Dear Editor (May 1973)

Loudspeaker Issue

Dear Sir,

I was prepared to let my subscription expire until I read John Crabbe's article. If you promise to include more articles by him and his colleagues, I promise to renew my subscription. In order to make more intelligent purchases American audio consumers must be armed with more knowledge of the kind John Crabbe can disseminate.

-H. K. Appleman Brighton, Mass.

I promise--and there will be more controversial articles in the future. -ED.

Dear Sir,

The March issue was great, these are the kind of articles we want. Keep them coming, you may offend some advertisers but you will have a better magazine. The same applies to equipment reviews--keep them objective.

-R. L. Brown Boston, Mass.

As we publish all points of view there is no reason why advertisers should be offended. A magazine that simply repeated manufacturers' claims without criticism, praised every loudspeaker or amplifier as the best, would soon lose credibility--and advertisers too for that matter. -ED.

From Percy Wilson

Dear Sir,

I largely agree with Ben Bauer but disagree with John Crabbe regarding column speakers. I find great virtue in columns provided they are properly designed acoustically, which most are not. They are all too short and do not match the units. Thus for a 60 Hertz resonance, the column ought to be 4 ft. 3 inches long.

-Percy Wilson, Oxford, Great Britain

Next time Percy leaves the fleshpots of Oxford and comes over to visit us, I must introduce him to the EPI column which must be over 6 ft. high. To be exact: 6 ft. and 3 inches--I just checked. Seriously, Percy is an expert on column speakers and I hope he can be persuaded to write an article on the subject soon. -ED.

And from Gilbert Briggs

...I rather like your summing up on page 36 and I agree with your findings.

-Gilbert Briggs; Ilkley, Yorkshire, England

Help

Dear Sir,

Will you please tell us where we can purchase fine tape dubbings from first generation Master tapes?

-J. E. Cade, Casonic; Foundation, Ft. Lauderdale, Fla.

Lee Kuby of Harman-Kardon is also anxious to get some prime quality tapes. Can anyone help?

Dear Sir,

I do agree with Editorial observations on the widespread use of clippers, limiters, AGC's etc. The sad part is that many broadcasters install these devices not realizing that you don't get something for nothing! The mad race to get more effective transmitted energy by making the audio more "dense" does cost something aside from the outlay for the AGC amplifier ... subtle things like the ease with which listeners can tolerate one station versus another over a given period of time.

Recently, I watched a nearby out-state FM on a VU meter with modulation varying from 0 to-3 dB! How's that for dynamic range? There was plenty of record noise, tape hiss and studio noise all transmitted at "4 times the station's rated power" as the AGC amplifier ads say! This could well be a station who will add Dolby to top off their string of squashing, squeezing and shaping devices.

The high frequency clippers and dynamic treble controls are even more interesting. One area metropolitan FM sends out a special signal on top of the music for me at all times (apparently unknown to the station) so I can instantly evaluate their high frequency response! They constantly transmit a high frequency RF buzz (RF getting into the audio circuits). Every time a muted trumpet plays or the castanets begin, my special "spy tone" disappears along with record scratch, tape hiss and high frequency content of the music.

The bulk of FM broadcasters would probably state quite boldly that their facilities well meet FCC proof-of performance standards. I would dare over half of them to allow proof of performance measurements to be made actually through their microphone (not the mic input) or through their cartridge or reel-to-reel tape equipment or their turntable pickups. Very few would pass! Most of these stations buy good equipment. How it is used is quite another story. Many times, the vocalists on the records played sound more “live” than the live studio announcer. This is usually when the station uses public address grade microphones while ironically, their listeners sport super fidelity condenser microphones! On the other hand, many stations buy good microphones but use them in studios that are not flat. You'll find acoustic ceiling tile cemented to the walls which does nothing for the bottom end while absorbing the highs leaving the studio with a response looking like that of a loudspeaker or phonograph of 20 years ago. Or what about the station who does not know (or care)

what tape azimuth is or maybe how to properly load a phono cartridge to obtain flat response from a test record? I squirm every time I listen to one station with an intense yearning to adjust azimuth screws on cartridge tape machines. The announcers sound like they're talking through a bail of cotton! Limiters, compressors and other related equipment are necessary but must be used properly ... not as cure-alls.

I'm for starting a nation-wide ecology movement to clean up the sound on our AM's and FM's. Let's get rid of the noisy announce studios, the hiss, hum, distortion even though station managers say only those radical audiophiles can hear it. Let's end the discrimination against bass fiddles who are being jumped on by overly active compression amplifiers and let's stop the repression of violins, muted trumpets, cymbals and percussive instruments who are being suppressed by other distorters! Let's make practical dynamic range a to-be-desired specification and then add Dolby. Wouldn't it be nice?

-Thomas H. Jones; President & General Manager; KNXR Rochester, Minn.

(Source: Audio magazine.)

Also see:

Editor's Review (Feb. 1973)

= = = =