Sybaritic Style
Dear Editor:
I enjoyed Mr. Fantel's sensitively written boyhood remembrance in the December issue. This style of writing seems to be strangely out of place in a magazine which panders shamelessly to aural Sybarites. Mr. Canby is very much your type of writer. He hasn't anything of great importance to say, but he says it so well.
-Larry Mark; Mississauga, Ont.
Win Some ...
Dear Editor:
I would like to commend you and your staff for the excellent job done on the November 1981 Todd Rundgren interview. I do feel, however, that the whole idea of a two-way multi-media system in my home sounds a bit 1984ish to me. Albums will be around for a long time and will be more immediately replaced by purely audio laser discs.
Standards for these discs are being decided upon, and if all goes well, expect to see them sometime in 1982.
David Smith; Angola, Ind.
... Lose Some
Dear Editor:
I am writing to say that I am very disturbed by recent developments in the way Audio is being edited.
I note that in the November 1981 edition that Audio has apparently decided to publish frequency response of cassette recorders only at the unrealistic level of 20 dB. The reader is thus left with the impression that the Sony TC-K81 deck under review gives ruler flat response. Maybe it does, but only at-20 dB. The previously published tables and charts were not only more easy to read, but also included the 0 dB levels. Feldman's statement (p. 54) that "The Sony TC-K81 is one cassette deck that has taken proper advantage of the metal-tape formulation" is neither supported nor refuted by the published graphs because of the-20 dB level of the graphs presented to the reader. You can't tell whether or not it's a good machine.
Secondly, I resent the sharp decline in the level of technology presented to the reader. While technology is not my occupation, I subscribed to Audio because it was an advanced publication, not a beginner's "where does the plug go" publication. Right now you seem to assume we are teenagers.
Lastly, the "interview" with Todd Rundgren is as much out of place as an article on how to fix an Oldsmobile diesel. Does not CBS know anything but television and TV cameras anymore? Todd may be your friend, but he is of no interest to me. If I were to read an article about him, I'd assume it should be in an art magazine. Why not an article on computers? After all, digital technology, not cheap out-of-date video technology (as in "Video Scenes") is the wave of the future.
I subscribe to a large number of magazines in many different subjects.
I am sorry to say that the arrival of Audio is becoming a depressing event. Shape up!
-George H Conklin; Durham, N.C.
Up with Noise
Dear Editor:
On page 76 of your April 1982 issue, you carry an advertisement for the Lirpa I Distortion Demodulator. I cannot believe that a publication of your high standards has the audacity to print the claims of Lirpa Laboratories with respect to this product.
Having owned a Lirpa I receiver for several years, I am more than willing to attest to its superiority over any other audio product available. (As you well know, this receiver was initially marketed by Ultima Electronics-see Audio, April 1975, pg. 54.) However, I must take exception to the claims made for the Distortion Demodulator.
Having purchased a unit myself at the suggested retail price of $13.11, I rushed home to further improve my unimprovable receiver. After carefully following the enclosed instructions and hooking up the input cables as directed, I sat back and heard NO AUDIBLE DIFFERENCE. After a careful scientific investigation, I came to the conclusion that the only thing that saved my system was the inherent 0.0003% distortion level in my Ultima One.
The reason the Lirpa unit does not function properly is quite simple. Referring to basic transmission line characteristics (i.e. the input cables), everyone knows that the reflection coefficient (gamma) is found from the following:
Where E, is the reflected voltage, E, is the incident voltage, RL is the load resistance, and Zo is the characteristic impedance.
Since the characteristic of the incident that we are observing is reflected with resistance, it stands to reason that since the source impedance is not equal to the characteristic impedance of the cables (Zo), reflection will occur from the load end of the line back toward the source.
Now, it is known that any receiver below the specification of the Ultima One will amplify these reflections in the form of noise. Hence the product was inaccurately termed a demodulator when in fact it acts as a modulator.
A copy of this letter is concurrently being sent to the Federal Trade Commission, for obvious reasons.
-Peter S. Jasion Succasunna, N.J.
Our Number's Up
Dear Editor:
What a disappointment! I have been reading the "For Sale" columns over and over again, issue after issue, and what do I find? Well, I'll tell you, I found a Lirpa 1 Distortion Demodulator, that's what.
I carefully studied the Lirpa ad with a 50X magnifying glass. After three days with no sleep, I finally gave the ad to my wife, she gave it to my 11 year-old daughter, and she gave it to my 7-year-old son. None of us left the confines of home for a week.
I am now under a doctor's care and the rest of the family won't associate with me. The problem is that the ad for the Lirpa did not contain any telephone AREA CODE. My hi-fi is totally dismembered and my component rack is lying sideways on the floor ready to receive the Lirpa.
I have sworn off music and have refused any food for two weeks. If Audio has any heart, I implore you, send the telephone area code.
Milton Michelstein; Ozone Park, N.Y.
Editor's Note:
We suggest you try looking in old cereal boxes for a decoder ring.
(Source: Audio magazine, Sept. 1982 )
= = = =