Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/5/84; site angband.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!sdcsvax!sdcrdcf!hplabs!hao!seismo!ut-sally!mordor!angband!sjc
From: sjc@angband.UUCP (Steve Correll)
Newsgroups: net.audio
Subject: Low-price CD players
Message-ID: <20@angband.UUCP>
Date: Thu, 4-Oct-84 02:53:27 EDT
Article-I.D.: angband.20
Posted: Thu Oct  4 02:53:27 1984
Date-Received: Sun, 30-Sep-84 04:54:00 EDT
Distribution: net
Organization: S-1 Project, LLNL
Lines: 16

>...The one area where
>poor performance (Magnavox and Sylvania to name two) in CD players shows up is
>in the low-pass anti-aliasing filters after the D/A.  Does more $$ get better
>performance ??

I'm confused. I thought the Magnavox players were Philips players with
the Magnavox label pasted on them, and that they used digital filtering
so as to permit the final analog filters to be much gentler (with less
of that infamous phase shift) than in players using strictly analog
filtering. The scope photos in a mid-1983 review in High Fidelity show
almost perfect symmetry in the ringing on square waves and pulses, in
contrast with many Japanese players (including mine). What is the
evidence that Magnavox players perform poorly?
-- 
                                                           --Steve Correll
sjc@s1-c.ARPA, ...!decvax!decwrl!mordor!sjc, or ...!ucbvax!dual!mordor!sjc