From dfischer at usol.com  Fri Feb  1 20:29:02 2008
From: dfischer at usol.com (Duane Fischer, W8DBF)
Date: Fri Feb  1 20:28:54 2008
Subject: [Vintage-Audio] Specifications For SAE-5000
Message-ID: <002101c8653a$ffde0cb0$75ea1240@hpdc5100mt>



Hi All,

A friend just made me the new owner of a SAE-5000 unit. It is supposed to 
remove noise from vinyl recordings "prior" to them being recorded on tape, 
DAT, CD etc.

I know zero about the SAE-5000. It has no manual. If any of you could 
provide its technical specifications, "actual functions" or anything else 
about it, I would be most grateful. Thank you!

Duane

Duane Fischer, W8DBF/WPE8CXO
dfischer@usol.com
HHI: Halligan's Hallicrafters International
http://www.w9wze.net
HHRP: Historic Halligan Radio Project
hhrp.w9wze.net

From dfischer at usol.com  Thu Feb  7 19:45:42 2008
From: dfischer at usol.com (Duane Fischer, W8DBF)
Date: Thu Feb  7 19:46:05 2008
Subject: [Vintage-Audio] SAE-5000 Vs Soundcard Software Scratch And Snip
	Software
Message-ID: <009e01c869eb$f072b720$a0ea1240@hpdc5100mt>



Hello All,

While reading through some commentary sent to me on the SAE-5000 I could not 
help but notice the frequent remarks about how much better software was then 
the SAE-5000 for removing scratches, snaps, crackles and pops.

Now before about 2003 aprox., there was no affordable software that the 
common audio fan could afford! Hence, devices like the SAE-5000 were the 
best way to go.

Then I read about the guys using computer sound cards costing around $500 
and special audio editing software costing from $100 - $250. They make all 
sorts of fantastic claims about quality etc. However, I have been around 
audio for five decades and I am not that easily convinced about anything 
being that wonderful!

Some of you have been dabbling with audio since Thomas Edison last replaced 
the 1.5 volt lantern batteries in his prototype hearing aids! So tell us, in 
your experience, what devices actually did work to reduce, or remove, 
undesireable audio debris without clipping the top end of musical notes off 
like a mad Barber with a sharp pair of Sheep sheering scissors?

Am I wrong, or do computers using audio editing software add both noises 
from the computer itself, plus sounds peculiar to the software and then one 
needs to filter that back out? If this is true, and the battle seems to flip 
and flop both ways over the fence of reason frequently, isn't their data 
loss from increasing the number of recording/copying generations?

Duane

Duane Fischer, W8DBF/WPE8CXO
dfischer@usol.com
HHI: Halligan's Hallicrafters International
http://www.w9wze.net
HHRP: Historic Halligan Radio Project
hhrp.w9wze.net

From soundval at foothill.net  Sun Feb 10 18:31:15 2008
From: soundval at foothill.net (Soundval)
Date: Sun Feb 10 18:36:26 2008
Subject: [Vintage-Audio] FS: microphones
Message-ID: <8B3FED6B0027425C9DF17C4F99ED38ED@Rippen>

Prices do not include shipping, so please state your ZIP.
Offers are welcome and may certainly be made; however, 
the sale will be made to the first unconditional offer (with ZIP)
at the listed price, or what I consider to be an  cceptable price.


Electro Voice 605.  Works.  Looks good.
$55
http://www.muchstuff.com/pics/EV605A.JPG
http://www.muchstuff.com/pics/EV605B.JPG 


Electro Voice 605.   Works.  Looks rough - see pics.
$15.
http://www.muchstuff.com/pics/EV605RA.JPG
http://www.muchstuff.com/pics/EV605RB.JPG


SBE mic.  Works.  Still has protective sleeve on the cable.
Cable connector is 5 pin.  $40
http://www.muchstuff.com/pics/SBEMIC.JPG



HEATHKIT Mic. . {Plug is male 4 pin offset.)
Works. Name plate is gone from the back.
$35
http://www.muchstuff.com/pics/HEATHMIC.JPG


Shure 440 Mic. Works. Was beautiful until I just
scratched it (see pic).  Still very good looking.
Has about 7 feet of mic cable, no connector.
$160
http://www.muchstuff.com/pics/SH440A.JPG
http://www.muchstuff.com/pics/SH440B.JPG
http://www.muchstuff.com/pics/SH440C.JPG


I don't leave the computer on.  I just check my
email once or twice a day usually.

Eugene Rippen,  WB6SZS
Auburn, CA



From ma.locksmith at juno.com  Wed Feb 13 08:28:54 2008
From: ma.locksmith at juno.com (ma.locksmith@juno.com)
Date: Wed Feb 13 09:18:09 2008
Subject: [Vintage-Audio] I need some advice to help me find a good
	electronics repair facility near Minneapolis, Minnesota
Message-ID: <20080213.091119.-556889.0.ma.locksmith@juno.com>

Van,

There's a vintage audio group on qth.net

I'm forwarding your request to that forum.  I'm sure there's someone that
can help you

Ed
K1ZOK

On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 07:55:55 -0500 van lincoln <vlincoln@frontiernet.net>
writes:
> I need advice on a good Roberts 997 tape recorder repairman,
> in Minnesota, near or in Minneapolis, or St. Paul.  I am
> assuming this group with it's collective knowledge should
> have some recomendations, even though this group is amateur
> radio oriented.  At least I am hoping so.
> 
> These days, it's hard to find ANYone to look
> at our mechanical monsters, (like reel to reel tape machines,)
> much less tube electronics.
> 
> I was wanting it basicly restored, cleaned up, new belts,
> even though it's presently working, sound is good,
> so the electronics are in reasonably good shape still.
> 
> Anyone have some names I can call locally, as shipping
> nowadays is horrendously expensive!  I could drive a
> distance also for personal dropoff/pickup.
> 
> Thanks in advance
> Van Lincoln, Jordan, Minnesota
> 
> 
From dfischer at usol.com  Wed Feb 13 15:02:41 2008
From: dfischer at usol.com (Duane Fischer, W8DBF)
Date: Wed Feb 13 15:03:48 2008
Subject: [Vintage-Audio] I need some advice to help me find a
	goodelectronics repair facility near Minneapolis, Minnesota
References: <20080213.091119.-556889.0.ma.locksmith@juno.com>
Message-ID: <002001c86e7b$6cf0c3d0$dcea1240@hpdc5100mt>

Hello Van,

First, you are going to have a very difficult time in finding a qualified 
and competent person to do the work you desire. I seriously doubt you can 
find one near where you live. I am in Michigan and I had to ship my reel to 
reel decks to California.

Yes, you can find people to fix it, Van. But finding a person who truly 
knows what to do, not do, and how to do it correctly, really narrows down 
the field! So be prepared to ship it to where ever the right person is at.

Second, it is not going to be inexpensive. Parts for most of these vintage 
units do not exist. Depending on what needs to be replaced, it may, or may 
not, be possible to repair it.

Expect to pay several hundred dollars, plus parts to get it 'truly' 
refurbished electrically. Case restoration is another story.

I do not intend to sound negative Van, but I think you should know what to 
expect before you end up disappointed and discouraged. They are worth 
refurbishing and having it done right is worth every cent.

If you can not find anyone who is qualified Van, I can send you to the super 
tech with all the experience, as he has done this work for over forty years, 
in California. He has rebuilt four vintage radios, two vintage tube amps, 
two vintage FM multiplex tuners, two tape decks and other items for me.

He does NOT do cosmetic work, just electrical.

Good luck Van!



Duane Fischer, W8DBF/WPE8CXO
dfischer@usol.com
HHI: Halligan's Hallicrafters International
http://www.w9wze.net
HHRP: Historic Halligan Radio Project
hhrp.w9wze.net

----- Original Message ----- 
From: <ma.locksmith@juno.com>
To: <vlincoln@frontiernet.net>
Cc: <vintage-audio@mailman.qth.net>
Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2008 8:28 AM
Subject: [Vintage-Audio] I need some advice to help me find a 
goodelectronics repair facility near Minneapolis, Minnesota


> Van,
>
> There's a vintage audio group on qth.net
>
> I'm forwarding your request to that forum.  I'm sure there's someone that
> can help you
>
> Ed
> K1ZOK
>
> On Wed, 13 Feb 2008 07:55:55 -0500 van lincoln <vlincoln@frontiernet.net>
> writes:
>> I need advice on a good Roberts 997 tape recorder repairman,
>> in Minnesota, near or in Minneapolis, or St. Paul.  I am
>> assuming this group with it's collective knowledge should
>> have some recomendations, even though this group is amateur
>> radio oriented.  At least I am hoping so.
>>
>> These days, it's hard to find ANYone to look
>> at our mechanical monsters, (like reel to reel tape machines,)
>> much less tube electronics.
>>
>> I was wanting it basicly restored, cleaned up, new belts,
>> even though it's presently working, sound is good,
>> so the electronics are in reasonably good shape still.
>>
>> Anyone have some names I can call locally, as shipping
>> nowadays is horrendously expensive!  I could drive a
>> distance also for personal dropoff/pickup.
>>
>> Thanks in advance
>> Van Lincoln, Jordan, Minnesota
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Home: http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/vintage-audio
> List Administrator: Duane Fischer, W8DBF
> ** For Assistance: dfischer@usol.com **
>
>
>
> -- 
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG Free Edition.
> Version: 7.5.516 / Virus Database: 269.20.0/1268 - Release Date: 2/9/2008 
> 11:54 AM
>
> 

From dfischer at usol.com  Thu Feb 28 20:20:27 2008
From: dfischer at usol.com (Duane Fischer, W8DBF)
Date: Thu Feb 28 20:20:16 2008
Subject: [Vintage-Audio] Re Pirate Album Replications?
Message-ID: <014101c87a71$461ce110$a7ea1240@hpdc5100mt>



Hi All,

Yesterday I opened a sealed copy of the RCA Nashville stereo album "Floyd 
Cramer: Class Of 1968". Released in 1968, supposedly.

I first noticed that it had no paper liner for the album to be stored in 
inside the heavier outer cardboard album jacket. I thought this odd, as I do 
not ever recall any other 'new' album being like this.

Then upon removing the actual album I discovered it was Dynaflex! Now unless 
I am totally wrong here, Dynaflex was not put into the marketplace until 
about 1971. Hence, this album could not be an "original" from 1968 with 
Dynaflex!

I had a friend read me the jacket, both sides. No mention whatsoever of it 
being re-released or re-issued. However, it does say it is Dynaflex!

The quality? Very poor. The second song on side #1 had a deep scratch in it. 
The overall quality of all songs was only 'good' at best due to surface 
noise that was built into the vinyl!

I have an original copy of this album that I purchased in 1968 and from the 
outside, they appear identical. Whomever did the replication copied the 
jacket perfectly, except for altering the text by mentioning Dynaflex! Which 
there is no mention of on the original album jacket!

Have any of you encountered apparent fraud copies of albums? It may be 
common, but this is the first one that I have personally become the unproud 
owner of!

Thanks.


Duane Fischer, W8DBF/WPE8CXO
dfischer@usol.com
HHI: Halligan's Hallicrafters International
http://www.w9wze.net
HHRP: Historic Halligan Radio Project
hhrp.w9wze.net

From w9ran at oneradio.net  Fri Feb 29 13:09:04 2008
From: w9ran at oneradio.net (Robert Nickels)
Date: Fri Feb 29 13:13:19 2008
Subject: [Vintage-Audio] Re Pirate Album Replications?
In-Reply-To: <014101c87a71$461ce110$a7ea1240@hpdc5100mt>
References: <014101c87a71$461ce110$a7ea1240@hpdc5100mt>
Message-ID: <47C84A40.9080909@oneradio.net>

Duane Fischer, W8DBF wrote:
>
> Then upon removing the actual album I discovered it was Dynaflex! Now 
> unless I am totally wrong here, Dynaflex was not put into the 
> marketplace until about 1971. Hence, this album could not be an 
> "original" from 1968 with Dynaflex!
Hi Duane,

According to Record Collectors Guild online. Dynaflex was:

"Ultra-thin pressings of high-grade Virgin Vinyl introduced by RCA 
Victor in late 1969. Although considered inferior by most collectors 
because they do not seem flat when held, they actually have much quieter 
surfaces then most of the popular records pressed by RCA in the 
mid-to-late-1960s due to the extraordinarily high percentage of reground 
vinyl used in all but its Red Seal, Vintage Series, and Original Cast 
pressings. Dynaflex was also less prone to breakage and permanent 
warping in shipment. Its lighter weight reduced shipping costs and 
allowed for the use of a higher grade of vinyl because less material was 
required. They were supposed to lie flat on the turntable due to their 
own weight, but RCA forgot that many people had changers with 8-inch 
turntables!"

So now that we've narrowed the time span down to a 1968 record and a 
1969 process, my bet is someone at RCA just made this "running change" 
without making any comment to consumers.

73, Bob W9RAN
