HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: Craig_Everhart@transarc.com
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: Dolby Pro Logic in Music and Vidio Tapes anyone ?????
Date: 15 Sep 92 15:38:56 GMT
	<1992Sep14.180029.177@bmerh85.bnr.ca>
Organization: Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA

Excerpts from netnews.rec.audio: 14-Sep-92 Re: Dolby Pro Logic in Musi..
Shiv Naimpally@bnr.ca (1399)

> Any Dolby Pro Logic encoded material will be marked as such. Stereo Review
> recently looked at this relatively new phenomenon of encoding music CDs
> using Pro Logic and they listed 30-40 cds. I do know of 2 off the top of my
> head: Isao Tomita's "Holst's The Planets" and Wendy Carlos's new "Switched
> on Bach" release. Both are electronic realizations of Classical pieces.
> I think some of Tomita's other CDs have also been released with Pro Logic
> encoding.

> Unless you are playing Pro Logic encoded source, don't use the Pro Logic
> decoder. 

Not quite.  Close, though.

``Dolby Pro-Logic'' is a decoding technology, not an encoding/decoding
technology.  ``Dolby Surround'' is the companion encoding technology. 
It can be decoded, to varying tastes and abilities, with several
decoders, including Dolby Pro-Logic.  Source material will be marked
with the encoding technology used, not any of the collection of possible
decoders.

There is material in non-surround-encoded stereo sources that will be
used as ``surround'' information by various decoders.  Perhaps what the
poster (Shiv Naimpally) meant is that it can be a mistake to use Dolby
Pro-Logic decoding on material that isn't surround-encoded. 
Unfortunately, there's nothing in the encoded material itself that would
indicate the encoding, as the surround information is electrically a lot
like the ordinary, expected signal differences between left and right
channels.  Thus, anybody coming up with an ``indicator light'' to
indicate surround-encoded source material would be making a guess.  This
contrasts with, say, the ``FM stereo'' multiplex sense, which is a
positive identification.

It's tough to find stereo audio on videotapes that isn't
surround-encoded, so it's not surprising that you can leave your
surround decoding on all the time for A/V sources.  Surround encoding on
audio-only material is, as the poster suggested, less typical.

		Craig
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: jp@linus.mitre.org (Jeffrey Picciotto)
Subject: surround speakers
Organization: MITRE Corporation, Bedford, MA
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1992 20:44:08 GMT



I'm thinking about buying a set of speakers (front L/R, surround L/R, center)
for surround.  These would be separate from my normal "music" speakers.  I'd
like to go with a single brand system.  Thus far, ignoring $$$ systems (like
KEF), I can only come up with three possibilities:

  NHT 
  Cambridge Soundworks
  Boston Acoustics

Anybody have comments on these systems?  Suggestions for alternatives?
Anybody care to compare NHT to Cambridge Soundworks?

Any info would be greatly appreciated, esp. since auditioning Cambridge
Soundworks stuff seems not to be possible.  Post, or mail and I'll summarize.

Thanks!

--jeff
jp@mitre.org
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: pinghann@maui.cs.ucla.edu (Ping Hann Wang)
Subject: need information about TASCAM company and its "Portastudio 464"
Organization: UCLA Computer Science Department
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 92 19:17:41 GMT

My friend abroad is looking for the compact-size multi-track cassette recorder
"Portastudio 464" by TASCAM company. I trid to find TASCAM's 800 phone number
but failed. The only thing I know about TASCAM is that a preamp with multi-
headphone jacks in our music library is TASCAM's product, but that preamp was
manufactured bt TEAC in Japan. I wonder if TASCAM has some affilitation with
TEAC. Could someone out there give me the phone number of TSACAM or any audio
store carrying TASCAM's products in LA area?

-- 
Pinghann Wang
UCLA Computer Science Department
Organization: Penn State University
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 00:38:39 EDT
From: <LLH111@psuvm.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: Best type of CD changer?

All of the replies I've gotten regarding cd-changer type have been
pro-carousel.  One of the prinmary reasons I thought that a mag.
player is good is that the magazines protect the disks.  Any support/
further discredit to this idea?
.
Richard
Organization: Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1992 01:11:19 -0400 
From: Kent Andrew Edmonds <ke0u+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Design Acoustics PS-9

Anyone have experience with Design Acoustics PS-9's?

Thanks,
Andy Edmonds

Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: jreiser@scott.skidmore.edu (jason reiser)
Subject: Re: Alon speakers by Acarian Systems
Organization: Skidmore College, Saratoga Springs NY
Distribution: usa
Date: Sun, 6 Sep 1992 21:40:08 GMT

des@des.net.com (Dave Swanson) writes:
> I've been auditioning speakers in the $1000 to $2000 range.  I've listened to
> Theil, Vanderstein, Apogee, Snell, Magnapan, and Mission.  A local dealer just
> got in the Alon IV and Alon II speakers by Acarian Systems.  I recall some
> postings about the Alons, mostly about their appearence.  I don't recall any
> discussion about how they sound.  Anyone want to put in their 2 cents about the
> Alon II?
> BTW, the Alon II lists for about $1800 and the Alon IV for about $3000.
> I've seen the review of the Alon IV in _the abso!ute sound_ (Issue 80 June '92). 
> Have there been any other published reviews?  Ultimatly, my ears will be the
> judge... just wanted to get some other opinions.
> 
> Thanks in advance,
> Dave Swanson (des@des.net.com)


Have you heard the Alon II's yet?  I didn't even know they existed.  I
heard the Alon IV's at Audio Breakthroughs on Long Island when they
first came out and fell in love immediately.  I had always loved the
Dahlquist DQ-20's, but the new DQ series speakers, (the 30 in
particlar) just didn't sound right, even with the crossover change.
Dahlquist can't build speakers, or rather they can't design good
speakers without Carl Marchisotto.  When it's time to upgrade from my
Dahlquist M903 and M905's, I'll look to Carl for the best sould available.

				- Jason


Newsgroups: rec.audio,rec.video
From: summer@mamura.ee.mu.oz.au (Mark Summerfield)
Subject: Multiformat video/audio disk players
Organization: Electrical and Electronic Eng. - University of Melbourne 
Date: Sun, 6 Sep 1992 07:26:13 GMT

I don't usually read either of the groups I have sent this to, but I
need a genuinely world view here. Please respond with e-mail.

I am considering buying a multiformat disk player (ie the kind that plays
everything from CD singles up to full-length digital videodisks). The
questions I would like answers to are:

1) What is the audio quality of such players like by comparison to
   mid-range audio-only CD players? Particlular reference to Pioneer's
   range of machines would be appreciated.

2) What is happening in the video area? There seem to be very few video
   disks available in Australia (although there seem to be a few specialist
   places around). Are video/audio CD singles becoming commonplace? Are
   most video releases including the digital video disk format these
   days? Obviously I expect to pay more for these things, but I want
   to know if I can get them from *somewhere* if I really want them.
   And is the trend in the US and Europe towards a greater support
   of laser disk formats in video libraries?

Thanks in advance for any help.

Mark.
          --------------------------------------------------------
              Mark Summerfield,  Photonics Research Laboratory
Department of Electrical and Electronic Engineering, University of Melbourne  
                ACSnet[AARN/Internet]: summer@ee.mu.oz[.au] 
          --------------------------------------------------------
   "This terminal is no more. It has ceased to be. It's expired and gone
    to meet its maker. This is a late terminal. It's a stiff. Bereft of
     life, it rests in peace. If you hadn't nailed it to the bench, it
      would be pushing up the daisies. It's run down the curtain and
            joined the choir invisible. This is an X-Terminal!"
From: bender@oobleck (Duke of Canterbury)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: Sony formally introduces MD on 9-10-92
Date: 12 Sep 1992 01:02:01 GMT
Organization: SPARK's R US
Reply-To: bender@oobleck.eng.sun.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: oobleck
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL3

And now, Mohit's article re-posted for those of us that had trouble reading
double-spaced text:

goyal@utdallas.edu (Mohit K. Goyal) writes:
 Hello.  Just thought I would relay this bit of news to the rest of you:
 Our local news station here in Dallas, Texas, KRLD 1080 AM, announced
 today Sony formally introduced the MD.  The segment I listened to was
 not very long but they listed the benefits of MD, said the sound 
 quality was not quite as good, "an audiophile who compared both the
 formats would probably notice a difference" (quote from a Sony guy).
 The Sony guy also said that a MD player and recorder *lists* for $750
 in the US and a player only *lists* for $500-$550. (I can't remember)
 Anyways, I found this exciting for two reasons:
 1. These are the LIST prices which means that they will be less in 
    stores.
 2. These are the prices on *brand new* equipment.  They should fall
    noticeably soon.  Remember how highly priced CD players were when
    they first came out?
 Finally, the Sony guy said prerecorded MD's will cost the same as or a
 little less than CD's, and the blank MD's should be less than $10.
 -----------------------
 How long do people think it will be before prices start falling on the
 MD equipment?  I don't know how long it was before prices of CD players
 went down from their intial high prices.
 Oh yeah, I got the impression that the players were being released today,
 or very soon, but the Sony guy never gave a date and the newspeople never
 asked him.  They just said "Today Sony introduced the Mini Disc"
 Does anyone know when these might start appearing in the US?
 3rd Quarter?  4th Quarter?  JITFC? (Just In Time For Christmas)
 Thanks.

--
Tips for secure passwords:
    o base it on something easy for you to remember, such as:
	Irb49rg!   (I'd rather be at a 49er game!)
	12*Sd2Bb   (Twelve shopping days to Beethoven's birthday)
Organization: Pittsburgh Supercomputing Center, Carnegie Mellon, Pittsburgh, PA
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 1992 12:34:56 -0400 
From: Stephen Jeffrey Petko <sp2b+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: Universal Remotes

I have seen many universal reomte controls on the market from folks
like Zenith, HK, Philips, and a company I can't remember whose whole
face was a touch sensative "programmable" LCD.

I would be interested in recommendations people may have, assumeing
for now price no object. Most interesting would be remotes that have
some sort of menu driven LCD display.

Please reply via mail and I'll post a summary later.

Thanks in advance,
Steve
From: adm@cs.man.ac.uk (Alan Murta)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: Advice on scratched CD
Date: 14 Sep 92 10:13:38 GMT
Organization: Dept Computer Science, University of Manchester, U.K.

Smoothing the scratch with a mild abrasive, such as toothpaste or metal
polish can cure the problem as a last resort.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alan Murta   Department of Computer Science, University of Manchester,     
Lecturer     Oxford Road, Manchester, M13 9PL, U.K.  Tel: (+44) 61-275-6259
             JANET: adm@uk.ac.man.cs                 FAX: (+44) 61-275-6236
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: shiv@bnr.ca (Shiv Naimpally)
Subject: Re: Recommendations needed for Speakers
Reply-To: shiv@bnr.ca (Shiv Naimpally)
Organization: Bell-Northern Research Ltd.
Distribution: na
Date: Mon, 14 Sep 92 16:24:58 GMT

In article <Bu72G5.Jp1@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG>, pchi@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG (Eric Chi) writes:
|> Hi, I am setting up a stereo system for the first time. After reading
|> the recent discussions about satellite speaker systems, I have some 
|> questions:
|> 
|> 1. Are satellite speakers better than the more traditional 2 speaker system?
|>    I know one of the advantage for satellite speakers is they occupied less 
|> space. My price range is no more than $650.
|> 
|> 2. Is surround sound better than the traditional 2 speaker system? 
|> Are satellite speakers good for surround sound?
|> 
|> 3. Does anyone have any recommendations for the speakers?
|> 
|> 4. Where is the best place to purchase these stereo components? Is mail
|> order a good source? Is original manufacturer's warranty necessary?
|> 
|> Thanks in advance.
|> 
|> Eric.
|> 
|>

1. No. Satellite/subs are relatively new and while they are improving, a
well designed traditional speaker is usually better than a satellite/sub
speaker for the same money. Most people buy satellite/subs because of
space and/or aesthetic considerations.

2. Surround sound is used to simulate a theatre experience (ie. multiple
speakers surrounding you). If the film had dolby sound in the theatre,
you need a dolby pro-logic decoder and 5 speakers (2 front, 2 rear, one
center) for the dolby experience. For older films and non-pro logic
sources such as TV and CDs (some shows and CDs do come encoded but
they are the minority for now), surround sound is just that - it
surrounds you with sound. 

Is it 'better' ? For movies and other video applications, yes, surround
does make it more enjoyable. For music ... thats more subjective and
depends on your equipment, room, etc..

3. Cambridge Soundworks Ensemble if you are looking for sattelite/sub.
These are available only via mail order ($399 - there is a 30 day trial
period I think). Bose has the AM series but they are higher priced.
For 'traditional' speakers, Paradigm makes some excellent speakers,
from small bookshelf speakers, upwards. KEF, B&W, and others also
make excellent speakers. Speakers are a highly subjective thing -
listen before you buy !

4. Mail order is fine if price is of overriding concern and you are
willing to live with the hassles should anything go wrong (with
speakers there is less likely to go wrong than with say a tape deck).
But as I said, speakers are very subjective and you need to hear them
so the 'best' place to buy is probably someplace that has a good selection
of speakers, knowledgable salesman, and reasonable prices. Cambridge
has a good reputation for a mail order place. 

You may also want to consider buying used speakers. Audio-holics are
notorious for upgrading their systems so you can often find good deals
in classifieds or trade-ins at dealers.
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: dud@cbnewsf.cb.att.com (William F. Dudley Jr.)
Subject: Schematic needed for Pioneer SF700
Keywords: Crossover schematic
Organization: AT&T
Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1992 20:02:41 GMT

I have a Pioneer SF700 3-way crossover that has developed a noisy
channel.  I called the local parts place, and they don't have a
listing for a SAM's photofact for it, and they suggested I call Pioneer.
I called 1 800 457 2881, dealer parts order line, and the person
there said that the SF700 isn't in her database.

This thing is 20 years old, but I like it.  Does anybody have or know
where I can get a schematic for it?  Its all discrete transistors
(like 30 of them) and I could trace it out if I had to, but ... ugh.

Thanks in advance.

Please email to       71631.737@compuserve.com
as I shall be losing this account as of the 16th of Sept.

Bill Dudley
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: palane@iastate.edu (Paul A. Lane)
Subject: Re: Very expensive cables
Organization: Iowa State University, Ames IA
Date: Tue, 15 Sep 1992 16:33:40 GMT

In <193egnINNrjf@uniwa.uwa.edu.au> scott@psy.uwa.oz.au (Scott Fisher) writes:

>palane@iastate.edu (Paul A. Lane) writes:

>>My personal preference (which I think would satisfy both camps) would
>>be extended black box listening. If long-time listening will bring out
>>differences between (for example) different amplifiers, take a Pioneer
>>amp and put it in a black box with a brick and a Mark Levinson (or your
>>favorite ultra-expensive amp). The listener does not hook the amps up
>>and level matching should be unnecessary (the listener still can adjust
>>volume). Run a trial over several weeks with half the critics getting
>>cheapos and half the critics getting ultras.

>This would be known as a "between" subjects design and would probably
>(in this case) be better to do a "within" subjects design (where each
>reviewer listens to all the amps, cables, speakers etc, under review) just 
>give the critic "2, 3 or 20" black boxes...then what you have is simply a 
>"double blind experiment" where 1 trial takes about a month. 

I agree with you that a "within" subjects design would be more accurate
for determining differences, though more time consuming for the individual
reviewer. However, if differences are minimal, some reviewers would be
giving Pioneer amps glowing reviews and trashing Levinson. With a relatively
small sample, one should find out if the claimed differences between equip-
ment are observable under extended conditions.

>To make things really interesting give them 6 black boxes for a month, have 
>three amps (pairs of each) in there "somewhere" and get the reviewer to not 
>only write a review for each box but also tell you which boxes contained the 
>"same" amps....to make things "really" interesting, don't tell the reviewer 
>that there are only 3 different amps in the 6 boxes :-)

The main point of my suggested procedure is to remove pressure from the 
reviewer. Don't require comparisons or trying to find out which amps are
the same and which are different. I could see the same claims made about
the uselessness of AB comparisons being made here (pressure, etc.) I rather
like the idea of taking an amp to someone who claims to here substantial
differences and asking them to use it for a month (possibly comparing it
with their reference) and say what they think. It could be rather illum-
inating.

Alas, I'm afraid that manufacturers, magazines, and consumers' egos have too
much to lose for this to be pulled off.

>Tasks for the subjects could be writing extended, subjective reviews, simply
>saying "same, different", "better, worse", etc etc...

>Regards Scott.


Paul
From: mjo@castle.ed.ac.uk (M J O Clark)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: CD pricing
Keywords: Expensive
Date: 14 Sep 92 09:42:56 GMT
Organization: Edinburgh University

If I were you, I would not complain about the phenomenal price of CDs
($15...)

I have been paying on average stirling #12 (~$24) for a few years, and
would just LOVE to find a CD priced at stirling #7........:-)

mjo, Endiburgh, Scotland
                ^^^^^^^
                |||||||
                NB I am NOT scottish :-)

-- 
                        |                 INDECISIJIG: 
Introducing a new word  |   A frequent occurrence  in crowded streets
Everyone should use it  |   when two people hesitate  in  deciding in
Please copy this sig.   |   which direction their paths should cross.
From: al@qiclab.scn.rain.com (Alan Peterman)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: Stereo TV to Stereo Causing a hummmmmmmm
Date: 10 Sep 92 21:09:48 GMT
Article-I.D.: qiclab.1992Sep10.210948.1748
Organization: SCN Research/Qic Laboratories of Tigard, Oregon.

In article <1992Sep10.162158.27695@gasco.com> eeh@gasco.uucp (Eric Hutchinson x1589) writes:
>Looking for options to a problem before I run nuts and do something 
>on my own.
>
>I have a Mitsubishi stereo tv and want to connect to my stereo 
>system for the improved sound.  The receiver is an NAD 7140, speakers 
>are Magnapan (MGIIB?).  I am using the output RCA jacks on the TV and the
>input to the AUX on the receiver. 

You don't mention it - but I'll bet you are hooked to cable for your TV.
At any rate you have a ground loop.  The TV is connected to the cable,
and the cable's ground, and the stereo is connected (perhaps indirectly)
to the house wiring ground.  The fix is to break the ground loop.  You can
prove this is the problem by disconnecting the antenna, and seeing if the hum
problem is solved.


There are 2 fixes.  You can use RCA cables that have ground just connected
at one end to connect the TV to the stereo - but I don't really recommend
it.  The better way is to use an antenna ground isolator - which is really
just 2 baluns "back-to back" to get rid of the ground path while passing
the signal.   Radio Shack parts 15-1140 and 15-1253 will do the job just
fine.  More expensive isolators are available if you wish.

-- 
Alan L. Peterman                                 (503)-684-1984 hm & work
                       al@qiclab.scn.rain.com
It's odd how as I get older, the days are longer, but the years are shorter!
From: smee@bristol.ac.uk (Paul Smee)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: Best type of CD changer?
Date: 11 Sep 92 15:51:00 GMT
Reply-To: P.Smee@bristol.ac.uk (Paul Smee)
Organization: University of Bristol

In article <92255.003839LLH111@psuvm.psu.edu> LLH111@psuvm.psu.edu writes:
>All of the replies I've gotten regarding cd-changer type have been
>pro-carousel.  One of the prinmary reasons I thought that a mag.
>player is good is that the magazines protect the disks.  Any support/
>further discredit to this idea?

If you buy enough mags to store all your disks in, then it's probably
true.  (Though then you have the problem of arranging your disks in
sets of 6(~) that you're always going to want to have loaded together,
and the further problem of how to organize the liner notes.  Not to
mention the extra cost.  In compensation, they will store in a bit less
space that way than in their own boxes.)  If you only have a few mags,
or want a different assortment each time, then you are going to have to
continually be loading and unloading mags, and that is a BIT more
fiddly than dropping the disks into a carousel, so may increase the
risk of scratching or fingerprinting them.

My own feeling is that if you really want a changer (not my favorite
idea, but it's your money) then the carousel is the way to go, both for
those reasons, and because it's easier to deal with disks which you've
borrowed or just bought and so haven't decided where to put them yet.

-- 
Paul Smee, Computing Service, University of Bristol, Bristol BS8 1UD, UK
 P.Smee@bristol.ac.uk - ..!uunet!uknet!bsmail!p.smee - Tel +44 272 303132
From: kevinm@ocf.berkeley.edu (Kevin Miller)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: Pro-Logic Recievers (STRAV1070/D1S/etc) Summary!
Keywords: pro logic surround receiver summary sony pioneer strav1070
Date: 13 Sep 92 05:48:43 GMT
Organization: U.C. Berkeley Open Computing Facility
NNTP-Posting-Host: tornado.berkeley.edu

In article <77792@ut-emx.uucp> everett@ut-emx.uucp (Everett Wang) writes:
>>Any comments on the above Denons or those listed below (low prices,
>>or any other comments) welcome.
>>
>>>	Kenwood 8040			375
>>>	Kenwood KR-V7030		380
>
>	The price is from S.B.H Enterprises at New York. Their phone number
>is 1-800-451-5851. 
>
>	I especially like VSXD601 for its DSP, digital pro-logic decoder, 
>65 watt for both center channel and main channels.
>
I have the Kenwood KR-7030 (in fact it's on right now) and I like it immensly.
In stereo mode, it is 100 watts per channel, and in Pro-Logic surround sound,
it's 65 watts for the mains and center and 15W for the rears.  

I paint $349 from a local retailer call "The Good Guys" in April of this year.
I think this store is regional only, though.

DSP is available in the KR-8030.  I don't recall the price on that model.

Kevin
kevinm@ocf.berkeley.edu