sci.electronics.repair@googlegroups.com

Google Groups

oldschool@tubes.com: May 31 11:27PM -0400 >old medal in Women's gymnastics at the Olympics. I would rather > be eaten alive by a shark.   >P   I feel the exact same way about facebook.....   However, there is a price for everything. If someone pays me a half million dollars, I WILL get a facebook account. And for another half million, I will check it weekly for one full year.   Does anyone want to pay me?????   Until someone does, I have facebook blocked in my HOSTS file. (It takes about 35 or 40 lines to completely block it).   Facebook has ruined most of the internet. They should rename it to fecesbook!

oldschool@tubes.com: May 31 11:33PM -0400 On Mon, 29 May 2017 13:25:18 -0500, Dave M <dgminala at mediacombb dot net> wrote:   >readings. To fix this, you have to turn the counter off, and hold a >button down while turning it back on.   This sounds like a huge pain. Glad I did not buy it.

rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com>: Jun 01 12:02PM -0400 > half million dollars, I WILL get a facebook account. And for > another half million, I will check it weekly for one full year.   > Does anyone want to pay me?????   Is this an auction? I'll bid $1.   --   Rick C

thekmanrocks@gmail.com: May 31 06:18PM -0700 Phil Allison: " ** ROTFL !!   TW is spewing his usual audiophool nonsense while a know nothing idiot is lapping it up.     ..... Phil "     Then why don't you explain what was done?

Phil Allison <pallison49@gmail.com>: May 31 06:21PM -0700 Trevor Wilson wrote:   --------------------     > resistors in the 101 and the same values in the 701? I presume you are > suggesting that there is a measurable difference, but that difference is > inaudible?   ** FFS TW, do the math on those values.   Find the -3dB frequencies and see how far above the audio band they are and that there is almost no difference in using 15k or 16k - the caps are only 5% types !!   PLUS the fact that it is having NO effect on the 11uS offset.   I reckon it's a bloody typo in the parts list.         ..... Phil

Phil Allison <pallison49@gmail.com>: May 31 06:28PM -0700 thekma...@gmail.com wrote:     ----------------------------       > ..... Phil "   > Then why don't you explain what > was done?   ** I do not have to explain audiophool bullshit to anyone.   If you believe in " IF it exists it MUST be audible " - you can go to hell.   There is a miniscule 11us time offset between L & R channels - Sony could easily have engineered it out but did not bother cos they KNEW it was NOT audible.       .... Phil

Trevor Wilson <trevor@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au>: Jun 01 11:53AM +1000 On 1/06/2017 11:21 AM, Phil Allison wrote:   > Find the -3dB frequencies and see how far above the audio band they > are and that there is almost no difference in using 15k or 16k - the > caps are only 5% types !!   **You are correct. 5% mica types. The resistors are 1% tolerance.     > PLUS the fact that it is having NO effect on the 11uS offset.   **Funnily enough, the difference between those two values is pretty close to 11uS. Those 5% caps are a bit of a problem though.     > I reckon it's a bloody typo in the parts list.   **It might instructive when you next pull your machine apart to check out the values. I just checked the schematic and the supplement. Both cite identical values for these components.     -- Trevor Wilson www.rageaudio.com.au

Phil Allison <pallison49@gmail.com>: May 31 07:09PM -0700 Trevor Wilson wrote:   ----------------------     > > are and that there is almost no difference in using 15k or 16k - the > > caps are only 5% types !!   > **You are correct. 5% mica types. The resistors are 1% tolerance.   ** For a total of 6%.       > > PLUS the fact that it is having NO effect on the 11uS offset.   > **Funnily enough,     ** TW only sees what he WANTS to see, and heasr what he WANTs to hear.     > the difference between those two values is pretty > close to 11uS.   ** 15k & 75pF = 1.12 uS   16k & 75pF = 1.20 uS.       > Those 5% caps are a bit of a problem though.   ** FFS, TW has no case at all since the 11uS offset ( exactly half a sampling period ) is NOT affected.     BTW:   For my interest, was it YOU who came up with this mad interpretation or did you find it floating free on the great world wide sewer ?       ..... Phil

jurb6006@gmail.com: May 31 08:20PM -0700 >"All (?) other players used two DACs (one for each channel) and the delay was not required. "   Using two DACs does not negate the need for a delay. However it is probably easier to implement in the digital domain, something you can't do with a single DAC.

jurb6006@gmail.com: May 31 08:30PM -0700 >"Something I am aware of that you didn't bring up: Pre-emp/De-emp."   I did bring it up but only in the context of the playback quality - that is if there is an error in decoding.   The pre-enph and de-emph is not quite like Dolby. First of all it is either o or off, and it is designed to turn on and off transient free during playback. It is a command on the CD itself, there is no detection of level or spectral content like in Dolby or other noise reduction systems.   And actually it is not really for noise reduction. When the source has low HF content it is not using enough bits and people complained it sounded grainy or whatever, some such adjective. This was before CDs actually, it is built into all CD players, unless there are some that are cheaper than even I can imagine.   Then, when it came to totally digital sources they actually had to add noise, called dither, to make the low level HF sound right. They may use the pre-emph on that at low levels at all. But there was never any need for noise reduction because there is no noise. In fact, when they did the old AAD disks which were from the master tapes from back in the 1950s ad such, the tape hiss provided the dither and I think the quantization process actually removed some of that hiss without having any effect on the frequency reponse.

jurb6006@gmail.com: May 31 08:32PM -0700 >"Answer:   your head being offset by 1.7mm from exact centre of a pair of speakers. "   Might hear it on headphones. Might.

Phil Allison <pallison49@gmail.com>: May 31 09:04PM -0700 jurb...@gmail.com wrote:     ---------------------   > The pre-enph and de-emph is not quite like Dolby. First of all it is either o or off, and it is designed to turn on and off transient free during playback. It is a command on the CD itself, there is no detection of level or spectral content like in Dolby or other noise reduction systems.   > And actually it is not really for noise reduction.   ** Fraid it is really.   > and people complained it sounded grainy or whatever, some such adjective. > This was before CDs actually, it is built into all CD players, unless > there are some that are cheaper than even I can imagine.   ** Very few CDs in the past or now use pre-emphasis and some players do not accommodate it.   When I got my Sony, I figured it lacked one feature - it did not reveal if de-emphasis was in use. One could hear tiny click from a relay inside so I added a red LED in parallel with the relay coil and fitted it in the display window.   Can't recall when I last saw it come on.       .... Phil

jurb6006@gmail.com: May 31 09:18PM -0700 >"** Very few CDs in the past or now use pre-emphasis and some players do not accommodate it. "   Well that seems to jibe with the Madman Muntz philosophy of design now.   Keep taking parts out until it doesn't work and put the last one back in.   A relay huh ? Can't say Ive ever seen that, or if I did I assumed it was just for muting.

Pat <pat@nospam.us>: Jun 01 07:16AM -0400 On Wed, 31 May 2017 21:04:03 -0700 (PDT), Phil Allison   >When I got my Sony, I figured it lacked one feature - it did not reveal if de-emphasis was in use. One could hear tiny click from a relay inside so I added a red LED in parallel with the relay coil and fitted it in the display window.   >Can't recall when I last saw it come on.   >.... Phil   Interesting subject. When I got my first CD player back in the day, it had a de-emphasis indicator. I occassionally saw it on, but I can't remember which CDs were being played at the time. That player is now long gone and nothing I have owned since then has an indicator. While I have a nice older stereo set up in the basement, most of my listening these days is in the bedroom at night while falling asleep. The bedroom player is a Sony Blu-ray player (BDP-S370). Is it likely that it properly handles de-emphasis while playing old CDs?   Pat

thekmanrocks@gmail.com: Jun 01 04:25AM -0700 jurb wrote: "And actually it is not really for noise reduction. When the source has low HF content it is not using enough bits and people complained it sounded grainy or whatever, some such adjective. This was before CDs actually, it is built into all CD players, unless there are some that are cheaper than even I can imagine. "     _______ So CD really DID emphasize compactness over fidelity in the design stage! So much that the sampling rate and bit depth were 'just adequate', especially at higher frequency content where more waves fit between the samples and represented by same available bits.   So by boosting above, say, 10 or 12khz those highs would take more advantage of available bits, and then the de-emph on the player is supposed to check TOC for a pre-Emph flag and apply de-Emph, like turning down a treble control with a standardized curve, like RIAA on vinyl records.   Some of my older CDs are kind of trebley, not at all grainy, but top heavy. When I turn my treble knob a little left of center, it smooths out the whole sound. These are same CDs that Exact Audio Copy does not detect pre-emphasis on. So the engineer probably didn't know how to flag it in the TOC, or forgot, or flagged it improperly. ???

"None" <none@nospam.org>: Jun 01 07:36AM -0400 < thekma @ dumbfuck.shortbus.edu > drooled in message news:50d9d08e-dceb-47bc-8e7c-1ddf2529b61e@googlegroups.com... > So CD really DID emphasize compactness > over fidelity in the design stage!   So you're an idiot.   > content where more waves fit between the > samples and represented by same available > bits.   You love to gibber about things you don't understand, li'l buddy,   > engineer probably didn't know how to flag > it in the TOC, or forgot, or flagged it > improperly. ???   Or maybe your just flatulating about something you'll never comprehend. DJKSH. FCKWAFA, KHD!

ohger1s@gmail.com: Jun 01 06:08AM -0700 On Thursday, June 1, 2017 at 7:37:00 AM UTC-4, None wrote: > > So CD really DID emphasize compactness > > over fidelity in the design stage!   > So you're an idiot.   If you think audio fidelity was high on the Compact Disc design team's agenda you're quite delusional. The CD format offered a few obvious improvements over vinyl: zero wow and flutter, no surface noise or rumble and better dynamic range. Since most people at the time the CD hit the mass market had a crappy turntable, crappy cartridge/needle, and vinyl discs that weren't particularly well cared for, the improvements the CD offered really stood out.

Phil Allison <pallison49@gmail.com>: Jun 01 06:42AM -0700 ohg...@gmail.com wrote:   ----------------------   > mass market had a crappy turntable, crappy cartridge/needle, and vinyl > discs that weren't particularly well cared for, the improvements the > CD offered really stood out.   ** Can't let that pile of idiotic bull shite go by.   FACT is :   Philips and Sony had FIDELITY at the top of their list - so the proposed new system would have no possible sound quality shortcomings.   PLUS the usual benefit of PCM in being *infinitely* copyable without the slightest loss - a massive benefit the to recording industry.   PLUS being immune from wear and tear deterioration in normal use for decades.   PLUS being convenient to use and low cost to produce as stampings.     BTW:   Obviously YOU are a complete, know nothing fuckwit.   One of millions of on the internet         ..... Phil

thekmanrocks@gmail.com: Jun 01 06:51AM -0700 Phil Allison wrote: "Obviously YOU are a complete, know nothing fuckwit.   One of millions of on the internet   ..... Phil "     Phil: Are you and 'None' related?? Sure seems that way!   Most of your points were valid, until that last part I quoted.

thekmanrocks@gmail.com: Jun 01 06:58AM -0700 _______ I think the best thing to do is to divide the sampling rate of CDDA by the lowest and highest frequencies it was intended to cover:     44,100 samples / 20Hz = 2,205 samples per cycle.   44,100/1kHz = 44.1 samples per cycle.   44,100/20kHz = *ONLY* 2.205 samples per wave cycle at that frequency. So even I could see where things might get a little dicey, sonically, up above 15kHz or so. That, combined with 16bit depth and potential for lower amplitude events in that part of the spectrum.

Phil Allison <pallison49@gmail.com>: Jun 01 07:08AM -0700 thekma...@gmail.com wrote:   ----------------------------   > 15kHz or so. That, combined with 16bit > depth and potential for lower amplitude > events in that part of the spectrum.   ** Wow !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!   Jurassic park has no creatures as pre-historic as you.   Wot a six toed fucking idiot.   Wonder if he plays a five string banjo and fancies pig's arses.   And I do not mean for dinner.           .... Phil

jurb6006@gmail.com: Jun 01 07:43AM -0700 >"Philips and Sony had FIDELITY at the top of their list"   Yup. As long as it fit in the standard car stereo opening in the dashboard of cars at the time.   I will agree they did the best they could. But if it was REAL good PCM at 48 KHz the disk would be too big.

N_Cook <diverse@tcp.co.uk>: Jun 01 04:27PM +0100 On 31/05/2017 22:50, amdx wrote: > vias and resoldered them. > He gave me back a working CD Player!   > Mikek   twice over the years I've seen insect silk blocking the optics of a CD player , once was a complete cocoon, no insect found in either case, just the evidence of thgem having taken up residence

"J.B. Wood" <arl_123234@hotmail.com>: Jun 01 07:20AM -0400 Hello, all. The above referenced ca. 1980s MIDI sequencers (termed "Disk Composers" by Brother) all appear to use the same internal 3.5" FDD. The spindle is belt rather than direct driven. I can't find any specific belt info for these devices on line except for the FB-100 Brother drive which was intended for use with their line of knitting machines. I have the MDI-30 and I think a 8.5" or 9" circumference flat belt might work but if anyone can provide some additional detail it would be most welcome. Thanks for your time and comment. Sincerely, -- J. B. Wood e-mail: arl_123234@hotmail.com

"Miguel Giménez" <me@privacy.net>: Jun 01 12:10PM +0200 El 01/06/2017 a las 1:16, whit3rd escribió: > a week, the (equivalent of) dust bunnies just pile up.   > The implication is, use your CD/DVD/BD readers and burners every week or so. They > might just go bad on the shelf otherwise.   Certainly the Sony unit was seldom used, and the Aiwa use was greatly reduced after first failure to preserve the laser (sigh!). In both units the new part failures happened after some weeks of inactivity.   Thank you.   -- Saludos Miguel Giménez

You received this digest because you're subscribed to updates for this group. You can change your settings on the group membership page. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it send an email to sci.electronics.repair+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com.