HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: peterca@ento.csiro.au
Newsgroups: rec.audio.high-end
Subject: Speaker Design: Have One For 18 Liter Box?
Date: 29 Sep 1992 12:57:40 GMT
Organization: University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.89.7.4
Originator: tjk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu

One of these days I plan to use a pair of nice-looking, well constructed
speaker boxes I got at a garage sale.  The drivers were damaged and not
worth repairing but the real wood veneer was too nice to waste.  The box
volume is about 18 litres and sealed and has holes for an 8" woofer and a
tweeter.  I was wondering if anyone had a design which could drop in
easily.  I have one from an electronics magazine for Vifa drivers which
uses a sealed box of this size.  However, does any one else has a favourite
recipe or other recommendations?
  
There is a Focal driver which is one of their cheapest which lists this box
volume as suitable and goes pretty flat to about 5KHz.  I naively thought
that I might just use this without crossover components and then get a
tweeter with the same efficiency with one series cap to fill in the last
two octaves.  However, I don't know what phase shifts are associated with
the natural HF roll off of the woofer.  I presume that this is due to the
inductance of the voice coil (a first order filter so far) plus effects due
to the mass of the driver, compliences etc (don't know what effect).  I can
see that this might confound this simple-minded scheme and give me a hole
in the response at the crossover.  Any suggestions?

----------------------------------------
Peter Campbell
C/O Div. Entomology, C.S.I.R.O.
Box 1700 Canberra A.C.T. 2601
Australia  (peterca@ento.csiro.au)
Ph.61-6-2464158 (w), 61-6-2516213 (h)
----------------------------------------
From: Skip Osborne <osborne@software.org>
Newsgroups: rec.audio.high-end
Subject: Re: "Ultimate" headphones
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 92 14:55 EDT
Organization: University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.89.7.4
To: info-high-audio@csd4.csd.uwm.edu
Originator: tjk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu

>	I've been asked by my sister in law to determine what the best 
>	set of stereo headphones available are - with price being 
>	_no_object_ (must be nice, I know).  

	Nice...oh, yeah...

	I've heard the Stax Lambda Signatures with Stax's matching 
tubed amp (SRM-T1, I think). These are slightly better than my 
Lambda Pro with the matching solid state amp. I didn't think 
anything could be better, but they are.

	There is a marvelous attachment: Stax ED-1 "Diffuse Field" 
generator, a box that equalizes frequency and phase to correct 
for the way headphones bypass the pinnae of your ear. It does 
improve the sound, and I love it. But you're running up the 
numbers some more, of course...

	So, where are we? Cost:

		Signature and amp		~$2000
		ED-1					 $900

	$2,900. Cost No Object.

	[If you want the priciest instead of the best known, there is 
an even fancier tube amp made by Stax, somewhere around $3,800 if 
memory serves, so add 2,800 more to replace the tubed amp (1,000) 
in the above price. But I haven't heard it, so I can't testify.]

>	   Oh yeah - 
>	wireless headphones would be nice, but only if audio >
>	degredation is _minute_ (if that's possible).

	It's not.

Skip Osborne
Software Productivity Consortium
Herndon VA 22070
From: STATRAA@YaleVM.YCC.Yale.Edu
Newsgroups: rec.audio.high-end
Subject: Opinions of NYAL Components
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 92 19:28:07 EDT
Organization: University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.89.7.4
To: tjk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu
Originator: tjk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu


I have a friend who was GIVEN a set of NYAL components, and he is considering
selling them to me, so I have a question or two.
The components are : NYAL Moscode Minuet Preamp, NYAL Moscode 150 amplifier.

1) My system now is Adcom GTP400-->SAE A205-->Klipsch kg4's, all in a room
with NO right angles (really).  How would the NYAL componets compare to the
Adcom and the SAE?

2) How reliable are these two TUBED components?  How often do they need to be
retubed, and how much would new tubes cost, now that NYAL is out of business?

3) What are these components worth?  I've heard $200 for each, which seems
cheap, are they bad/flawed/unreliable, or otherwise troublesome.  I don't mind
tinkering, but I don't want a money pit!

Thanks...


-------------------------------------------------------------------------
|     Travis Stansbury        |        Yale University, ES '94          |
| statraa@yalevm.ycc.yale.edu |  2358 Yale Station, New Haven, CT 06520 |
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
From: jas@proteon.com (John A. Shriver)
Newsgroups: rec.audio.high-end
Subject: the holy wars
Date: 29 Sep 1992 12:57:22 GMT
Organization: University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.89.7.4
Originator: tjk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu

The holy wars continued onto the pages of Audio Amateur in the latest
issue, carrying on from the recent AES in NYC.

Gary Galo (a most technically capable subjectivist) had a most telling
response. 

Why is it that we are not "allowed" by those of an anti-subjectivist
bent to comment on the sound of electronics, when people ARE allowed
to comment on the sound of concert halls?  Is everyone who thinks that
Avery Fisher Hall in NYC cannot project sound out of the proscenium
just the victim of marketing hype?  Are the people who hear
differences in the renovated Carnegie Hall just imagining things?
These were the examples cited by Gary.


(Going to my own experience.)  Do I just imagine that Boston's
Symphony Hall can sound rattly when you play triple-forte in it?  Did
I just imagine that the Dorothy Chandler Pavillion in LA and the Large
Festival Hall in Salzburg both sound hyper-detailed (they look so
similar they must have the same architect)?  Is it a delusion that the
Royal Festival Hall in London is one of the most unremittingly bright
and over-reflective halls I've ever been to?  (You can fairly hear the
music bouncing from teak wall to teak wall!  Alexander Nevsky there
many years ago was downright distorted!)  Was I smoking dope when I
noticed on my last visit that the Royal Festival Hall isn't so bad
with the organ screen open?

Sure, there are measurements that can be made of concert halls, like
reverberation time and frequency resposne.  They did all that stuff in
Washington D.C., designing the Concert Hall at the Kennedy Center.
The Concert Hall measures fine, but it surely does not sound like
other halls with similar measurements.  It does not sound like
Symphony Hall of the Musikverein, much as they tried.  (OK, I've never
been to the Musikverein.  You try and get VPO tickets!  Absolutely
impossible!)


Galo also goes on to point out that he, Walt Jung, and others, have
devised measurements that correlate with the problems they have found
in designs.  Of course, they aren't the Holy Grail (Trilogy?) of
frequency response, harmonic distortion, and twin-tone intermodulation
distortion.


Anyone care to design an A/B/X box for concert halls?  I'd like to see
one!  (Bang, crash!)


Gary Galo has come out with a much better argument (in many ways) than
the traditional Oneophile (wine tasting) one.
From: biesel@javelin.sim.es.com (Heiner Biesel)
Newsgroups: rec.audio.high-end
Subject: Re: on all the time?
Date: 28 Sep 1992 13:08:42 GMT
Organization: Evans & Sutherland Computer Corporation
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.89.7.4
Originator: tjk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu


bvs@photon.com (Bruce Shetler) writes:
> 
> Here's an easy question I'd like to solicit the collective wisdom on:
> 
> Should components be left on all the time?  

Depends. There are three primary sources of wear: friction, for things like
motors, pulleys, etc., heat, and electromigration. Obviously it makes sense
to turn off things that move, like turntables, etc. Heat essentially
accelerates chemical and physical reactions, so electrolytes evaporate
more quickly from capacitors, resistors drift faster, lubricants deteriorate,
oxides form more quickly on connectors. Most consumer electronics generates
relatively little heat, and most of that is dissipated by a few components,
mostly in the power supply. It becomes a tradeoff between the possible
damage due to the power-surge on turn-on versus the continuous but slight
damage due to elevated temperature. For power amps, and anything else that
uses more than say 50 watts, I'd leave it off. Everything else I'd leave
on, but I suspect that the difference between leaving this stuff on or off
is more likely to show up in my electricity bill than in the repair
costs of the equipment.

BTW, electromigration is a failure mechnism for semiconductors, and is
responsible for some failures after infant mortality. It is accelerated
by elevated temperatures, but occurs even at normal temperatures as long
as the component is energized.

Regards,
       H. Biesel
From: moskowit@panix.com (Len Moskowitz)
Newsgroups: rec.audio.high-end
Subject: Re: my revox grunts
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 1992 20:29:42 GMT
Organization: PANIX Public Access Unix & Internet, NYC
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.89.7.4
Cc: tjk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu
Originator: tjk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu


In article <9210021417.AA06824@cupoftea.ctrg.rri.uwo.ca> "Lance R.
Bailey" <lrb@ctrg.rri.uwo.ca> writes:

>that's about the best way i can describe it.  my B77 makes grunting noises
>as the reels rotate.  clues?

If the B77 is anything like the A77, the brakes are stainless steel
bands that wrap around the hub.  When the brake bands are misadjusted
you'll hear grunts as you describe.

-- 
Len Moskowitz
moskowit@panix.com
From: rogn@telematikk.idt.unit.no (Egil Rognvik)
Newsgroups: rec.audio.high-end
Subject: Re: on all the time?
Date: 28 Sep 1992 13:08:48 GMT
Organization: IDT
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.89.7.4
Summary: warm-up, sound, component life, and electric bills
Originator: tjk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu

In article <1992Sep24.132603.11133@porthos.cc.bellcore.com> 
hera!gfl@uunet.UU.NET (22402-lenahan) writes:

>> Here's an easy question I'd like to solicit the collective wisdom on:
>> 
>> Should components be left on all the time?  

>You are absolutely right.

>Most solid-state equipment will:
>        a.) sound its best, and
>        b.) last longest
>if left on continuously.  In general, damage can only occur
>if a component is too hot to touch ( I mean the internal ones,
>not the case).  For well designed stuff (I guess this leaves out
>50% of high-end boxes......:-)), heat should be no problem.

Heat is bad, that's correct. But this also goes for normal operating 
temperatures. A component will last longest if it's switched off...
Switching the power on/off is also bad, but if you switch on/off only once/
twice a day I'd recommend you switch it off. This goes for all electronic 
equipment. If you won't be using it for a couple of hours, switch it off.


egil

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
Egil Rognvik                                * egilro@idt.unit.no
The Norwegian Institute of Technology       * rogn@telematikk.idt.unit.no
Division of Computer Systems and Telematics *
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *
From: David Collingwood <colling@math.washington.edu>
Newsgroups: rec.audio.high-end
Subject: Transports, converters and all that stuff.....
Date: Fri, 2 Oct 92 09:41:39 -0700
Organization: University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.89.7.4
Originator: tjk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu


I am considering two options to upgrade my cd player and would 
welcome comments and suggestions. Current equipment: B&W 801 series 3,
Levinson 27.5 amp, Bryston .5B preamp, CAL Icon II cd player.

I recently home auditioned the Proceed PCD3 (cd player) vs the Proceed 
PDP3 (processor) + Icon II. After hours of comparing and blindfold
testing (which drove my wife crazy) I discovered the following: With
one exception (I'll get to that in a minute) the Icon+proceed processor
was a clear winner. The combo was more musical than the cdplayer alone.
Instruments and voices were consistantly better seperated out in space.
In addition, the combo smoothed out a slight forwardness (brightness)
in the mid treble that I noticed in the player. These comments applied
to jazz, chamber music, pop, folk, vocals. The exception was big orchestral
music, where the player clearly conveyed a better sense of size. The difference
in the width of soundstage for Orchestral music was significantly
better on the player vs. the Icon+processor. So, here are some
questions and I welcome any and all comments:

1. Would the quality of cd reproduction of a large complex orchestral work
depend more heavily on the transport A/D converter than (say)
something "small" like Sara K's Chesky disc? (ie are my listening
conclusions imagined or real?)

2. The PCD3 is $3K, the PDP3 is $2.5K and the Icon II is $800. I could
exchange the Icon II in on a PCD3 (getting full credit), or keep the
Icon and buy the PDP3; so we are talking $3K or $3.3K (plus a digital
interconnect). What is the "smart" course of action here?

3. The PCD3 only has a 1 year warrenty whereas the Icon II and PDP3
each have 3 year warrentys. Should this influence my decision? I assume
Madrigal stands behind their products as well as anyone in the
industry.

4. What breaks on a cd player or transport? What would a typical
repair cost be on this?

Thanks

dave collingwood (colling@math.washington.edu)
From: dasher!patter@uunet.UU.NET (24224-guthrie)
Newsgroups: rec.audio.high-end
Subject: Bose 10.2 speakers
Date: 30 Sep 1992 12:55:32 GMT
Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ
  (5.65c/IDA-1.4.4 for rec-audio-high-end@uunet.uu.net); Tue, 29 Sep 1992 17:08:14 -0400
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.89.7.4
Originator: tjk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu

I'm considering purchasing some new speakers. I've heard good things
about Bose speakers, and I've seen an ad for their model 10.2 tower
speakers at $1,030 a pair. My main music is older rock (eg. Jethro Tull),
with occassional forays into classical.

Opinions?

For email replies, use patter@dasher.cc.bellcore.com
The From: line address will probably bounce.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------
                    |
George Patterson -  | If God had meant for man to fly, he'd have
                    | given him more money.
                    |
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
From: D_KRUS@UNHH.UNH.EDU (Daniel L. Krus)
Newsgroups: rec.audio.high-end
Subject: Subwoofers and Amplifier Retrofits
Date: 30 Sep 1992 12:55:24 GMT
Organization: University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.89.7.4
Originator: tjk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu

I'm looking into purchasing a subwoofer.  I'm basically considering the M&K
MX100 (20-125Hz, variable crossover and 200W) and the Velodyne ULD15 Series II 
(15-85Hz and 400W).  I've heard that the Velodynes are over priced and I know
that M&K have a good reputation.  (note:  My brother has a pair of M&K's SA1
satallites, after almost 11 years of use the high end finally fell out.  After
speaking to the company he was told to send them in and M&K would bench test
them and fix-them/bring-up-to-current-specs without charge.  In the end, what
he received from M&K was a new pair of SB1's(?)).  My system core consists of
Hafler's Iris Preamp and their XL600 amp.  Does anyone have an opinion on these
two subwoofers.

Second question.  Has anyone had experience with retrofitting a Hafler XL600.
There are a couple of companies (Musical Concepts, St. Louis, MO, to name one)
that will replace critical electrical components with with "top of the line"
electrical replacements.  These companies claim that the retrofit is worth the
money.  Any comments?

Third question/observation:  Is Hafler equipment passe` or just below your
standards.  I seldom see the name mentioned in this forum.  Just curious.

                           Thanks,

|**:**:**:**:**:**:**:**:**:**:**:**:**:**:**:**:**:**:**:**:**:**:**:**:**:**:|
| Internet:    D_KRUS@unhh.unh.edu              | Daniel L. Krus               |
| Compuserve:  71601,365                        | Parsons Hall                 |
|-----------------------------------------------| Department of Chemistry      |
|  "A good word is an easy obligation, but not  | U of New Hampshire           |
|  to speak ill, requires only our              | Durham, New Hampshire  03824 |
|  silence, which costs us nothing."  Tillotson | (603) 862-2521               |
|**:**:**:**:**:**:**:**:**:**:**:**:**:**:**:**:**:**:**:**:**:**:**:**:**:**:|
From: winalski@adserv.enet.dec.com (Paul S. Winalski)
Newsgroups: rec.audio.high-end
Subject: Re: DAT problem
Date: 29 Sep 1992 12:57:28 GMT
Organization: Digital Equipment Corporation, Nashua NH
Distribution: world
Reply-To: winalski@adserv.enet.dec.com (Paul S. Winalski)
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.89.7.4
Originator: tjk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu


In article <5296@gold.gvg.tek.com>,
chrisc@gold.gvg.tek.com (Chris Christensen) writes:

|>I would be interested in comments from people who know:
|>
|>Are Pro machines transports the same as consumer units?  I believe
|>this to be the fact.  

I own a Panasonic SV3700 pro DAT deck and a Sony DTC-700 consumer DAT deck.
The transport on the Panasonic is decidedly more heavy-duty than the Sony's.
For example, it applies more torque to the tape both during playback and
high-speed rewind.  I've encountered tapes that were rewound with a bad pack
that would not play on the Sony (due to the extra friction caused by the
bad pack) but worked just fine on the Panasonic.

Now, another question is, is the Panasonic SV3700 transport the same as that
used in the corresponding Technics consumer unit?  I don't know.

--PSW
From: kcalica@pyrman2.mis.pyramid.com (Kelly Calica)
Newsgroups: rec.audio.high-end
Subject: Combak Anti-Resonance Devices
Date: 2 Oct 92 00:24:55 GMT
Organization: Pyramid Technology Corp., Mountain View, CA
Reply-To: kcalica@pyrman2.mis.pyramid.com (Kelly Calica)
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.89.7.4
To: rec-audio-high-end@Pa.dec.com
Originator: tjk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu


Wanted to find out if anyone has experience in integrating Combak 
Anti-Resonance Devices on his/her speakers.  We have already incorporated
many various tweaking devices as noted below.  All have been worth the
investment.  Should we expect the same for this additional device??

Our reference system consists of  

Classe Audio DR3 Amplifier
Conrad Johnson PV8 Pre -Amplifier
Sony X7ESD CD player
Definitive Technology BP-10 Speakers

XLO Type 1 Interconnects
XLO Type 6 speaker cables

Navcom Silencers
Sorbathane Feet
Tip Toes
PDK Digital Noise Absorbers

We also use the -

CD Stoplight
Audio Quest Laser Guide

And how does the Finyl CD Treatment system compare to the Audio Quest Laser 
Guide?
From: DPierce@world.std.com (Richard d Pierce)
Newsgroups: rec.audio.high-end
Subject: re: Revox grunts
Date: 6 Oct 92 07:06:37 GMT
Article-I.D.: world.Pine.3.03.9210061137.A10276-b100000
Organization: University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.89.7.4
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
Originator: tjk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu


There are several sources that might be responsible for the noise. One
mentioned the brake bands, and that is certainly one candidate. Adjusting
the brakes is not a trivial task, as what may work for reducing noise may
well end up setting the braking tensions so that you dump or snap tape.

Another brake-related problem common to Revox's (but fixed, I thought, in
the B77) was the inadequately cured brake lining, a synthetic linen cloth
that was adhesive coated then baked. The linings would be sticky, and the
recommended cure was to pull the drums out and bake them at about 125F for
30 minutes or so. This method solved a lot of eratic brake problems for
me, but may or may not be your problem.

Yet another source is the motors themselves have been know to make
occasional noises. They are AC motors that are not running at their full
speed, and the occasionally can make some low-frequency (line frequency)
noises not unlike what you are describing, similar to other motors under
some loads. No easy cure for this one.

You also might try any sort of mechanical interference, rubbing, and so
forth.

In desparation, you can always copntact Revox/Studer in Nashville.

|                Dick Pierce                |
|    Loudspeaker and Software Consulting    |
| 17 Sartelle Street   Pepperell, MA  01463 |
|       (508) 433-9183 (Voice and FAX)      |
From: resou@darcy.mi.uib.no (Odd Arild Urtveit)
Newsgroups: rec.audio.high-end
Subject: Re: "Ultimate" headphones
Date: Wed, 30 Sep 92 13:09:55 GMT
Organization: University of Bergen, Norway
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.89.7.4
Originator: tjk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu

In article <01GPB800UOVM8Y5HQA@vaxdev.mayo.edu>, Al Spohn * Hilton 516 * 507-284-1666 <spohn@mayo.edu> writes:
> Howdy -
> 
> I've been asked by my sister in law to determine what the best set of stereo 
> headphones available are - with price being _no_object_ (must be nice, I know).  
The Stax Lambda Signature is the reference headphone of most high-end
hi-fi magazines,  and also among most high-enders.  I have owned a
Lambda (not the Signature, but the 'cheap' one) for some years and have
been VERY satisfied with that!  The sound is incredibly open and
detailed.  The Signature uses a thinner membrane and is even more open
and detailed (I have tried it!).

You should try to get your hand on some Lambdas (or preferably the
Signature) and enjoy the ultimate sound!

Odd Arild resou@mi.uib.no
From: peterca@ento.csiro.au
Newsgroups: rec.audio.high-end
Subject: valve biasing
Date: Mon, 5 Oct 92 13:59:43 EST
Organization: University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.89.7.4
Originator: tjk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu

A while back I posted a request for comments on an unusual output valve
biasing arrangement involving zeners between the cathode and ground which I
had read about in Audio Conversions.  I had a few replies but none had
tried it or had comments other than "what? semiconductors in a valve amp!".
 I recently tried it and it was very disappointing.  At very low volume
there might have been an improvement but at higher volume there was
definite distortion.  I still don't know why. It seemed like a good idea. 
Did anyone else try it?

----------------------------------------
Peter Campbell
C/O Div. Entomology, C.S.I.R.O.
Box 1700 Canberra A.C.T. 2601
Australia  (peterca@ento.csiro.au)
Ph.61-6-2464158 (w), 61-6-2516213 (h)
----------------------------------------
From: <MPA15C!ARTHUR@TRENGA.tredydev.unisys.com>
Newsgroups: rec.audio.high-end
Subject: Re: *** tube equipment,  marantz 10-B ***
Date: 05 OCT 92 19:47
Organization: University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.89.7.4
Comments: Automatic Return Receipt Requested
Originator: tjk@csd4.csd.uwm.edu

The going rate in Audiomart seems to be about $1200 - $1500, although I
don't know if the price actually ends up getting negotiated lower.  You might
as well shoot for that range.  Although I've never heard one (it's only been
25 years), I'm surprised that there's any market for this unit as:

    a). I understand that it really doesn't sound all that great, compared to
        better modern-day tuners such as the Etude;
    b). Many of the parts were proprietary Marantz inventions, rather than
        being off-the-shelf componentry.  Marantz has been bought and sold so
        many times in the intervening years that these parts have long since
        become available.  One cannot simply pick up an equivalent replacement
        for a failed part.

  Arthur L. Shapiro        ARTHUR%MPA15C@TRENGA.TREDYDEV.UNISYS.COM
  Software Engineering
  Unisys Corporation       Speaking as a civilian, rather than for
  Mission Viejo, CA        Unisys, unless this box is checked: [ ]