HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: ST101969@brownvm.brown.edu (Guy Seebohm)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: Energy Speakers
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 20:24:08 EDT
Organization: Brown University - Providence, Rhode Island  USA
Distribution: na
NNTP-Posting-Host: brownvm.brown.edu
News-Software: BNN via BNN_POST v1.0 beta

I have a pair of Energy 2.1e's.  I liked them better than comparable Boston Aco
ustics but that was merely a matter of taste.  One of the great things about th
em is that they vent through the front so they can be placed closer to the wall
without too much distortion.  Of course you can get reflections from the wall i
n behind too if they are too close but...  I bought them in the US too.

Guy Seebohm
Guy_Seebohm@brown.edu
From: css1rs@gondor.mcs.surrey.ac.uk (Russell Smithers)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: DAT things
Date: 21 Aug 92 09:31:12 GMT
Organization: University of Surrey, Guildford, England
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL4

First of all is there going to be a group rec.audio.dat or something?
of should DAT related questions go to rec.audio.pro?

I would like to get as much info on DAT players and the format as
possible, so if there's some sort of DAT FAQ then could some one
post it, and if any body has text files of related info then could
you mail it to me. Basicly I would like any info on DAT and machines
related things. Thanks

PS Would this be better in rec.audio.pro?
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: lcoe@convex.com (Loren Coe)
Subject: opinions on technics SAGX505 reciever
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 15:10:59 GMT
Distribution: usa
Organization: Engineering, CONVEX Computer Corp., Richardson, Tx., USA
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by a user at CONVEX Computer
              Corp. The opinions expressed are those of the user and
              not necessarily those of CONVEX.

i am about to buy a new technics reciever.  unfortunately i have only
a newspaper ad and a price.  it claims 110w/ch and dolby pro-logic
for only 296.97.  it seems to share the same case as the SAG1010(?), it
is taller than many 100w/ch units.

can anyone familiar with the technics line offer an opinion of this
unit, the SAGX505?

thank you,


loren
From: cauble@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (Troy Cauble)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: THX migration - many questions
Date: 14 Aug 92 02:48:27 GMT
Distribution: na
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Holmdel NJ

In article <1992Aug12.182221.10984@shearson.com>, kaplanr@knish.shearson.com (Roger Kaplan) writes:
> In article <1992Aug10.212056.29045@cbnewsj.cb.att.com> cauble@cbnewsj.cb.att.com (Troy Cauble) writes:
> >	How fast do you expect the cost of THX decoders to drop?
> >	Is this cost technology driven or marketing driven?
> >	(Any widely available chip sets coming out?)
> >
> >	Do any of the "enhanced Dolby Pro" modes out there
> >	(such as Yamaha's stuff) approach THX?  Do any of
> >	them offer improvements without adding "ambience"
> >	that wasn't there originally?
> >
> >	What are the odds there will ever/soon be a THX receiver
> >	or integrated amp now that Dolby Pro has swept this
> >	section of the market?
> 
> 
> This should probably be a FAQ...
> 
> 
> THX is **NOT** a technology, or even a standard.  It is
> a **CERTIFICATION PROCESS**.  THX is a trademark that
> can only be applied after the certification process 
> has taken place (and fees paid to Lucas :-).

So what's your point?  It takes some technology to implement
the decoding to pass the certification, yes?


> In the home, the same certification cannot realistically 
> take place.  Instead, THX certification is given to certain
> components.  THX processors start with Dolby Pro Logic,
> and add even more processing, namely surround channel 
> decorrelation, re-equalization of the front channels,and
> "timbre matching" (ref: Bob Niland's article on surround).
> 
> My understanding is that only one brand of home processor
> has been licensed by THX (Lexicon, or something).  Therefore,
> "THX chip sets" are not really on the horizon.

Fosgate has one.  It was reviewed in TPV #14.  And I've seen
ads for one from ADA.  The welcome-to-THX ads list several
other companies, surely some of them are doing decoders.

Dolby Pro exploded with a chip set.  (Well, that's my impression
anyway -- and I got it reading the net 8)  It seems like a logical
progression to put the THX decoding on one too, IF THERE'S A MARKET.


> Also, since THX is 75% marketing (IMHO), and they trade on that
> image of exclusivity, I doubt you'll be seeing THX decoders 
> in Fisher rack systems. Or even in midrange A/V receivers, for that matter.

Yeah, but is it unreasonable to expect the decoders to get down
to say $1000 in the next couple years?

I have to admint that I've pretty much swallowed the marketing
and image whole.  Anyone familiar with the THX stuff want to
comment on the *sound*?


-Troy
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: yves@speedy.dev.cdx.mot.com (Yves Vidal)
Subject: Re: Temperature and component life 
Organization: Motorola Codex, Canton, Massachusetts
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 12:59:31 GMT

In article <133141@lll-winken.LLNL.GOV> turner@rastaman.llnl.gov (David Turner) writes:
>My new amp lives on the top shelf of my stereo cabinet, which is an old wooden 
>armoire.  I noticed that it was getting quite warm up there, so I rigged up a 
>hanging thermometer above the amp.  On a hot day, with loud music playing, I 
>saw temperatures above 100 degrees F., actually around 110.  I know this is 
>warmer than I would like, and I plan on adding a fan and more vents to the 
>cabinet.  But it made me wonder:  How warm is too warm?  How much damage am I
>doing to my amp by having it bathed in 110 ambient degrees?  I would be inter-
>ested in seeing a discussion of heat and its effects on stereo components.
>Thanks for listening...later...DT

First of all, you should not put your amp on the top shelf.
You know that hot air tends to go upward, and therefore the
amp is less cooled by being located in top of a furniture. 
If you are using a Class B amplifier, and I guess you do, 
then you should not have any concern with your amp. If the 
temperature gets extreme, the first thing to suffer will be 
the capacitors. They could either (or both) leak and then
explode (which is always interesting : it does a little 
PLOC !!). The next components to suffer will be the transistors
and more specifically the output pairs. Resistors should be fine
since, your transistors being destroyed, no current should 
cross them. But honestly 110 DF, is not such a big deal, and 
Southern States provide this kind of temperature very often in 
summer. So don't worry.
Yves
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: jpau@oracle.com (Jeffrey Pau)
Subject:  Best amp for $700.00?
Organization: Oracle Corp
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 1992 21:38:52 GMT
X-Disclaimer: This message was written by an unauthenticated user
              at Oracle Corporation.  The opinions expressed are those
              of the user and not necessarily those of Oracle.

I am looking for votes for the best amp (200 watts/channel) with a budget of around $700.00
(not suggested retail but the actual selling price).  This is intended to drive a pair
of NHT model 2 tower speakers.  Any comments on the Denon PA-2800!

thanks,
Jeff
From: chrisc@gold.gvg.tek.com (Chris Christensen)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: Temperature and component life
Date: 13 Aug 92 17:35:48 GMT
Organization: Grass Valley Group, Grass Valley, CA

Operating audio equipment at elevated temperatures for extended time
will shorten the life of the unit.

Operating a new unit at elevated temperatures will help to burn in the
unit and flush out infantile component faliures.  This burn doesn't
need to exceed a few days.

I suggest that you don't operate the unit in an environment that you
yourself wouldn't be comfortable in.

Cut the holes and put in a fan.....:-)
-- 
Chris Christensen                  The opinions I express are my own,
chrisc@gold.gvg.tek.com            and sometimes they are wrong!
916-478-3419 FAX 916-478-3887      After all, I *AM* only human.
From: jhenders@jonh.wimsey.bc.ca (John Henders)
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
Organization:  One of these days for sure
Subject: Re: XLR-type Connector of choice?
Reply-To: jhenders@jonh.wimsey.bc.ca
X-Software: HERMES GUS 1.03 Rev. Apr 14 1992
Date: Sun, 16 Aug 1992 01:41:34 -0700

In <1992Aug15.174058.9931@news.iastate.edu>, j1meb@isuvax.iastate.edu writes:
>
>Brent Laminack (brent@cc.gatech.edu)writes:
>>I still like the old switchcraft a3m/a3f series. I've used the Neutrix
>>line for a few years and find their strain-releif lacking. The internal
>>plastic screw part that cinches down on the cable breaks under strain
>>right at the case.
> 
>We had the same problem with the Neutrik connectors that we bought 
>a few years back. We have switched back to switchcraft...no problems
>except for the occasional one crushed by a forklift!

	I want to add a third vote for Switchcraft, especially in live 
situations. Even the newest Neutrik's have exposed plastic parts on
their plugs, and these break.
	However, I just saw a new xlr from Cannon, and it is very nice, 
though they're still using that little screw that always gets lost, 
to hold the shell on.

	Have to say though, the Neutrik rca beats the pants off the 
Switchcraft.


-- 
jhenders@jonh.wimsey.bc.ca 	

Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
From: jrusby@darkwing.uoregon.edu (Jim T. Rusby)
Subject: Re: Making cables
Organization: University of Oregon Network Services
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 92 15:34:50 GMT

In article <124350004@hpwin052.uksr.hp.com> mow@hpwin052.uksr.hp.com (Mark Payne) writes:
>hmm
>
>
>In the end I often find the only way to stop hum loops is to lift the ground
>wire on the mains on some kit... DO THIS AT YOUR OWN RISK and not at all 
>if you have and sense.

Do not do this AT ALL.  Yes it is dangerous and could be expensive. There
is always a reason for ground loops, some take longer to find than others.
It is true that many traveling musicians do this out of desperation when
firing up for a gig and time is tight. It is still dangerous.
 
If you are working on your own studio you have time to fix the problem,
however long it takes.

But DO NOT UNGROUND YOUR POWER CORDS. 
JR
From: v035550@stortek.com (Steve Monroe)
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
Subject: Re: Rudy Van Gelder: Digital vs Analog
Date: 20 Aug 92 14:11:36 GMT
Organization: Storage Technology Corp.  Louisville, CO
Originator: v035550@stcvax.stortek.com

kurts@hpnmdla.sr.hp.com writes:                                                 
                                                                                
>why did you bring this back..{other assorted rantings deleted}                 
                                                                                
BRING IT BACK? what are you talking about?  as far as  bringing                 
anything back,I was unaware that Mr Van Gelder's quote had been                 
posted here before.  As far as  what this quote was "supposed"                  
to do, I just thought people on this group would be interested                  
in quotes from people like Rudy Van Gelder.                                     
                                                                                
If you think I did this merely to provoke a fight, or start                     
some type of debate, take your miserable little goddamn ego                     
over to alt.conspiracy. I am sick of maggots like you accusing                  
before you have ANY idea of what the facts are:  I was trying                   
to pass on something that was obviously within the scope of                     
discussion for this group.  I thought you would find it interesting.            
                                                                                
Someone else mentioned that this article was duplicated on                      
rec.audio.high-end.  It was a mistake OKAY?                                     
                                                                                
sjm                                                                             
-- 
"Learn tunes: Learn melodies: all bassists need to 
 become more melody conscious."    -Jaco Pastorius
From: chrisc@gold.gvg.tek.com (Chris Christensen)
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
Subject: Re: Rudy Van Gelder: Digital vs Analog
Date: 20 Aug 92 17:56:49 GMT
Organization: Grass Valley Group, Grass Valley, CA

In article <18030003@hpnmdla.sr.hp.com> kurts@hpnmdla.sr.hp.com 
(Kurt Strain) writes:

(text edited)

>So I want this to be a warning that Mr. Jensen has made himself moderator
>of this group and only digital proponents are allowed by him to write 
>here.  Never mind the fact that this article was duplicated in .high-end
>after I read it here (and that goes against rules of .high-end, a truly
>moderated group. So get your garbage out of "my group", as Jeff would call it.

Come on Kurt let's not let one persons direct flame speak for those of
"us" who use this un-moderated group.  I only speak for myself here in
stating that Mr. Jensen doesn't speak for all of us  :-)

>I think if you want to moderate a group, get it moderated. Don't have some
>wise ass make cheap shots on e-mail.  It really makes some of you guys look
>particularly mean and snobby.  That's my impression so far.

Please see above,  don't let that nasty impression keep you away.

In general this news group has been freee of flame fests and I,
personally and just speaking for me, would like to see it stay that way.

I am aware of the no cross-posting rule for .high-end and I support
the reason for it. I have written articles that I wanted to cross-post
to .high-end but didn't because of the rule even though I felt that it
applied to those who read that forum.

So Kurt, just speaking for myself, please feel free to post to this
group as long as the posting relates to it's intended charter!
-- 
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.
Xref: sparky rec.audio.pro:1487 sci.electronics:14292 rec.music.synth:13450
From: ebe@pitt.edu (Elmer Beachley)
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro,sci.electronics,rec.music.synth
Subject: Help converting optical SPDIF to electrical form
Date: 13 Aug 92 01:24:30 GMT
Followup-To: rec.audio.pro
Organization: University of Pittsburgh
Originator: ebe@unix.cis.pitt.edu


I would like to connect the optical output of my cd player (which I
presume to be SPDIF format) to the electrical (rca connector) interface
on my AudiomediaII board (which is definitely SPDIF format).  Does anyone
know of a converter that does optical to electrical conversion?  A
schematic would be o.k., too.

So far I've received lots of blank stares when I've asked this question
at pro audio and dat stores.  Most people say there is no such device.
Two unacceptable (to me) solutions that have been suggested are:

1) buy a dat machine that has optical in and electrical out,

2) buy an SPDIF to AES/EBU protocol translator (~$500) that also provides
   optical-in/electrical-out.

There really can't me much to doing this, right?

Elmer Beachley ebe@unix.cis.pitt.edu  etb@cs.pitt.edu
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
From: ray@eecs.nwu.edu (Jim Ray)
Subject: Re: XLR-type Connector of choice?
Organization: EECS Department, Northwestern University
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 02:01:58 GMT

In article <1992Aug12.223743.2753@uicc.com> neidorff@uicc.com (Bob Neidorff) writes:
>
>
>Is there such a thing as a better and a worse XLR-type connector,
>or are Switchcraft, ITT/Cannon, and all of the others about the same?
>
>I care about:
>
>	Ease of assembly
>	Durability
>	Sound Quality
>	Compatibility with Different Wire Sizes
>	Cost
>	Dependability
>
>Thanks for any comments at all.  I welcome testamonials,
>bug reports, feelings, etc.  Please mail direct.  If there 
>is enough interest, I will summarize to the newsgroup.
>
>-- 
>Bob Neidorff; Unitrode I. C. Corp.  |  Internet: neidorff@uicc.com
>7 Continental Blvd.                 |  Voice   : (US) 603-424-2410
>Merrimack, NH  03054-0399 USA       |  FAX     : (US) 603-424-3460

Don't buy Radio Shaft.  They did not mate with my Switchcrafts.

*****************************************************************
*                                                               *
* Jim Ray                                      ray@eecs.nwu.edu *
*                                                               *
* The opinions expressed are my own and not my mama's.          *
*                                                               *
*****************************************************************
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
From: gburton@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Garland O Burton)
Subject: Re: Dat recording and processing
Organization: The Ohio State University
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 05:56:05 GMT

In article <1992Aug13.050407.15731@news.columbia.edu> gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Gabe M Wiener) writes:
>
>
>
>
>Excuse me, but why would I *want* to post it?  Location recording is not a
>pure science, and a book does not a recordist make.  Sure, there are useful

the critical distance deal came up because I read here that someone told someone else to put mics in the back of a room.  I was only trying to add some reason
for putting extra mics at certain places.  If I have stepped on your "lord of
the group" toes, thats tough.

there are many ways to make recordings and it will help some people
to understand why acoustics behave certain ways in certain places in a room.

If gabe is one of those people who can make a mic sound better because 
he touched it, then that is grand for his "clients."

some of us would like to use the group to share ideas and explain things
to those who ask questions.  I didn't know I had to have gabes permission 
to reply to someones question.   sheeesh, I'll be more careful now that I       know that there is the "all knowing gabe" on board to spill his ideas 
as gospel.

>
-- 
gburton@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu.............copyright 1992 gary burton........
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
From: gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Gabe M Wiener)
Subject: Re: Dat recording and processing
Reply-To: gmw1@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Gabe M Wiener)
Organization: Columbia University
Date: Thu, 13 Aug 1992 14:14:34 GMT

In article <1992Aug13.055605.1004@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu> gburton@magnus.acs.ohio-state.edu (Garland O Burton) writes:
>
>the critical distance deal came up because I read here that someone told 
>someone else to put mics in the back of a room.  I was only trying to add 
>some reason for putting extra mics at certain places.  If I have stepped on 
>your "lord of the group" toes, thats tough.

Unlike many groups on the net, this is a professional forum, the advantage
of which is usually manifested inasmuch as we rarely get people who pop
in and decide to flame for no reason.  So I disagree with something you 
said.  Big deal.  Are you so small that you cannot take criticism?  If
your method has validity, then *explain it* to all.  

This group exists so people can share ideas about recording.  If you don't
want to contribute, don't bother posting.  No one is interested in your
ramblings about being so right.  If your method is so right, explain
why.  But also be prepared to find people who are going to disagree and
who are going to tell you why.  I hope you can live with that, though
I have my doubts based on your behavior.

>there are many ways to make recordings and it will help some people
>to understand why acoustics behave certain ways in certain places in a room.

Indeed.  And people utilize room acoustics in many ways depending on their
mic choices.  Not always your way.  Sorry for the inconvenience.

>If gabe is one of those people who can make a mic sound better because 
>he touched it, then that is grand for his "clients."

Gee, wouldn't that be a great skill to have!  Touch an EV and turn it
into a Schoeps.  Touch a Shure SM58 and turn it into a B&K.  While
you're on this alchemy kick, would you mind turning about 300 feet
of copper gotham cable into oxygen-free gold?

>some of us would like to use the group to share ideas and explain things
>to those who ask questions.  

Yes, some of us would.  More to the point, some of us have, for quite a 
good number of months.

> >I didn't know I had to have gabes permission to reply to someones
> question.  sheeesh, I'll be more careful now that I know that there is
> the "all knowing gabe" on board to spill his ideas as gospel.

Would someone tell me what this guy is babbling about?


--
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: davisonj@bnr.ca (John Davison)
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
Subject: Re: Rudy Van Gelder: Digital vs Analog
Date: 20 Aug 92 04:48:01 GMT
Organization: Bell-Northern Research, Richardson, Tx.

In article <18030002@hpnmdla.sr.hp.com> kurts@hpnmdla.sr.hp.com (Kurt Strain) writes:
> No digital machine ever made could do that correctly either.  None.

        Many computer musicians who copy synthesized sound straight from disk
to DAT would tell you that you are wrong.  (Does this fall in the gray area as
far as your definition of "correct" goes?)


-- 
NOTE: I CAN'T SEND/RECEIVE E-MAIL HERE!!!  Use --> davisonj@ecn.purdue.edu <--
      During (roughly) August 20-25, I will be in transit.  Please be patient.
      The opinions and other information contained herein are not necessarily
      representative of Northern Telecom or any of its subsidiaries. 
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro
From: brent@terminus.gatech.edu (Brent Laminack)
Subject: Re: XLR-type Connector of choice?
Organization: Georgia Tech College of Computing
Date: Sat, 15 Aug 1992 00:48:49 GMT

cms2839@ultb.isc.rit.edu (a.stranger) writes:

>Is there such a thing as a better and a worse XLR-type connector,
>or are Switchcraft, ITT/Cannon, and all of the others about the same?
>
I still like the old switchcraft a3m/a3f series. I've used the Neutrix
line for a few years and find their strain-releif lacking. The internal
plastic screw part that cinches down on the cable breaks under strain
right at the case.


					
					-Brent Laminack (brent@cc.gatech.edu)
From: mow@hpwin052.uksr.hp.com (Mark Payne)
Date: Tue, 11 Aug 1992 10:47:46 GMT
Subject: Re: Making cables
Organization: Hewlett Packard Response Centre, England
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro

hmm

I'm not sure that earth lifting your interconnect loom is a good idea. Sounds
like you have individual cores of 2 signal (twisted) plus drain (screen).
I think I would wire the patch bays up with the drain and the spare connected
together to the jack plug earth at both ends.

I would then only earth lift signal wires on individual interconnect  links 
from bits of kit to the patch bays.. Keep a few "special" jack/jacks for this.

In the end I often find the only way to stop hum loops is to lift the ground
wire on the mains on some kit... DO THIS AT YOUR OWN RISK and not at all 
if you have and sense.

Mark
______________________________________________________________________________
Mark Payne | Mail: mow@hpwin052.uksr.hp.com |  Telephone
___________|________________________________|_________________________________
Hewlett Packard, King Street Lane, Winnersh, Wokingham, Berkshire RG11 5AR
United Kingdom.
Newsgroups: rec.audio.pro