Wouldn't cylinders have been better for reproduction than platters?
"Soundhaspriority" wrote in message
...
"videochas www.locoworks.com" wrote in message
...
On Jan 18, 8:54?pm, Doc wrote:
I've been reading about some of the myriad complexities involved in
creating LP's, and it seems a lot of the difficulties stem from the
fact that the speed of the surface changes - i.e. slows - constantly.
Strictly from a standpoint of reproduction, wouldn't a cylinder
configuration have been more advantageous for high quality
reproduction than the platter? Or no?
Only if the vertical modulation was not used. Cylinders were made by
the Edison company, and they consisted of a series of peaks and
valleys. That doesn't work well for high frequencies because the
stylus doesn't have time to fall back into the valley before the next
peak comes along. The lateral modulation of the LP works much better
for that. Edison firmly believed in vertical modulation.
---------------------------------------------------------
As far as the cylinders, I seem to recall that the abandonment in favor of
discs was purely for cost. The cylinders were extremely expensive to
make -- is that correct?
That's right. You can't press a cylinder. You have to cut each one
individually. I'm sure in time, someone might have figured out a way to
expand the master or shrink the copy, but I think pressing discs is just
easier. Plus, they're easier to store.
|