Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83 based; site hound.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!hou3c!hocda!houxm!hound!rfg
From: rfg@hound.UUCP (R.GRANTGES)
Newsgroups: net.audio
Subject: Re: Ugly Square Waves - Not all are...some are purty!
Message-ID: <527@hound.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 14-Jun-84 12:14:55 EDT
Article-I.D.: hound.527
Posted: Thu Jun 14 12:14:55 1984
Date-Received: Fri, 15-Jun-84 01:12:48 EDT
References: <4@sunybcs.UUCP> <428@ihu1g.UUCP>, <926@eosp1.UUCP>
Organization: AT&T Bell Labs, Holmdel NJ
Lines: 13

[] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] [] []
Leave us not confus  of the reading world.  amplifiers,
at least in the good old days, wers quite capable of reproducing some
mighty purty square waves. For example my old (tube) Citation IV's
would give you a near perfect square wave output at 100 (!), 1000, and even
5000 hz rep rates. The picture (no load) at 10 hz was very little droopy.
The right speakers will give you a pretty nearly square wave  if the freq.
is high enuf but not too high. Again, the rule of thumb says if the
wave looks square then your response is substantially flat with
linear phase  over the range .1f to 10f, where f is the rep frequency.
If (when) the waveshape is "ugly", then something is wrong within that range
or (esp. in the case of phase) just  outside it.  hound!rfg