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 confusof 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