sep 92 12:10:07 GMT
Organization: Merrimack College, No. Andover, MA, USA


     Does anybody know anything about this cd player? I'mwondering
why it is so expensive($600) and if the sound quality is worth it 
compared to a Sony or Nakamchi. I heard about it in a newspaper
article lending help to people on setting up a hifi audio system.
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: rajeev@oahu.cs.ucla.edu (Rajeev Gupta)
Subject: Connecting FM antenna to receiver
Organization: UCLA, Computer Science Department
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 92 20:45:34 GMT

I recently purchased a Kenwood KR-V8040 receiver.  It came with a
regular FM wire antenna.  My question is - how should I place the
antenna?  Right now, I have it lying on the floor behind the receiver.
This is not good enough as there is noise in many stations (which goes
away when I hold the antenna end in my hand).  The antenna is an 8'
long wire, with the last 2' split apart so it can be mounted in a
T-shape.

-- Rajeev
From: sheppard@hpnmdla.sr.hp.com (Roger Sheppard)
Date: Mon, 28 Sep 1992 17:24:12 GMT
Subject: Re: DDD and AAD
Organization: Hewlett-Packard, Santa Rosa, CA
Newsgroups: rec.audio

In rec.audio, chrisc@gold.gvg.tek.com (Chris Christensen) writes:


>    You believe a SALESMAN!  Actually he is right and wrong,  Dither is
>    added to the A-D usually in the digital domain.  During the D/A it is
>    subtracted out......Read on.

Dither is added in the ANALOG domain to randomize the effects of correlated
quantization errors due to the A/D. Dither in the digital domain is used for
other purposes. It can be subtracted out, filtered out, or left alone at the 
discretion on the engineer at the recording end. Whatever they choose to do, 
in the cd standard, the D/A has no control signals to subtract it out.

>"harshness"  etc of digital....A generation of bickering!
                                    
>We have come full circle and improved the digital process so thet it
>sounds almost as good as a great analog recording with a lot lower
>noise floor......

And a generation of incredibly bad digital recordings that have been lost to
14 bit linear, brick wall filtered, undithered recording techniques. Too bad 
we are just back to where we were a generation ago.

>    -- 
>    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.

Roger..
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: jseiler@sei.cmu.edu (Joseph Seiler)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Better Cross-over frequency?\
Date: 29 Sep 92 15:43:38 GMT
Article-I.D.: sei.1992Sep29.154338.19672
Distribution: usa
Organization: Software Engineering Institute

What is the better cross-over frequency for a woofer, not a sub?
1600hz or 800hz?
Please respond today before 4:00
Thanks Jseiler
From: krishna@oreo.sybase.com (Krishna Murthy)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Speakers Question/Suggestions
Date: 1 Oct 92 19:32:32 GMT


I am looking to buy speakers for my home stereo. I looked at a few
and narrowed down my options to either Boston Acoustics 930 or the
JBL LX600. I would like to hear about any experiences with the two
(or either) speakers and how they compare (if that can be done at all),
and their reliability in general.

The prices quoted for both are around $740/pair. Is that a reasonable
price or are there places which offer better price ? I'd also like to
hear about any other speakers you think are better in the same price
range.

I am not a regular on this news group so please send me mail. If there
is interest, i will post a summary.

-krishna

-- 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Krishnamurthy Tammana                         Sybase, Inc
krishna@sybase.com                            1650, 65th Street
{sun,lll-tis,pyramid,pacbell}!sybase!krishna  Emeryville, CA 94608-1010
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: rvkl60@aus18a25.sps.mot.com (Tom Mathes)
Subject: Re:  Dolby C vs. dbx - correction
Organization: Motorola Inc, Austin, Texas
Distribution: na
Date: Tue, 6 Oct 1992 16:35:40 GMT

In article <1992Oct5.150116.24577@oakhill.sps.mot.com> rvkl60@aus18a25.sps.mot.com (Tom Mathes) writes:
>
>In article <1992Oct4.021511.709@cmkrnl.com> jeh@cmkrnl.com writes:
>>Rather, Dolby B and C apply *compression* to the high frequencies on record,
>>and expansion on playback.  Parts of the program that already have a lot of
>>high-freq. content won't be much affected by Dolby.  But in parts in which the
>>highs are of low level, highs are boosted on record and cut on playback. 
>>During the "cut on playback", the tape hiss, which is also mostly high freqs,
>>gets cut too.  Voila.  (When there is a lot of high-freq content in the 
>>program material, you don't notice the hiss nearly so much, as you're paying
>>attention to the program.  This is a psychoacoustic affect known as "masking".)
>
>You've got your theory right, but terminology wrong.  Dolby amplifies, or
>expands the high frequencies during recording, then compresses them during
>playback.  That's one reason to critically check the recording levels during

I'm eating crow on this one.  I realized soon after I posted this that Jamie
was right and I was wrong.  Dolby does amplify the high-frequencies, and does
indeed compress the dynamic range of those signals.  I guess my brain was in
neutral when I wrote this.

Sorry about the screw-up part folks.

Tom
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: jseiler@sei.cmu.edu (Joseph Seiler)
Subject: Another requested recommendation for a center channel speaker
Keywords: none
Organization: Software Engineering Institute
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1992 18:13:11 GMT

I need a 5th speaker (center) for the true home theater effect. My fronts are
a pair of BOSE 4000's and my rears are a pair of BOSE 21's. Please offer as
many options as possible.



jseiler@sei.cmu.edu   J.J. Seiler (Native Pittsburgher)

--------

Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: YKWON@SLACVM.SLAC.STANFORD.EDU (415)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Carver surround processor?
Date: 4 Oct 92 00:06:34 GMT
Article-I.D.: SLACVM.92277.160634YKWON
Organization: Stanford Linear Accelerator Center

Does anybody in the net have opinion on the Carver's Dolby Prologic
processor DPL-33?
Considering features and prices, I think it would be good for my current
system, (NAD 7240PE receiver and Cambridge Soundworks speakers) but
I would like to hear any opinions from this group.
I will post summary of interesting/inspiring
opinions, unless asked otherwise.

Thank you, in advance.

-Youngjoon

ps: What is the general opinion on Carver components? How are their
   pre-/power-amp separate system compared to similarly configured
   ADCOM or Rotel systems, for example, in sound quality?
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: nau@ssesco.com (William Nau)
Subject: Re:  Dolby C vs. dbx
Organization: SSESCO
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 1992 16:48:59 GMT

>I can tell you how Dolby works, but I can't really say how dbx
>works, but my understanding (explained by more than one audio
>engineer) is that Dolby is a reduction system which requires
>the same implementation during playback that was used during
>recording, where-as dbx will improve the quailty of the tape
>even if you do not have dbx at playback (in fact I think that
>dbx is only effective during recording).

I believe you are getting dbx mixed up with hx-pro.  HX-pro is
effective only during recording.  DBX compresses the signal
and must be uncompressed during playback or it really sounds
terrible.
From: chrisc@gold.gvg.tek.com (Chris Christensen)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: need recommendations for center channel speaker
Date: 5 Oct 92 16:50:35 GMT
Article-I.D.: gold.5376
Organization: Grass Valley Group, Grass Valley, CA

In article <BvHI7I.8Ju@comp.vuw.ac.nz> brian@comp.vuw.ac.nz 
(Brian Boutel) writes:

>In article <1992Oct2.044043.15378@dunix.drake.edu>, kjt001@dunix.drake.edu 
(Kevin Tieskoetter) writes:
>|> hold on, hold on...you guys are talking about projection TVs and buying
>|> identical speakers for the center channel....I'm a college student...I
>|> don't have money...I spent $200 for a pair of front speakers (and I'm
>|> estatic about them...for the price, I can't believe the sound), and I
>|> can't spend much on another speaker.
 
>|> I was talking in the $20-$40 range...

(deleted Brians description of his system and his "problems".......)

>What am I saying? Well, if you want a centre speaker for $40, forget it. Use a
>phantom centre - most dolby decoders provide this facility, and unless you have
>people sitting way off centre, it's quite acceptable.

>What do you say, Chris?

I would say forget the $40 center channel speaker!  Save it up to
build on the the system!

Even though the discussion went off to the esoteric I believe that
general useful information was disseminated.

My general recommendation for someone who is contemplating the
construction of a home theater:

Go for three full size front speakers, Left Center and Right.  Also go 
for a subwoofer.  The surround speakers need not be full range units but 
should very closely match the front speakers in the bandpass of 100 to 7Khz
(both response and phase).  A surround speaker that was the same make and
used the same midrange and tweeter.  The surround speakers should be located
behind the viewing position and the surround speakers should be like a "wall
of sound"  behind you.  you do not want localization of the surround
source.

Then sit back and enjoy!
speaker might just be ideal.

-- 
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
From: hans@smab.se (Hans C Larsson)
Subject: Re: Recording times of MD and DCC
Organization: Saab Missiles AB, RLD-Gbg, Sweden
Date: Sat, 26 Sep 92 23:37:58 GMT

<U58402@uicvm.uic.edu> writes:

>I probably missed this, but does anyone know the maximum recording times
>for the Minidisc and DCC systems? 1 hour? 2 hours? 74 minutes?

74 minutes for MD and 45+45 (with autoreverse) minutes for DCC.

DAT is 120 minutes or even 180 minutes if you use the 90 meter
data tapes (DDS). Half speed (LP) would double that.

BTW. The LP option for DCC seems to have been dropped.
-- 
------------------------------------------------------------
        Hans C Larsson			Email:	hans@smab.se
	Saab Missiles, Sweden		Motto:	"keep it short"
Newsgroups: rec.audio