HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: mlm2@crux1.cit.cornell.edu (Mark Lee Margolis)
Subject: Carver or Harmon Kardon
Organization: Cornell Information Technologies
Date:  9 Nov 92 20:07:27 GMT


Does anyone know how well Carver or Harmon Kardon receivers compare to
Sony ES, Pioneer, Yamaha, Denon, or Kenwood receivers? I have a friend who
is interested in purchasing an AV receiver and she would like some info on 
Harmon Kardon or Carver. I have received some EMAIL discussing other brands,
but not HK or Carver. Any opinions would be appreciated. Thanks!

- Mark









--

************************************
*                                  *
* Mark L. Margolis                 *
From: ballen@convex.csd.uwm.edu (Bruce Allen)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: PNP vs NPN Output Stages
Date: 11 Nov 1992 05:42:10 GMT
Organization: Computing Services Division, University of Wisconsin - Milwaukee
NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.89.7.30
Keywords: Lock

I just wanted to comment that the original author DID have a 
sense of humor -- he signed his remarks "Rob Bish"
== Rubbish!

Cheers,
		Bruce
From: chrisc@gold.gvg.tek.com (Chris Christensen)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: Pro Logic Center channel speakers
Keywords: pro logic
Date: 10 Nov 92 00:01:22 GMT
Article-I.D.: gold.5515
Organization: Grass Valley Group, Grass Valley, CA

In article <1992Nov4.173445.6396@keinstr.uucp> marks@keinstr.uucp 
(Mike Marks) writes:

>stud1b53@bnr.ca (Anshu Prasad) writes:

>> Actually, its best if the center channel has the same power as
>>the left/right mains.  In addition to good power handling, one must
>>be careful of the tonal characteristics of the speaker.  The
>>speakers in a surround system MUST be tonally matched or you'll
>>hear the difference (I have, at least).  I recommend experimenting
>>with various center channel speakers in your price range by listening
>>to them in your sound room with your existing L/R mains.  This will
>>yield the best results.

I interpret the term "......tonal characteristics of thespeaker" to be
a close match in frequency and phase response.  These two elements are
the dominate terms in the listening experience equation......

For the Dolby Stereo system to work to it's best potential it is
imperative that the frequency and phase response match as close as
possinble just because of the way that the surround field is generated
in the listening/viewing room.

>What do you use for a center channel if your mains are Magneplanar
>MG-III's.  At 6' high by 2' wide, I can't just stick one of these
>in the center if I want to see the screen.  A traditional "box"
>center channel isn't going to tonally matched to the maggies.  Should
>I just use the phantom mode?

If you're "stuck" with the Maggies use the phantom mode.  I agree with,
I think it was Greg,  that a point source speaker is best for center
channel and further state that the left and right speakers will
produce the best possible surround effect when they ate a point source
speaker system.......

-- 
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: lstowell@pyrnova.mis.pyramid.com (Lon Stowell)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: Confusion over new CD technology
Date: 12 Nov 92 22:25:43 GMT
Reply-To: lstowell@pyrnova.pyramid.com (Lon Stowell)
Organization: Pyramid Technology Corp., Mountain View, CA

In article <1992Nov12.150156.16290@news.cs.brandeis.edu> weitzman@chaos.cs.brandeis.edu (Adam J. Weitzman) writes:
>
>I'm going to soon be in the market for a new CD player. I have noticed while
>looking around that various CD companies have introduced various new 
>technologies into their CD players. I've noticed the phrases "Pulse" and
>"MASH 1-bit" most frequently, and of course 37-bit-471x oversampling. Can
>anyone please summarize for me what these new technologies are (and any I 
>haven't listed here), how they help playback, what to listen for when 
>comparing the players employing these technologies, etc.? I would really 
>appreciate it.
   
   NONE of them helps playback a bit.  A good implementation of one
   type will beat a lousy implementation of the other type.  

   Ignore the fluff and look for a nice solid look and feel, a good
   transport, and the features YOU want.   

   And unless you do a lot of headphone listening, don't evaluate
   the sound quality of a player from its headphone jack.  Some
   spend all of 20 yen on the headphone drivers and some use
   discrete drivers with quality equal to the main outputs.  

   The differences between the $200 players and the $500 players are
   a lot bigger than the differences between the $500 and $1000
   players.   And you'll find examples of all the playback
   technologies in the mid and upper price levels.   

>
>Also, does DSP *really* make anything sound much better, or are you better 
>off getting a low-to-medium-priced equalizer?
>
   DSP is a pretty generic term.  It doesn't do the same thing as an
   EQ except on some pretty pricey players.  DSP is usually used for
   "ambience enhancement"...and the implementations range from
   atrocious to satisfying.   IMHO it is best done OUTSIDE the
   player, but your tastes may differ.


Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: tommy@macpost.vanderbilt.edu (Tommy Williams)
Subject: Re: DAT recorders with mike input
Followup-To: rec.audio,rec.audio.pro
Organization: Vanderbilt School of Medicine
Date: Thu, 5 Nov 1992 16:07:42 GMT

In article <1992Nov5.144628.5134@tc.fluke.COM>, strong@tc.fluke.COM (Norm
Strong) wrote:
> 
> Does anyone know of a one-piece DAT recorder that will accommodate 2
> phantom-powered mikes?  It does not--repeat, does not--have to run from
> batteries.  Line power is entirely adequate--maybe even preferred.  
> It's important that it be portable, and operable by someone who knows
> nothing about audio recording.  They don't have to do a world class job,
> but they should get reliable results.  
> 
> Thank you.
> -- 
> 
> Norm Strong  (strong@tc.fluke.com)
> 2528 31st S.   Seattle WA 98144   USA

Sounds like you're describing the Panasonic professional portable DAT
recorder perfectly. My father has one, but I'll be damned if I can remember
the model number now. It's very small, can work off batteries but doesn't
have to, has a built-in mike preamp, can take 2 phantom-powered mikes, and
is very easy to use. We use it to record piano.

--Tommy Williams        tommy@macpost.vanderbilt.edu

  The Virgil Project
  Vanderbilt University School of Medicine
  (615) 343-0343
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: klm41661@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Kevin Molander)
Subject: Re: Are Record Club CD's The Same Quality?
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Thu, 12 Nov 1992 01:38:25 GMT

I have not noticed any quality differences, but an interesting thing
happened to me:

I ordered Bob Marley's Legend based on listening to a friend's.
When I got it, I noticed that the songs seemed shorter.  We compared, and
my version was about 12 minutes shorter than his.  His says "Tuff Gong" at
the top and mine says "Island."   I have no idea whose fault this is but
I was certainly pissed off since I like the longer version _much_ better.

Kevin Molander
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: bill@bilver.uucp (Bill Vermillion)
Subject: Re: High Speed Dubbing
Organization: W. J. Vermillion - Winter Park, FL
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 15:33:12 GMT


(It would help if you kept your lines shorter - wjv)
In article <1992Nov9.132525.9514@lsican.uucp> michael@Canada.lsil.com writes:

>High-speed dubbing shifts the frequency spectrum of the recording
up by whatever
>factor the speed increase is.  For example, if the play-back/recording
is at twice
>the normal speed (just a guess here), all the frequencies will be doubled.
In an
>ideal world, this doesn't really matter.  The problem with this is that
most (all??)
>of the high speed dubbing machines are usually low-fi or mid-fi at best.
The heads
>on these machines would probably be incapable of reproducing frequencies above
>16-18kHz.

>So, if we have a head roll-off at 16-18kHz under a high-speed copy,
this corresponds
>to a 8-9kHz roll-off on the normal play-back, or non-high-speed play-back.
This
>means that the "copy" will effectively have all of its high-frequency
components
>stripped by the copying process.  Probably acceptable for copying store-bought
>tapes on mid-fi equipment, but for good quality copies, this is probably
>unacceptable.

Magnetic recording is limited to 10 octaves.  And systems are designed
for maximum output (with no EQ) in the 700-1200Hz range.

As you double the tape speed you shift the entire spectrum up one
octave.

If a machine went to 10KHz at any given speed, doubling the tape speed
would push it's upper limit to 20Hkz, while moving it's lower limit up
one octave in the meantime.

A head doesn't have a 'roll-off at 16-18Khz' in it's design except at a
given speed.

In the early days the only way to get more high-frequency response was
to increase the tape speed.  

And the rule of thumb then was 1 inch for each kilocycle per second of
response.  (I put it that way because it was before Hz was designated
as a cps measure).

And in the those days it was true.  A reel-reel at 7.5 ips would get to
7500cps.   15 ips would get you 15000cps, and 30 would get you
30,000cps.

Advances in tape, head, and electronics design have pushed that barrier
away but the old 10 octave rule holds pretty well.   High-end pro
reel-reel machines are quite that limited anymore but they have
relatively sophisticated engineering in them.

What will give you problems is alignment, electronics limitation, and
transport instability at a higher speed.

-- 
Bill Vermillion - bill@bilver.oau.org  bill.vermillion@oau.org
                - bill@bilver.uucp 
                - ..!{peora|tous|tarpit}!bilver!bill

Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: rodiers@JSP.UMontreal.CA (Rodier Stephane)
Subject: MORDAUNT-SHORT 3.10 comments
Followup-To: rodiers@JSP.UMontreal.Ca 
Organization: Universite de Montreal
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 04:42:00 GMT

        I would like to purchase 3.10 speakers but before I do so I would
like some comments about these speakers.....

Steph.
From: ptb2@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (PETER TALAN BERGEN)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: How 'bout a new group for the rest of us?
Date: 12 Nov 92 00:31:05 GMT
Organization: Lehigh University

In article <1992Nov11.020415.8305@dunix.drake.edu>, kjt001@dunix.drake.edu (Devi
l Bunny!) writes:
>How about making a new group called something like
>rec.audio.college.student or rec.audio.penniless.  Almost every
>conversation that occurs here is pointed to those who have $10k to spend
>on audio equipment.  It would be nice to know that maybe somewhere out
>there are other people with as little money as I.  <sigh>
>
>
>--

I could not agree with you more, I am f**cking sick and tired of listening to
people ask questions whether they should a stereo for $10,000 or $13,000.  I
am personally a little offended that someone would spend that much money on a
stereo when there are so many bigger problems today.  We definitely need a
college audio board.
From: chrz@tellabs.com (Peter Chrzanowski)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: High Speed Dubbing
Date: 12 Nov 92 00:54:41 GMT
Article-I.D.: tellab5.1992Nov12.005441.7733
Organization: Tellabs, Inc.

In article <1992Nov9.132525.9514@lsican.uucp>, michael@Canada.lsil.com (Michael Smith) writes:
> High-speed dubbing shifts the frequency spectrum of the recording up by whatever
> factor the speed increase is.  For example, if the play-back/recording is at twice
> the normal speed (just a guess here), all the frequencies will be doubled.  In an
> ideal world, this doesn't really matter.  The problem with this is that most (all??)
> of the high speed dubbing machines are usually low-fi or mid-fi at best.  The heads
> on these machines would probably be incapable of reproducing frequencies above
> 16-18kHz.
> 
> So, if we have a head roll-off at 16-18kHz under a high-speed copy, this corresponds
> to a 8-9kHz roll-off on the normal play-back, or non-high-speed play-back.  This
> means that the "copy" will effectively have all of its high-frequency components
> stripped by the copying process.  Probably acceptable for copying store-bought
> tapes on mid-fi equipment, but for good quality copies, this is probably
> unacceptable.
> 

The HEADS would not be the problem here, as the heads have a high frequency
limit that is a function of wavelength and head gap.  Doubling the speed
also doubles the wavelength.  This is, of course, the trick used in VCRs:
increase the tape-to-head speed and you increase the max. freq. the heads
will work at (but you also increase the minimum they will work at also).

The limitation in high-speed dubbing, therefore, would be the mechanics
and/or the electronics.  The electronics may not have the required freq.
range, or the mechanics may have trouble keeping the tape motion even.
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: gfl@hera.cc.bellcore.com (lenahan,grant f)
Subject: Re: WANTED: used cd player (sellers or suggestions)
Organization: Bellcore, Livingston, NJ
Distribution: usa
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 92 14:32:40 GMT
Summary: comments

nflack@eniac.seas.upenn.edu (Nigel R Flack) writes:
> 
>      Anyway, I would like to purchase a *real* CD player, and this post is
> basically to serve two main purposes:
> 
>   1) I have been reading this newsgroup for a while, and so I am aware
>      that the Rotel 855 receive's high praise.  I have also done some
>      research on my own, and I think I would really like an Adcom GCG-575,
>      if I can find one I can afford. ($300 --> $400 MAX!!)
> 
>           Carver, Rotel, Luxman, Adcom, Denon, HK, JVC (got *really* good
>           recommendation before), NAD, Nakamichi, Onkyo, Philips, Pioneer
>           Elite, Sony ES (ONLY ES).

From my limited experience, JVC, NAD.
The Sony ES units are supposedly good, but expensive.
Luxman's in the same range may be better.  Partucularly the
tubed unit.
The Rotel (now 955BX) IS really good for the money,  REALLY good.

Grant
From: battan@sequent.com (Jim Battan)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: Yamaha RX-V1050
Date: 7 Nov 92 05:27:32 GMT
Article-I.D.: sequent.1992Nov7.052732.16281
Organization: Sequent Computer Systems Inc.

In article <1992Nov04.182252.8122@bmerh85.bnr.ca> stud1b53@bnr.ca writes:
>|> could someone post me information about Yamaha RX-V1050.

I've got one.  It's a versatile unit with lots of I/O capabilities.
And it sounds nice, but I'm running it through Cerwin Vega speakers
(until I get new ones), so I can't really comment.  I do, however,
hate its physical/ergonomic design.  Both the unit and its remote
have rows of identical buttons, its display isn't very informative,
and it has limited tuner functionallity (no preset scan, 40 channels
are spread over 5 banks of 8, poor signal quality meter).  If I were
you, I'd compare the Yamaha with the new Sony ES Pro-Logic rcvrs.

-- 
Jim Battan - Sequent Computer Systems, Beaverton, OR
battan@sequent.com or uunet!sequent!battan
+1 503 578 5129
From: kevinm@ocf.berkeley.edu (Kevin Miller)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Surround Speakers
Date: 12 Nov 1992 00:23:41 GMT
Organization: U. C. Berkeley Open Computing Facility
Distribution: world
NNTP-Posting-Host: bigbang.berkeley.edu

It has come time to add some decent sounding surround sound speakers to my 
system.  I have a Kenwood 7030 Pro-Logic Surround receiver with a pair of KHL
tower speakers as my fronts (2 12" woofers, 1 5.25" midrange, 1 1" dome 
tweeter).

I've been to two places asking about what type of speakers I should get, but I 
wanted the opinion of the people here.  I looked at two speakers.  One was an
Audiosource that ran for about $80 per pair.  They were small (30 watts max),
but the salesman told me that they were very efficient and would work well on 
my 15 watt rear channels.

The second set of speakers I looked at where Infinity speakers.  They were
larger, and ran for $150 a pair.  The salesman I talked to said that they would
work on my system fine, but didn't comment on the efficiency of the speakers
specifically.

I
I'm on a limited bedget, but don't want to end up buying something that I will
regret later.  Ideally, I would also like to mount these speakers to my wall
(that's why I was shown the Audiosource speakers--they have a small wall mount
on the back), so an included mount is a plus.

If you have any suggestions, please post here or send e-mail.  I'm a regular 
reader of this group.

Kevin
kevinm@ocf.berkeley.edu

PS...I know what this is going to start but...What wire should I use on the
surround speakers?  I currently use Monster Cable (XP, I think) for the fronts.
Would it be wise to use something like Monster Cable for the surrounds as well,
or it cheap no-name wire sufficient?
From: ptb2@ns1.cc.lehigh.edu (PETER TALAN BERGEN)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: To the guy who flamed Infinity
Date: 12 Nov 92 00:33:10 GMT
Organization: Lehigh University

In article <1992Nov11.165426.657@scic.intel.com>, sbradley@scic.intel.com (Seth
Bradley) writes:
>>Go listen to an Infinity Beta equipped system.
>
>And if anyone is looking to spend around $2500 on a set of speakers, and
>will consider used, I'd recommend they try to find a set of RS-1B's.  These
>were basically "Baby IRS" systems, with 5 enclosures(from memory): 2 6'
>enclosures with a large number of EMIM's and EMIT's in each, 2 6' enclosures
>with 6 12" woofers in each, and a servo unit for the woofer enclosures.
>Very impressive speakers!
>
>
>--
Not all of us have $2500 or more to spend on a set of speakers, some of us are
paying 23 G's for a college education.  GET A CLUE!!!!!!!!!
From: lawson@ecst.csuchico.edu (M. Todd Lawson)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Off The Subject Help Please....
Date: 10 Nov 92 23:20:18 GMT
Article-I.D.: charnel.1dpg3iINNrhh
Distribution: world
Organization: California State University, Chico
NNTP-Posting-Host: hairball.ecst.csuchico.edu



   Hi!

     I am a student at Calif. State Univ. Chico studying computer engineering.
  I am currently looking forward to a career in the field of technical
  writing and documentation. Because of this, I have decided to start 
  a journal for the most frequently asked questions about computers. I
  intend for it to be a bi-monthly publication with the purpose of answering
  all the most often asked questions new and semi-experienced computer
  users have. It will not be for those of you with off the wall, obscure
  questions, because I will not be able to answer many of those.        
  
  Try to remember when you were a new computer user and some of the questions
  that you had.

    For me to get started, please send me any question that a new user is
  likely to ask; i.e. What is the speed of my computer? 386 or 33mhz?
  I know that seems simple, but you would be surprised to hear what
  new computer people will ask. 
  
    Below is a subscription form and question
  sheet.  All I ask is that you send me a question, and your name will go
  into the mailing list. However, as I am a student, I have limited funds.
  
  If this is not in the scope of        
  NetNews, then, forgive me and just send a question. I will print as many
  as I can afford and send them out.

    Thanks for your participation, and I look forward to hearing from you.

    Todd Lawson.

    Lawson@cscihp.ecst.csuchico.edu

    1245 Esplanade Ave. #10
    Chico Ca. 95926

    




    Name:..................................................
     
    Address:...............................................

    City, State, Country:..................................
   
    Zip:..............

    Phone Number:..........................................

    Please put question below:.............................















    .......................................................


   Thanks again.

   Todd.
  
   
-- 
===============================================================================
M. Todd Lawson -- Lawson@cscihp.ecst.csuchico.edu
California State University, Chico. Computer Engineering Dept.
It happens to the best.  It happens to the rest.
Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: news@berlioz.nsc.com (UseNet News account)
Subject: npn vs. pnp (response)
Organization: National Semiconductor Corporation
Date: Tue, 10 Nov 1992 19:49:59 GMT

Article: 20821 of rec.audio
From: DPierce@world.std.com (Richard d Pierce)
Newsgroups: rec.audio
Subject: Re: PNP vs NPN Output Stages
Keywords: Lock
Date: 9 Nov 92 14:50:07 GMT
Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA

In article <1992Nov9.113458.16272@EE.Surrey.Ac.UK> R.Bish@EA.surrey.co.uk (Rob Bish) writes:

>Here at ExtrAudio we have recently been studying the comparative merits of
>PNP vs NPN transistor audio output stages. The results are indeed
>interesting. PNP transistors were found to have preferable characteristics
>owing to their warmer more precise sound which listeners believed created
>a sound reproduction environment more suited to the rendition of
>quintessentially romantic lyricism, but NPN transistors were more at one
>with the idiom of Baroque counterpoint. 
>
>***** if you like Bach use NPN *****
>***** if you like Chopin use PNP ***
>
>We are currently working on an output design that allows the audiophile to
>switch between NPN and PNP output stages depending upon taste and source
>material, with a hybrid NPN/PNP transistor for those who like Elgar. 
>
>We believe this effect owes to the higher speed of electrons through an
>N-type junction being relativistically effected (by the uncertainty
>principle) leading to noise and distortion, particularly noticeable at low
>frequencies. 
>
>Has anyone else observed this effect, and can they shed any light on the
>cause? 

PLEASE, GOD, LET THERE BE A SMILEY FACE SOMEWHERE IN THIS POSTING!

-- 
|                Dick Pierce                |
|    Loudspeaker and Software Consulting    |
| 17 Sartelle Street   Pepperell, MA  01463 |
|       (508) 433-9183 (Voice and FAX)      |



Newsgroups: rec.audio
From: caf@omen.UUCP (Chuck Forsberg)
Subject: Re: So? Anyone have dcc yet? (long)
Organization: Omen Technology INC, Portland Rain Forest
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1992 23:10:38 GMT

My impression (mostly related to classical music) is that music
lovers buy into a new medium, obsoleting their old collections,
when there is an improvement in the reproduction.  This was the
case when LPs replaced 78s, again with stereo, and again
(gradually) as the sound quality on LPs improved.

This has mostly stopped with the advent of CDs.  A definitive CD
recording is not so likely to be obsoleted by a newer sound
recording technology.  Of course there are video and discrete
quad.  Quad doesn't seem to be of much interest for music.
Video is a different genre that requires a unique artistic
approach, and a different commitment on the part of the user.

It seems that sound recording has been "perfected" some time ago
in the sense that the best recordings being made today are only
marginally more musical than the best recordings of 30 years
ago.  The important improvements have been in the quality of
records (now CDs) available to the average consumer.  Compared
to DCC and other new formats that have been proposed, the sound
on CDs is about as good as it is likely to get.  Some of the new
formats have advantages of interest to niche markets, but none
seriously claim to sound better than CD.

The impetus for new sales must come from new music lovers, new
music, and new performances.  There isn't much new Classical
music being written these days.  Less well known music is being
recorded, but few of these works are blockbusters.  New
performances by new artists will always be with us, but fewer of
them will displace available recordings of definitive
performances.

Perhaps the next step beyond CD audio will exploit more of our
senses since CD has pretty much perfected the utilization of the
sense of hearing.

Brainstorm?

-- 
Chuck Forsberg WA7KGX          ...!tektronix!reed!omen!caf 
Author of YMODEM, ZMODEM, Professional-YAM, ZCOMM, and DSZ
  Omen Technology Inc    "The High Reliability Software"
17505-V NW Sauvie IS RD   Portland OR 97231   503-621-3406
Newsgroups: rec.audio