Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83; site charm.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!mhuxr!mhuxb!mhuxn!charm!prk
From: prk@charm.UUCP (prk)
Newsgroups: net.audio
Subject: Noise-reduction units
Message-ID: <589@charm.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 18-Feb-85 19:04:51 EST
Article-I.D.: charm.589
Posted: Mon Feb 18 19:04:51 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 21-Feb-85 07:13:29 EST
Organization: Physics Research @ AT&T Bell Labs Murray Hill NJ
Lines: 40


	I've been reading all sorts of interesting things about equalizers
on net.audio, but I am left with the following question about these
and other 'outboard' items that are added to reproduction systems,
in particular, 'dynamic filters' or noise-reduction units, and 
fancy encoder/decoders (eg, dbx) and 'ambience enhancers' (eg, Carver).
Do these gadgets have negative qualitative effects on the sound?
An equalizer can change the spectrum of your system very nicely,
but does it caues the music to sound more (or less) like it's coming
from two discrete boxes rather than from the entire Mormon Tabernacle
Choir, like it did when it was recorded? Frequency response and 
noise level are one thing, but I will live with a slight resonance
in the bass if the alternative is constricted sound.

	I ask this because of my limited experience with one single
outboard gadget, the old Phase-Linear noise-reducer/dynamic-range
expander.  I found that it definitely removed surface hiss from my
records, which was annoying back when I could only afford headphones.
When I got a real system including speakers, I didn't bother to 
put it back in the signal path, because noise was much less noticeable
and I didn't want to muck up the sound.  Shouls I put it back in?
(It means cleaning up some switch contacts as well as making room
- ie, a deliberate use of valuable time).

	In general, I'd like to hear less on net.audio about the
quantitative aspects of sound reproduction and more about the 
qualitative side.  The effects of weak aliases at 22.4 kHz have
a relatively small effect on my enjoyment of music, as do the
last dB or two of flatness in a frequency response and the precision
of the resistors on the input of my phono preamp.  It would be
a lot more interesting to me if someone said that such-and-such
an add-on had a noticeable effect on the aoustic ambience of his 
or her system.  Got the idea?  Of course, this could lead to
arguments, but why else are we here?  Besides, arguments about
opinion can be so much more vindictive, personal, and interesting
than arguments about fact, which seem to be the major source
of pollution on this net recently ( I refer to the great 'sampling
at 44.8 kHz' controversy of late).

	Bye-bye.