HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: mjs@hubcap.clemson.edu (M. J. Saltzman)
Subject: Re: Cassette Deck Dilemma
Organization: Clemson University, Clemson SC
Date: Sun, 20 Dec 1992 21:28:26 GMT

In article <85434@ut-emx.uucp> logan@ccwf.cc.utexas.edu (Logan Shaw) writes:
>In article <1722@stake.DaytonOH.NCR.COM> bsmith@stake.DaytonOH.NCR.COM (ROBERT SMITH) writes:
>
>[ question: whether to repair / replace broken 10 year old cassette deck. ]
>
>>        -  I pay to get the old deck fixed.  Least cost option. (I'm broke
>>these days.)
>>
>>        -  I buy a new modestly-priced deck (maybe $300).  Is it possible to
>>get an adequate deck in this price range? What brands? Any 3-head ones?
>>
>>        -  I wait and save money (very un-American) and buy a better deck, but
>>will this be another dying medium, like LP's.  
>
>Personally, if I were you, I'd get the Nakamichi Cassette Deck 1.  I'm not
>sure how much they cost, but I know they're < $500.  If I remember
>correctly, it's not a 3-head one, but it performs better than many lower
>end 3-head decks.

I think you must mean Cassette Deck 2.  It's not three-head, but the
one I just bought sounds excellent--a major improvement over the unit
it replaced (no, I'm too embarassed to say...8^).  The Cassette Deck 
1, 1.5, 2 line has been replaced by a new series (DR-3 is the CD-2
replacement, if I recall).  According to my salesman, the internals
are about the same, only the appearance is different (they've gone
back to a more traditional-looking front panel).  This means you may
be able to find the CD-2 for close to $300 (they listed for about
$400).

The CD-1.5 is a three-head deck, and the CD-1 is a three-head deck with
azimuth adjustment on the front panel.  These are also being replaced by
DR models, so the CD-1.5 should be available for $600 or less.

-- 
		Matthew Saltzman
		Clemson University Math Sciences
		mjs@clemson.edu
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: monty@quasar.lerc.nasa.gov (Monty Andro)
Subject: Seeking subwoofer plans
Organization: NASA Lewis Research Center
Distribution: rec
Date: 23 Dec 92 10:10:58


Can someone provide me with references or plans for building a
subwoofer?

Thanks,
Monty
From: erich.lim@cutting.hou.tx.us (Erich Lim) 
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: RE: COMMENTS ON NAKAMICHI
Date: 28 Dec 92 11:31:00 GMT
Distribution: world
Organization: The Cutting Edge - Houston, TX - 713-466-1525
Reply-To: erich.lim@cutting.hou.tx.us (Erich Lim) 

Kfriedman@desire.wright.edu  writes in response to Thomas Wong's posting
for comments on Nakamichi:
-> I know I'll probably get blasted for this opinion...but here goes:  I
-> really don't think you'll hear any true differences among any of the
-> receivers you mentioned.  But you will hear MAJOR differences among
-> the speakers.  So don't worry about which receiver is hooked up to
-> which speakers.  Judge the final sound of your system by what your
-> speakers sound like, not the receiver.

 True, you won't be able to tell a major difference between 2 recievers,
but everything relies on the speakers,  the first part of an upgrade.
But, you would be able to tell the difference between 2 recievers when
you really crank them up to the max..  Distortion,etc..  But, I guess
most people pick recievers because of their features and ease of use,
and also power.. But if Thomas is going to buy everything else Nakamichi
(xcept speakers of course), he'd probably also go with a Nak reciever,
just to make it all "the same" and get the use of the integrated remote
control system.  From my listening experiences with Nakamichi
recievers/amps, they are quite decent sounding...


Erich.
                                                                                          
----
+---------------------------------------------------------------------+
| The Cutting Edge BBS (cutting.hou.tx.us)    A PCBoard 14.5a system  |
| Houston, Texas, USA    +1 713 466 1525          running uuPCB       |
+---------------------------------------------------------------------+
From: jj@alice.att.com (alice!jj)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: ??JJ be nice?? I've not seen the original of that thread.
Date: 24 Dec 92 16:39:08 GMT
Article-I.D.: alice.24480
Organization: NJ State Home for Bewildered Terminals


>From: tonyb@juliet.ll.mit.edu ( Tony Berke )

>JJ -- you're pretty hard on recording engineers that turn out CDs with
>clipping and/or underutilization of all 16 bits!!
Depends.  When talking about a piano recording done in a studio,
I'd think one could avoid 4 bits of unused overhead.  One could
also dither so as to not have spurious partials come and go with
the breeze.  Ecch.

>from live sessions, I have to emphathise with the engineer.  16 bits
>stinks, and not just for "poor engineers".
16 bits is not enough for live recordings, note that I've said that
some dude at the AES espoused 24 bits for live recordings, with
the recording chain calibrated to 0dB SPL = +1 1 lsb.  I happen
to have a lot of sympathy with this particular dude, too.

>If, by "poor engineer", you mean, "that poor engineer, he's got to
...
>18 bits would be nice, and your use of the term "poor engineer" is
>appropriate.
I mean it in lots of ways, that's one of them.  I've dealt with
choruses and performers who wandered over about 15 dB depending
on the phase of the moon (and I don't mean deliberate dynamics, either).
I know, believe me.

>the 14-15 bit recordings that I often make.  I know for sure that a 16
>bit recording made with the aid of a limiter can't possibly sound
>worse than the occasional 17 bit recording that I try to turn out!
Chuckle.  Yeah, oh yeah, I know what you mean.  I don't particularly mind
a 15 bit or even 14 bit recording, but 12 bits is a wee bit far off.
Now, like I said, sometimes for live stuff it's hard, but for
studio stuff...

>On the other hand, if you're talking about a studio session, or a
>session in which the engineer has had the chance to attend numerous
>rehearsals or performances in the same hall by the same artists with
>the same orchestration, or if you're talking about a transfer from an
>analog recording, yeah, anything less than normalization to 16 bits is
>the sign of a poor engineer (or a poor customer, that won't pay a good
>engineer to be patient!)
I've met both.  My impresssion given a lot of CD's is that the engineer
was not only beleagured, but also not paying attention.

What's the "jj-be nice" thread, anyhow?  I've not seen the original.
-- 
Extremism *Copyright alice!jj 1992, all rights reserved, except transmission
   in the    *by USENET and like facilities granted.      Said permission is
  defense of     *granted only for complete copies that include this notice.
 liberty is no vice.  *Use on pay-for-read services specifically disallowed.
From: normanw@cs.concordia.ca (WOO norman)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Sony Vs Mitsubishi VCRs
Date: 23 Dec 92 16:19:48 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: Computer Science, Concordia University, Montreal, Quebec

Hi folks

I'm in the market to purchase a VCR.  My choices have been narrowed down to 
either the Sony SLV-696HF ( $649.00 up here in Canada ) or the Mitsubishi
HS-U57 ( $629.00 Canadian ).  Can anyone out there recommend one or the
other?

Another question...  I'm also looking for a new cassette deck.  Right now
I have my eyes on the AIWA AD-F800 ( AD-F810 in the USA ).  The lowest price
I've seen for this model up here is $399.00.  Again, can anyone recommend this
or another model within the same class/price range?

Thanks very much in advance.

My e-mail address is normanw@.cs.concordia.ca
or
woo@bnr.ca

Norman
From: kfriedman@desire.wright.edu
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: Comments on Nakamichi's last year models....
Date: 27 Dec 92 20:57:07 EST
Distribution: world
Organization:  Wright State University 

In article <1hbbj3INNe6n@iskut.ucs.ubc.ca>, twong@civil.ubc.ca (Thomas Wong) writes:
> Hi everyone. I have been given an opportunity to buy a Nakamichi
> Receiver 2 and a Nak Cassette Deck 1.5 which was last years model hence
> they can give it to me for almost 40% off. It's a real steal but my
> problem is that the other components I want to get (speakers, cd player)
> is in other stores hence I can't really do a real comparison until I bring
> everything home and hook it up (the other 2 are still undecided yet). So
> I was wondering what other people's opinion on these 2 components are.
> 
> These will be SALE items so I can't bring them back. That's my problem.
> They sound good in their soundroom hooked up to speakers around my price
> range but not quality I don't think. So I can't eally compare it with
> what I want to buy. So I had them hooked up to something way out of my
> price range ($2000 Mirages) and it sounded REAL good. But I was only
> going to spend a couple of hunred on my speakers and they probably
> won't be of the same quality. Or at least not of the quality of the ones
> I've been testing. So I don't know if it's the speaker or the
> components. 
> 
> Any Nak owners out there? For about the same price, at another store, I
> can go with NAD 705 receiver which also sounded real good. But can't
> compare them cause different soundroom, speakers, everything was
> different. I was also listening to the a Luxman and Denon of the same
> price range but weren't as good. Are Naks one level above that of NAD,
> Denon, Luxman...etc?
> 
> Thanks in advance. I need to know before the end of this week.
> But the sooner the less chance of it being sold! :)
> Thanks again!
> 
> Thomas.
> 
> 
Thomas,

I know I'll probably get blasted for this opinion...but here goes:  I really
don't think you'll hear any true differences among any of the receivers you
mentioned.  But you will hear MAJOR differences among the speakers.  So don't
worry about which receiver is hooked up to which speakers.  Judge the final
sound of your system by what your speakers sound like, not the receiver.
From: cal@gsbux1.uchicago.edu (Cal Lott)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Clipping questions
Date: 29 Dec 92 21:09:24 GMT
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations

Hi folks!

	I have a few questions regarding clipping that I would like to
submit for the group's consideration.

	What I am specifically unclear on is the relationship of the
amplifier to the speaker that it is driving when clipping occurs. Can
one realistically say that it is either the amp or the speaker that is
"clipping"? It would seem to be more reasonable to say that the entire
system is clipping, but that would not help in determining which
component is the weak link in the chain.

	Is there an audible difference between the ugly noise a system
makes when it runs out of power to properly drive the speakers and the
ugly noise a system makes when the speakers are being overdriven?

	The reason that I ask is because of an incident that occurred
when I was back at my parent's house for the holidays. I purchased a
pair of Polk S6 speakers for my sister's Christmas gift. After Xmas,
while listening to her system, it clipped at what I considered to be
a fairly low volume level. (One would be able to hold a conversation
without shouting over the music.) It wasn't particularly dynamic
source material, either: it clipped on the low bass output found on
U2's recent album, "Achtung Baby". (The particular song was "So Cruel",
which does have quite a bit of low bass.) I could get the system to
clip rather easily on any CD of hers that had a fair amount of bass
on it.

	The amplifier driving the speakers is an *awful* Fisher
100-watt (RMS into 8 ohms, 20-20khz, <0.08% THD) integrated amp. The
Polks have an average impedance of 6-8 ohms. (I'm not exactly sure
which, but it is not a particularly difficult speaker to drive in
terms of impedance.) Maximum power handling is rated conservatively
at 125 watts. (The Polks were demonstrated in the store with an
Adcom GFA-555II 200wpc amp at an extremely high volume, and they never
showed a hint of strain.)

	So what is causing my sister's system to clip, folks? Any
ideas would be appreciated. It's not a real problem-- just something
that I am curious about.

	I would prefer posted reponses so that any other curious
lurkers could benefit from the conversation, but will not refuse email.

	Thanks!

						Later,

						-Cal
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Cal Lott          "Oh, I see-- I thought 'no' meant 'spoon'!" --Dan
Email me, baby!   cal@gsbux1.uchicago.edu   cjl1@midway.uchicago.edu
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: Mike_Benna@mindlink.bc.ca (Mike Benna)
Subject: Re: Velodyne ULD-12 hums - why, and can it be fixed?
Organization: MIND LINK! - British Columbia, Canada
Date: Wed, 30 Dec 1992 18:33:52 GMT

> Lon Stowell writes:
>
>    Never be sure of anything in electronics....its a good way to
>    embarass yourself.

Good point.  I should then say "I'm reasonably sure it's not a ground loop
problem".

> >1) Is this normal?
>
>     Can you hear the hum from your normal listening position or only
>     when you stick your ear in front of the driver?

Yes.  When everything else is off, I can easily hear it from anywhere in the
room.

> >2) It wouldn't be so bad if the unit would automatically shut off after
> >   several minutes of inactivity.  Any idea why the Foundation series
> >   has the auto shut-off but the ULD series does not?
> >
>     Simple.  What's the cost of the two models?

The ULD series (the one I have), is the more expensive model.  That's why I
questioned why it didn't have the auto shut-off.  I have been told by someone
else that the ULD-12 should go into stand-by mode after a few minutes, but
mine does not appear to be doing that.

>   Try SHORTING the inputs to the sub.  You may need to try each
>   individually as well as all together.

I'll try that.  Thanks for the suggestions.]
--
Mike_Benna@mindlink.bc.ca      Vancouver B.C., Canada
MindSpan Technologies          Video Game Design and Development
HardBall III, Summer/Winter Challenge, Joe Montana Football, Face Off!, etc
From: bp816@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Stuart Krivis)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: archive request
Date: 23 Dec 1992 20:42:46 GMT
Organization: Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland, Ohio (USA)
NNTP-Posting-Host: slc4.ins.cwru.edu


Recently there were a couple of interesting threads on Sovtek
tubes and tube output transformers. Somehow I lost them. Does
anyone have them laying around?

Thanks,

Stuart
From: awelker@dciem.dciem.dnd.ca (Andrew Welker)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Digital Cable
Date: 29 Dec 92 18:03:55 GMT
Organization: Defence and Civil Institute of Environmental Medicine

I purchased a Museatex Melior D/A on the weekend at 40% off list
price. I am now wondering if a special digital cable needs to be
used. One person said that the cable had to be 75 ohms like video
cables. Is this true? Please send suggestions ASAP since I am
going to look this evening. Thanks!

Andrew Welker
Organization: Penn State University
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 15:41:40 EST
From: <ADB103@psuvm.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: WANTED:Advent BIG screen parts and info.

I have a Avent Videobeam 1000A that had liquid spilled on the projection
unit.There is a board(ill have specifics later)that has most of the parts
burnt beyond recognition.  It is small and looks rebuildable.  I would be
interested in any one with parts or schematics avilable.  thank you ED b
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: joe@avs.com (Joe Peterson)
Subject: Re: Subwoofer power supply
Organization: Advanced Visual Systems Inc.
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL8]
Date: Tue, 22 Dec 1992 20:13:00 GMT

Mark Trostler (mtrostle@sdcc13.ucsd.edu) wrote:
: Finally, what is the current that comes out of a wall socket? I
: see it's 110VAC @ 60Hz, fine, but what's the current?
: But, does the amount of current not matter because the line current is
: isolated from the output current by the transformer?  Is 110volts
: pulsating 60x/sec. all that's important to the transformer/rest of
: the power supply?

Maybe this answer will clear up your previous questions.  The current
produced from any voltage source (like your wall socket) is determined
(within limits) by the load (e.g. a light bulb, or whatever).  It is
extactly what you said: V=IR.  In fact, when nothing is plugged in,
the current is zero (infinite R).  If you put a plain wire (R near
zero) across the wall socket (I DON'T recommend this!), you will get
a very high current (as the resulting sparks, melting will indicate).
Of course, the voltage source will have a max. current it can produce.
In house wiring, circuit breakers are there to prevent you from finding
this limit the hard way (and melting your home's wiring!).  You can figure
out how many amps are flowing through a 100W light bulb with: P=IV
(100 = I * 110; I = 0.9A).

: THANK YOU EVERYONE WHO HAS A MUCH BETTER GRASP OF THIS STUFF THAN ME!
: 	& a big fat HAPPY HOLIDAYS to you all...
: 						Mark

Sure, same to you!
						Joe
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: ptg2351@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Panos Tamamidis )
Subject: Re: CD Changers
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 24 Dec 1992 04:13:11 GMT

slin@cisco.com (Steven Lin) writes:

>Some magazine-type CD players can store playlists for each magazine.
>This is useful if there's a certain set of songs on different CDs you
>like to listen to.  Just put the CDs in a magazine, program the
>tracks, and store it in the player's memory.  Then each time you put
>that magazine in, it will automatically recall the playlist.  It
>identifies the magazine by examining the first CD and comparing its
>signature against the stored playlists.  Obviously the player will get
>confused if you change switch any of the other disks, but I think
>it'll just revert to normal operation once it detects an
>inconsistancy.  

 Gee.  I recall that few years ago, when I was about to buy my first CD
 player, I decided to go for a CD changer (actually, I bought a 6+1 kind
 of changer).  The reason for buying a changer instead of a regular CD
 player was that with a changer I could enjoy music for hours without
 any interuption.  I could program 7 CD's, use random play etc.

 Unfortunately, I found out that I was punishing myself by programing the
 stupid machine.  I had to think which songs I would listen to, with what order
 I would program them etc.  I'm fed up with using the changer, and I tend
 to use most of the time (90%) the single drawer.

 We don't need to complicate our lifes by programing and storing to
 the memory of the stupid CD changers the music we listen! Single CD players
 are just fine! 

>Steve

 Panos
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re:  hooking portable CD to tape-less car radio
From: vanz@tragula.equinox.gen.nz (Martin Nieuwelaar)
Date: 24 Dec 92 10:44:57 +1200
Organization: Not an organisation

In article <6998@otc.otca.oz> brendan@otc.otca.oz (Brendan Jones) writes:
>In article <Dec.9.21.00.45.1992.13883@athos.rutgers.edu> borgida@athos.rutgers.edu (Alex Borgida) writes:
>>I have a Toyota without a tape deck, but with a radio and speakers that I am
>>quite happy with. I also have a portable CD player that I use in the garden,
>>at work, etc. I was told by a local "car stereo" place that it is *not*
>>possible to hook up wires to the car radio so that I can listen to my
>>portable CD player in the car, when I go on long trips. 
>
>Well, it is possible, but only with some effort and electronics knowledge.
>I wanted a similar thing - my car just had the factory fitted radio, and I
>wanted to be able to play my walkman or CD player through it.
>
>I pulled the radio out, tracked down the line stage of the radio, and put in
>a stereo switch at that point.  I then built a line-interface circuit with
>a couple of op-amps to make a high impedance line input, built a 3 V power
>supply inside the radio, and then fed two cables (stereo line input and the 3V
>DC supply) out the back of the radio through its 5 pin DIN connector and into
>the glovebox, where I can then plug in my walkman or CD player.

[stuff deleted]

You could always build a kitset stereo transmitter.  They're around
$25 US, and as long as your radio picks up FM, and you can have
the transmitter near the radio, they work quite well.  Of course
the sound quality will not be as good, but it does mean you won't have to
make any modifications to your car.
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Gabe M Wiener)
Subject: Re: questions on new digital formats
Reply-To: gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Gabe M Wiener)
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Sat, 26 Dec 1992 02:02:30 GMT

In article <PHR.92Dec25154056@napa.telebit.com> phr@telebit.com (Paul Rubin) writes:
>
>I have sometimes wondered whether the DAT tape tax is an effort
>to kill off DAT altogether. 

Errr....you can't kill something that was never alive.

DAT has clearly fizzled as a consumer format.  It never gained widespread
acceptance.  The machines are too expensive, and most consumers couldn't
give a damn about digital recording or sound quality.  

DAT has soared as the 2-track _professional_ medium of choice.  The only
reason DCC or MD (but not both in my opinion) will make it is if the price
point drops low enough to make it a realistic alternative to cassettes for
the audio-brain-dead buying public.

>In some parts of the world, cassettes have been pretty much the only
>medium in use for over a decade (very little vinyl or CD's, even back
>when vinyl was the dominant medium here).  Even in the US, I believe
>ACC, not CD, is still the "dominant" distribution medium.

In places like India, cassettes are more or less the _only_ media used,
especially in rural parts of the country.

In the US, the Compact Disc is surely dominant.  Many record firms are
not even producing pre-recorded cassettes of anything but the major
releases.
>I'd also like to see MD's (which store 128 megabytes
>of digital data) replace floppy discs (i.e. drive cost < $100, blank
>disk cost <$2) but I'm not holding my breath.

Well, I'm hopeful that if anything, this impending marketing war will
force the price of MO technology down low enough that it becomes a 
cost-effective alternative to magnetic media and replaces the floppy
disk.  A good riddance that would be.


--
Gabe Wiener - Columbia Univ.     "This 'telephone' has too many shortcomings 
gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu       to be seriously considered as a means of 
N2GPZ in ham radio circles        communication. The device is inherently of
72355,1226 on CI$                 no value to us." -Western Union memo, 1877
From: matthews@eecs.ucdavis.edu (Thomas W. Matthews)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: CD Sound (again?)
Date: 28 Dec 92 19:31:57 GMT
Organization: Division of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, UC Davis

In my work with sampled-data detectors, I find it is often necessary to
clarify something about the Nyquist sampling theorem.  Maybe some aspect
of this principle would be appropriate for the FAQ on sampling.

In my application (not audio), I care only about the value of the input
waveform at the sample times.  I will not be attempting to reconstruct the
waveform BETWEEN the sample times.  Hence, the input signal need not be
bandlimited to half the sampling frequency.  

However, it is the goal of audio devices to reconstruct the input waveform
from the samples, including the part of the waveform between the samples.
The Nyquist sampling theorem addresses this problem.  In the digital vs
analog debate, I have heard it said that digital leaves out part of the sound
(the part between the sample times).  It may not be widely understood that
the goal of digital recording is to reconstruct the entire signal.  Maybe the
FAQ should state that explicitly.  

Once the goal of digital recording has been established, one can apply
the Nyquist sampling theorem to determine a minimum sampling rate depending
on signal bandwidth, given ideal samplers and ideal filters.   Practical
filters certainly introduce undesirable effects; these can be mitigated by
increasing the sampling frequency (to decrease required filter complexity) or
by doing more of ther filtering in the digital domain (certain types of
filter responses are possible there).  The "sinc interpolation" refered to
in an earlier article can be called filtering - convolution with a sinc
function results in a "brick wall" filter.

Tom Matthews