HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: rpeck@pure.com (Ray Peck)
Subject: Bay Area Repair Joints
Organization: Pure Software, Los Altos, CA
Distribution: ba
Date: Tue, 17 Nov 1992 06:03:51 GMT

I've pointed Distribution at ba.  If this gets to your site and you're
not in the Bay Area, please yell at your news feed, not me.


That dispensed with, I have a question for you ba rec.audio folk.  I
have an old Akai top-o-the-line cassette deck from the year they made
great decks (1982?).  I love it dearly.  It's started to eat cheap
tapes.

XLII's and MX's work fine, but UD's (I was taping for a friend) get
shredded.  I cleaned it carefully, same deal.  I took it to Sound
Goods in MV (where I've gotten some good deals on other stuff).  The
guy replaced the pinch roller and other assorted soft parts.  I took
it home.  It ate the first tape I used (after 20 min).  I took it
back.  The guy tweaked the guides.  I took it home.  It ate the first
tape I used (after 20 min).  I took it back.  The guy tweaked the
guides.  I took it home.  It ate the first tape I used (after 20 min).
I took it back.  The guy tweaked the guides.  I took it home.  It ate
the first tape I used (after 20 min).  I got disgusted, and it's sat,
untouched, for 2 years.


So. . .  I'm looking for a *good* tech to repair my wonderful deck.  I
don't mind driving all over the ba to get to him, as long as he fixes
it, and fixes it *right*.


Where should I go?

Email, and I'll summarize.




-- 
Ray Peck						rpeck@pure.com
Pure Software						415-903-5100

Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: daniel@netcom.com (Sam Daniel)
Subject: Re: Latest issue of TAS?
Organization: Netcom - Online Communication Services  (408 241-9760 guest) 
Distribution: usa
Date: Wed, 18 Nov 1992 03:13:36 GMT

macak <macak@mixcom.mixcom.com> writes:

>It's been a long time since I received a regular issue of The Absolute Sound,
>and I'm beginning to wonder if an issue was lost in the mail.
>The last issue I received was Issue 81, July/August 1992.  Has there been an
>one after that?

The October issue is at my local stereo store, but I haven't gotten my
copy through the US snail yet.  I hate it when that happens; another
$7.50 down the drain because I can't stand to wait...
-- 
*
*
Sam Daniel          *   UUCP (Smart):  daniel@netcom.com
Paramax Systems     *         (Dumb):  {...}!uunet!netcom!daniel
1001 W. Maude Ave.  *          Voice:  1-408-235-2661
Sunnyvale, CA 95131 *     Disclaimer:  It's only my opinion, but it's
                                       a DAMN good one...
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: kevinc@fraser.sfu.ca (Kevin "The Master" Chew)
Subject: Panasonic query
Organization: Simon Fraser University, Burnaby, B.C., Canada
Distribution: North America
Date: Mon, 23 Nov 1992 23:57:20 GMT



Just wondering if anyone has got an opinion for an audio neophyte
concerning the Panasonic portable that has the power flip-top
control panel and the front loading CD (I apologize for not having
the model number).  I am concerned not only about the overall quality
of the unit itself, but also if I should bother holding my breath
waiting for one of these new "miracle" formats (DCC or MD) to manifest
themselves in a portable format.


Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: andy@csqx.cs.rhbnc.ac.uk
Subject: MD recording quality
Organization: RHBNC
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 17:51:44 GMT

Something that I haven't seen mentioned before in this group is the fact
that the quality of MiniDisc home and studio recording will inevitably
differ.  How audible the differences will be I don't know, but the
difference will certainly be there.

 The reason for this is that pre-recorded MDs will make use of a
professional format converter, which will perform real-time conversion into
ATRAC.  These, at $35K each, will probably never even be seen by people
outside the music industry.  The ATRAC converter to be found in consumer
products, especially the smaller personal units where the power consumption
of the ATRAC chipset is significant, will not be as sophisticated as that
found in the professional unit.

 So, what does this mean?  Well, take the case of someone who buys the
lastest album on CD for use in his home hi-fi, and then records it onto MD
so he can listen to it on the move, or in the car.  The MD copy will sound
inferior to the same album bought on MD, because the pre-recorded MD will
have had the conversion into ATRAC performed using the professional format
converter, whilst the home copy will have used the ATRAC encoder from the
portable MD player.

 The difference in the quality of encoders is made possible from the fact
that the ATRAC standard fixes the number of sub-bands into which the signal
is to be split, but specifically does not fix the accuracy with which
signals in each of the bands will be coded.  

 Finally, it's possibly worth noting that while this difference does exist,
it won't matter much in practice.  MiniDisc is not meant to be a format for
home use, but rather one to extend the lifetime of the WalkMan beyond that
of the analogue cassette (whose sales are predicted to decline) and into the
digital era.  ATRAC with either encoding system isn't going to rival DCC,
let alone CD, but that's missing the point - MiniDisc's are immensely cute,
amazingly small and compact, and are a great improvement over analogue tape
in terms of sound quality, and over both analogue tape and DCC in terms of
access time and durability.

andy
-- 
Information Security Group              |  mail: andy@cs.rhbnc.ac.uk
Computer Science Department             |  uucp: ...!mcvax!uknet!rhbnc!andy
Royal Holloway, University of London    |  talk: +44 784 443696 (direct)
Egham, Surrey TW20 0EX, England         |   fax: +44 784 443420
Newsgroups: rec.audio,aus.hi-fi
From: strong@tc.fluke.COM (Norm Strong)
Subject: Re: Tape head demagnitizing...
Organization: John Fluke Mfg. Co., Inc., Everett, WA
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 15:18:46 GMT

In article <1992Nov17.032423.19975@mprgate.mpr.ca> walduck@mpr.ca (Andrew Walduck) writes:
}Here's a question that I've been meaning to ask for awhile...
}How often and how, should a tape head be demagnitized...
}
}I use my tape deck quite a bit (for both playback and recording...)
}and I'm wondering if tape head demagnitizing is even necessary??
}(of course...I've looked in the manual...it ain't there!! ;-)

The act of recording demagnetizes the record head.  If your deck uses
the same head for recording and playback--and if you do plenty of
recording--your heads will never need demagnetizing.  Of course, the
capstan and guides might.

If you have a 3-head deck, the playback head might very well need
occassional demagnetizing.  Just one of the disadvantages of a 3-head
deck.  

-- 

Norm Strong  (strong@tc.fluke.com)
2528 31st S.   Seattle WA 98144   USA
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Gabe M Wiener)
Subject: Re: Dolby C
Keywords: Dolby 
Reply-To: gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Gabe M Wiener)
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 14:00:41 GMT

In article <1992Nov16.123957.2456@athena.mit.edu> rcharbon@athena.mit.edu (Ray Charbonneau) writes:
>
>How does recording a cassette with Dolby C affect playback if the tape is played
>with Dolby B?  Or no Dolby?  (note: I understand how Dolby B works).
>
>Please respond by e-mail as I am not a regular reader of this group.
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Maybe it's time to start being one....

Dolby C is dynamic, Dolby B is static.  The compression effect changes
throughout a Dolby C recording.  As such, you *cannot* readily play it
back on a machine without Dolby C, whereas you certainly can play a Dolby
B tape back on a machine sans Dolby.

Playing a Dolby C tape back w/o Dolby C will give, ah, less than desirable
results.


--   
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: fineberg@win31.nas.nasa.gov (Samuel A. Fineberg)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: ELITIST SNOBS
Date: 17 Nov 92 00:20:41 GMT
Reply-To: fineberg@nas.nasa.gov
Organization: CSC, NASA Ames Research Center, NAS Division

I|> |> |> In <1992Nov15.104325.22786@henson.cc.wwu.edu> n8846069@henson.cc.wwu.edu (BarryB) writes:
|> |> |> 
|> |> |> >OK, DUDEZ, LET ME FIRST STATE THAT I AM IN TOTAL AGREEMENT WITH
|> |> |> >THE DUDEZ THAT WHO ARE FEED UP WITH THE HIGH-END ELITIST SNOBS
|> |> |> >WHO SIGNON TO THIS BBOARD.  THESE IDIOTS THINK YOU NEED TO
|> |> |> >SPEND A ZILLION DOLLARS ON A SYSTEM TO GET GOOD SOUND.  WELL
|> |> |> >THE JOKES ON THEM!  AND DON'T TELL ME I HAVEN'T HEARD A GOOD
|> |> |> >HIGH-END SYSTEM!  MY FRIEND HAS A $1000 SONY RACK SYSTEM.
|> |> |> >IT HAS BIG MOTHER SPEAKERS WITH 15 INCH WOOFERS THAT REALLY
|> |> |> >VIBRATE THE WHOLE ROOM!  AND TO TOP IT ALL OFF, THESE BABIES
|> |> |> >ARE RATED FOR 500 WATTS!!!  OK, SO DON'T GIVE ME THIS SHIT
|> |> |> >ABOUT NOT KNOWING WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT.
|> |> |> 
|> |> |> >TO TELL YOU THE TRUTH, MY $200 SOUNDESIGN SYSTEM SOUNDS
|> |> |> >JUST AS GOOD.  THE BASS SOUNDS JUST AS BIG!  THE SECRET
|> |> |> >IS TO ADJUST THE BASS CONTROL TO MAX.  TRY IT ON SOME
|> |> |> >OF THESE CHEAPER SYSTEMS.  IT REALLY CAN MAKE A DIFFERENCE!!!!
|> |> |> >ADJUST THE SYSTEM BEFORE YOU JUDGE!  GEEESH HOW HARD
|> |> |> >CAN IT BE???
|> |> |> 
|> |> |> >LATER DUDEZ.....
|> 
Have you considered jumping up and down while holding a hair dryer.  That way
you could shake the room and be rated at over 1000 watts for considerably
less money. (it would probably sound better too)

Sam
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: MD home units?
From: <MHUGHES@MIAMIU.BITNET>
Date: Thursday, 19 Nov 1992 15:19:38 EST
Organization: Miami University - Academic Computer Service

The initial release for DCC is a full-size home component from Philips,
but the MD units all seem to be portables.  Does anyone know if Sony
or other manufacturers have concrete plans to produce full-size home MD
components in the near future?  My main reason for getting MD (which I
favor over DCC as a format) would be as an archival medium for recording
all my old LPs.
 
Thanks, Mike
 
PS: Is Soundesign planning to produce MD players?  :) :) :) :)
From: jfs@oas.olivetti.com (Fred Stone)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: MC275
Date: 20 Nov 92 19:46:11 GMT
Distribution: ba
Organization: Olivetti ATC; Cupertino CA, USA

Has anyone seen the new MC275 tube power amps at Century Stereo in
San Jose?  Be interesting to see one of these again and find out what
they cost.

Fred
From: dbfarenw@amigo.brl.mil (Drew B. Farenwald )
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: Help!
Summary: The 8 Track
Date: 19 Nov 92 11:24:48 GMT
Followup-To: dbfarenw@cbda6.apgea.army.mil
Organization: U.S. Army Research Laboratory, APG, MD.

In article <7490250@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM> myers@hpfcso.FC.HP.COM (Bob Myers) writes:
>> 
>> 	The 8-track
>
>Don't know.

	The 8 Track was invented by Bill (?) Lear, a professional engineer who 
	also designed the Lear Jet.  He felt that he needed a tape player that 
	he could operate while piloting his plane.  That is, without taking 
	attention from piloting. So he came up with a design that was easy to 
	handle, and that would play continuously.  It is actually a quite nice 
	design for what it was intended.
From: jj@alice.att.com (jj, curmudgeon and all-around grouch)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: DCC -- JUST SAY NO!  (was: The end of cassettes,
Date: 18 Nov 92 02:14:53 GMT
Article-I.D.: alice.24221
Reply-To: jj@alice.UUCP (jj, curmudgeon and all-around grouch)
Organization: NJ State Home for Bewildered Terminals

In article <27617@oasys.dt.navy.mil> curt@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Curt Welch) writes:

>Yes you must.  But you don't explaing why you think this.  I don't expect
>multiple generation (analog or digital) copies on DCC or MD to be bad.  Why
>do you?
I'm sorry that you don't understand the basic technology,
and I'm sorry that you haven't taken the time to examine the
DCC technology, and the results of the CCIR SG10 report
on ISO MPEG Layer I in tandem applications before you've
resorted to what is essentailly an ad-hominem attack.

>Are you thinking that the first generation will compress the data by
>throwing away 80%, so therefore the second generation must throw away
>another 80% of the 20% left, leaving only 4% of the original music?
That's a pretty silly way of looking at it.

>If this is your thinking, then here's mine.  The first compression
>will remove 80% of the information, but the second time through the
>system, almost nothing will be removed, because it was all removed
>in the first pass.
That's absolutely wrong as well.  Think if of it this way:
The first compression will add some amount of noise.  The second
will add the same amount of noise, although perhaps not
in the same places (the compression has enough effect on
source statistics that the psychoacoustic models may not
be quite the same), and as a result there will be twice as much
noise in the second copy, for another 3dB loss in masking
ratio.

Enough of these losses (how many are needed depends on the
difficulty of the source material you use) and you will surely
hear noise, and lots of it.

Again, I refer you to the CCIR Study Group 10 test on
tandeming for the CCIR digital audio compresson standard.
The documents from CCIR should be in the public domain soon
if not already.
>
>I don't expect multiple analog DCC or MD copies to hold up as well as
>DAT, but I expect it to be better than any cassette format.
>
>Have you heard (:-)) otherwise?
>
>If you have some evidence that multiple generation copies will be
>bad, please let us know about it.  If you don't, please stop passing your
>theories along as if they were facts.
>
>Curt


-- 
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.
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: bmaraldo@watserv1.uwaterloo.ca (Commander Brett Maraldo)
Subject: Re: Advice on portable DAT needed
Organization: Unit 36 Research
Date: Sun, 22 Nov 1992 10:22:54 GMT

In article <1992Nov21.091143.9477@doug.cae.wisc.edu> loj@cae.wisc.edu (Lo Jeffrey) writes:
>I am looking for a low price (around $600) portable DAT.  I will be using
>it mostly for playing back through an outboard D/A converter and for
>making pure digital copies of digital sources (CDs and laserdisks) so I'm
>not terribly concerned with the internal A/D and D/A quality.  I am
>mostly shopping for reliability.  I just heard of a Damark offer for a
>Casio DA-R100 portable DAT for $600.  Can anyone give me some advice here?
>Is this the deal of my dreams or is the Casio a turkey?  What other units
>should I be looking at?

	Here is my advice:  First, let me tell you the DAT machines that I
have experienced.  I have used the TASCAM DA30, TEAC DA-P20, Casio RA7
and the Sont TCD-D3.  I now own a D3 myself.  I found that it sounded as
good at the DA30 in strenuous listening tests.  The Teac and Casio sounded
the same which isn't suprising since they are the same.  I was afraid of the
new Casio, the R100, because it thought it might have a similar sound to the
older casio.  

brett maraldo
plexus productions



-- 
               --------     Unit 36 Research     ---------
	                "Alien Technology Today"
  	 	      bmaraldo@watserv1.UWaterloo.ca
  	           {uunet!clyde!utai}!watserv1!bmaraldo
From: kautz@research.att.com
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: linking audio systems?
Date: 23 Nov 92 05:21:01 GMT
Reply-To: kautz@research.att.com
Distribution: rec
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories

I would like some advice on how to link two audio systems.  My current
set-up has a good quality audio system in the living room, and a cheap
system hooked to a vcr and cd player in the bedroom.  I would like to
be able to play the same music is both rooms (and possibly others, if
I ever get around to buying some more speakers).

The vcr has to stay in the bedroom, so my first thought was to move
all the equipment there, and run extension speakers to living room;
but this is obviously less than ideal, since I do most of my music
listening in the living room, and I would hate to run upstairs
everytime I wanted to change a CD or adjust the volume.

I would like to be able to simply select whatever is playing in the
living room as an input to the bedroom system.  What is the best way
to do this?  Is iit possible to distribute the line-level source, from
the living room preamp?  It would have to run at least 50 feet.  What
about running a speaker-level output --- how could that be safely
connected to a line-level input?  I imagine I'd add some resistance in
the circuit --- but how to determine the amount?

Advice greatly appreciated, please email as well as posting --
--
---- Henry Kautz

:internet: 	kautz@research.att.com
:uucp:		allegra!kautz
From: snguyen@orion.oac.uci.edu (Desperately Seeking Sarah!)
Subject: Spica, Mod Squad, Audioquest, Denon forsale
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Organization: University of California, Irvine
Date: 16 Nov 92 19:51:45 GMT
Distribution: usa

I have the following equipment forsale:

Spica Angelus, $800 with box and papers
Mod Squad Deluxe Line Drive AGT, $600, with box and papers
Denon 1520 CD player, $325, no (original) box
Audioquest Clear, 8' pair, $400
Audioquest Midnight, 8' pair with 2 pairs of Xterminators, $100

Please email if you're interested.

Son Nguyen
snguyen@uci.edu
(714)856-8415

Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: bill@bilver.uucp (Bill Vermillion)
Subject: Re: Question about record cleaning.
Organization: W. J. Vermillion - Winter Park, FL
Date: Fri, 20 Nov 1992 15:56:04 GMT

In article <1992Nov19.004301.1@auvax1.adelphi.edu> schmidt@auvax1.adelphi.edu writes:

>\In article <1992Nov15.051849.27622@cs.mcgill.ca>, narpet@cs.mcgill.ca (Greg WARD) writes:

>> I have a question that has probably plagued mankind for decades, and (I
>> fear) will become increasingly hard to answer: what's the best way to
>> clean my vinyl LP's?   ...

>My experience over some years is that plain tap water, with a small amount of
>hand soap works wonders, scrub gently with a soft rag or such, but NOT the
>label, unless you like to have to guess what is on the album, and then rinse
>well.  Don't put too much soap on the record, you don't want to have it slip
>out of your hands into the sink :-[ .  Water also has the advantage of reducing
>the static charge on the disc in the winter. 

Argh!  If you are going to wash records don't abuse them.

There are (or at least were) brushes made for washing records.
Soft, fine bristles that will reach into the groove.   Scrubbing is not
going to get into the groove and unless done in a circular mode can
cause more damage.

A rag can pick up the contaminants you are trying to remove and abrade
the surface.  

Make sure it's soap - and a very mild soap.   Too many hand soaps
aren't soap but a detergent.  So if you use one of those use the
detergent VERY sparingly.    The soap/detergent is needed to break up
any oily deposits.  If the 'dirt' is not oil based then a good wetting
agent is all that would be needed for the water to penetrate to the
bottom of the grooves.   



-- 
Bill Vermillion - bill@bilver.oau.org  bill.vermillion@oau.org
                - bill@bilver.uucp 
                - ..!{peora|tous|tarpit}!bilver!bill
From: idealord@dorsai.com (Jeff Harrington)
Subject: Opinions on Snell Acoustics Type E/III Speakers
Organization: The Dorsai Embassy, New York's Computer Consulate. +1.718.729.5018
Date: Mon, 16 Nov 1992 18:16:26 GMT

Hi, a friend of mine is considering buy the afore-mentioned Snells
and asked me to request opinions.  What do you think of them?  Do
you know about discounted pricings?  
 
Email preferred
 
Jeff Harrington
idealord@dorsai.com
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: gvh@metrosoft.com (Gordon Van Huizen)
Subject: Re: ELITIST SNOBS
Reply-To: gvh@metrosoft.com (Gordon Van Huizen)
Organization: Metrosoft
Date: Thu, 19 Nov 1992 16:35:57 GMT

In article <1992Nov18.174236.8421@megatek.com> max@megatek.com (Max Elliot)  
writes:
> DUDEZ, TO GET THE REALLY MOST KILLER BASS YOU SHOULD UZE A BUNCH OF
> CROSSOVERS AND SEND ONLY THE BASS TO ALL THE SPEAKERZ MAN. LIKE TO
> THE TWEETERS AND EVERYTHING! YEAH, DEATH TO MIDRANGE!
> 

Hey! You must be the engineer that put that nasty dip the the Bose AM-5  
response curve. I'd recognize your work anywhere...

:-)

-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------
Gordon Van Huizen           vox: 619.488.9411  fax: 619.488.3045
Metrosoft                   gvh@metrosoft.com [NeXTmail welcome]
----------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: jeh@cmkrnl.com
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: A $2700 public audio system for a church???
Date: 17 Nov 92 09:20:10 GMT
Organization: Kernel Mode Consulting, San Diego, CA

In article <3340269@hpcc01.corp.hp.com>, kirk@hpcc01.corp.hp.com 
(Kirk Lindstrom) writes:
>>My questions are
>>
>>(1)	Is there any difference between a home audio system and a public
>>audio system?
> Major.  Public systems should concentrate on voice rather than extended
> bass, imaging, clean highs, etc.
>>(2)	Is Radio Shack's system good enough for a church?
> You probably want more rugged construction and fewer features.
> 
>>(3)	Should my cousin use the local audio designer's $2700 system?
>>
> Tell the designer what budget you have in mind.  You can also consider
> some used gear and you can offer to pay him/her a flat fee and let him
> get the best price.
>>
>>-Luke
> ----------
> Anyway, discuss the options with the designer and also tell him about
> RadioShack and he'll let you know the weak points for your (cousin's)
> use.

Kirk is right on target here. 

Home audio equipment usually does not do well in a P.A. application.

More:  Experience gained from working with home audio equipment, in the home,
does not translate well to P.A. work. 

The single biggest difference is the sheer volume of the space that must be
filled with sound.  Home audio speakers are terribly inefficient by P.A. 
standards.  If you try to use home speakers for P.A. work you will usually
find that the power required is WAY beyond what the speakers can handle.  

The other single biggest difference :-) is that reverberation time is a much
bigger factor in P.A. system design than it is in home systems.  

If someone has asked you for advice on P.A. systems, run, do not walk, to the
nearest library that has back issues of _Audio_ magazine, and find the 
May, 1984 issue.  The article you want is titled "Sound Reinforcement for the
Amateur".  

Test: If you don't know what RT   or speaker "Q" are, you need this information!
                               60

Disclaimer:  No way am I a P.A. designer.  I have set up a few systems based on
the formulas and guidelines the article gives, and they worked well, but that's
about it.  Most of the above was cribbed from memory of the article.  So please
don't ask me for further advice -- go look it up, then you'll know as much as I
do, probably more 'cause you've read it more recently than I have. 

	--- Jamie Hanrahan, Kernel Mode Consulting, San Diego CA
Internet:  jeh@cmkrnl.com, hanrahan@eisner.decus.org, or jeh@crash.cts.com
Uucp:  ...{crash,eisner,uunet}!cmkrnl!jeh
Newsgroups: rec.audio