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.