HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: chowkwan@alumni.cco.caltech.edu (Raymond Maihin Chowkwanyun)
Subject: A Tale of Two Tubes
Originator: tjk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu
Organization: University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1992 13:08:37 GMT



This will probably be of interest only to tubeophiles
and EL-34 tubeophiles at that.  On the other hand, it
might give non-tubeophiles a glimpse into the arcane
and fanatical world of the tubeophile.

Due to a bad habit of blowing out tubes, I recently 
had the GE EL-34's in my VTL Ichiban replaced with
Tesla EL-34's from Czecho.  I hasten to add, for the
benefit of our non-tube brethren, that blowing out
tubes is not a regular or common part of the tube
owning experience.  The cause lay elsewhere.
Tube gear is generally well-behaved.  
Also, I should add that EL-34 is a tube type, rather as 
Formula One is a racing car type.  

So it was a case of the American Goliath (GE) vs.
the Eastern European David (Tesla).  I would like
to report that Goliath won but the story turned
out along straight Biblical lines with a bit of twist.

My first impression upon listening to the Teslas was that they were
incredibly smooth sounding.  Much more so than the GE's.  There was
also a weight and heft to the instruments that was not there before. 
There was a problem though.  The attack on the Teslas was slow.
It had the odd effect of rubberizing transients.  A bit like
what Gindi reported with the Koetsu Pro IV in his Absolute Sound
review (issue 71), if you recall that.  In other words, it took
all the bite out of the music.

So this is the twist.  You have to let the Teslas burn in for
about 20 hours.  Then the rubberized transients disappear.
And you still have all the wonderful smoothosity and heft and
weight to the instruments.  Also, with the Teslas, I have for the
first time noted that the Ichiban sound better after about half 
an hour of warm up.  They sound great cold, they just get better.
With the GE's I never really noticed much difference in the
sound whether hot or cold.

More notes and clarifications: 

1. Alas you cannot simply plug the Tesla into the plug recently 
vacated by the GE.  The Tesla has a different impedence or something
so to get the correct bias your local technician will have to modify
the innards of your amp.  A simple mod, so Luke Manley (runs VTL)
assures me but nevertheless only to be carried out by a competent
tech due to the lethal voltages at play in a tube amp.

2. The Teslas tinkle after the unit is turned off.  My GE's never
tinkled.

3. GE has ceased tube production.  Rumor has it that the quality
went down, way down, at the end.  

4. Who knows how much longer Tesla will be in the game?  My advice
is to stock up now.  VTL has them.  (714) 627-5944.  $20 a pop.
Or your favorite tube source.

-- ray

Newsgroups: rec.audio.high-end
From: neidorff@uicc.com (Bob Neidorff)
Subject: Re: AR M-1's
Originator: tjk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu
Organization: Unitrode Integrated Circuits Corp., Merrimack, NH
Date: Mon, 13 Apr 1992 12:57:43 GMT


Someone mentioned the idea of a cheap(er) equalizer.  Really?  On
rec.audio.high-end?  Isn't that grounds for disconnection? :-)

Rather than purchase an equalizer, you might feel better with a
very simple low pass filter on the input of your amplifier.  As a
guess, you could try a 1nF polypropylene capacitor from amp in to
ground.  If your preamp output resistance is 10k, then this capacitor
would add a pole at 16kHz, or a slight high-end roll off.  Even better,
try 1nF in series with 2k ohms.

If you were really adventurous, you could experiement with different
capacitors in the 500pF to 3nF range and resistors in the range of
between 200 ohms and 5k.

The overall effect would be a slight amount of phase shift at very high
frequencies, and a slight roll-off in the 15kHz to 20kHz range.  It will
cut the grunge slightly but leave the rest of the spectrum untouched.

This may make some preamps sound worse, so try before you invest a fortune
in a serious modification.  The parts are really cheap, yet it has to sound
better than an equalizer.
-- 
Bob Neidorff                  |  Internet: neidorff@uicc.com
Unitrode I. C. Corp.          |  UUCP    : uunet!chillon!neidorff
7 Continental Blvd.           |  Voice   : (US) 603-424-2410
Merrimack, NH  03054-0399 USA |  FAX     : (US) 603-424-3460

Newsgroups: rec.audio.high-end
From: mohan@yoko.rutgers.edu (Sunil Mohan)
Subject: Re: RE: Mirage M3 Bi-Polar Speakers
Originator: tjk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1992 12:40:42 GMT


I just bought a pair of Thiel 3.5s. They are extremely good! A clear,
transparent, detailed high end, with excellent imaging, and some
respectable bass to boot. I chose them over the following models:
	Vandersteen 2ce and 3: good bass, not transparent
	Infinity Renaissance 80
	Mirage M-3
	Martin-Logan CLS 2
	Snell whatever
	Thiel 2.2: not enough bass.

Newsgroups: rec.audio.high-end
From: ias_student6@eis.dofasco.ca
Subject: Cleaning inaccessible tape heads: DRS810 DENON
Originator: tjk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu
Nntp-Posting-User: ias_student6
Organization: Dofasco Inc, Hamilton, Ont. Can.
Date: Fri, 10 Apr 1992 14:04:35 GMT


     Hi, recently a burglar ripped off my computer, hard drive, tape deck
and headphones.  The equipment being a few years old, naturally it would
be hard to find an exact replacement.  I've settled on a higher model
computer and hard drive.  Fortunately, AKG-240M headphones still exist.
However, DENON has recently discontinued the DRM-800A tape deck and has
replaced it with the DRS-810.

     The difference between the DENON DRM-800A tape deck and the DENON
DRS-810, is that the 800A is a conventional vertical loading deck,
whereas the 810 is a horizontial loading deck--sliding drawer like
a CD player.
     I have no doubt that the horizontial loading system provides 
better vibration isolation.
     The 800A was a snap to clean--the front bay door slides off, making
it easy to get in there with a demagnetizer wand and with cotton swabs.
Apparently, the 810 has no reference to cleaning the deck in it's user
manual.  I do not like the idea of using a cleaning cassette and/or
demagnetizing cassette in a $700 tape deck.  These are unprofessional
methods of cleaning.

     Apparently, dealers are still able to get the old DRM-800A model.
However, I would prefer to go with the recent model.

     Any comments on alternative methods of cleaning decks with
inaccessible heads would be appreciated.

Thanks in advance,
Peter Czarnecki

until April 30th  - IAS_STUDENT6@EIS.DOFASCO.CA
after May 4th - PMCZARNECKI@CHEMICAL.WATSTAR.UWATERLOO.CA


Newsgroups: rec.audio.high-end
From: mfm0@midway.uchicago.edu (martin frederic melhus)
Subject: DAC & CD Stuff (was Rotel)
Originator: tjk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu
Keywords: CAL, Creek
Reply-To: mfm0@midway.uchicago.edu
Organization: University of Chicago Computing Organizations
Date: Mon, 6 Apr 1992 12:51:22 GMT

In article <1992Apr3.050744.19377@casbah.acns.nwu.edu> mhauser@courtney.acns.nwu.edu (Marc Hauser) writes:

[stuff deleted]

>Also, has anybody heard that new, lower-priced DAC from Cal. Audio Labs?   
>How does it compare to the $420 Audio Alchemy DDE?  Any better?
>
>Marc Hauser
>mhauser@courtney.acns.nwu.edu

Yes, I have auditioned the CAL DAC.  It is not lower priced than the 
Audio Alchemy unit (perhaps there are more than 1 new new CAL unit.)
The unit I heard was the CAL Sigma, and it is a tube DAC.  Price was about
$700 list.  The sound was nice, and a slight improvement on the Icon II 
by itself (using the Icon as a transport that is.)  
The real surprise of that listening session, however, was the other unit
I heard.  The Creek CD-60 just blew away the Icon II/Sigma combo.  The 
highs were clear and crisp (perhaps bright - matter of taste.)  The most
impressive test track was the finale from the three tenors concert in 
Rome.  During the encore of Nessun Dorma, Pavarotti, Domingo and Carreras
all switch off during the song, each singing a few lines at a time.
The difference was clear on the Creek; going back to the CAL unit, one
could hear it *if* one knew to listen for it.  If you are looking for a
CD player in the $1300 range, give the Creek a listen.
The rest of the system was the exposure big pre-amp, big power supply, and
big dual mono power amp, playing on a pair of Linn Kabers.
If anyone else knows of other good players in this price range, please 
send me e-mail about them; I'm almost done looking, and would like to see
a few more units at this level. Thanks.

Martin F. Melhus         |        "and who are you?" she sternly spoke
mfm0@midway.uchicago.edu |            to the one beneath the smoke.
-------------------------+             "why, I'm fire," he replied
Joan of Arc (Warnes/Cohen)    "and I love your solitude, I love your pride."
-- 
Martin F. Melhus          |  Ted is the false Bob, as Elvis is the false Ted.
mfm0@midway.uchicago.edu  |  The False bob is not false Elvis  - The Ted Bob.
From: derek@au-bon-pain.lcs.mit.edu (Derek Chiou)
Subject: Wanted: Linn LP12
Originator: tjk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu
Cc: derek@au-bon-pain.lcs.mit.edu
Organization: University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
Date: Wed, 15 Apr 1992 13:10:55 GMT


Moderator: I don't know if this is an appropiate message for the
newgroup.  If it isn't, please let me know, else post it.  Thanks.

[Hell, I don't know, either. Comments, readers? -tjk]

Derek

--------------------------
Hello,

I'm trying to find a used Linn LP12 turntable with an Iitok or Ekos
arm.  Please email me if you want to sell any of these pieces.

Thanks.

Derek Chiou
derek@abp.lcs.mit.edu
From: bill@verdix.com (William Spencer)
Newsgroups: rec.audio.high-end
Subject: Re: AR M-1's
Date: 13 Apr 92 12:55:19 GMT
Organization: Verdix Corp.
Originator: tjk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu

In article <92099.214722ASOLOMO@auvm.american.edu> ASOLOMO@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU (ari solomon) writes:

>   I recently purchseda pair of AR M-1's sight-unseen, on the basis of consist-
> ently strong reviews. I agree that their sound belies their size, but I have
> a serious objection to their...shrillness. No other way to put it. Most objec-
> tionable is the sibilance in vocals. I'm really curious what other
> people think about this!

The ARs rely on off-axis listening instead of crossover components to 
help roll off the woofer at its high end. Place them high in the air
or tilt them back. Or add an inductor in series with the woofer, if 
all else fails.

> Similar experiences? Different? Frankly, I'm
> surprised this sibilance didn't disqualify them immediately in HP's review in
> TAS. I mean, my auditioning skills are much more roughly hewn and it's very
> distracting to me. How could *he* tolerate it?

He noticed it, but dealt with as mentioned above, and he didn't have to live
with it day after day. Besides, he likes tweaky products.

These hi-end mags seem to occasionally come with something that's "surprisingly
good for the price." I wonder if maybe they have an even greater bias against
mid-fi type equipment than is fair. I hazard to guess that more equipment 
would be called "surprisingly good" if they heard more of it and weren't
biased.

>     One possibility is that he had them set up in a much more heavily damped
> room: I tried this out at The Speaker Factory this weekend, comparing the
> AR's to TSF's Amazing MiniMonitor (made there, excellent sound), and found
> that surrounding the AR's side and back with absorbent panels attenuated the
> peak a lot.

I expect a small absorbency on the ceiling spot would do some
good. On the woofer axis.

Bill S.
From: ASOLOMO@AUVM.AMERICAN.EDU (ari solomon)
Newsgroups: rec.audio.high-end
Subject: AR M-1's
Date: 9 Apr 92 12:56:14 GMT
Article-I.D.: auvm.92099.214722ASOLOMO
Organization: The American University - University Computing Center
   with BSMTP id 7673; Wed, 08 Apr 92 22: 06:35 EDT
Originator: tjk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu


   I recently purchseda pair of AR M-1's sight-unseen, on the basis of consist-
 ently strong reviews. I agree that their sound belies their size, but I have
 a serious objection to their...shrillness. No other way to put it. Most objec-
 tionable is the sibilance in vocals. I'm really curious what other
 people think about this! Similar experiences? Different? Frankly, I'm
 surprised this sibilance didn't disqualify them immediately in HP's review in
 TAS. I mean, my auditioning skills are much more roughly hewn and it's very
 distracting to me. How could *he* tolerate it? (I do recall he had the Cello
 front end, with parametric EQ options, so maybe he just nailed the offending
 peak and forgot about it).
     One possibility is that he had them set up in a much more heavily damped
 room: I tried this out at The Speaker Factory this weekend, comparing the
 AR's to TSF's Amazing MiniMonitor (made there, excellent sound), and found
 that surrounding the AR's side and back with absorbent panels attenuated the
 peak a lot. But the MiniMonitors still sounded smoother, less 'stressed', bet-
 ter imaging & balance hands-down. 'Course, the MiniMonitors cost $650, and
 the AR's cost me $220.00 incl. shipping :)
          Well, enough impressions for one post. Let's see if that gets some
 discussion going.
Newsgroups: rec.audio.high-end
From: Yi Sun <ys0n+@andrew.cmu.edu>
Subject: recommendation on VMPS subwoofer
Originator: tjk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu
Organization: University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
Date: Fri, 17 Apr 1992 12:49:31 GMT
          ID </afs/andrew.cmu.edu/service/mailqs/q000/QF.cdvN8t600io500bkdk>;
          Thu, 16 Apr 1992 10: 42:01 -0400 (EDT)
          ID </afs/andrew.cmu.edu/usr11/ys0n/.Outgoing/QF.wdvN8hu00io50=pEZF>;
          Thu, 16 Apr 1992 10: 41:50 -0400 (EDT)
          via MS.5.6.baran.ini.andrew.cmu.edu.pmax_ul4;
          Thu, 16 Apr 1992 10: 41:49 -0400 (EDT)

Some one is offering a VMPS subwoofer, I need opinons before considering
purchase.  And also, do you think a 45 watt amp is powerful enough to
drive it?

thanx  yi.

Newsgroups: rec.audio.high-end
From: hera!gfl@uunet.UU.NET (27223-lenahan)
Subject: Re: CD PLAYERS: is compact good?
Summary: compact is not good, alas
Originator: tjk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu
Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ
Date: Tue, 7 Apr 1992 12:40:12 GMT
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for rec-audio-high-end@uunet.uu.net); Mon, 6 Apr 1992 10: 53:03 -0400

(Shiv Swarup Pathak) writes:
> 
> HELP ME!!
> I have an 100watt/ch Kenwood KVR-6040 reciever with a Cambridge
> Soundworks Ensemble (2 sattelite/2 subwoofer system).  I cannot decide
> whether to buy a CD player which is compact or not for the purpose of
> running it through my speakers and reciever.  Portability is nice, but
> if it costs extra money (does it?) and/or sacrifices sound quality, I
> wouldn't want it nor do I need it.  Basically, I have about $300 dollars
> to spare and I want the best sounding CD player I can buy (portable or
> not) for my system and for the money.  I really don't care to much about
> features (all I want is suffleplay and resume) as I do about sound
> quality.  I know there is no one answer, but are there and suggestions
> for audiophiles out there?  Thanks in advance.

Shiv:

Compact design involves several trade-offs which preclude the best
sound quality.  Predominantly, it involves designing with smaller
components, such as surface mount resistors, capacitors, inductors.
These do not exhibit the linearity and noise performance of the\
best through-hole components.  For high-end aspirations, certain
critical parts must be film caps and metal film resistors.

In addition, with power supplies, bigger is generally better.
If a device is designed to be small, lightweight, and power
efficient, those will be the goals of the power supply.  In
general, these are the antithesis of design for high end
sound.

In practice, avoid most of the mass-market Japanses brands is
you are really interested in good sound, damn the features.
At about $295, NAD makes a unit (forget the model) which 
Stereophile gave a very nice review, and which I've heard
quickly.  For about $100 more, I strongly recomend ROTEL's
model 955 multi-bit player (NOT the 965 bitstream version).
Its very, very good.

For somewhat less money, listen to either Magnavox or SONY
players in the $200 range.

Hope this helps.

Grant


Newsgroups: rec.audio.high-end
From: hendra@cs.columbia.edu (Hendra Soetjahja)
Subject: D/A converter builder books?
Originator: tjk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu
Organization: Columbia University Department of Computer Science
Date: Wed, 8 Apr 1992 13:08:29 GMT
	(queueing-rmail) id 151520.29193; Tue, 7 Apr 1992 15: 15:20 EDT


I'm interested in building a D/A converter over the summer and I'd like to
do some reading about the details of D/A converter for audio application.
Does anyone have any pointer to any book that explains about outboard
D/A converter? 
I'd welcome any book recommendation from intro to very technical.

Thanks,  Hendra

-- 
Hendra Soetjahja		hendra@cs.columbia.edu
				(212) 932-8185  home
				(212) 932-3209  office


Newsgroups: rec.audio.high-end
From: sancese@cs.unibo.it (Silvio Sancese)
Subject: Low-cost "audiophile" amp recommendation
Originator: tjk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu
Organization: University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
Date: Tue, 14 Apr 1992 13:05:27 GMT
	id AB24486; Mon, 13 Apr 92 10: 44:20 +0200

Hi everybody!

I'm looking for a low-cost yet "audiophile" integrated amplifier and I
would like to hear from you, for your suggestions and experiences.

Budget is a real constraint, let's say approximately $700, and the
destination speakers are temporary, so I am free to choose (suggestions
about how to interface the amp are welcome :-)
The output power required is modest and should run between 20W and 50W.

Here is a list of possible candidates (no one listened yet):

	- Proton              AM 452/5 PRO
	- Acoustic Research   A-03
	- Parasound           C/HD-350
	- Mission             Cyrus One
	- Rotel               RA-930 AX
	- Arcam               Alpha 3
	- Aura                VA50
	- Cambridge Audio     P25
	- Creek               CAS 4040
	- Musical Fidelity    B1 MKII
	- QED                 A240 SA


So, I'm looking forward your suggestions and/or experiences about any of
these amplifiers or others I haven't listed (NAD, Adcom ???).
Please reply by email, if I meet interest enough I will post a summary.

Thanks in advance.

Ciao.
        	      -=Silvio

''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''
Silvio Sancese                    Internet: sancese@cs.unibo.it
Computer Science Department       
Universita' di Bologna            |    "Tra il dire e il fare
Italia                            |      c'e' di mezzo 'e il'."
                                  |             --- Elio
From: rsud@lectroid.sw.stratus.com (Rajiv Sud)
Newsgroups: rec.audio.high-end
Subject: Re: Speaker placement ?
Keywords: Speaker placement listening room
Date: 14 Apr 92 13:06:10 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Stratus Computer, Inc.
Originator: tjk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu




The general guideline for speaker placement is about 5 to 7 feet apart,
slightly toed in, and 2 to 3 feet away from the back wall. What happens
after this depends on the type of speakers and the room. With all
speakers I find damping the wall behind the listener (hung blanket or
curtains) helps a great deal. With box speakers I also find damping the
wall behind the speakers also helps a lot.

You'll also find that having the speakers on a stable stand with
tiptoes will help out a great deal. If you have a concrete floor,
great. Its too bad your source is a cd player. Most mid to low priced
players don't do much with presenting a soundstage or stable images.
The higher priced players are getting there (but there's still a way to
go to match a good analogue source) and we should see the trickle down
over the next few years to the mid priced players.
From: mohan@yoko.rutgers.edu (Sunil Mohan)
Newsgroups: rec.audio.high-end
Subject: Advice sought on Cables and Interconnects
Keywords: Cable, Interconnect
Date: 13 Apr 92 12:56:02 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Rutgers Univ., New Brunswick, N.J.
Originator: tjk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu



This is a request for recommendations and any comments on 
	- Speaker Cables
	- Interconnects
Will summarize if I receive many replies. Thanks in advance.
Questions follow.

I have the following system:
Sony CDP 970 (CD player) ==> Acoustat TNP pre-amp ==> 
  Hafler XL280 ==> Thiel CS3.5 speakers.
The speakers were my last purchase, and all I can afford to upgrade
next is the wiring. I would like to take advantage of the excellent
high-end and imaging on the Thiel's, without losing any bass. So the
questions are:

Speaker Cables
---------------
- Which speaker cables within ~$15 p. foot ?
- What should I expect to hear in "good" cables and not in Very Thick
or Doubled cheap copper cable from Radio Shack?
- What is the (sonic and electrical) difference between 'side-by-side'
pair, braided (a la Kimber Cable), any other config?
- I guess that the REALLY EXPENSIVE stuff uses Silver for the low
resistance. Whatever happened to Aluminum as the happy medium between
Cu and Ag?

Interconnects
-------------
- Which intercons within ~$50 p. metre?
- Are some manufacturers using the same cable for both Speaker and
InterCons?
- If so, then how would very thick/doubled/braided/shielded cjeap
copper wires fare?
- Is shielding to protect from RF noise?

_
Sunil
Newsgroups: rec.audio.high-end
From: chrisc@gold.gvg.tek.com (Chris Christensen)
Newsgroups: rec.audio.high-end
Subject: Re: Speaker placement ?
Keywords: Speaker placement listening room
Date: 16 Apr 92 14:05:26 GMT
Article-I.D.: gold.4297
Distribution: usa
Organization: Grass Valley Group, Grass Valley, CA
Originator: tjk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu


In article <1992Apr15.005709.868@ampex.com> ampex!dna@decwrl.dec.com 
(David Altekruse) writes:
>Rajiv Sud writes:
(texted edited for clarity...)

Rajiv:
>>The general guideline for speaker placement is about 5 to 7 feet apart,
>>slightly toed in, and 2 to 3 feet away from the back wall. What happens
>>after this depends on the type of speakers and the room. With all
>>speakers I find damping the wall behind the listener (hung blanket or
>>curtains) helps a great deal. With box speakers I also find damping the
>>wall behind the speakers also helps a lot.

David:
>After a lot of experimentation I've found that the best place for my 
>Magnepan MG-III's in my room for my tastes is about 10 feet apart and at 
>least 8 feet from the back wall with no extra sound absorption on the 
>back wall.  Since these speakers are 6 feet tall, putting them on a stand 
>looks a bit strange.  (Actually, I tried raising them a bit once.  The 
>main effect was to decrease and muddy the bass which was not desirable.)

>The interaction of speakers in a room is a complex subject. There 
>are several good books on music acoustics.  I like the "TAB" book 
>(can't remember the exact title) which is interesting, doesn't cost 
>too much, and is available in most larger bookstores.  Then forget
>all guidelines you've ever heard and experiment. Often the best
>speaker and listening position will not be where you would expect
>(and unfortunately, where they would fit in with your decor).

Once again Science and Technology loses out to magic and witchcraft!

David the book you cite is F. Alton Everest's "The Handbook of
Acoustics"  This book has enough information for you to accurately
caculate the effect of a room on the speaker as well as what to do to
circumvent that effect.

No room, no matter how nice it is, the furnishings, etc can be
considered an accurate listening room if it hasn't been tested and
treated for proper acoustics!

Further ignorance of this fact will only serve to perpetuate the magic
and witchcraft of "setting up the speakers..."  And the "general
guidelines".

One of the founding reasons for the use of near field monitors was to
circumvent the acoustic problems found in older, poorly designed
studio control rooms.  The acoustic situation is the reason this
practice continues in recording rooms today.  It is expensive and
sometimes impractical to treat some types of recording rooms.

-- 
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.