freda@tekig.UUCP (Fred Azinger) (04/03/84)
are "grinding" the same cuts over and over again on your records, not the
extra speaker in the room. One thing I've never understood about all these A/B
test is that nobody takes into account the "memory" that the vinyl has between
plays. I always wait 24 hours to allow the record to forget that it has been
played before playing it again. This practice (I firmly believe) will preserve
the fidelity of your records a great deal longer. If your MUST A/B speakers
or amps or something, then get yourself a GOOD cassette deck to use as a source.
SAVE YOUR RECORDS, POSSIBLY THE MOST EXPENSIVE "COMPONENT" IN YOUR SYSTEM!
--
Fred Azinger
Tektronix Inc., IG
Beaverton, OR
uucp: {ucbvax,decvax,hplabs,uoregon}
{purdue,ihnp4,uw-beaver,purdue}
{zehntel,hplabs,allegra,masscomp}!tektronix!tekig!jm
CSnet: tekig!freda@tek
ARPA: tekig!freda.tek@rand-relay labelle@hplabsc.UUCP (WB6YZZ) (04/04/84)
I believe the only way in which your cassette deck could have modified the sound of your system (presuming it was off) is by the sound of your stereo physically vibrating the recorder on the shelf causing un- known sound effects. Check it out!
coltoff@burdvax.UUCP (Joel Coltoff) (04/09/84)
This line contains only natural ingredients
When I look at the schematics for my terminal I see a 2N3904
transistor directly driving the speaker. Also in that circuit
are a few resistors, a flip-flop and finally an 8041 microcomputer.
The only storage elements in that circuit are the flip-flop
and the Miller capacitance of the transistor and the 8041.
Is it these two things that make every LP I play sound like
Kate Smith singing "God Bless America" or is it the fact that
the 2N3904 is in a TO-92 ceramic can?
All seriousness aside I think things are getting carried away
here. I can see that with larger speakers that have cross-over
networks some charge ( maybe even a measurable one ) is stored
in the caps. I really don't believe that a detectable difference
exists. Has anybody done tests with test equipment. Can somebody
give me a ( report * ) pointer to these results. If there REALLY
is an audible effect I would like to read about it.
--
Joel Coltoff {presby,bpa,psuvax}!burdvax!coltoff
(215)648-7258jj@rabbit.UUCP (04/09/84)
>Foo. You don't need to exploit the doppler effect to shift pitch. >All you have to do is have the other speaker vibrate at a different >frequency than the source. > >-Ron Ok, Ron, let's put it this way: How do you get the second speaker to vibrate at the different frequency? How do you manage to NOT have the beats between the two frequencies, ONLY a pitch shift? How do you propose to make this sytem time-varying? Phew! -- TEDDY BEARS ARE NICER THAN PEOPLE--HUG YOURS TODAY! (If you go out in the woods today ... ) (allegra,harpo,ulysses)!rabbit!jj
ron@brl-vgr.ARPA (Ron Natalie <ron>) (04/10/84)
Personally, I think that it's just as likely as doppler shift or any other effect you are going to get from a 3" speaker. =Ron
lincoln@eosp1.UUCP (Dick Lincoln) (04/11/84)
From rabbit!jj >> Ok, Ron, let's put it this way: >> How do you get the second speaker to vibrate at the different >> frequency? How do you manage to NOT have the beats between the two >> frequencies, ONLY a pitch shift? How do you propose to make this >> system time-varying? From Ron Natalie > Personally, I think that it's just as likely as doppler shift or any > other effect you are going to get from a 3" speaker. Sorry, Ron, but linear system theory is on jj's side on this one, and I believe we may assume that linear system theory is applicable at the minute power levels possible for "passive" acoustical energy storage into a 2-4" speaker connected to "dead" electronics. This theory states in effect that it is impossible to produce a frequency pitch shift *in a relatively stationary object* (eliminating Doppler effect) without a significant non-linearity, such as the "super het" signal multiplier designed in receiver front ends specifically to produce just this frequency shift translation through "beat" frequencies from the incoming antenna signal and a single oscillator tone. Note, however, that a time *delay* (increasing phase shift with increasing frequency) is quite possible with just "linear" components - happens all the time. This does *not* produce a pitch change, though. There is no reason to accept a pitch change without a credible, significantly non-linear, "passive resonator" model, or some convincing psychological data indicating humans interpret a time delayed and frequency filtered echo combined with its original signal as a pitch change.