Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 (Tek) 9/26/83; site tekig1.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!mgnetp!ihnp4!houxm!houxz!vax135!floyd!harpo!decvax!ucbvax!ucbcad!tektronix!tekig1!gregr From: gregr@tekig1.UUCP Newsgroups: net.audio Subject: Re: Square Wave Response Message-ID: <1680@tekig1.UUCP> Date: Wed, 13-Jun-84 22:00:51 EDT Article-I.D.: tekig1.1680 Posted: Wed Jun 13 22:00:51 1984 Date-Received: Sat, 16-Jun-84 03:44:40 EDT References: <270@whuxj.UUCP> Organization: Tektronix, Beaverton OR Lines: 17 Sorry Bill but I got to take issue with you on your remarks concerning CD square waves. CD square waves are remarkably good for frequencies within the audible range. In general they are much better than the most highly regarded moving coil cartridges which you can verify by looking at back issues of hi fi mags as one source. The best "looking"! square waves are produced by moving magnet cartridges, which are generally considered inferior to the moving coils by the "golden ears". So what does this tell you about drawing conclusions from looking at square waves? Should we denounce the sound of moving coil cartridges because we misinterrupt the meaning of the square wave appearance? Secondly it makes no since to talk about CD response to 20Khz square waves. The second harmonic is 40Khz and almost no speaker can reproduce it and fewer listeners can hear it. Hence reproducing 20Khz square waves is the same thing as reproducing 20Khz sine waves as far as the listener is concerned. In addition I know of no tape recording equipment that could possible record a 20 Khz square wave without virtually turning it into a sine wave, so where are you going to get any source material.